Callsign112

Your absolutely right about the group command. I think what's happening is when you place your lead vehicle in Autopilot with the "C" key, it becomes part of the group and moves with them. But if you are not in Autopilot, the group command goes only to the other tanks in your platoon, and your free to take another direction. But in terms of units that look like they are not moving/moving slow, try using another formation like row for example just to see the difference. You should see all vehicles start out at nearly the same time, and reach the selected speed much quicker. Each formation has a slightly different spacing to it. If you place a unit in the mission editor and then make multiples of it, jut measure the distance between each unit. Its like 40 meters. I'm not sure, but I think it has something to do with path finding. Having more distance between each unit helps prevent them from crashing into each other as they change speed to make turns and what not. But 40 meters seems a bit extreme when placing infantry using the On-road way point. Splitting columns up can also help make it easier to move them sometimes. Like if I need a column of 6 vehicles, depending on what I want to do, I sometimes split them into 2 group of 3. I can switch back and forth between the two lead vehicles, or just set the path for one, and direct control the other.

@Nealius, I am unable to reproduce what you are seeing. A couple things though. When you are in Autopilot ("C" key), you control your vehicle's movement using the Group command (green arrow that appears when pressing and holding the "G" key). This works whether the vehicle you are directly controlling is a single vehicle group, or 1 of a number of vehicles. You should see slightly different behavior depending on whether the vehicle you are directly controlling is the primary vehicle in the group or not. So I'm not sure why your own vehicle does not move after you position the little green arrow using the LMB while pressing and holding the "G" key. Are you sure your in Autopilot? You have to hit the "C" key to put your own vehicle in Autopilot (you will see "Autopilot" designated at the bottom right hand side of the screen when active). The Group command works for the other vehicles in your group even when Autopilot is not activated. Exiting Autopilot (pressing "C" key again) before you reach your assigned way point is like cancelling it, so it makes sense that all the other vehicles in the group stop. I think I can explain and help answer the question you raise in the OP though, and the behavior you are seeing in the F10 map view. It has to do with the formation your group is in. When you place a group in the ME, the default for way point 0 is an Off-road column formation. You can change a groups starting formation at way point 0 in the ME. I put together a couple of examples to demonstrate how formation affects group behavior in the attached video. In the first example, I give a "follow the leader" command which also uses a column formation by default. Units in a column formation obviously follow one after the other, and when you give a column the "follow me" command, they also mimic what you do. In the first example I do a sort of dog leg pattern with a left turn. This causes the column formation to become very spaced out as each of the following units waits for its preceding unit to make the left turn. So it is possible that not all of the units in a group will move when the set way point distance is too short depending on the command you gave and the position of your vehicle in relation to the other units in your group. To see how the position of the command vehicle affects Ai behavior, notice in the video what happens when I give a group command way point from a position behind the formation, and when I give the same command when my vehicle is in front of the formation. When my vehicle was behind the formation, I joined the column as the 3rd vehicle (distance dependent). When I give the same command from the front of the formation, the column forms up on me. To use "Cruise Control", simply press the "T" key once your vehicle is moving at the desired speed. You no longer have to continuously press the "W" key (gas pedal) for movement. To recap the ways we control unit movement in Combined Arms, we can either assign way points to a group from within the F10 map view, or by direct control. Directly controlling a primary unit can be further broken down into simultaneous movement with other vehicles in the controlled group, and independent movement from other vehicles in the controlled group. Autopilot (press "C" key) - All vehicles in the controlled group (including your own) move to the assigned way point using the "G" key. Command menu (press "\" key, then "F3") - All vehicles in the controlled group will move together/follow your vehicle. Cruise control (press "T" key) - All vehicles in the controlled group will move to the assigned way point using the "G" key independently of your vehicle. Direct control ( press "W, A, S, D" keys) - All vehicles in the controlled group will move to the assigned way point using the "G" key independently of your vehicle. In addition to these movement options, the groups formation and behavior can be changed from within the "Command Menu" ("\" key), or F10 map view. I hope this helps.

I'll have one of everything he's selling. I think your prediction makes a lot of sense, because it includes a lot of the much needed updating which ED has repeatedly stated it intends to do. I really hope you are right!

I am haven't seen the behavior you are describing, and would not be able to check it in game till much later, but some things do stand out as a possible explanation. To start, try giving the Group command when you have Autopilot activated to see if all the units follow your Group command. Next, deactivate Autopilot and then give a Group command that is more than 200 m away from the tank you are giving the command from. If you can get Group command to work while in Autopilot, and you can get all the other tanks in your platoon to follow your Group command when the way point is more than 200 m from your tank, then maybe there is a minimum distance that the Group command works with. Either that, or could it have something to do with the distance your tank is from the rest of the platoon? I'm not sure why you are getting booted from the tank you are in direct control of just because you open the F10 map. That doesn't make any sense to me, because you are supposed to be able to use the F10 map whenever you need to. I go back and forth between the F10 map and F1 Gunner view continuously. But the issue regarding setting a way point for a vehicle in the F10 map, and then taking direct control of it does automatically cancel the way point because you are now driving the unit. The vehicle no longer follows its way point, but will go where you drive it to.

Yeah I agree, that's why I said; "the German front line barely crossed into the detailed part of the map we have". But I use all the maps to simulate various locations. That is why I suggested that nothing is stopping the OP from using the WWII assets on this map. Although I liked his suggestion for a WWII Caucasus map, it wouldn't change much in terms of the historical battles, because the map we have doesn't cover the Eastern Front.

The German front line barely crossed into the detailed part of our map. And while @razo+r is quite right in saying that our map lays mostly south of the WWII front line, the detailed part of our map is also a lot farther East from where the German front line was. My choice of words was following the name of the front itself. But in order to recreate WWII scenarios on the Eastern front, we would really need a new map.

No I was just in the ME doing my own thing. Have two groups of ships sailing towards each other with way points set in the ME. But when the mission was running, I was unable to give new way points, or add a target. I will have a look later tonight and post what I find.

I am using latest stable version.

That may be, but both products will still have a different focus. For me, excitement peaks in game play when the focus is kept on vehicles/planes that are being supported by Ai infantry. If done right, Ai infantry could be an absolute game changer in DCS for everyone in terms of immersion. There is still so much improvement needed in ground/navy units that it is hard to see how they will ever get it all done in a timely manner without adding more manpower to their team. I think a common perception, and one that seems to cause a fair bit of animosity within the community, is that any effort made to improve ground units is wasted because it was effort that could have been spent on fixing/adding to the plane set regardless of how adamant ED claims working on one has no effect on the other. And while it is difficult to blame anyone for becoming frustrated with the long wait times, I think most just don't understand the scope of what is being attempted with DCS World, and ED needs to find a way to decrease the amount of time it takes to release modules in order to address this. After they complete the recently announced improvements to the SC deck crew, I would personally like to see that tech being offered as paid DLC content (deck crew with assets) for all the other carriers to support the continued/continuous development of ground units/infantry. The tech should also be used to offer airfield crew/assets. Anyone that enjoys the experience of having working deck crew on the SC will understand what I mean after going back to a carrier that doesn't have it. Playing around with the Tarawa in the mission editor recently, and I have to say, something is definitely missing! My interests would be to have the ability to do what ever I feel like on any given day on a single platform. I prefer not to have to switch platforms just because I am tired of driving a tank and want to drop bombs/launch missiles from a plane. More importantly, I want to be able to build real combined arms missions/game play. And I want to continue watching the great content you put up on YouTube,... so keep it coming!

Isn't there also a Combined Arms issue with navy units in general at the moment? I am able to place a ship and give it way points in the ME, but one the mission starts non of the set path/add target stuff seems to work for me.

@Razorjet XII, no apologies needed. In my view though, adding/improving control of animated human figures whether it be a pilot going from the barracks to his plane at the start a mission, a downed pilot trying to be rescued, or an infantry unit walking on a road, the methods used to provide the control should be the same from the programmers point of view. It would still add work in terms of adding another unit to be animated of course, but the work needed to invent the wheel so to speak should only have to be done once.

@Silver_Dragon, it is possible that what I saw was not related to DCS World, but it definitely caught my attention as something to look forward to. The video was like a combined arms promotion for a campaign, and one of the other features I remember was a bridging vehicle that would allow tanks to cross wide trenches. Is it possible there is a mod like that? I have searched and searched on YouTube, with no luck.

@Silver_Dragon, thanks for sharing. I completely missed this.

Now that was pretty easy on the eyes. Thanks @TimRobertsen

Yeah there is certainly a lot of work that would have to be done to get more usable Ai infantry, although I remember seeing an ED promotional video some time ago that showed infantry crawling towards an objective. I think it was a promotion for combined arms, but I'm not sure. I just remember there was an assortment of ground vehicles. The single standing pose we have currently is very limiting. I would be a huge improvement if infantry were able to crouch/prone.

NS98, thanks for the link. Love what these guys do!

Really enjoyed your description of the flight, and agree, I would love to see any/all of the bombers make it to DCS W! I wish ED would consider increasing the size of the team, it just seems like things are going way too slow.

Yeah I understood you the first time, but that is not how combined arms works. I don't expect to see my wing man in an Abrams, or the rest of my platoon following me in F14's. As the mission designer, how you keep everyone busy during the mission is really up to you. Whether you have them standing around, or doing something else, I am sure you are going to get feedback on it from your group. But I have to wonder at this point if your original advice that the OP play an infantry game couldn't be put to good use here? The only difference being, you might be looking for a plane only game. I would encourage you to keep exploring DCS World though, as it offers a much more enriching experience than other platforms that have only a single focus. And the reason behind the more enriching experience IMO is the level of detail ED puts in its products, and the ability to have real combined arms game play.

This is stressing a mute point, but what I think this boils down to @Razorjet XII is more just the way you see things and nothing else. Working in a cohesive way with someone doesn't mean if your in a tank, I have to be in something moving the same speed. If the mission was to have ground units capture a town/strong point, but in order to do that, the ground units need support from air units to take out an artillery battery, then the pilot taking out the artillery battery is working in unison/together with the ground units to achieve the mission objective. That is what working in a coordinated cohesive way means. As you can see from the example I gave, their interaction would absolutely be the deciding factor. And this point is repeated in the request you made. If you get shot down and have to eject, your request would be to have an air unit come to your rescue. As the downed pilot, you would be absolutely banking on the physics behind the science that allows flight to occur, because if anything untoward happens to the rescue helicopter's air speed in flight, you will likely loose your ride.

Well if that isn't what you are requesting in the quoted text above, then that is how I read it. Among other things like having a S&R helo pick you up, it appears to me that you are requesting more control over your pilot in first person. If that is not the case, then just a heads up, that is how your request comes across. Regardless, your free to ask whatever it is you want, but that brings me to the question I was wondering about. @cfrag did a mission for his group where after being shot down and having to eject, the pilot can wait to be picked up, but it wasn't well received because the majority of players in his group didn't find the long periods waiting to be picked up very fun. I was curious to know if based on the request you making, would you rather wait up to 1.5 hours to be rescued before being able to spawn back into a plane, or would you rather immediately after ejecting spawn into the S&R role and fly the mission to pick the downed pilot up yourself?

My understanding is that all you will need is the SC. I agree the wait is long, but after news regarding the major update to Ai animations/behavior/collision model being implemented on SC deck crew, I wonder if that could be contributing to the holdup?

If your definition of simultaneously using air and ground units means that they have to be driving/flying within arms length from each other, then that definition isn't part of the natural world we live in, will never happen in the real world, and I don't think we can hold any reasonable expectation to see it in a simulation of the real world either. I would have never responded to your comments had I known they were based simply on your own opinion of what combined arms is. @shagrat's resupply mission is a perfect example IMO of air and ground forces working in a coordinated, cohesive way to achieve a single goal. The fact that he is in a plane carrying supplies I would think makes it obvious that he has to arrive by air to deliver the needed supplies to keep the grounds units fighting at full strength. That is the cohesive element of the mission. His air speed has no impact on how fast the ground units are moving, or their ability to work cohesively, because their interaction together is done through radio communications. His ability to keep his end of the bargain and successfully perform his part of the mission is a good example of working together. And unless your friends are sitting in the same room as you, then like in real life where someone is in a tank, while someone else is in a C-130, they will be seeing the battle field from their own discrete perspectives. But its all good @cfrag, I am not here to challenge your views, or what your interests are. I can see now how my initial post was taken as a challenge, but you have to accept that my initial post was also made under the assumption that we were both using the known definition of CA in terms of what it actually is.

We are getting a little off topic here. I don't mind as long as the OP doesn't mind. His request was to have first person infantry, and he might find this useful since your points can be loosely linked to how that might be used in a mission. But in terms of mixing air and ground units then, you are discussing nothing but your own subjective point of view @cfrag, and not what actually is. So your going to have to bite the bullet and take your own advice on putting up! I have showed you a mission being played out with jets and tanks on one team, and jets, helicopters, tanks and infantry are on the other... mission accomplished! In the context of this conversation, whether you find a mission more, or less interesting is not relevant and I see no point in discussing it further. But like I said, the biggest difference might be how we see things, and that is becoming clearer with every post. Just look at the bold text above. Your view seems to be that real world military operations are boring. I mean, DCS World is meant to simulate actual military scenarios using simulated versions of real world military equipment. I'm not knocking your point of view, or criticizing what you find interesting. I am just pointing out to you that in order to simulate real world combined arms scenarios, Eagle Dynamics had to let go of the concept that everyone should hold hands during the mission. So when you originally responded to this thread and said that ground/air units cant be used in the same mission in a fun way, you meant because a tank doesn't drive at 10,000 feet going mach 1.2, and an F14 doesn't fly over rough terrain going 20KPH? In other words, you view point that air/ground units cant be used in the same mission in a fun way has nothing to do with the DCS World platform.

I didn't originally respond to the OP because I don't agree with/get the point behind the request unless it is for something other than the downed pilot just standing around doing nothing. I know its a common request, but I just assumed the vast majority of people if asked would be more interested in flying the search and rescue mission to retrieve their pilot after being shot down, then they would be in actually doing the standing around part waiting to be picked up. I was just guessing that the request must be attached somehow with the players stats/career, or something like that. But you seem to have taken the request quite literally, and I thought that was interesting. The reason I decided to contribute to this thread was because of point #4 in your original post, and the comments you made regarding your views on CA. In the text at the top of your quote in this post, you are comparing something that is not possible with something that is. I'm not sure what you mean by "freely running" infantry, but unless you mean infantry that you gave a bunch of way points to, then what your suggesting can't be done because that feature hasn't been made part of the SIM yet. But you can on the other hand combine air/ground/sea assets in the same mission similar to the way it happens in real life. The attached video is just an example, but it includes jets, helicopters, tanks, and infantry. You are likely much better at creating missions than I am, but I think the bigger difference might be just our outlook on things. For instance, the teamwork example you gave working with your friends. Lets say you created a mission where the objective was to have your armored units take a town. But before they can do that, you need air support to knock out the artillery battery that has the units pinned down, and is preventing them from crossing a bridge and reaching the town. So your buddies in the jets come to the rescue. Now if you want them to loiter around overhead longer, just give them something to do. Once they destroy all the artillery pieces, you could use a trigger to spawn a group of enemy jets to attack your armored units that your buddies now have to deal with. So while your armored units take control of the town, your buddies are kept busy watching your back. Its like your experience in Germany, you could create a mission like that, but why would you want to? I created a mission where everyone on the airbase is sleeping. So yeah, lots of stuff going on in that one. I would think you have a lot of rich experience to draw from, all you have to do is add a "what-if" scenario to get a really exciting mission. But I have said it before, my impression is that CA is one of the most underrated misunderstood pieces of DCS World. I think a lot of people it seems are unclear on how to use it, mostly because documentation is so scarce. CA is a full featured combat training software, and what helped a lot with getting more use out of it was taking a closer look at the different roles, and how, when to use them. The Game Master is the instructor slot, but is also very useful in SP mode. Tactical Commander, and JTAC are the slots that should be filling MP missions, and or by the people receiving training. I had a look in the downloads section for the CA user manual, but couldn't find it. Its a little dated, but I think it still covers all the main points if anyone is interested. Combined Arms Manual EN(1).pdf

+1 Part of the problem might be that we don't currently have an infantry model that could use map objects. Hopefully that will change, and we will see the CA aspect gain more traction.