Is anyone still playing this ?

[oscar19681]

Is anyone even playing CA at all ? Hardy any online games around and The activaty seems pretty dead on The forum to .

[VincentLaw]

I would drive around in ground vehicles online, but most multiplayer servers don't have vehicle control active. Some servers with CA enabled put the ground stuff way too far apart. I have seen maps where it would take hours to get ground units to any of the objectives. I actually drove for 5 hours one time to capture an enemy airbase. Last time I joined a server as the ground forces commander, pilot players kept overriding my orders, so I quit.

 

I would blame part of the inactivity on server operators and mission designers... but maybe they would not get much CA participation even if it was better? Single player with CA has been a better experience. (or maybe I just don't know how to find the right servers?)

Edited August 27, 2014 by VincentLaw

[Abburo]

Waiting for an Erikson Skycrane or a Mi26 to move mechanised troops :D.

 

Indeed, for now CA is great to be played in SP, custom missions. I like to be in Huey and coordinate ground troops by spotting enemy from above...

[mnrty]

On the COG (Combined ops group) dedicated server there is alot of missions with CA slots avail :)

[Devrim]

I play it on my wife's laptop (it can hardly run CA) when summer holidays. That's it.

 

Almost no any MP server missions support CA.

[Skall]

I still look forward to what CA can become and hope that once EDGE is ironed out, ED can divert more attention to CA. Also, their RFI for the Abrams tells me they plan to up the ground game. At least I hope.

[NineLine]

I love CA... Hope it keeps getting love, especially after we see new maps...

[mnrty]

I love CA... Hope it keeps getting love, especially after we see new maps...

 

I agree. We use it in almost every mission, and its a complete game changer IMO. Looking forward to new maps and scenarios to play out with humans in the vehicles!

[HiJack]

I agree, vould love som updates to CA. They should make it possible to assign a set of units (divisions) to one player so we could set up a CA battle with many players. Once you loose all your controlled units you die. As it is now all have access to all units on one side.

[BitMaster]

If there is any module with enough perspective to attract new groups of players it is Combined Arms once it receives the resources from ED after EDGE2.0.

 

More than 2-core-SMP will be critical for the machines to have or there will be now way you can calculate that much stuff I guess. So the hardest part will be redoing that part of the engine so it may use more than 2 cores, maybe infinit...as many as you got. That would really ooomps the game :)

 

Bit

[shagrat]

With current AI problems it is a bit difficult. You can't really control all units by humans and apart from giving a few orders, or JTACing/spotting, there isn't much you can do at the moment.

Especially the railway bridge bug, crossing bridges in general and the trees only blocking human line of sight are definite gamebreakers at the moment.

 

I would love to integrate CA more, but as it is now, it is difficult.

 

...though Manpad mayhem in the woods is great! :D

[DieHard]

Is anyone even playing CA at all ? Hardy any online games around and The activaty seems pretty dead on The forum to .

 

S77th's Dedicated server usually has CA, as well as 159th and Putzer's Newb City. S77th usually has rotating missions; their Phantom Scythe has CA.

 

I don't play CA very often. Wish they had a USA football game sim like CA.

Edited August 29, 2014 by DieHard

[Friedric]

yeah ist a pitty , i love CA also , wich there where more servers hosting them

[theGozr]

Add a cockpit and everything will change.. :)

[fastfreddie]

Do you guys really think that ED is going to enhance CA with the Edge update? I mean, it never gets any attention from them it seems.

 

It would great for a third party come in and do something great. Fully fleshed out vehicles with realistic modeling like in the aircraft models. Could even split it up into different packs like US, RU, Euro and considering the WWII part of DCS is coming on strong they could do period pacts (1936-1959)/(1960-modern). It would be great playing a very well simulated Panther blowing away Shermans until a P51 or Tempest comes rolling in for a rocket attack.

[BrassEm]

We are planning a new campaign based heavily on human CA opposition but are waiting for the new Nevada terrain.

 

So looking forward to it.

 

 

(Hopefully I will have all my hardware issues sorted by then. :( )

[remi]

I can hardly understand what to do with it. No tutorials or training.

 

And the fact that the mouse control is inverted makes it unplayable.

[remi]

If ED can improve it so that it can almost rival arma, dcs would generate significant interest outside of the current userbase.

[Flagrum]

If ED can improve it so that it can almost rival arma, dcs would generate significant interest outside of the current userbase.

If. If the word "if" would not exists, we all were millionaires. :o)

 

This idea is all but new, but realistically it is not going to happen in the forseeable future. Too diffent types of sim - neither ArmA nor DCS as a platform would suffice to integrate both worlds. It would basically require a completely new system ... and then there are still unsolved technical difficulties to put all requirements under one hat.

 

Maybe we can talk about this in 10-20 years again ... that would be my estimation. :noexpression:

[Flagrum]

Meh. Plenty of third parties out there that will be willing to do it, if they get enough support from ED. The death of ARMA and ACE has left a black hole in the Realistic FPS Universe. DCS / EDGE with its super realistic flight simulation would be the perfect successor for a realistic FS/FPS World. Crysis, while not that realistic aircraft wise, showed how well aircraft / vehicles and troops could work together to win a mission. DCS World would be the realistic version of that. And, after all, the prime mission of aircraft are too support the ground troops and maintain control of the air over them.

The problem is: ground warefare, especially with infantry, needs highly detailed and realistic environments. This can be archieved with todays technology only by reducing the size of "the world" (i.e. maps).

Flight sims on the other hand need large maps - which must be less detailed in order to allow for a decent performance.

(Helos are somewhat sitting here between the chairs - probably similar to tanks and the like - they need high(ish) details but maybe not THAT large maps)

 

But this is the crux - a basically total diamentral set of requirements.

 

edit:

And even if the technology were not the chokepoint, the time (= costs) for the development would be. How long did it take for BI to develop ArmA III? How much time was spent on the maps? Now multiply that with something like 10 or 20 for a decent flight sim map ...

Edited August 29, 2014 by Flagrum

[NineLine]

The problem is: ground warefare, especially with infantry, needs highly detailed and realistic environments. This can be archieved with todays technology only by reducing the size of "the world" (i.e. maps).

Flight sims on the other hand need large maps - which must be less detailed in order to allow for a decent performance.

(Helos are somewhat sitting here between the chairs - probably similar to tanks and the like - they need high(ish) details but maybe not THAT large maps)

 

But this is the crux - a basically total diamentral set of requirements.

 

Honestly as we see more work done with CA and whatever becomes of anything else along those lines, that maybe we will see smaller, ground based maps, maybe with smaller higher detailed areas aimed at ground combat.

[Flagrum]

Honestly as we see more work done with CA and whatever becomes of anything else along those lines, that maybe we will see smaller, ground based maps, maybe with smaller higher detailed areas aimed at ground combat.

It would probably still be a compromise, but yeah, perhaps.

 

For example VEAOs Falklands could be interesting. At least for helos something like that could work.

[Mojeaux]

We are planning a new campaign based heavily on human CA opposition but are waiting for the new Nevada terrain.

 

I love this Module...The ground game can be so much fun when played right...

[NineLine]

It would probably still be a compromise, but yeah, perhaps.

 

For example VEAOs Falklands could be interesting. At least for helos something like that could work.

 

It wont be like BF4 or something, but I bet the smaller the map, the more detail, but until we see it up and running full blast we wont know, but I am hopeful....

[Shaman]

CA feels more like a demo then finished product and as demo it's good. Beside coop between human JTAC with A-10C human pilot there's not much to do. There is basically no interface for human driver beside blindly smashing keyboard commands hoping for action.

Same goes for Ground Commander screen, it is not too capable, plenty non-intuitive actions.