Infantry - Combined Arms

[Northstar98]

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

AFAIK that’s what we have now. Infantry can be in or on top of buildings. But there can’t be detailed combat within or between structures, can there?

 

I meant interior floors and walls, rather than just the roof.

 

Only the watchtower (AFAIK) allows you to -ish put infantry inside it.

 

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s makes sense. A detailed ground combat sim would need its own map. 

 

It doesn't need it, after all we already have a playable MANPADs in FPS-lite style. But it might be a better idea to have a CA dedicated map, much like what was done in that other WW2 game.

 

The other issue I see is how would you place infantry inside buildings instead of on the roof? Wouldn't we need a 3D editor for that?

 

But in terms of playable infantry themselves, I don't think there's much of an issue, even if it's done like our current MANPAD units.

[upyr1]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

For buildings, why do you need to do any more than floors and windows, and maybe walls?

I was saying the saying the same thing as long as we kept infantry an AI asset. 

 

21 hours ago, upyr1 said:

With AI infantry, where we are driving an APC or IFV Eagle will only have to deal with having the enemy shoot from the windows and dice roles as our grunts go in and clear out a house or bunker. 

With AI infantry the only thing Eagle would need to worry about would be the external walls, doors and windows.

[Callsign112]

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Clearly you don’t play Battlefield… A great amount of the action that game utilizes the building interiors. An FPS game without this aspect would be ridiculous. 

A lot of game play in that title is done in the open outdoors. The Norway map in the latest edition is almost all outdoors.

 

7 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I've played at least one of the games you mention and in an earlier post (I removed the titles) good recommendation BTW- while playing the game there a few missions where I'm thinking it would be nice if I could go into a building and snipe the dude hiding behind the trash dumpster. Anyhow my point had been without modeling interiors you have eliminated a defining trait of MOUT and reduced  realism since you will be left with 2 dimensional tactics. This would work out in the open. As I stated earlier I think we would be better off with improved AI and having windows and external doors to the buildings 

 

I understand your point completely and agree, but considering how Combined Arms currently works with the main focus on real players in vehicles/helicopters/planes/jets and little to no prospect for a FPS, the current maps are more then adequate to support ground force battles where a player in a tank could interact with AI infantry attacking/defending his/her position while hunting other armored units, and another player in a helicopter could be working in unison, or attacking the armored units at the same time.

 

I have created a number of missions on the Normandy map, and the limitation is not because I am unable to enter buildings, but because of the current limitation with AI logic and functionality. With real players in vehicles, it matters little that AI infantry could enter buildings. At the moment, I can get into a tank in first person view and attack enemy infantry and other armored units, that are limited in their response. Improved AI logic and functionality would just make it that much better, even without being able to go into a building, because I can't do that now anyways.

 

What I would suggest to ED instead of modeling the inside of buildings that real players wouldn't use anyways, would be to add assets that would allow me to create fortifications for infantry like sandbags/trenches and such. I would pay for this addition, and in fact it could be attached to an airfield ground support pack something like what was being suggested by BattleField productions.       

 

7 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

For buildings, why do you need to do any more than floors and windows, and maybe walls?

 

As for urban and rural environments - this is purely a mission editing issue.

 

That said, I still think it would be better if we had a CA orientated map, with very high terrain detail, high resolution objects and building with limited interiors on maybe a map that was a lot smaller (say 50x50km or something), suitable for CA, but also leaving enough room for helicopters.

 

This could work if ED had the interest, but the downside would be that it would take people away from what is already a really good set of maps for WWII, as well as the other maps for more modern theaters.

[upyr1]

43 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

I understand your point completely and agree, but considering how Combined Arms currently works with the main focus on real players in vehicles/helicopters/planes/jets and little to no prospect for a FPS, the current maps are more then adequate to support ground force battles where a player in a tank could interact with AI infantry attacking/defending his/her position while hunting other armored units, and another player in a helicopter could be working in unison, or attacking the armored units at the same time.

 

I have created a number of missions on the Normandy map, and the limitation is not because I am unable to enter buildings, but because of the current limitation with AI logic and functionality. With real players in vehicles, it matters little that AI infantry could enter buildings. At the moment, I can get into a tank in first person view and attack enemy infantry and other armored units, that are limited in their response. Improved AI logic and functionality would just make it that much better, even without being able to go into a building, because I can't do that now anyways.

 

What I would suggest to ED instead of modeling the inside of buildings that real players wouldn't use anyways, would be to add assets that would allow me to create fortifications for infantry like sandbags/trenches and such. I would pay for this addition, and in fact it could be attached to an airfield ground support pack something like what was being suggested by BattleField productions.       

 

The sandbags and trenches would be a great addition to DCS. Combined arms needs a lot of work, and I think the next up date they need to fix the VR bug ASAP, add items for defensive pistons like sandbags and trenches.  Eventually the windows and doors for the buildings as well as damage models would need to be added as I want to  fight battles on the Vegas strip 

[Callsign112]

5 hours ago, upyr1 said:

The sandbags and trenches would be a great addition to DCS. Combined arms needs a lot of work, and I think the next up date they need to fix the VR bug ASAP, add items for defensive pistons like sandbags and trenches.  Eventually the windows and doors for the buildings as well as damage models would need to be added as I want to  fight battles on the Vegas strip 

I am 100% with you. I just don't understand how Combined Arms doesn't get more support/attention, because it is a really great module with a lot of potential. But +1 to all your suggestions above.

Edited June 2, 2021 by Callsign112

[Silver_Dragon]

I approve that point, fortifications and trench can be get great improvement on mission building.

 

Little OT: I go to open a informative post about units crews on vehicles and squad/platton and up compositions.

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Callsign112 said:

The Norway map in the latest edition is almost all outdoors.

This really isn’t a discussion about Battlefield V but that whole map is a town (ok there’s 2 Norway maps, one is a town). Try to imagine infantry gameplay where you couldn’t use any of the buildings. All the infantry in the DCS eras would do urban combat. They go there to get hide from the tanks and aircraft

Edited June 2, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Hobel]

With a reasonable way for infantry to build spawn points, which of course consume resources (like Squad), I don't see the big problem of too long marches owait times.

 

And helicopters are then responsible for supplying them, which they do in the current state anyway

[jwflowersii]

I think the idea is that you don't have to use the same engines for the infantry combat and flight simulator aspects.  It could be different game engines that share data and the same world. You could spawn in AI spots without having to return to base on different parts of the map.  The infantry engine could have very specific areas they can participate in.

[upyr1]

On 6/7/2021 at 8:39 AM, Hobel said:

With a reasonable way for infantry to build spawn points, which of course consume resources (like Squad), I don't see the big problem of too long marches owait times.

 

And helicopters are then responsible for supplying them, which they do in the current state anyway

This is a matter of mission design, I just don't want to see DCS become a mess with spawn points,

[Adorabull]

On 3/25/2021 at 8:17 AM, StevanJ said:

I can imagine it now.
You start at Incirlik, get into a Chinook, armed up ready to go, you look out the window for the 40 minute journey taking in the beauty that is the Syria map, you fly over cities, mountains and lakes.. After 40 minutes you reach your destination Hatay, You touch down, ready to walk over and jump into a Humvee to move into an area where insurgents have taken over a small village.
After the 30 minute drive, you approach the border of Turkey and Syria.. Where you see smoke billowing into the air, you jump out the Humvee, ready your weapon, and prepare to snipe targets from afar.
You see an APC- As you casually sit, waiting for the shot, you sit still for 10 minutes...

Then.. 'BOOM!' Someone else in an FA18 has launched JSOWS from 30 miles away, and has done the work for you.

You then walk back to the Humvee, as you need to get back to base..
After the 30 minute drive to Hatay.. And another 40 minutes in the Chinook, You land back at base..

'DCS: FPS Simulator'..

On a serious note, I absolutely love Combined Arms. But no one else does in Multiplayer, and there are no missions for it.
Its not even a 'unit' on the userfiles page..
Why not try to make a few missions for what we have, and see if you can garner some interest into it?
It works really well in Multiplayer on the right missions, which is a shame.

But in the wrong missions, its awful.
And the AI, really is pants. Especially with the current damage model.

I was destroyed by a Humvee TOW from miles out, and i was in a T-90 that couldnt drive through an orchard..
The Humvee just watched me (saw him turn and aim for 5 minutes), as my AI tank just drove around and around in a circle.

You just described Operation Flashpoint, lol

[Bestiajez]

En 26/3/2021 a las 21:06, Rick50 dijo:

¿Es posible hacer unidades manejables/luchables como un mod para Combined Arms?

I am working on it