Work on Combined Arms

[NineLine]

Indeed CA was designed for basic vehicle control, but not as a vehicle simulator, do we want to improve on that some day? Sure. As always stated, its time and manpower.

[tae.]

Is there any update on when we will get working multiplayer support for the Combined Arms module? 

[Callsign112]

21 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

On the CA Russian forums, has x10000 request about "improve CA" and the aswer has the same. "JTAC CA team" has dead 10 years ago, to improve CA, need build a new team and a new product, a CA 2, but no resources yet.

From Russian Forum

 

 

 

Thanks for all the info you bring to the forum SD. One  thing I would really like to see added to the JTAC feature is the ability to guide Ai aircraft onto target. This would really add to mission building options IMO, and would also help better support player use of CA in ground combat roles.

It would also be nice to see CA become more WWII friendly with the addition of a forward observer type role. Views through actual WWII binoculars would also be a plus. But even if the team has been reassigned/disbanded, someone is still clearly working on CA as it has seen numerous updates over the last 10 years.

20 hours ago, NineLine said:

Indeed CA was designed for basic vehicle control, but not as a vehicle simulator, do we want to improve on that some day? Sure. As always stated, its time and manpower.

Really appreciate all the input from ED's team on the forums. I think it is one of the things that separates DCS World from most other platforms. The community here might not always like the response it gets, but there is usually a response on most issues. So thanks.

I would just like to add that vehicle control in DCS CA is on par with most dedicated platforms, and even better than some. Even with all its current issues, I think CA gets the short end of the stick more than it should and hope ED can find a way to continue its regular updates.

 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

Thanks for all the info you bring to the forum SD. One  thing I would really like to see added to the JTAC feature is the ability to guide Ai aircraft onto target. This would really add to mission building options IMO, and would also help better support player use of CA in ground combat roles.

It would also be nice to see CA become more WWII friendly with the addition of a forward observer type role. Views through actual WWII binoculars would also be a plus. But even if the team has been reassigned/disbanded, someone is still clearly working on CA as it has seen numerous updates over the last 10 years.

I have the impression that this functionality was in the professional version, the same thing happens with the A-10C or the FLIR Turret of the AC-130... functionality that we will never see in those modules, because it is very possible that it is "locked "by contract and for security.

[SparxOne]

Thinking of it, one feature or improvement i'd love to see with DCS and Combined Arms is to have actual ground battles happening, proper ground battles with actual moving vehicles trying to achieve something (An objective of some sort) and not just drive to a set waypoint while engaging what ever ennemy unit they see. Might be something happening in all the scripted campaigns and missions (Which i unfortunately never play since i spend all my time in MP), but from my experience playing online, you simply never see ground units actually driving around trying to reach an objective and conquer it or what not, it's always the same thing, static stuff waiting to be destroyed like a shooting range almost 

 

Something that clearly seems to add to the fun and immersion is having the feeling that you are actually participating to a battle taking place, whether if you are flying or driving a vehicle, looking at some videos of another game represented by a snail (I don't actually enjoy that game though because of how arcadish it is and other reasons, whatever anyway), seeing the possibility to drive all sorts of vehicles while guys are flying attack helis or planes is one feature that's awesome, making the world around you feel alive, not just you and a few other guys flying and picking on static targets.

Being a tanker and seeing helicopters or planes fly around while you're having your battle on the ground is simply awesome, and the other way around too, that to me is what DCS lacks a lot at the moment.

[Silver_Dragon]

5 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

Thinking of it, one feature or improvement i'd love to see with DCS and Combined Arms is to have actual ground battles happening, proper ground battles with actual moving vehicles trying to achieve something (An objective of some sort) and not just drive to a set waypoint while engaging what ever ennemy unit they see. Might be something happening in all the scripted campaigns and missions (Which i unfortunately never play since i spend all my time in MP), but from my experience playing online, you simply never see ground units actually driving around trying to reach an objective and conquer it or what not, it's always the same thing, static stuff waiting to be destroyed like a shooting range almost 

 

Something that clearly seems to add to the fun and immersion is having the feeling that you are actually participating to a battle taking place, whether if you are flying or driving a vehicle, looking at some videos of another game represented by a snail (I don't actually enjoy that game though because of how arcadish it is and other reasons, whatever anyway), seeing the possibility to drive all sorts of vehicles while guys are flying attack helis or planes is one feature that's awesome, making the world around you feel alive, not just you and a few other guys flying and picking on static targets.

Being a tanker and seeing helicopters or planes fly around while you're having your battle on the ground is simply awesome, and the other way around too, that to me is what DCS lacks a lot at the moment.

A real battle will coming to Dynamic Campaign and AI improvements, that is not a CA feature. 

[SparxOne]

12 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

A real battle will coming to Dynamic Campaign and AI improvements, that is not a CA feature. 

Hopefully it will be that way, and hopefully Combined Arms will be implemented into the Dynamic Campaign in a way that makes it usefull. I'd love to be able to take control of a vehicle via Combined Arms going through a battle with its friendly units and trying to win an objective you know. 

Or even being able to take control of let's say an SA-19 Tunguska that is positioned defensively at an objective and now being able to engage what ever air threat that would come flying around.

 

Either way, i'm really hoping ED will make the war aspect of the game much more alive while we fly our jets and helis, or drive a vehicle and participate in an offensive

[draconus]

6 minutes ago, SparxOne said:

Hopefully it will be that way, and hopefully Combined Arms will be implemented into the Dynamic Campaign in a way that makes it usefull. I'd love to be able to take control of a vehicle via Combined Arms going through a battle with its friendly units and trying to win an objective you know. 

Or even being able to take control of let's say an SA-19 Tunguska that is positioned defensively at an objective and now being able to engage what ever air threat that would come flying around.

 

Either way, i'm really hoping ED will make the war aspect of the game much more alive while we fly our jets and helis, or drive a vehicle and participate in an offensive

All of that is already possible with good mission design. Just ask yourself if it's realistic and wise to move your ground forces without the air superiority.

[Callsign112]

11 hours ago, SparxOne said:

Thinking of it, one feature or improvement i'd love to see with DCS and Combined Arms is to have actual ground battles happening, proper ground battles with actual moving vehicles trying to achieve something (An objective of some sort) and not just drive to a set waypoint while engaging what ever ennemy unit they see. Might be something happening in all the scripted campaigns and missions (Which i unfortunately never play since i spend all my time in MP), but from my experience playing online, you simply never see ground units actually driving around trying to reach an objective and conquer it or what not, it's always the same thing, static stuff waiting to be destroyed like a shooting range almost 

 

Something that clearly seems to add to the fun and immersion is having the feeling that you are actually participating to a battle taking place, whether if you are flying or driving a vehicle, looking at some videos of another game represented by a snail (I don't actually enjoy that game though because of how arcadish it is and other reasons, whatever anyway), seeing the possibility to drive all sorts of vehicles while guys are flying attack helis or planes is one feature that's awesome, making the world around you feel alive, not just you and a few other guys flying and picking on static targets.

Being a tanker and seeing helicopters or planes fly around while you're having your battle on the ground is simply awesome, and the other way around too, that to me is what DCS lacks a lot at the moment.

Couldn't agree more, a combat simulator should include more than just air elements. But drac is right, you can already do this quite easily if you have Combined Arms.

I made a couple videos to show off both modern, and WWII ground units in DCS CA. In case your interested and haven't seen them yet, I linked them below. There was no fancy mission editor stuff needed to make either video. Everything you see is just the Ai reacting. All I did was have a bunch of blue units drive toward a bunch of red units holding a point using simple way points.

But the thing is, I could have taken control of any one of the ground/air units in the battle using Combined Arms, or I could have configured CA to allow other players to join me and take control of the various units as well.

The intention of the videos was to show how advanced the ground environment already is using CA. I have also made other videos that show off the user interface of player controlled vehicles, and it wouldn't take too much to push the combined arms experience in DCS well beyond something like WT.

 

 

 

[inexus]

9 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

Couldn't agree more, a combat simulator should include more than just air elements. But drac is right, you can already do this quite easily if you have Combined Arms.

I made a couple videos to show off both modern, and WWII ground units in DCS CA. In case your interested and haven't seen them yet, I linked them below. There was no fancy mission editor stuff needed to make either video. Everything you see is just the Ai reacting. All I did was have a bunch of blue units drive toward a bunch of red units holding a point using simple way points.

But the thing is, I could have taken control of any one of the ground/air units in the battle using Combined Arms, or I could have configured CA to allow other players to join me and take control of the various units as well.

The intention of the videos was to show how advanced the ground environment already is using CA. I have also made other videos that show off the user interface of player controlled vehicles, and it wouldn't take too much to push the combined arms experience in DCS well beyond something like WT.

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry but I must say I completely disagree.

The AI units are very static and hardly any reaction to be shot at. They can shoot at airplanes/helos with razer sharp precision that completely kills the immersion. Get the AI units to go between a few houses and you are practically guaranteed that one or more will get stuck in a house or in the small piles of rubbish that are next to them. 

I am not looking for drivable vehicles with the internals represented or a 1st person shooter. I just wish to simply have the AI to react a bit more as to 'feel alive' a bit. 

Edited September 25, 2022 by inexus

[Callsign112]

2 hours ago, inexus said:

 

I'm sorry but I must say I completely disagree.

The AI units are very static and hardly any reaction to be shot at. They can shoot at airplanes/helos with razer sharp precision that completely kills the immersion. Get the AI units to go between a few houses and you are practically guaranteed that one or more will get stuck in a house or in the small piles of rubbish that are next to them. 

I am not looking for drivable vehicles with the internals represented or a 1st person shooter. I just wish to simply have the AI to react a bit more as to 'feel alive' a bit. 

 

I think everyone here would agree that the Ai needs to see improvements.

But I don't think it is fair to say the Ai have hardly/no reaction to being shot at.

As demonstrated in the two videos above, the Ai units on both sides are doing the shooting. In the WWII video the red stationary units defeated the advancing blue units, but in the modern video it was the advancing blue units that defeated the stationary red units to take the point. This was without any interaction on my part.

Regarding way points, it is also true that path-finding is another area in need of improvements, which I believe is being worked on. But I think it is also worth pointing out that it also depends on how the end-user places the way points. You can eliminate a lot of problems by taking the time to plan unit movement, especially through areas with lots of obstacles.

When I am setting up a mission, I quite often make several test runs to iron out issues like path-finding.

A few things I found helped Ai movement were:

1. Experiment with the number of units in a group to find what works best.

2. Test different combinations of way point types, and unit speeds between each way point to see what works best.

3. Use as few way points as possible to achieve the desired movement.

You can have a much larger group of vehicles if all you are doing is having them move along a road, but you should reduce the group size when you want them to move through areas with lots of obstacles. You may find giving each of 10 units their own way points works better than giving a group of 10 vehicles a path to follow. 

Similarly, if you want a large group of vehicles to travel along a road before turning off into an open field following the lead unit, use on-road followed by off-road where you want them to enter the field. You can also make this movement look much more realistic though by breaking the large group into 2 or 3 smaller groups and using custom way points to have them enter the field. Using 2, or 3 smaller groups gives you more control over the speed of each group (time it arrives at each way point), the distance between each group, as well as the way point type each group follows at any given point. A column of 10 vehicles might look the most realistic as it moves through an objective when it is broken into a group of 4, a group of 3, a group of 2, and one single unit group.

When traveling along roads, add way points only at points where you want the group(s) to change direction. I start by placing my first way point at the groups destination, and then I add way points to force the on-road path along the desired route.

When traveling across country, I start with the destination way point and then do test runs to observe the group(s) movement. I might find the group navigates okay through a group of buildings, but then gets hung up on a hedge. I then go back and add the necessary way points to coax the group around the hedge. This takes time, but that's mission building for you.

Could the end-user experience be improved by improving the Ai logic in DCS World? Definitely.

Could the overall experience of the digital combat simulator be improved by improving the ground war side of DCS World? Without a doubt.

Work on Combined Arms please!

[Silver_Dragon]

1 hour ago, Callsign112 said:

I think everyone here would agree that the Ai needs to see improvements.

But I don't think it is fair to say the Ai have hardly/no reaction to being shot at.

As demonstrated in the two videos above, the Ai units on both sides are doing the shooting. In the WWII video the red stationary units defeated the advancing blue units, but in the modern video it was the advancing blue units that defeated the stationary red units to take the point. This was without any interaction on my part.

Regarding way points, it is also true that path-finding is another area in need of improvements, which I believe is being worked on. But I think it is also worth pointing out that it also depends on how the end-user places the way points. You can eliminate a lot of problems by taking the time to plan unit movement, especially through areas with lots of obstacles.

When I am setting up a mission, I quite often make several test runs to iron out issues like path-finding.

A few things I found helped Ai movement were:

1. Experiment with the number of units in a group to find what works best.

2. Test different combinations of way point types, and unit speeds between each way point to see what works best.

3. Use as few way points as possible to achieve the desired movement.

You can have a much larger group of vehicles if all you are doing is having them move along a road, but you should reduce the group size when you want them to move through areas with lots of obstacles. You may find giving each of 10 units their own way points works better than giving a group of 10 vehicles a path to follow. 

Similarly, if you want a large group of vehicles to travel along a road before turning off into an open field following the lead unit, use on-road followed by off-road where you want them to enter the field. You can also make this movement look much more realistic though by breaking the large group into 2 or 3 smaller groups and using custom way points to have them enter the field. Using 2, or 3 smaller groups gives you more control over the speed of each group (time it arrives at each way point), the distance between each group, as well as the way point type each group follows at any given point. A column of 10 vehicles might look the most realistic as it moves through an objective when it is broken into a group of 4, a group of 3, a group of 2, and one single unit group.

When traveling along roads, add way points only at points where you want the group(s) to change direction. I start by placing my first way point at the groups destination, and then I add way points to force the on-road path along the desired route.

When traveling across country, I start with the destination way point and then do test runs to observe the group(s) movement. I might find the group navigates okay through a group of buildings, but then gets hung up on a hedge. I then go back and add the necessary way points to coax the group around the hedge. This takes time, but that's mission building for you.

Could the end-user experience be improved by improving the Ai logic in DCS World? Definitely.

Could the overall experience of the digital combat simulator be improved by improving the ground war side of DCS World? Without a doubt.

Work on Combined Arms please!

We need understand....

Ground AI unit moving and tactics has none to do with CA (building by IA specialists), and require build by steeps to make them realistic WW2 / Cold War / Modern tactics, or infantry movement. The same with improve the Ground War (Dinamic Campaing building by DC enginers).

CA never was a ground combat simulator or a acurated representation of ground armored or mechanized war.

Edited September 25, 2022 by Silver_Dragon

[Callsign112]

39 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

We need understand....

Ground AI unit moving and tactics has none to do with CA (building by IA specialists), and require build by steeps to mape, realistic WW2 / Cold War / Modern tactics. The same with improve the Ground War (Dinamic Campaing building by DC enginers).
 

 

I think there might be a lost-in-translation thing going on here SD!

While I am advocating for continued support of Combined Arms, which is what this thread is about, I am also responding to someones comments regarding the CA video demos I linked above. Those being the members issues related to an Ai units ability to react to fire, and its path-finding logic.

I realize path-finding is not a CA issue in and of itself, but because of the large number of problems path-finding can represent when trying to get ground units to move across a map, the issue is often talked about in discussions related to Combined Arms. And there is nothing wrong with that considering the issues are largely encountered while using Combined Arms to move ground units around.

I have a lot less issue with setting way points for Ai aircraft than I do for Ai ground units.

I think you are overstating the importance of the Dynamic campaign feature in terms of fixing issues with Ai logic. The dynamic campaign will add to the way our missions/campaigns progress, but I don't expect that it will affect any of the current issues related to Ai logic. Path-finding for example will not be fixed because I can play my mission out in a dynamic campaign style.

While a dynamic campaign will definitely add to the ground war, I don't see it bringing the other types of improvements I want to see with the ground war side of DCS.

[Silver_Dragon]

31 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

I think there might be a lost-in-translation thing going on here SD!

While I am advocating for continued support of Combined Arms, which is what this thread is about, I am also responding to someones comments regarding the CA video demos I linked above. Those being the members issues related to an Ai units ability to react to fire, and its path-finding logic.

I realize path-finding is not a CA issue in and of itself, but because of the large number of problems path-finding can represent when trying to get ground units to move across a map, the issue is often talked about in discussions related to Combined Arms. And there is nothing wrong with that considering the issues are largely encountered while using Combined Arms to move ground units around.

I have a lot less issue with setting way points for Ai aircraft than I do for Ai ground units.

I think you are overstating the importance of the Dynamic campaign feature in terms of fixing issues with Ai logic. The dynamic campaign will add to the way our missions/campaigns progress, but I don't expect that it will affect any of the current issues related to Ai logic. Path-finding for example will not be fixed because I can play my mission out in a dynamic campaign style.

While a dynamic campaign will definitely add to the ground war, I don't see it bringing the other types of improvements I want to see with the ground war side of DCS.

I think some are getting overly confused... Those videos don't show an CA AI working, it just shows how the DCS World AI works on ground environment... A continue insane "light brigade charge" to reach the next waypoing, at matter a cost, without any coordination, force structure, organization, economy of forces or any tactics... and making friendly fire...

Ground Artificial intelligence reactions that have never been programmed in the core to working as the reality. We have none as a AI commander with take decisions. An armor platoon is not going to act as a unit, covering sectors of fire meanwhile protect a flank of a company on movement, reacting jointly against threats, or taking a hull down position, calling artillery to supress them, making ambusers, or doing a mechanized assault, deploying troops to attack a position while IFVs protect them, or turn from attack to defense if encounter superior enemy units firepower.

In part, a well-constructed dynamic campaign should move ground forces with a certain logic. Send recon units to scan the enemy device and look for weak points. Mount attack to make penetrations, with the help of artillery and armor, with the infantry clearing isolated enemy positions, and the engineers setting up minefields, and creating obstacles against the enemy, while supporting the advance by clearing obstacles and bridges to continue advancing to reach tactical / operational / strategy targets.

Im sorry, but some old games was a superior enemy AI, with intent making consice decisión on the battlefront. Pathfinding has a DCS Core problem, not only with ground environment, and meanwhile the maps go to up on complexity, more pathfinder problems go appears in the future.

[Callsign112]

@Silver_Dragon, some of the confusion seems to be with our use of Ai logic and Combined Arms in the same discussion. While they are two different things, it is just natural that we see Ai logic in action while using CA, unless the units are all occupied by real players. 

But I never suggested the videos above show CA Ai working. What I said was:

"But the thing is, I could have taken control of any one of the ground/air units in the battle using Combined Arms, or I could have configured CA to allow other players to join me and take control of the various units as well."

The mission examples in the videos were created specifically for CA use. Meaning, as a GAME MASTER I could take control of all units on both sides to affect the battle outcome. I could also control just one side vs Ai, or include other real players.

But as I already mentioned, the action shown in the video is all Ai controlled and it's worth mentioning that you can run the mission ten times and get 10 variations to the outcome.

I think that demonstrates that the Ai does in fact react depending on the situation. Meaning a vehicle that might be taken out early in one battle, might survive to the end the next time you run the mission to completely change its outcome.

But my understanding of a dynamic campaign is obviously quite different from yours. When I think of a dynamic campaign, I don't really think of Ai control, but more how the outcome of one battle will affect the next battle to follow.

[3WA]

17 hours ago, inexus said:

The AI units are very static and hardly any reaction to be shot at.

THIS.  I've been playing this sim for years.  Everything on the ground just literally stands there, waiting to be shot.  This sim has the worst AI of any game I have ever played.

In my opinion, AI should be the next thing that is HEAVILY upgraded.

[draconus]

2 hours ago, 3WA said:

Everything on the ground just literally stands there, waiting to be shot.

That's mission designer fault isn't it?

[BIGNEWY]

31 minutes ago, draconus said:

That's mission designer fault isn't it?

Essential yes, if you want moving targets the AI need to be given routes and tasks, to many just place them and then thats it. 

[Hotdognz]

21 hours ago, draconus said:

That's mission designer fault isn't it?

 

20 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Essential yes, if you want moving targets the AI need to be given routes and tasks, to many just place them and then thats it. 

Whilst the moving of AI ground targets is up to the mission designer for sure, its the reaction to the threat from us once we attack them, that would be up to the attacked AI as a mission designer can only script in so much, in all cases the Ai just stops of moves another 10 foot and then stops wanting to be hit again and in fact doesn't move after that, this is very apparent in the helicopters we are flying now where it just becomes a turkey shoot as the AI reaction to being fired on is very simple logic.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Hotdognz

[BIGNEWY]

it can be difficult to keep targets moving once engaged. 

I will ask the team

[BIGNEWY]

Ok, 

everyday is a school day. 

Select disperse under fire in the advance waypoint actions - options 

Untick the box for disperse under fire, the units will continue on the route regardless of engagement 

[Callsign112]

11 hours ago, 3WA said:

THIS.  I've been playing this sim for years.  Everything on the ground just literally stands there, waiting to be shot.  This sim has the worst AI of any game I have ever played.

In my opinion, AI should be the next thing that is HEAVILY upgraded.

 

9 hours ago, draconus said:

That's mission designer fault isn't it?

+1 drac! With a little know how, the end-user can make Ai units do quite a bit in DCS World, but I would still like to see the Ai logic for both air and ground units improved.

For example, we can actually already do most of what @Silver_Dragon would like to see almost with triggers alone.

"Ground Artificial intelligence reactions that have never been programmed in the core to working as the reality. We have none as a AI commander with take decisions. An armor platoon is not going to act as a unit, covering sectors of fire meanwhile protect a flank of a company on movement, reacting jointly against threats, or taking a hull down position, calling artillery to supress them, making ambusers, or doing a mechanized assault, deploying troops to attack a position while IFVs protect them, or turn from attack to defense if encounter superior enemy units firepower."

We can use triggers to have one group of units advance and protect the flank of another group of units if/when it comes under fire. Or we could add voice acting to the mission to make it sound like a unit is calling in artillery on a position when it comes under fire. Or we could have a group of infantry attack a position with supporting armored vehicles. 

But some of this logic could also be built-in to make it easier/more intuitive for the end-use. If we want the ground war to look and feel more realistic though, what we really need is more capable infantry units, and more types of them. More capable infantry moving with armored units would really light this thing up!

5 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Ok, 

everyday is a school day. 

Select disperse under fire in the advance waypoint actions - options 

Untick the box for disperse under fire, the units will continue on the route regardless of engagement 

Thanks @BIGNEWY, I have never used this before so just to be clear. When you select the box for disperse, the units will do this for the specified number of seconds, and then continue following their way points?

[BIGNEWY]

17 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

Thanks @BIGNEWY, I have never used this before so just to be clear. When you select the box for disperse, the units will do this for the specified number of seconds, and then continue following their way points?

if you select disperse under fire and tick the box they will stay dispersed for the time you have selected then continue. Just bare in mind if the engagement continues they will hold.

if you want them to continue even after being engaged untick the disperse under fire box, they will then continue moving. 

[Silver_Dragon]

On 9/26/2022 at 4:24 PM, Callsign112 said:

 

For example, we can actually already do most of what @Silver_Dragon would like to see almost with triggers alone.

"Ground Artificial intelligence reactions that have never been programmed in the core to working as the reality. We have none as a AI commander with take decisions. An armor platoon is not going to act as a unit, covering sectors of fire meanwhile protect a flank of a company on movement, reacting jointly against threats, or taking a hull down position, calling artillery to supress them, making ambusers, or doing a mechanized assault, deploying troops to attack a position while IFVs protect them, or turn from attack to defense if encounter superior enemy units firepower."

If this were so easy, it is very rare that nobody or ED in 10 years, would not have done it already.

We go to start by the basic... on DCS World, Tanks and vehicles dont make battle drills.

Another point is the total lack of radio communications associated with the platoon.

 

[Callsign112]

Great videos SD, thanks for sharing. The biggest point from the videos that should be/could be added to DCS World is weapons orientation while moving in formation. This is already present in other titles. Currently in DCS, all weapons are orientated with the turret centered. The Dev's should add the correct weapon orientation for each formation as an Ai improvement.