CA Possibilities

[NineLine]

So I know that CA is not intended to be a study sim for armored vehicles, but could it be, does it open the door for 3rd party devs to add more advanced simulated vehicles?

 

I was just day dreaming at work about what could be :)

[BigfootMSR]

It has been mentioned that World is supposed to eventually be a simulator of land sea and air. I personally believe that CA is a step towards that future for the land portion. Only time will tell. I do know that there was a least one 3rd party developer who was interested in creating tanks for world but not the right time for it just yet. Perhaps someday. Its a great dream though :)

[Faelwolf]

DCS World has the potential to be the "Holy Grail" of simming.

 

Land, Sea, and Air, complete with a command and control structure, with realistically (as real as a computer sim can get) modelling, all interacting in real time. A few games have done this before, but not nearly at this level of realism.

 

This would be way too much to tackle by a single company, so I am excited to see it being opened up to 3rd party developers. Free market forces will hopefully drive the developers to make their products high fidelity and weed out the junk.

 

There are limits, of course, I wouldn't care to see it become "The Sims at War" or something, but I would love to see much better AI for ground forces. Combat Mission, for example has troop AI that can react to the tactical situation and will ignore orders if they are tired out or under suppressing fire, etc. They can also react to a nearby threat and will take the initiative rather than blindly follow a script.

 

Of course all of this is limited by technology, I have to wonder how much today's computers can handle. Just imagine what the next generation will have :)

[PlainSight]

First we'd need persistent long-term battle campaigns, where you could jump into the action in any vehicle you have. Planes or ground armor. Ship battles are now done with missiles and planes, so i don't think we'd see ww2-style broadside gun action. It would be great to manage a fleet, then jump into a hornet and fly a mission yourself. I think that's the most exciting part of naval warfare. Or just let AI to do the management.

 

So one part of the game would play like a strategy, if you want to, or let AI to do the strategy and you just fly/drive the missions AI or your MP commander prescribes you.

[Ripcord]

First we'd need persistent long-term battle campaigns, where you could jump into the action in any vehicle you have. Planes or ground armor. Ship battles are now done with missiles and planes, so i don't think we'd see ww2-style broadside gun action. It would be great to manage a fleet, then jump into a hornet and fly a mission yourself. I think that's the most exciting part of naval warfare. Or just let AI to do the management.

 

So one part of the game would play like a strategy, if you want to, or let AI to do the strategy and you just fly/drive the missions AI or your MP commander prescribes you.

 

They are making some steps in that direction. We saw the mission generator appear. Now we see the warehouses show up, although not yet functional -- still WIP. So maybe soon we see damage tracking? Or maybe the ability for a mission to write results or variables to a file, which can then be read by another mission...(eg, last location of naval units & ground units). There is a lot that can be done, even with that we have now -- it just requires a lot of work.

[Wolfie]

DCS World has the potential to be the "Holy Grail" of simming.

 

Yes, ARMA has been around for what?, 10 years now? Surely we have the tech to move beyond that now. DCS needs to get the pretty realistic landscape of ARMA, and then move beyond that with better graphics. Only then will we be able to bring in realistic land and sea forces. This sim needs to become the "real world" version of ARMA. Imagine playing in a Crysis graphics world with "real" study level sim tanks, aircraft, and infantry. And I'm sure there are third party developers and mod groups ( ACE, for instance ), who share that dream. We just need DCS to give us a base world.

 

I know graphics can really bring a computer to its knees, but come'on. Were study sim players. We spend money on our computers and we want more. I play Crysis on a cheap $500 USD HP Laptop. If my laptop can do that with large Crysis maps, I know a good desktop with a $500 USD video card could probably run Crysis graphics in DCS. This sim does need better graphics (and buildings, etc), especially if you want to attract FPS players for ground troops.

[LazerPotatoe]

I play Crysis on a cheap $500 USD HP Laptop. If my laptop can do that with large Crysis maps, I know a good desktop with a $500 USD video card could probably run Crysis graphics in DCS. This sim does need better graphics (and buildings, etc), especially if you want to attract FPS players for ground troops.

 

there's a major difference between an engine that is fine for displaying terrain, and an engine that needs to do that AND work with AI, work with you, work with pathfinding, work with radio simulation, LOS, etcetera etcetera etcetera.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1341416&postcount=25

 

Graphics are a tiny part of DCS. The simulation itself, which is all processed by the CPU, is the main consumer of system resources.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1476460&postcount=42