The Argument FOR Comined Arms in DCS world
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 10. 2022
- Is DCS World a study level flight sim? I'd like to think that is a lot more than that.
Can DCS World be a bit more noob friendly? Yes, I think so, and this is how.
Combined Arms unlocks the ground combat portion of DCS World. While it is a bit under developed compared to the sky warrior aspect, the ground warrior aspect has been developing over the years.
More DCS Combined Arms videos are popping up on my feed, meaning that more people are playing CA - and I'd like to see more content from you beautiful CZcamsrs!
DCS multiplayer server admins - maybe it is time for some Combined Arms slots on your servers.
Mission creators - this sort of thing can be fun! (hint hint)
Developers at Eagle Dynamics - you have done some great work, I have definitely noticed the improvements to this module and this (increasing DCS CA content on CZcams) should be proof that it is time to put more priority on this module.
Lets all work together to grow this overlooked side of DCS. - Hry
They should just make Combined Arms free honestly been saying it for years!!!
I think that Combined Arms has a lot of potential, but is currently restricted by the fact that ground damage models and ground AI is very primitive currently. I hope that ED focuses a bit more on improving these things, because it would make the module a lot better and draw more new players into DCS
The server you are looking for is Alpenwolfs Cold War Server.
The Missions are won or lost mainly with combined arms.
You have JTAC slots with single vehicles that provide comms for CAS and GCI.
And a commander slot for the greater scale ground warfare.
Helicopter can deploy troops, SAM etc.
So if the team is communicating well. You have a great combined arms expirience
I never knew how cool Combined Arms was, thanks for taking the time to show this off! :] Just bought it myself during the sale, it looks like it would be tons of fun to play with a friend doing air support or vice-versa. :D
Press V to turn your stabilization on.
Also - the M60 has a laser range finder so no need to do whatever that 'high shooting' thing is that you're doing. 😀
If your new to DCS world, you like easy flying, then get FC3 first to fly. If you get other expensive modules, you will be learning the controls instead of flying, or testing it on your system. After getting a few fc3 aircraft, it cost just as much just to get the whole Flaming Cliffs 3 module, which is also usefull with third party mod, that you can download for free, like f-22, ect..
As passionate player of Arma 3, I am highly interested in Combined Arms unlike all pilots in DCS. They don't want realistic operations on land, just the next ultra realistic cockpit, that it. Not to mention the prices of the DLC. What "action" with land vehicles only without any infantry?
been playing for 15 years. using T16000 for last 3 years, you dont need expensive hotas.track ir i got from a thrift store where i was lucky. they had a sale for 50 off in 2022 december and probably in 2023 easter. when you look at the long run these costs are very minimal. and i still dont own few modules like some ww2 stuff, viggen ,etc
Delanclip gear with ps3 cam, or other cams is cheapest besides the new head trackers that are coming out now.
Nice bro😊
Great video!!
:D thanks!
If you want a detailed Tank Sim try Steel Armour Blaze of War. It does T62 and M60 Iraq and Iran. It's an old game in comparison but very detailed. Other than than Gunner - HEAT PC is the latest and greatest hope.
Please try Steel Beasts. In my opinion that is the benchmark in pc armor sim. I try also Gunner, heat pc. But in current state it's not that great...
I will look into them. I am heavily invested in DCS but I can keep an open mind.
@@dewfiend You maybe also interested in Sam Simulator. It's free. Visually somewhat lackluster. But DCS absolutely need it as a complete module.
You was aiming over the vehicle @15:34. Under 800 yards use the t at the top of the sight.
Okay I watched your video and loads of fun with Combined Arms. So, I wanted to comment on some of the things you were saying in regards to modules and getting tarted in DCS being too expensive. I’ve been flying simulators since the late 80’s & up through the 90’s all the way to today. So I think I have a pretty good knowledge of simulations. I’ve been flying DCS since it’s first days of SU27 etc.. As far as DCS being too expensive and the modules, I have to say I totally Disagree with you. There are so many super good FREE mods, you could actually play DCS completely free! Sure purchasing CA makes the game much better and opens up the game to access to more modules. But you can download the A-4E Skyhawk as a example. It can be flown off a carrier or land based airfields. It has a ton of weapons it can carry and even has a few that the makers made just for the Mod! The A-4E is extremely detailed both in and out of the cockpit and could easily stand up to a lot of pay modules. It has a air to air radar and Air to Ground mode. It also has computer numb sites which really help getting warheads on foreheads!!! Then you have mods like the SU-30 but I think you need CA to get it up and running. CA isn’t that expensive to purchase on sale and the regular price is $40 which is a pretty standard price for a lot of games out there in the real world. Sure having a head Tracker and HOTAS makes the simulation more realistic but you don’t Have to have them in order to play DCS. I went without a head tracker for many, many years before I purchased one and it changed to whole simulation for me! Same with a HOTAS, I had a Sidewinder stick I used for many years until I got the Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS and the only reason I purchased it was because i liked flying the A10CII. Also the Mod community has put out Carriers and other military assets for the simulators.
So there are a whole slew of Free mods out there to fly in DCS. Also don’t forget about the Play and Pay or Try Out feature Eagle DYnamics offers! This allows people to fly Modules before they pay for it allowing people to see if the module is something they like. Last you get TWO maps to fly in. There’s the Marianas Islands Map and the Caucus map. Both of those maps are pretty good for a Free simulator. The Marianas will be getting a upgrade soon to make it a WWII era map. So once thats released you’ll have Three Free maps to fly in!
So, I don’t think people have to stay with the small trainer aircraft that you seem to enjoy. They can get the A-4E Skyhawk and drop bombs or Dogfight all they want! They can download some of the free Carriers and fly off a carrier or use the free ones included with the game. My last item I wish to comment on is what was said about the F/A-18C and the role it plays. You said it’s role is to launch, refuel, drop bombs and refuel then land on the carrier. Well sure thats One of the roles it can fly but it doesn’t have to. You can fly off any airbase or even make a Forward Arming and Refueling Point or FARP. Then you can fly off a freeway or rule road anywhere where you can find a good enough road! You don’t have to refuel in the air off a tanker. So theres All kinds of things people can do without having to use a carrier. There’s a whole lotta game in DCS that can be played for Free ^ adding CA makes it a lot bigger but people can wait for a sale. Eagle Dynamics seems to ALWAYS have a sale running! Just my opinion. Sorry it’s so long but as you can see I’m a DCS Fanboy that’s for sure! Thanks
I got CA for like 15 bucks many years ago. ED was talking about 'big plans' for the module back then, but I don't remember any significant changes from the patchlogs since then, except some QOL and bugfixes. It's still more of a tech demo than anything else, ground combat is just way too bad to be fun and the RTS element is crippled by terrible AI. There are some edge cases where it can be worthwhile, but those depend on having a decent community and/or exceptional mission/server design.
It's barely worth 15 bucks, let alone 40.
That server DDCS, supports this module btw. Posting in response to 13:00. But I realize I'm posting 8 months after you uploaded this video :). You still enjoy this module?
Yes. I think that enough recent attention to “Gunner Heat PC” has actually renewed a lot of interest in Combined Arms over the past few weeks. I enjoy the module and think that there is still a future to it. That future will have to have community support before devs put a ton of work into it, but I believe that it is happening.
@@dewfiend Yeah would love to see more features get added to it from the devs. Thanks
On the flying servers, you rarely see anyone in a tank, besides A.I. of course.
You can have a huge amount of fun buying nothing more than a single module. Buy F-16C, play on free Caucasus map, enjoy. The Caucasus map, despite not being the *prettiest* or *biggest* map, is in my opinion still the *best* map because it has complex geography and the mountainous terrain allows for more tactical complexity. Trying to do low altitude TFR ingress in the flat terrain of Syria or Persian Gulf is a bit of a fruitless exercise (granted there is *some* high terrain in PG, but it's at the periphery).
Likewise, you could buy AH-64, or F-5E, or most of the modules and have a great time on the Caucasus map.
The supercarrier module is only pertinent if you want to fly modern US carrier aircraft, and even then, supercarrier module isn't required. And even if you want to play F/A-18, there is no reason it *must* fly from a carrier. Out of all the nations that fly it, the ONLY one that flies it from carriers is the US Navy. Everyone else flies their F/A-18 from land bases. Australia, Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia, Spain and Switzerland all fly it from land bases.
Another thing to take into to account is that a lot of the player base are going to be playing the American F/A 18 or F 14 because it is from Top Gun and the F/A 18 has more capabilities than any other DCS aircraft and the Russian’s also got a carrier in the DLC, but I wouldn’t recommend it because of the insane cost
Edit spelling
You dont have to pay for anything. nobody said you need a module. nobody said you need a hotas. my friend loves using an xbox controller and a free face tracking software. Guys, dont let you put this off
DCS devs take far too long even to push out aircraft, to think they would dare delve into developing study level or even mid level(looking good and not totally shit) graphical looking ground vehicles and ocean going ships, like, don't get me wrong, it would be awesome if something more came of combined arms, but I just don't believe it will, as it is, it looks like you're playing something out of the 90's graphical speaking, so the devs would need to put in some heavy overtime, overtime I just don't believe they will ever commit too, the overtime that's required to make combined arms worthy of playing, cause honestly, fucked if I would play this in it's current state, it's so damn horrible, both the graphics and mechanics, unfortunately I think it's just a big pipe dream,
entry level hotas for 250????? the TM 16k is ~60-80 euro/dollar. and i dont agree that you "need" head tracker if you just want to do a bit of simple AG missions or some single player air to air combat.
Where are you finding a 16k for less than over 100 lol? Also a head tracker is probably more essential than a HOTAS, I'd honestly recommend trackir + an Xbox controller over HOTAS and mouse
@@Steven-cf1ty i bought mine for ~~70€ 3 years go xD
You just don't know what you're missing.
Would you rate dcs higher than WOT?
What a good question! There are a few things that World ofTanks does well - where DCS really falls flat - specifically armor thickness and angle mechanics. Armor plate thickness changes in WOT based on the aspect angle the incoming shell path and even can ricochet a shot if the angle is low enough. DCS only has a single hit box per side and it either penetrates and does full damage or is completely absorbed and does little damage without taking any other variables into account. I called the hit boxes “barbaric” in DCS. The computational mechanics was really only meant to be good enough to deal with an aircraft attack.
Where DCS is significantly better is in the spotting mechanics, muzzle auto-elevation for range, and the sandbox style of mission creation. The spotting mechanics of WOT take into account line of sight, how much of the target tank is visable, distance, and how hard it is to see out of the players steel box. If there isn’t enough of a tank to see at a distance, then you simply don’t see an enemy tank. Not a popular mechanic to say the least. In DCS you can see out to near infinity, at least in comparison to WOT, but the limits of your main weapon system prevents unrealistic battles. WOT distances were unrealistically close for tank battles anyhow. Also, WOT auto-elevates the muzzle for range, an arcade feature, and while tanks in DCS like the M1A1 Abrams has a laser rangefinder that performes that corrction for you but it is not automatic and only on tanks with that feature. In WOT the gameplay is 15 vs 15, so if one team spawns with more tigers than shermans and the other team spawns with more shermans than tigers you are going to have a bad time… it is vastly more complex than that, but you aren’t going to be able simulate the proverbial battle of five shermans to a single tiger in WOT. (Anecdotally the US Army lost 5 shermans to take down a single tiger tank, a numerical average and not a tactic). The DCS mission editor was literally made to create and simulate such battles.
Other features like shot dispersion on the move, ballistic arcs, and splash damage are present in both games and are realistic enough for me to believe that that is how it works in the real world.
One glaring fault in DCS is the AI, who can see (and shoot) unimpeded through trees and buildings.
The WOT tech tree and upgrades taught me to appreciate the history and different models and parts of a tank, a feature that made me passionate about specific tank loadouts (give me a sherman with the 100mm artillery cannon pls! Sherman derp for life!). In DCS Combined Arms, you drop into the commander seat with little idea of what weapons or features are in this vehicle, not that it is hard to find out but by comparison to WOT you had to work hard to unlock a particular weapon system and so you had an appreciation for it. Dispassionate is the word I was looking for, dispassionate about dropping into a random unit in DCS. I have found a few favorites in DCS to be passionate about, like the jagdpanther, the sherman, the stryker spg, or the M113 with the m61 vulcan cannon… and the DCS pattern of research - practice - win kicks in.
TLDR yes I rank DCS higher than WOT, with DCS combined arms not being perfect but getting better.
I feel a better comparison is war thunder and dcs
@@potatopilot1699 you are probably right, but I don’t have any first-hand experience with War Thunder. From what little I have seen of it on CZcams, I would be hard pressed to describe it as a simulator. World of Tanks isn’t really a simulator, World of WarPlanes isn’t really either, not in the management of speed and AOA and weight like in DCS, where I would describe DCS as a simulator. WarThunder strikes me as a wierd combination of WoT and WoWP where you are fighting first and given sufficient 3D freedom to give the user a sense of flying/driving. Perhaps that starts to meet the minimum definition what a simulator is, but where I draw the line I don’t think that a War Thunder pilot has much flying to do - just put the cursor in the intended direction and go. Ask a DCS pilot if they have a similar experience… FFS I quit playing MSFS2020 because I thought that it was too arcade like to really be a simulator. WoT, WoWP, and War Thunder are, in my humble opinion, great area arcade games that cater to a relatively unskilled audience and gives them an experience where skill in flying/driving is automated so that fighting is the only thing that really remains for the user to do. “Arcade”. Compare that to DCS… you will find that just flying takes a significant amount of skill and the fighting is unintuitive and difficult. While I have no doubt that War Thunder is a rewarding, immersive, and satisfying experience that does indeed take skill to play, I still can’t properly compare it DCS. DCS was always meant to be difficult to fly, fight, and unintuitively not autmated because the goal was to be as real a simulation as possible and requires you to know many of the skills that a professional career pilot would have to know.
War Thunder is a better comparison, but still a terrible comparison because these are very different kinds of games.
@@dewfiend fine said, I like WarThunder for it really great Armor details, but no comparison to dcs because two complete different things, one is like a semi realistic arcade game, the other tries to be the realistic simulator. I have both I play both (dcs more since a few weeks) but I also love both for what they are.
11:40 what about war thunder?
@Mischi I never played war thunder, mostly because I thought that it was more or less the same thing as WoT. I was looking for DCS. I was tempted by IL2’s Tank Crew (honestly I still am) but I wanted DCS’s sandbox style.
Same😔😔😔
why buy it if you're not into it???
40 bucks for this????
You know why they say you need this module? Top Gun Maverick wannabe Pilots fanboys wetting they pants on DCS :)