ED Forums - View Single Post - Unrealistic Threat Types
View Single Post
Old 01-13-2018, 11:06 AM   #14
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 477

Originally Posted by Fri13 View Post
Yes, but this is the problem in the current DCS (<2.5 at least) that we can't have a semi-realistic missions as we don't have a unit management as we should. Example, we should just be commanding a platoon or at most ATGM/Sniper team size infantry units and not individually but just as a platoon or team and let the AI position individual soldiers to positions they think is good. Same is with ie. MBT platoons that we are commanding individual ones, while we should just give a command for specific area and the threat direction, rules of engagements (zone, ranges, type etc) and let the AI to work out the rest. And then we don't have a communication simulation where delays of information passing between units is counted in, a inaccuracy of the units positions etc. Instead all is with perfect information.

But maybe we are getting there, ie how ED is developing the skeleton models for infantry etc. And as Wags mentioned that old engine before 2.5 was holding back the Combined Arms module, maybe it is a hint that they have been developing core functions for the unit commanding and all information warfare part that we can see in the future something closer to a "Close Combat" kind unit commanding and operations. So the AI would take care of the micromanagement and leave the mission designers to make the larger scale decisions if so wanted.

This could allow to build a more realistic missions more easily, or keep even the simple "fun factored" ones where target is a SA-6 or MBT Platoon alone middle of open field without any cover or support, just waiting that someone would toss a laser guided bomb at their direction.

Now alone the new engine in 2.x with Normandy tree system has started to change the techniques how to fly and how to deploy weapons, so when Caucasus 2.5 comes out, we might see a lot different methods to do the missions if mission designers are willing to polish the units operational tactics more realistic instead just throwing them to somewhere open.
And yet we will likely be seeing a multiplayer servers with easy target areas and air quake scenarios.
While I agree with some of that being points that would especially make CA better, I don't see the connection here really. Just because the mission design takes more time and effort because you have to direct all units individually doesn't mean it's impossible to set up realistic missions. You always have the option of not showing unit positions on the map.
Kang is offline