How do you ride a tank?

[Gunnyhighway]

I thought it was also an armor "sim". Yet i can not get into one how come?
I have DCS combined arms 1.5.
Any suggestions?

[Gunnyhighway]

But how can you control atank?...What is the procedure?

[Gunnyhighway]

How do you select a tank to ride?...from which screen do you choose the armor you will drive?

[Mors]

Yes, through the map behind F10 key, from there you select what you can control and then you get to operate that unit. You can as well command that group where your chosen vehicle belongs. Like you can command formation, places etc where to go.

[Gunnyhighway]

is that valid for all the DCS world version of the game?

[Surveyor]

Better get yourself Steel Beasts Pro PE for that. With all due respect, the CA module is a joke.

[Surveyor]

Originally posted by coxy:

I wouldnt say joke CA can helpful.

At least compared to SBPPE. To be more precise, CA is a joke as a tanking sim. It might be useful in other roles though. They should probably put a description stating explicitly that this is NOT an armor simulator.

[Mors]

Originally posted by Surveyor:

Originally posted by coxy:

I wouldnt say joke CA can helpful.

At least compared to SBPPE. To be more precise, CA is a joke as a tanking sim. It might be useful in other roles though. They should probably put a description stating explicitly that this is NOT an armor simulator.

CA is not an "tank simulator"!

It is now you who are throwing jokes around about something that ain't even such.

CA is "Combined Arms" and that means it is a module that allows a player to operate all arms to work together.
It ain't a individual unit module like DCS modules are. It is for commanders to command squads, platoons, companies and battalions.

The ED states clearly on their site:

DCS: Combined Arms gives you control of ground forces during the battle. Use the Command Map to move ground forces, set artillery fire missions, and control the ground battle. Assume the role of a Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) in multiplayer and designate targets for player-controlled close air support aircraft, or directly control armor vehicles or air defense weapons and engage the enemy.

Play DCS: Combined Arms as a real time strategy game, a first person armor warfare game, or direct the ground battle from the cockpit of a DCS aircraft like the A-10C Warthog, Ka-50 Black Shark, or P-51D Mustang.

DCS: Combined Arms supports both single player and multiplayer gameplay. When in multiplayer, different players can take on different roles such as artillery commanders, tank commanders, pilots, JTACS, etc. DCS: Combined Arms allows you full control of the battle. All roles can be changed dynamically during the battle.

At any point they say it is a "armor simulator".

You get basic and simple commanding capabilities for the group, as well the capability to engage enemy as commander, not as a vehicle crew positions.

[Surveyor]

Originally posted by Mors:

You get basic and simple commanding capabilities for the group, as well the capability to engage enemy as commander, not as a vehicle crew positions.

" or directly control armor vehicles"
The last time I tried it, I could operate a tank's main gun in a very gamey fashion. What's the point of that?
If you are making a command interface, make it look like one. Who in their right mind would, for example, take CMANO for an attempt at a ship simulator? You'd be hard pressed to... And CA just doesn't know itself what is it trying to be.

Ideally, it should have been something similar to ATF in the DCS environment with a 3D window. But if it insists on allowing you to control the ground vehicles directly, then that should be done properly.

[Mors]

Originally posted by Surveyor:

Originally posted by Mors:

You get basic and simple commanding capabilities for the group, as well the capability to engage enemy as commander, not as a vehicle crew positions.

" or directly control armor vehicles"
The last time I tried it, I could operate a tank's main gun in a very gamey fashion. What's the point of that?

Yes, they say that and it is totally true. You can directly control armor vehicles.... Are you saying it ain't true?
- You can drive forward or reverse
- You can even choose a advance speed
- You can operate main gun, secondary or even sometimes auxilary weapon:
- Aiming it
- Firing it
- Reloading it
- You can use NV view if the unit has such capability.

And what is the point? You can work as a JTAC or just a unit in group and be able to engage targets....

At any point they claim it is a armor simulator to level of Steel Beasts.
IF you have expectations to get something like Steel Beasts but much cheaper price, then it is your problem. As ED doesn't state or even implify such thing. If you fly in DCS, you know what to expect, if you watch their YouTube video presentation, you see what to expect.

If you are making a command interface, make it look like one. Who in their right mind would, for example, take CMANO for an attempt at a ship simulator? You'd be hard pressed to... And CA just doesn't know itself what is it trying to be.

Main interface in CA is the main map behind F10 key. It ain't a RTS game like Heroes of World War 2 where you can man and micro manage everything with very nice simulation of armors. It is more like a typical RTS games where you command unit to go somewhere, change its stance for fire of will, hold fire or fire on the ground and that is it. You can a commander who doesn't call directly to the tank commander and say what they should aim at or how to drive, you only give them commands for ETA to location and other general commands.

It is well known that CA is still under development and they need to get other things added before CA can advance more.
This is the whole DCS problem currently that there is no radar simulation, there is no fragment simulation, there is no armor simulation, there is no LOS simulation, AI reaction times simulation etc.
The whole DCS is still like Flanker 2.0 but with pretty graphics and far advanced cockpit, avionics and flight model simulation than other simulations are. But once you step out of that cockpit, everything is like in Flanker 2.0. You see a ground vehicle, it is nothing more than a bunch of pixel with Healt Bar that you need to empty with enough Damage Hitting.
The DCS is all about Su-27, Su-25A and A-10A flying around and doing simple combat tactics against SAM, SPAAG and other ground vehicles in simplest manner.

Ideally, it should have been something similar to ATF in the DCS environment with a 3D window. But if it insists on allowing you to control the ground vehicles directly, then that should be done properly.

It allows you to control the ground vehicles directly, it ain't a lie, it ain't false claim or anything like that.
You can select a ground vehicle and take direct control of it. You can command where to drive, and you can shoot what you want with what you want.

At no point "Direct Control" means that you have all armor penetration calculations in complex calculation manner, that each projectile has very complex math behind about angles, penetration etc. Or that you can man all the different crew positions with clickable functions and controls.

One day maybe there is more advanced things, as few years ago they showed M1A1 new movement animation and they had official request for more information about its behavior etc, hinting a A-10C level simulation for it.

But if you are working on project phase D, without completing C and B before it, you can't deliver what you want.
NTTR map was suppose to be out 2012 or something like that, while after A-10C was to come out from beta. It toke what, 3 years from them to get it out.... Because they needed to make the EDGE. And now they are working with the DCS 2.5 that ain't just Caucausus to 2.0 but far more new things.

But these false believes are spread everywhere
Even BIS is not claiming ARMA is a simulator, just a sandbox. Yet many player think ARMA is infantry or military simulator, and even realistic such (very far from truth).

In DCS World level simulation, a single individual soldier means _nothing_ A single MBT means _nothing_. The soldier life is very boring and mostly just waiting with very little action.

In pilots live, they as well are waiting, training in debriefings etc. When they get to fly, the 1-3 hour flying is big experience, on foot soldier life that 1-3 hours is nothing. Pilot has something to do when they fly 220km to one direction and then circle around in CAS for 30 minutes and return, while for infantry they sit 6 hours in a truck to travel that 220km and then they stand or lay still to something happens.
A tank driver drives on the road.... so do you want to have driving simulation now in DCS too? To drive 50km at speed of 30-40km/h? How exciting!
Want to drive tracked vehicle on the train and then secure it on that train and then wait that train to leave to its route and there to get vehicle out and prerare somewhere?

In Steel Beats you drive like 5km distances, in DCS you drive 50km distances and fly 300-400km.

[Surveyor]

Originally posted by Mors:

Yes, they say that and it is totally true. You can directly control armor vehicles.... Are you saying it ain't true?
- You can drive forward or reverse
- You can even choose a advance speed
- You can operate main gun, secondary or even sometimes auxilary weapon:
- Aiming it
- Firing it
- Reloading it
- You can use NV view if the unit has such capability.

And what is the point? You can work as a JTAC or just a unit in group and be able to engage targets....

Then they should have just made a JTAC addon and that would be it. If you ask money for a module, at least make it worth the money.

At any point they claim it is a armor simulator to level of Steel Beasts.
IF you have expectations to get something like Steel Beasts but much cheaper price, then it is your problem. As ED doesn't state or even implify such thing. If you fly in DCS, you know what to expect, if you watch their YouTube video presentation, you see what to expect.

It is not my problem, because I already own a license for SBPPE. Would be great, however, if ED at some point could consider to provide some competition to eSim.

Main interface in CA is the main map behind F10 key. It ain't a RTS game like Heroes of World War 2 where you can man and micro manage everything with very nice simulation of armors. It is more like a typical RTS games where you command unit to go somewhere, change its stance for fire of will, hold fire or fire on the ground and that is it. You can a commander who doesn't call directly to the tank commander and say what they should aim at or how to drive, you only give them commands for ETA to location and other general commands.

No need to tell me about RTS games when I already mentioned Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations and Armored Task Force by ProSIM. You might want to check for yourself what there are, then you'd probably agree that a similar interface would make more sense for this module.

It is well known that CA is still under development and they need to get other things added before CA can advance more.

I can't see them adding a single thing since the time I bought the module, whereas all the other modules are being worked on at a decent pace.

This is the whole DCS problem currently that there is no radar simulation

What about MiG-21? Also, that community A-4E mod seems to feature a radar with a functional terrain mapping mode, which looks impressive. I suppose that the AJS-37 comes equipped with a properly modeled radar as well.

there is no fragment simulation, there is no armor simulation, there is no LOS simulation, AI reaction times simulation etc.
The whole DCS is still like Flanker 2.0 but with pretty graphics and far advanced cockpit, avionics and flight model simulation than other simulations are. But once you step out of that cockpit, everything is like in Flanker 2.0. You see a ground vehicle, it is nothing more than a bunch of pixel with Healt Bar that you need to empty with enough Damage Hitting.
The DCS is all about Su-27, Su-25A and A-10A flying around and doing simple combat tactics against SAM, SPAAG and other ground vehicles in simplest manner.

About time to add a more detailed modeling, don't you think? Though I'm infinitely grateful for adding PFM and some classic helicopters already.

It allows you to control the ground vehicles directly, it ain't a lie, it ain't false claim or anything like that.
You can select a ground vehicle and take direct control of it. You can command where to drive, and you can shoot what you want with what you want.

I didn't say it was a lie. I said it was a joke.

At no point "Direct Control" means that you have all armor penetration calculations in complex calculation manner, that each projectile has very complex math behind about angles, penetration etc. Or that you can man all the different crew positions with clickable functions and controls.

And who is the target audience of such "direct control"? I just fail to see a reason for including something like this into DCS World. If it was an attempt to lure in some Battlefield players, I'm afraid they are not buying it, neither literally, nor figuratively.

One day maybe there is more advanced things, as few years ago they showed M1A1 new movement animation and they had official request for more information about its behavior etc, hinting a A-10C level simulation for it.

I'm also wondering what happened to that. The video looked interesting back then.

But if you are working on project phase D, without completing C and B before it, you can't deliver what you want.
NTTR map was suppose to be out 2012 or something like that, while after A-10C was to come out from beta. It toke what, 3 years from them to get it out.... Because they needed to make the EDGE. And now they are working with the DCS 2.5 that ain't just Caucausus to 2.0 but far more new things.

I'm loosely following the project since Flanker 1.0, so I'm aware of the above. In fact, the pushing of the updated Caucasus release further into 2017 disappoints me quite a lot.

But these false believes are spread everywhere
Even BIS is not claiming ARMA is a simulator, just a sandbox. Yet many player think ARMA is infantry or military simulator, and even realistic such (very far from truth).

With the ACE mod in place it pretty much is a sim for what it's worth.

In DCS World level simulation, a single individual soldier means _nothing_ A single MBT means _nothing_. The soldier life is very boring and mostly just waiting with very little action.

In pilots live, they as well are waiting, training in debriefings etc. When they get to fly, the 1-3 hour flying is big experience, on foot soldier life that 1-3 hours is nothing. Pilot has something to do when they fly 220km to one direction and then circle around in CAS for 30 minutes and return, while for infantry they sit 6 hours in a truck to travel that 220km and then they stand or lay still to something happens.
A tank driver drives on the road.... so do you want to have driving simulation now in DCS too? To drive 50km at speed of 30-40km/h? How exciting!
Want to drive tracked vehicle on the train and then secure it on that train and then wait that train to leave to its route and there to get vehicle out and prerare somewhere?

In Steel Beats you drive like 5km distances, in DCS you drive 50km distances and fly 300-400km.

And after eSim has updated their terrain so that it could be possible to traverse 50 km in a more or less straight line, you would write off Steel Beasts as boring?
Nobody is forced to utilize the WHOLE terrain at once. It's just nice to have more space at your disposal. Especially for a dynamic campaign (another "about time" feature to add to DCSW).

[Gunnyhighway]

Surveyor, how much do you get from SB proPE?....do you live in Germoney?... how many accounts do you have?