DCS Features Wish List

[EvilBivol-1]

Yes, I was thinking more about a possible third-party campaign system for single-player use. I think the combonation of the data in the debrief and lua export, combined with the ME trigger system can be used to create a campaign system that is able to track and carry over much of the world-state from mission to mission. Not being terribly familiar with the code, I had some time ago asked Vyrtuoz of Tacview to consider this possibility. Here is his reply:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=627620&postcount=66

 

Of course, this is back almost 2 years, but at least for single-player, it should probably stand true today.

Edited August 14, 2010 by EvilBivol-1

[GhostDog]

Just curious, what objects other than buildings can you collide with in BS?

[Boberro]

Power towers, power lines hmmm nothing more can't remind.

[GhostDog]

Is there a way to render a tree and have the game see it as a power tower, thus making the trees "collidable"?

[Boberro]

Yes, however AI will crash... cause they don't see them properly... something like that... it has been explained before BS cam in ;]

[GhostDog]

Found the discussion: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=52511&highlight=power+tower+trees

[AndyHill]

Andy, this is something we've discussed on the forum on a few occasions. It's certainly not ultra-convenient, but a combination of debrief and lua export data per mission should be enough to create a simulated wold-state transfer between missions at least to some degree.

 

I haven't looked very closely but judging by the results (TacView) and what I know about export.lua, yes they should provide a pretty comprehensive set of data. I don't know if something important is missing (like for example destroyed bridges, buildings?), but what there is could take us pretty far. It's just a bit heavy-duty solution for something simple that already has a simpler existing solution (the debriefing of singleplayer missions). I don't know how hard it would be to have something similiar for multiplayer as well, in general Lock on / BS have excellent export and modification functionalities.

 

One thing that has been puzzling me quite a bit is the strong separation of single and multiplayer functionality, for example the campaigns don't work in multiplayer mode at all (unless I've really missed something). Another puzzling thing (and quite relevant to dynamic multiplayer campaigns) is the way human flyables and AI planes are separated in multiplayer. It's very handy when in Il-2 you can just pick any flyable (unless specified otherwise) while the AI takes care of the rest.

 

Anyway, I've flown a lot of dynamic campaigns in Il-2 and although they're not exactly perfect, they've offered countless hours of fun especially when shared with buddies online. Lock on / DCS represent a much more complex environment, but I'm pretty confident that it should be possible to create enjoyable DCs for them as well. I can't code worth ****, but I would be very willing to assist in design work or at scripting level if someone is seriously working on a DCSDCS. "Digital Combat Simulator Dynamic Campaign System", wow that's poetic, someone just HAS to do it now!

[AndyHill]

 

4) place="Batumi". Just what is needed. But where is the information about whether Batumi is a friendly or hostile airbase relative to the player? The side of the player is known (by parsing the complex mission file as well as the debrief log) but the side of places can change due to triggers. If a player lands at an enemy airbase they should be considered captured and penalised for giving the enemy a working aircraft. This case can only be determined by modifying the net LUA to place a marker in the debrief log.

 

Some very interesting points there, this one just left me wondering a bit. I would assume you get info on if the player is red or blue? If so, wouldn't the campaign engine know which side Batumi is on? Whether or not it was taken over during the mission is another thing altogether and would of course be nice to know, but not vital at this point. Unless of course you're talking about a constantly running campaign on a dogfight server for example?

[Dr_Arrow]

I think some form of dynamic campaign generator is needed. However Moa, I don't think it has to be that complex and track every destroyed vehicle, building, bridge, etc (at least not in the first iteration). I woud consider take that data only as supplementary for moving the front and generating another mision. RamGEN was a good base example of how it could work, it just tracked what was destroyed in the last mission and generated the big scene by itself like base capturing and frontline move. I think that it is more important at this stage to have a good mission generator (I just ran out of missions in FC2) that takes in account what happened in previous missions and generates variable missions rather than a super dynamic campaign generator that tracks all bullets shot.

[shu77]

Well not only do you need to track them, but you also need to simulate all of there movements in an intelligent fashion while the player is not in the sim.

It also needs to be slightly more intelligent then say your RTS AI, its not just a matter of tank charges etc.

People talk about the Wall of Migs in falcon, as much as that had a good campaign engine it is a case of is that a realistic case for a large war?

Not to say it shouldn't be done, but it is a pretty complex undertaking.

[Dr_Arrow]

Not to say it shouldn't be done, but it is a pretty complex undertaking.

That's what I am trying to say - developing too complex dynamic campaign engine is a major undertaking for some years (2-3). No I think it would make senese to develop at least a good mission generator that takes in account what happened in previous missions (something like an expanded RAMGEN for FC1 was).

[Grimes]

It also needs to be slightly more intelligent then say your RTS AI, its not just a matter of tank charges etc.

 

Donno which RTS games you've been playing, but there quite a few out there that do a decent job of adapting to changes by the player. Unfortunately the WICs, SC2 (both of them) and other rts games are more "Real Time Tactical" than at a strategic level. I'd think something more like a 4x game would fix better into the same fundamentals that would make a dynamic campaign interesting. For those wondering a 4X game is like the civilization series. The goal is literally to "explore, expand, exploit, and exterminate"

 

That kinda fits in quite well from a dynamic campaign viewpoint.

[Moa]

The trick for the dynamic campaign is to leverage technologies that make it easier:

* XML, since XML to object conversion is far easier (eg. JAXB) than parsing LUA tables (I did this in lottu)

* Relational databases,

* Java, much easier than C++ (and more portable than C#, which is derived from Java anyway), plus the compiler helps you a lot (unlike LUA where it is all trial-and-error to get things to work properly, painfully slow to develop in).

 

Using these the 'war' can easily keep track of the ammunition expended and objects destroyed since most of the heavy lifting is done for you. The stats program I'm halfway through parses the results of battles (debrief.log) and already puts this in the database. It is one more step to modify the model of the world and another step for a mission generator based on that. A lot of work certainly, but not years (the bulk of my stats work for FC1 was dealing with missing/unreliable entries in logs which is now mostly fixed in FC2, but the FC2 work is correlating events since the log information is scattered between the network log, debrief log, and mission).

Edited August 16, 2010 by Moa

[shu77]

Donno which RTS games you've been playing, but there quite a few out there that do a decent job of adapting to changes by the player. Unfortunately the WICs, SC2 (both of them) and other rts games are more "Real Time Tactical" than at a strategic level. I'd think something more like a 4x game would fix better into the same fundamentals that would make a dynamic campaign interesting. For those wondering a 4X game is like the civilization series. The goal is literally to "explore, expand, exploit, and exterminate"

 

That kinda fits in quite well from a dynamic campaign viewpoint.

 

Honestly C&C2 :) I was thinking more the ROE around employing each of the units in the OOB for the red and blue teams is a lot more complex than what I have seen. Youre also talking a significantly more complicated threat modelling system for each unit. That's before we start on logistics modelling supply line management etc.

Edited August 16, 2010 by shu77

[gazcrowbar]

I'm naively assuming that extra effects would cost GPU resources which i doubt will be a problem for most, if it was CPU then there would be a major worry to frame rates. As for the smoke how about this video then: (no idea of it's provenance e.g. location but nevertheless)

[Boberro]

So maybe community would create new explosion effects? I know animations are in PFX files probably... is it possible? If yes nothing stops from creating new explosions. If it is not possible now, ED should say how to.... it's better than waiting for ED's explosions update minimum 1.5 year between modules.

[spyda]

maybe later on they can create an update pack with more detail added i would pay for that :)

[Boberro]

Heh I wouldn't ;]

[TeeJay82]

Play after bail choice?

 

now i know this probably wont happen, but as im thinking... its a pilots job to fly the plane, but he also needs to get back to base after getting shot down/ systems malfunctions. so if your ejecting and get to play FPS style in some sort (gameplay option?) so if your killed, its a campaign fail and if you RTB you live to fight another day.

 

Big thought in short words:music_whistling:

[MTFDarkEagle]

Very nice idea, but I doubt it's going to happen

[HitchHikingFlatlander]

Not gonna happen anytime soon at least. This has been mentioned many times, I'll stick with the simulation of flight aspect myself. And please don't hold up Arma as an example that it can be done lol!

[sliderslot]

If DSC would only develop one. That would be it - the best military sim out there!!

 

Or - make it easy for you clever guys out there to create one.

 

Dynamic Campaigns are massively under rated. Its the only thing lacking in my opinion.

[Lio]

In DCS:BS you can actualy walk around when in third person or first person view when you hit the ground after a eject.

[EtherealN]

Soo... Basically you want a study simulator AND an tactical shooter in the same package?

 

No. I'm afraid this is just not possible.

[element1108]

Not interested in that option...(it's not a bad idea) I personally have no business on the ground in a flight sim unless it's for taxi to and from the active ;).