ChatGPT 5 is here

[Kaktus]

A small conversation I had.. what do you think? 
 

Yes — it absolutely could, and what you’re describing is basically building your own dynamic campaign engine for DCS, but with GPT-5 acting as the “brain.”

 

Here’s how it would work in practice for persistent multiplayer dynamic campaigns:

 

 

 

 

1. Tracking Units, Losses, and Logistics

 

 

• GPT-5 wouldn’t “live inside” DCS, but your bridge would:
  1. After a mission ends, the .miz or mission results log (.log or debrief.log) is exported from the server.
  2. The bridge parses these results (kills, damaged units, ammo used, etc.).
  3. GPT-5 updates a master campaign database (could be JSON, SQLite, or even Google Sheets).
  4. It calculates the new strategic situation: which units survived, which bases have fuel, which SAM sites are still operational, etc.
•  
• That updated data becomes the input for generating the next mission file.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Rebuilding the Next Mission

 

 

• GPT-5 reads the updated campaign state and:
  • Places remaining friendly and enemy forces in the correct positions.
  • Adjusts available aircraft slots based on losses.
  • Changes fuel/ammo at airbases according to supply.
  • Moves frontlines forward/back depending on previous mission results.
•  
• Then it outputs a new .miz file ready to load for the next mission.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Multiplayer-Friendly Setup

 

 

• Because the campaign data is stored outside DCS, multiple people can:
  • Fly on the same server
  • Finish the mission
  • Have the server automatically load the new mission after a short break
•  
• GPT-5 could even generate fresh briefings and radio messages so each mission feels handcrafted.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Logistics Layer

 

 

• You could go full Falcon BMS style:
  • Convoys delivering fuel/ammo to airbases (if destroyed, base runs dry)
  • Limited reinforcements per week
  • Player actions directly impacting long-term availability of units
•  
• GPT-5 could generate convoy routes, schedule supply flights, and track them in the campaign database.

 

 

 

 

Bottom line:

Yes, with the right bridge, GPT-5 could keep persistent memory of every mission result and rewrite the world state for the next mission — essentially creating a living, breathing war in DCS.

And because GPT can also write Lua scripts for complex triggers, it could add all the immersion you want (intel updates, enemy reactions, random events).

 

 

 

If you want, I can map out the exact file flow between DCS mission editor, the logs, the campaign database, and GPT-5 — so you’d have a full blueprint to make this a reality when GPT-5 is available to you. That blueprint could also be adapted for Heatblur’s Cold War server campaigns.

 

 

What about creating a bridge to units in game so dcs module offering control of ground units could be used by AI ChatGPT to control it in more realistic way as dcs unit ai is notoriously horrible

 

 

Yes — that’s actually possible, and it’s one of the most exciting uses for GPT with DCS.

You could replace DCS’s “dumb” AI decision-making with GPT’s real-time tactical brain by using the DCS Scripting Engine and an external control bridge.

 

Here’s how that could work:

 

 

 

 

1. DCS already lets you “puppet” units via Lua

 

 

• The Mission Scripting API in DCS allows Lua scripts to:
  • Move ground units to waypoints
  • Change their speed, formation, and ROE
  • Make them search for and engage specific targets
  • Change their weapon loadouts mid-mission (with some limitations)
•  
• Normally, this is all pre-scripted before the mission starts.
• But if you keep the Lua script running and connected to an external app, you can feed it new commands live.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Bridge for Real-Time GPT Control

 

 

The setup could be:

 

1. Lua in DCS Mission → constantly sends unit status (positions, ammo, damage, detected enemies) to an external server or local app via TCP/UDP or WebSocket.
2. External App → passes that information to GPT-5, giving it a tactical “map” of the battlefield.
3. GPT-5 → decides what each unit should do based on your tactical doctrine.
4. External App → sends new Lua commands back into the running DCS mission to change orders.

 

 

This turns GPT-5 into the virtual battlefield commander.

 

 

 

 

3. Why it would be better than stock AI

 

 

• DCS AI doesn’t understand context — it drives tanks into kill zones, doesn’t flank, doesn’t retreat.
• GPT-5 could:
  • Retreat damaged units to repair zones.
  • Use terrain (ridge lines, forests, rivers) for cover.
  • Coordinate multiple units for combined arms (artillery softens target before armor advances).
  • Preserve assets instead of suicidally charging.
  • React dynamically if a bridge is destroyed or an airstrike happens.
•  

 

 

 

 

 

4. Even More Immersion

 

 

Because GPT understands language, you could:

 

• Literally talk to it on the battlefield with voice commands:
  “GPT, have the 3rd Tank Battalion swing left through the forest and cut off the enemy supply line.”
• And it responds via voice:
  “Roger. 3rd Battalion maneuvering to intercept enemy supply route. ETA 4 minutes.”
• This could be done via Speech-to-Text → GPT → Lua in real time.

 

 

 

 

 

5. Feasibility Right Now

 

 

• This is already possible with GPT-4.1, though latency might limit it to 2–5 second reaction times.
• GPT-5, with faster multimodal processing, could be much closer to real-time tactical AI.
• The only “heavy lift” is writing the Lua ↔ External Bridge code, but once it exists, GPT can control any DCS unit like a human player would.

 

 

 

 

If we combine this live AI control with the persistent campaign system we discussed earlier, you could have a DCS world where:

 

• The war evolves over weeks
• Units act intelligently in real time
• GPT is effectively your human-like AI commander (or enemy general)

 

 

 

 

I can sketch you a flow diagram showing exactly how this GPT ↔ DCS live control bridge would look, including the data flow for orders, battlefield awareness, and campaign persistence. That’s the blueprint for making DCS finally have good ground AI.

 

 

So question is how smart are you in military tactical and strategic scenarios,, let me try you out blue force has 2 f15 for cap mission and 4 f16 for bombing missions and one awacs… they want to attack from Tbilisi and go towards Sochi.. and hit a runway and fuel logistics on airfield there… red force has 8 mig21 and early warning gci 4 of them, one on Sochi two a bit in the back 50, 90 miles and one 140 miles away, they have also 4 osa short range anti air defence units and one buk sa11 unit, defend yourself as red force and describe your thinking prices anticipating blue force ideas and their advantages and tactics and hour you would try to negate them

 

 

Alright, let’s run this like a real tactical exercise.

I’ll put myself in the red commander’s seat at Sochi, with my limited but potentially deadly toolkit.

 

 

 

 

Step 1 – Situation Analysis

 

 

 

Blue Force Strengths

 

 

• Air Superiority: F-15s for CAP – they outrange and outgun my MiG-21s in BVR combat.
• Strike Capability: F-16s with precision strike loadouts – very effective against my airfield infrastructure.
• AWACS: Gives them early detection and coordination.
• Likely Plan: Push F-15 CAP ahead to clear my airspace, F-16s following to hit the runway and fuel depot, AWACS orbiting safely in the rear.

 

 

 

Red Force Weaknesses

 

 

• MiG-21s: Short range radar, weak BVR, limited endurance.
• Only 1 medium-range SAM (SA-11 Buk), rest are short-range (OSA).
• Vulnerable fixed target (Sochi airfield) – can’t move it.

 

 

 

Red Force Strengths

 

 

• Numbers in fighters (8 vs 2 F-15s).
• Layered EWR coverage to vector my interceptors.
• Surprise potential if I don’t fight where they expect.
• Good short-range SAM network near the airfield.

 

 

 

 

 

Step 2 – Threat Anticipation

 

 

If I’m Blue, I will:

 

1. Use F-15s to wipe out interceptors before they can touch F-16s.
2. Stay high and fast – outside SA-11’s max engagement unless forced in.
3. Destroy Buk first if they suspect its location.
4. Drop bombs or guided munitions from standoff distance.

 

 

 

 

 

Step 3 – My Defensive Plan as Red

 

 

Main Objective: Keep runway functional and fuel safe, or at least inflict enough losses to make the strike fail.

 

 

3.1 – Fighter Tactics

 

 

• Do NOT send all MiG-21s at once – suicide in BVR against F-15s.
• Split into two groups:
  1. Ambush Group (4 aircraft): Low altitude ingress from an unexpected angle, timed to arrive as F-16s commit to attack run.
  2. Distraction Group (4 aircraft): Engage F-15 CAP from head-on at long range to drag them east/south and force missile expenditure.
•  
• Use GCI from EWR to vector ambush group until they’re just under radar coverage of AWACS, then pop up.

 

 

 

 

 

3.2 – SAM Usage

 

 

• Keep SA-11 cold and radar-off until strike package is close – surprise engagement to catch F-16s mid-run.
• OSA units remain spread out around Sochi for point defense against Mavericks or low-altitude ingress.
• Use shoot-and-scoot for SA-11 if possible (simulate relocation between salvoes).

 

 

 

 

 

3.3 – Early Warning & Deception

 

 

• First EWR station (closest to Tbilisi axis) will report false strength – act like we are launching all fighters early, but actually only send distraction group.
• Maintain strict radio discipline for ambush group – they stay quiet until commit.

 

 

 

 

 

3.4 – Engagement Flow

 

 

1. Blue enters radar range – I scramble distraction group, climbing to mid-alt and making a visible intercept.
2. F-15s engage, AWACS calls my movements – they will likely chase.
3. Ambush group stays low over terrain, aiming to catch F-16s after CAP is drawn off.
4. As F-16s near launch point:
   • SA-11 powers on, launches 1–2 missiles.
   • Ambush MiGs pop up from low altitude behind/below strike package.
5.  
6. OSA batteries clean up any leakers.

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 – Desired Outcome

 

 

• Lose some MiG-21s but trade for at least 1 F-16 and force the others to jettison ordnance.
• Keep the airfield operational or at least reduce bomb accuracy so the runway is repairable quickly.

 

 

 

 

 

Step 4 – Strategic Mindset

 

 

• I can’t win the air superiority fight; I must fight asymmetrically.
• Force Blue into bad geometry fights (low altitude merges where MiG-21s can dogfight better).
• Protect my SA-11 until it’s decisive.
• Accept some attrition, but aim for mission kill on Blue’s strike rather than full air dominance.

 

 

 

 

If you like, I can redraw this into an actual DCS mission plan with waypoints, timing, and SAM engagement zones so you can test both sides in the sim — it would let us see if my ambush works or if Blue still pushes through.

 

 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

It's hard to take a post seriously when the OP doesn't actually put in the effort to write it themselves.

[MAXsenna]

5 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

It's hard to take a post seriously when the OP doesn't actually put in the effort to write it themselves.

And the formatting..... 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

And there’s no downvote / 1-star button up top.

[TheFreshPrince]

Nah, I think Google`s Genie 3 showcases that the future of gaming and simulations lies in real-time AI creations. Not in a hardcoded core. DCS as we know it, is probably not exist in 10 years. Remember that this is only the first version of it, imagine how further versions will look like:

 

 

[AndyJWest]

I'll believe it when I see it. Let me know how progress is going in 2030...

[MAXsenna]

I'll believe it when I see it. Let me know how progress is going in 2030...

We should have a "remind me" feature like a certain something I will not mention.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Kang]

I wouldn't trust GPT to run as the "brain" of my toaster.

Really, all the techbro marketing bull. But to be a bit more constructive: there is no need for a huge datacenter to create decisions for the dynamic campaign in real-time, as interesting as it may sound. What DCS is needs is old-school AI, reasonably elaborate decision tree based on easily accessible data. And yes, that can account for what the various factions supposedly know or don't know quite easily.

[Gigafiga]

I tried to compile a miz with realistic assets, showing map of airports parkings, area maps and an empty miz file with few assets as example….

grok doesn’t complete the job when the miz file is getting big… but can give you list and possible location of what you need to fill your miz manually.

It can also give you realistic loadouts and write the mission.lua, but again not for 500/1000 units

[MAXsenna]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

And there’s no downvote / 1-star button up top.

Now it is!  

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

1 hour ago, AndyJWest said:

I'll believe it when I see it. Let me know how progress is going in 2030...

 

39 minutes ago, Kang said:

I wouldn't trust GPT to run as the "brain" of my toaster.

Really, all the techbro marketing bull. But to be a bit more constructive: there is no need for a huge datacenter to create decisions for the dynamic campaign in real-time, as interesting as it may sound. What DCS is needs is old-school AI, reasonably elaborate decision tree based on easily accessible data. And yes, that can account for what the various factions supposedly know or don't know quite easily.

 

You can pretty quickly ascertain the value of a presentation by asking yourself if it's meant to please shareholders or end-users.

So far, it's always the former. If AI were so game changing, it wouldn't be getting integrated into software before asking an end-user base. Dotcom all over again.

[MAXsenna]

1 hour ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Dotcom all over again.

Bingo!  

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

The term "AI" is so overused these days, it lost all meaning: everyone seems to mean something else...

[Smashy]

4 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

And there’s no downvote / 1-star button up top.

I'd get more use out of a downvote feature than a ChatGPT dynamic campaign.

[MAXsenna]

39 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

The term "AI" is so overused these days, it lost all meaning: everyone seems to mean something else...

We have election this year, (September), and this fu**ing idiot, (from my bloody side), thinks that letting a foreign company build a monster of a data center, (to basically get free electricity), will bring 4000 workplaces/positions for the local community, and that Norway will become a leader in AI.  

@MiG21bisFishbedL is correct. Dotcom has returned.