Mission Editor Features Request Wishlist

[Speed]

True, but scripting is a top-level system and so is a greater resource tax on the computer system than one that is incorporated into the code of the engine. Personally, I have trouble finding the code required for the operations I want to do.

Incorrect. Triggers are in fact Lua functions themselves. They are just wrapped into a GUI interface so that you don't know that you're actually doing Lua scripting. And you can have thousands of triggers and not have a noticeable impact on game performance.

[bn880]

Ability to change coalition mid-mission design. I think this is a HUGE problem if you change your mind or don't know this critical feature is missing. (happened to me)

[mjeh]

Ability to change coalition mid-mission design. I think this is a HUGE problem if you change your mind or don't know this critical feature is missing. (happened to me)

 

I agree. This could be a very simple operation by default, but since it is not included it is a quite complicated operation in hintersicht

[-Demon-]

Hi all,

 

I don't wanna sound rude, but does ED reads through that wish list? If so, I want to suggest that we get a flag list, where we see which flags are in use and for what purpose: in the trigger display is a lot of free space beneeth.

 

It could lok like this...

_______________________________________________

Flags in use:

 

Flag 1 Purpose: checks if trigger enemy was activated

Flag 3 Purpose: checks if unit passed 2 triggers

.

.

.

 

Where as Purpose can be a commentstatus typed in by the mission maker.

After all I just want to see which flags ar actually used so you dont have to go through all flags and check which number they have. :thumbup:

 

just my 2 cents

 

Cheers

 

Demon

[ricnunes]

I recently decided to install and try DCS World and I'm really enjoying flying with the SU-25T.

I also decided to take a look into DCS World mission editor and since this thread is about "Mission Editor Features Request Wishlist" I would like to request the following improvements/updates on the object database in the mission editor:

 

- I noticed that Canada only has the following armour: Leopard 1, M113 and LAV25. But in reality Canada also has the Leopard 2 tank and one of my suggestion is that the Leopard 2 be added to Canada's armour list. Also regarding Canada's armour I even suggest adding the Stryker ICV in order to model the LAVIII with RWS (equipped with the Nanuk RWS) and the ATGM Stryker in order to model the LAVIII TUA.

Also regarding this, I would also like to suggest adding the Chinook to Canada's helicopter list, just like in the real world.

 

And of course make the appropriate improvements/updates on other countries database where applicable.

[Pikey]

+1 for AI Respawning Capability

In particular, I would like an interface for the Game Master mode to spawn during mission. This would be especially great if linked to the warehouses and spawning new aircraft from the warehouse at an Airport midgame.

 

What about macro button slots? So you have an empty button in GM mode that launched a LUA script of your choice or a fixed dummy one in a folder? Wouldnt that give unlimited functionality into a tiny interface space? Cost for this would be tiny and what it could give would be huge. I'm aiming at being able to have a single player war using fixed resources, but I dont want to spawn them all in the editor. I want to be able to react in realtime or try different scenarios.

 

or am i being stupid and we can launch LUA anyway? In which can anyone show me a spawn script for aircraft?

[-Demon-]

Me again :)

 

another fine feature would be to be able to check if certain buttons or actions from the aircraft systems are done.

 

For example:

 

trigger checks if condition: flaps down, or engines start/stop action: message to all

 

I want to be able to check what buttons or levers are beeing operated within the flight. I want to make missions for rookies becoming a memeber of a squadron. I want to check if they know how to use the different buttons and systems.

 

I could imagine that a condition is added which is called: check input: and then we get a bunch of a list where we can choose the button beeing pressed. I dont know if I am clear enuff. I try to explain it a bit better:

 

Condition: check keyboard input

than a dropdown menue opens up with:

left engine start

right engine start

left engine shutdown

right engine shut down

flaps set

gear down

gear up

ecm on

ecm off

etc......

 

I have no clue how difficult that is to achive but we already have a code which checks the keyboard commands so why not use that in a triggers condition? Please yell at me, if that sounds stupid or if this is already doable in FC3. I know that this is doable for certain 6DOF DCS models like A10C and the P-51D. But I was not able to find out how to do it for FC3 planes.

 

I am thankfull for any hint on that. Thanks in advance and mybe we can see some day this feature in game.

 

Cheers

 

Demon

[-Demon-]

Another thing I just encountered: While beeing in the enzyclopedia it would be cool to filter all the content by country. So I can choose USA and see which groundobjects, warships, civil ships etc. they have. Right now its a pure guessing.

 

If there is a trick to findout which object belongs to which country than it will be appriciated to get to know :)

 

Cheers

 

Demon

[MasterZelgadis]

I usually look at the weapons. If it is something with an M in front, it is mostly US :D

[arteedecco]

A lot of times what I want to be able to do is create missions that have epic, cinematic sequences.

 

However, it is nearly impossible... or at least quite difficult because there is now way to tell the AI to be "literal".

 

Here is a very very basic example.

 

I created a B-1B and set it to what I estimated to be the "correct" altitude for an approach profile on short (3 mile) final to Kobuleti.

 

I wanted it to come in and land with a flight of four F-16s escorting it in a diamond formation... for show.

 

The desire was as soon as I launched the mission, the B-1B would be setup for landing, gear down, and just follow a smooth profile to come in and land. I also wanted the F-16s to spawn in a nice diamond formation just behind (in trail) and above the B-1B, follow (escort) it to landing, then come in, do the break in right echelon formation, and land one by one.

 

However... what really happens is the B-1B hits its afterburner after nearly impacting the runway... does the break in a climbing afterburner turn and orbits to land. The F-16s go crazy as they attempt to get into whatever position the AI thinks they should be in for "Escort" (or "Follow", I've tried both), despite how I've positioned them in the ME, or what Formation I've set them to in the Advanced Tasks options.

 

There should be an ability to say.. hold the formation I have started you in... and a way to specifically tell them to do what I've told them... LAND... straight in... despite a tailwind, maneuver to make it happen.

 

The F-16s should be told to hold their specific tight formation and then break and land ...

 

So, my recommendation / wish is the ability for more specific control of aircraft, overriding their natural AI tendencies. Yes, this is complicated obviously, but it is quite frustrating to constantly try to figure out what the AI is doing and "fight it".

[-Demon-]

Well, it seems there arnt too many ME users out there :) It would be nice to able to let move a group or unit to a desired place.

 

Possible actions:

- move to point of impact of group xy

- move to group

- move to unit

 

The reason:

 

- Move to point of impact of group xy: than you can programm actions on the airfield like firetrucks will drive to a bad landing position, the Tanker will go to the plane and refuel, ambulance will pick up an injured soldier (Huey Mission) aso.

 

- move to group: tanks, cars, trucks, fueltrucks aso will engange a group of vehicles. not only for fighting purposes.

 

- move to unit: same as group

 

just my thoughts

 

thanks

 

Demon

[Vakiwey]

Combine various created missions with same or different dcs modules, in just one mission, with just an "import mission" button

Edited May 14, 2013 by Vakiwey

[Ripcord]

Ability to create 'template units' on the map, for use in campaigns. Meaning there should be something that checks the previous mission results to verify the status of specific units. Need Damage Tracking that is persistent throughout a campaign.

 

You could do this several ways.

 

USER DEFINED -- In the ME, you could create a check box for each unit and give it a logical name such as 'campaign unit' or 'template' unit or 'unit status tracking' or 'damage tracking'. So those units would again show up on future missions in the same campaign series. This way they could be moved slightly.

 

AUTOMATIC -- Just do this automatically based on the type of unit., eg fixed SAM sites, radar/EW sites and naval units, along with fortifications and fixed structures, etc. If you set that Patriot Battery and FARP in mission one, then allow the sim to track the damage to that same FARP and Patriot Battery in missions 2, 3 and so on. If it gets killed, then it's still there, just it is a burned out wreckage. Of course naval units would be sunk, so nothing there but perhaps an oil slick or somethng.

 

WORKAROUND SOLUTION -- just let us do it ourselves manually as Mission Builders, guys. Give us the ability to write STATUS or write some kind of variable, even a 0 or 1, that can be read by subsequent missions. How hard is that? Even just something like save FLAG value on Exit or something, so that we can set units in campaigns to appear based on some previously written FLAG value.

 

We really should already have this by now.

[shagrat]

Given the fact, that the TGP and maybe other "optical sensors" show us the exact position on the ground they are pointing at, I would like to see a trigger like "Sensorfocus in zone"!

 

This will enable a variety of missions or tasks where you are required to identify (and not destroy) a specific target or area etc.

 

Think of recon missions, tracking hostages, give feedback / or trigger actions when you look into the correct general direction. e.g. let a mortar team start firing when your TGP points to the correct area... ED, pleeeeaaase :notworthy:

[Nemesis302]

If I place an aircraft on the ramp, and set it to ramp start, it would be nice if it weren't sent to a random hangar 500 meters away instead of in a designated spot very close to where I placed it to begin with. It's a pain creating a map where I want several aircraft in a neat row together because I'll often have to place 30 aircraft, 26 of which are sent off to a random hangar before I get 4 in a row on the ramp together like I want.

[Grimes]

If I place an aircraft on the ramp, and set it to ramp start, it would be nice if it weren't sent to a random hangar 500 meters away instead of in a designated spot very close to where I placed it to begin with. It's a pain creating a map where I want several aircraft in a neat row together because I'll often have to place 30 aircraft, 26 of which are sent off to a random hangar before I get 4 in a row on the ramp together like I want.

 

I don't know why the placement is somewhat random, but you can easily change the default parking for a given aircraft via the number value next to "PRK". For the most part the parking numbers are numerically indexed, but there are a few oddities that exist. Generally speaking the parking numbers separated into groups, but it is entirely possible that the next "group" is some other part of the base.

[EchoMasterMind]

If I place an aircraft on the ramp, and set it to ramp start, it would be nice if it weren't sent to a random hangar 500 meters away instead of in a designated spot very close to where I placed it to begin with. It's a pain creating a map where I want several aircraft in a neat row together because I'll often have to place 30 aircraft, 26 of which are sent off to a random hangar before I get 4 in a row on the ramp together like I want.

 

+1. Might be a small thing, but it is truly annoying.

[shagrat]

whenramp start is selected you can place an aircraft by selecting "parking" located near the waypoint selector, if wp 0 is selected. Usually parking 1-4 or the respective no. from the top is whatyou look for.

[Nemesis302]

Thanks for the input. I'll give this a try next time.

[Frogisis]

Someone must have mentioned this already but a quick use of the search button was inconclusive, so here it is in any case:

 

I'd love some kind of new logic that assigns unit names systematically.

 

When you create new units, you get "New Vehicle Group" and it contains "unit #1, 2, 3," etc. This can make it confusing in the debriefings or when creating triggers, since a name like "unit #62" doesn't really mean anything on its own.

Right now, I immediately go in and change all the names to something more descriptive, like:

 

RED Tanks 01

RED Tanks 01 1

RED Tanks 01 2

RED Tanks 01 3

RED Tanks 01 4

RED Tanks 02

RED Tanks 02 1

RED Tanks 02 2

RED Tanks 02 3

RED Tanks 02 4

RED IFVs 01

RED IFVs 01 1

RED IFVs 01 2

RED IFVs 01 3

RED IFVs 01 4

RED IFVs 01 5 (supply)

RED Gunships 01

RED Gunships 01 1

RED Gunships 01 2

RED CAP Fighters 01

RED CAP Fighters 01 1

RED CAP Fighters 01 2

BLUE Tanks 01

BLUE Tanks 01 1...

 

etc.

This makes it much, much easier to know what I'm doing with the mission, but it takes a long time to even copy-paste all this stuff in, let alone type it out, but it's such a mindless, algorithmic system of naming that I'm sure implementing something like it would be easier that most new features.

 

Obviously if people don't like whatever system is used then they can use something else, but right now you have to do a lot of mindless toil to have any useful naming scheme at all.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Frogisis

[chromium]

An old add-on by nomedeplume for blindspot ME mod (for BS 1.02) did that, than nobody else asked for something similar.

 

But for me it's +1, I believe that could be useful if units have the same name of the group. Maybe starting with a tag like "#001" or "#002", that is the same actually used for ground units o group duplicates.

[Python]

A simple one, but it would be nice to see a little thumbnail picture when you are selecting a colour scheme for the aircraft.

[shagrat]

Someone must have mentioned this already but a quick use of the search button was inconclusive, so here it is in any case:

 

I'd love some kind of new logic that assigns unit names systematically.

 

When you create new units, you get "New Vehicle Group" and it contains "unit #1, 2, 3," etc. This can make it confusing in the debriefings or when creating triggers, since a name like "unit #62" doesn't really mean anything on its own.

Right now, I immediately go in and change all the names to something more descriptive, like:

 

RED Tanks 01

RED Tanks 01 1

RED Tanks 01 2

RED Tanks 01 3

RED Tanks 01 4

RED Tanks 02

RED Tanks 02 1

RED Tanks 02 2

RED Tanks 02 3

RED Tanks 02 4

RED IFVs 01

RED IFVs 01 1

RED IFVs 01 2

RED IFVs 01 3

RED IFVs 01 4

RED IFVs 01 5 (supply)

RED Gunships 01

RED Gunships 01 1

RED Gunships 01 2

RED CAP Fighters 01

RED CAP Fighters 01 1

RED CAP Fighters 01 2

BLUE Tanks 01

BLUE Tanks 01 1...

etc.

This makes it much, much easier to know what I'm doing with the mission, but it takes a long time to even copy-paste all this stuff in, let alone type it out, but it's such a mindless, algorithmic system of naming that I'm sure implementing something like it would be easier that most new features.

 

Obviously if people don't like whatever system is used then they can use something else, but right now you have to do a lot of mindless toil to have any useful naming scheme at all.

+1 ! Brilliant idea! :thumbup:

[SUBS17]

One idea the ability for the campaign to remember tgts alive and tgts destroyed at the end of each mission and to have them exist in the next mission. (have a switch to allow this):thumbup:

[GripenNG]

Sorry if this has been discused before! But something that would be nice and realistic in the mission building, would be to have the option to select coalitions on group level, and not just country level. This would for example open up far more realistic Red Flag scenarios where a US F-15 could act as a hostile against another US aircraft.

 

I know it probably isn´t a super important detail in the DCS experience - but it sure would be a little more realistic. And for who of us that builds large scale missions and edit them after time (and not rebuilding another mission within the same large scale scenario) would love to see the option to change the country-coalition after the first coalition have been set.