FC 2 Mission Editor

[tflash]

It is only after designing many missions that it truly comes to light how the terrain and mission editor borrowed from DCS allows you to create very dynamic environments.

 

Reading how RuAF struggled with Georgian AD around Tshinkvali (only for a few days it must be said and in a very limited part of the theatre!), I wondered if we could replicate these conditions in Abchazia. I am now experimenting with a BUK/Osa/ZSU/Igla mix that remains a treath throughout the mission.

 

Using the trigger system, I can emulate a BUK site under siege to "shut down" and reappear after a while. You can also "move" an OSA by putting it somewhere, then disabling it and starting a copy that drives a little down the road, then you disable that one and activate the Osa at the definitive position.

 

This way, I could design quite lengthy single player missions that allow for multiple sorties.

 

Does any of the multiplayer mission designers use the trigger system to add a more dynamic sequencing of ground threads?

Edited April 18, 2010 by tflash

[zakobi]

It is only after designing many missions that it truly comes to light how the terrain and mission editor borrowed from DCS allows you to create very dynamic environments.

 

Reading how RuAF struggled with Goergian AD around Tshinkvali (only for a few days it must be said and in a very limited part of the theatre!), I wondered if we could replicate these conditions in Abchazia. I am now experimenting with a BUK/Osa/ZSU/Igla mix that remains a treath throughout the mission.

 

Using the trigger system, I can emulate a BUK site under siege to "shut down" and reappear after a while. You can also "move" an OSA by putting it somewhere, then disabling it and starting a copy that drives a little down the road, the you disable that one and activate the Osa at the definitive position.

 

This way, I could design quite lengthy single player missions that allow for multiple sorties.

 

Does any of the multiplayer mission designers use the trigger system to add a more dynamic sequencing of ground threads?

 

Can't remember who and which server, but there was someone who for a MP game made a king-of-the-hill style thing with triggers and zones.

[EtherealN]

I think that was 3sqn, with Grimes as the designer.

[159th_Viper]

It is only after designing many missions that it truly comes to light how the terrain and mission editor borrowed from DCS allows you to create very dynamic environments.....

 

Quite so :)

 

I am by no means an authority on the Mission Editor (thankfully the 159th have a lot of talented and sometimes frustrated Mission-Builders :D). Sometimes I cannot help but ponder that all the complaints/statements/comments re lack of Dynamic Campaign ala Falcon are at last baseless and without substance with the advent of the current incarnation of the ME.

 

Granted, the ME is in it's infancy with it's attendant faults and shortcomings and can only be improved upon......I would however submit that one is in a better position now to build missions around actual RL Engagement scenarios. In my opinion good enough, if not better, than a campaign with no basis in reality, however dynamic.

 

We have the tools - It's just a matter of getting to know how to use it properly. That will take time.....again, no problem. I am a patient man. After all, can only get better!

[nomdeplume]

I really feel like the editor lets the series down, but maybe it's just from how I play the games. After I became competent enough with the Ka-50 that the learning itself ceased to be enjoyable, I kindof found the whole thing pretty sterile. Which is a shame, because as flight sims, ED's games are quite incredible.

 

The theory of having hand-crafted scenarios is nice, but the reality always seems to be that there's not many around, and since they're so static it becomes kind of a puzzle game: each mission is a puzzle that you solve (typically "how to deliver these weapons to those targets without being shot down"), then move to the next. When you run out of puzzles, there's little replay value.

 

I like having a campaign rather than a single mission; and that I think is the "solution" to many of the problems one encounters when trying to do simple missions. For example, let's say you're tasked with supporting a ground offensive. You want groups to move up the front as enemy defences are eliminated. You can't really do this dynamically within the mission, because your only options are to deactivate a group and then activate a new one. Fine if you can guarantee the ground forces never suffer any losses and are always at the expected location when the next stage of the advance is to occur, but those conditions put huge restrictions on what you can actually do.

 

So the solution here is obvious: fly a mission to take out some targets, then start a new mission where the front is moved up a bit. Rinse and repeat. The problem with this is there's no way to create in-game continuity. For example, in the early missions of the A-10 campaign I took out the SAM site to the north with a Maverick (quite chuffed I was). Then it reappeared in the next mission as if nothing had happened. Ouch! Goodbye immersion. Again, each mission becomes a standalone puzzle to solve.

 

I think FC2 will keep me occupied for a while, because there's lots to learn (I didn't play the original LO). But I suspect that I'll eventually be back to F4 again, just for the dynamic campaign. Even though it's buggy and repetitive and kind of dull, at least it feels like what I'm doing actually matters beyond simply getting a "you win" screen.

[Grimes]

The thing about the mission editor is that it really does allow for so much to be accomplished, but the tools available are the simplest of simple. To create dynamic and complex missions you really need a ton of triggers. It becomes a question of time. The more time invested in a mission the more dynamic/random the location of enemies can be.

 

I think the biggest crutch to dynamic/random gameplay within the current mission editor is the AI. No matter how you look at it the AI follow a very specific set of rules. They act in a very linear fashion with no room for error. If you take out a bridge they don't have the common sense to find a way around. Air units fly their pre-defined waypoints until they die, run out of fuel, or complete their flight.

 

I will be overjoyed once alternative waypoints can be added... even for players. Tflash's example of a moving OSA can be accomplished currently, but requires a new group and a trigger each time you want to move it. To move just a single unit 10 times you'd need 10 triggers and 10 units. And thats if it does the "puzzle based" motion. If you want it to be random... well each choice is a new unit and a trigger.

 

nomdeplume summed it up really well, there is no in-game continuity. That is killer in SP when you fly from the same base and deal with the same threats. And flying the same mission or playing the same level in a first person shooter always comes down to being a puzzle. The trick is to have the capability to throw a wrench into the players established norms. In single player this means have very rare random triggers. In multiplayer it just takes 30 minutes for the mission builder to change a few things and not tell anyone.

 

For what I've done with triggers online ...

The two missions in the 3Sqn server are Dynamic in their own little way.

A New Battlefield has a 4 random choices for the different layers of sam defense. Outside of that, its like a normal mission you'd see in FC1.12. The ground targets are always in the same location, the sam threats change... but if you play it enough you will learn which setup loaded.

 

Its a good trick, the more of em you use the more random it could be. Just think... to have 4 random locations of tanks, 4 random APCs, 4 random IGLAS, and 4 random Shorads you get some pretty random results... but 4 times the normal number of units and 6 triggers for each random group type you want to place.

Capturing Maykop is mostly "repeatable" triggers. The entire mission is built around the idea of allowing itself to reset the mission into a neutral state. Meaning that the base can be captured and recaptured several times without the need to restart the mission. Within each stage of sam defense at maykop is identical to one another, with the only difference being location. In the mission there are several copies of the same aircraft that fly the same mission at the same time. The only difference is a specific flight is activated when its supposed to only if the previous flight is dead. There are 14 copies of the same convoy for when the airspace is captured and 5 copies of the first supply transport.

 

My goal for making MP missions is to do something unique each time with the triggers and to put them in an interesting scenario. But also to show everyone in the community what is possible in the hopes of all of the MP servers to develop and adopt their own complex ideas to try to outdo the previous best mission. It will take time. But I look forward to what others will try to do to raise the bar.

[Raimir]

I also experiment with the triggers in MP. I will not write a huge list because many of it was already written.

Very interesting from my point of view is the usage of random triggers which activate one of X groups. Where X is 2, 4, 8, 16 etc (it depends how many flag you use). So when mission is repeated the groups appear at different location. Same mechanism i use for CAP flights in a looped route, where i don't use four same groups at different location but one group and i delay activation of it via "X" different time delay combination.

Alternate waypoints would be really helpful to make amazing missions and put more

logic to the units. Also cloning of the triggers would help some of them i need to apply to each client.

 

Currently i'm experimenting to make empty missions just with preset triggers which will be used as a templates and then copy it directly between mission files. Because i'm missing more user friendly interface. In editor is not Tab key for switching between controls and mouse clicking is not my hobby. :mad:

 

Unfortunately the structure of the file looks simple but with many units and triggers inside is almost unreadable and is very easy to make a mistake and destroy it.

[WheelChair]

Can any of you assist me I am attempting to use triggers and it is not coming out right perhaps you could give me a link where I could read up on how to use them properly?

 

Thanx much,

 

Wheels

[ShadowVonChadwick]

Triggerable waypoints PLEASE.

Would go a long way to wards making dynamic missions in my opinion

[Panzertard]

I think that was 3sqn, with Grimes as the designer.

Sorry for going a bit OT, I just have to say it somewhere, at least once:

Grimes is the Mission Editors Chef Ramsey. ~S

Quality work all the way - and wont accept sloppy excuses and quick & dirty tricks.

Awesome, keep up the good work.

 

Can't remember who and which server, but there was someone who for a MP game made a king-of-the-hill style thing with triggers and zones.

 

And and btw - the "159th King Of The Hill" for DCS by 159th-Shallow_G may be the mission you think of regarding that one.

And that another awesome designer - damn, I've already used Chef Ramsey. Dr House then.

... House vs God is 1 - 0. So clearly, Dr. G. House.

 

Quite so :)

 

I am by no means an authority on the Mission Editor (thankfully the 159th have a lot of talented and sometimes frustrated Mission-Builders :D).

Absolutely ...definitivly House :D

Edited April 22, 2010 by Panzertard