Dynamic Campaign Discussion Thread

[Endy]

Well, since there was an option to vote for DC in the recent poll and it also won by a large majority of votes, perhaps we can count on this being worked on. Of course, people's opinion can be purely informational for ED, but the fact this option was included at all gives me hope that it's on their schedule anyway. Something like the Falcon BMS DC would be really great, and of course the ability to just jump on the server and create your own mission plan, waypoints etc.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Endy

[EagleEye]

Yes, I´m very curious what ED will come up with. We see what already can be done with the current possibilitys (i.e. with Lua scripting).

[Galwran]

I would like to have a proper and persistent virtual war just like on Falcon 4. What I mean is that there are certain resources that the AI will use as it pleases and it will plan missions and strike packages.

 

Of course, most of the "war" could be simulated just like in a strategy game (ie. Panzer General). So battalions would move and fight on the strategic level and if you flew missions on their areas their strengths would change accordingly. The point is that every truck would not have to be modeled and everything should not have to happen in the 3D world.

 

But if this is too complicated, then I would like to have at least persistent operations. Ie. the mission builder allocates the inventory that can be used and how many vehicles there are placed on the map and how many can be spawned. The important part is that you can fight this operation/scenario in multiple parts with your friends. On the first game night you destroy the air defenses, on the next week you destroy air bases, then you do CAS...

[SDsc0rch]

responding to "just like on Falcon 4..." above

 

i think this is an important point: F4 uses a "bubble" system where units that are outside of a certain range (not directly visible to the player) are "aggregated" ---- that is, a flight of four aircraft or a column of tanks are abstracted into a single unit, thus requiring fewer system resources (RAM, cpu cycles..) to manage

 

 

DCS doesn't do that (and i think that's a good thing)

 

but consider this - have you seen the lag produced in DCS when someone spawns in online? what if you had an entire THEATER to model and hundreds of people are spawning in and out??

 

 

don't get me wrong, i like the idea of a persistent dynamic campaign with thousands of units and yearn for the day this becomes a reality, but i just don't know how you get there from here

 

not as currently modeled

 

 

that's why i voted for more 4th gen multi-role fighters in the poll

[Endy]

that's why i voted for more 4th gen multi-role fighters in the poll

 

Well, of course new planes are always fun to play with, but the problem is, without some sort of DC, just "like Falcon4" it will remain pretty sterile, limited only to scripted missions. And while I agree that the editor in DCS is pretty powerful, it still requires a lot of effort to create missions for servers or single player. This also severely limits online play and only dedicated groups and individuals have heavily scripted missions that allow for some kind of dynamic multiplayer gameplay. With a working DC that all could be done by the program and you could create single or multiplayer missions in a blink of an eye for you and your friends, in a changing, dynamic environment full of AI doing their stuff on the ground and in the air. Just like Falcon :)

 

As for spawning, that needs to be sorted out if that is indeed a problem. I have not noticed the whole server lagging when someone spawns but perhaps I have not played online for a while. Also, I think spawning new units (for example by using a script) also doesn't have this effect, but again I might be wrong...

 

Anyway, I think it is possible to create some sort of bubble system similar to current spawn/despawn via scripting method. But of course that's up to ED to do their coding magic. The whole poll idea and the inclusion of DC option gives me some hope that they're at least considering it.

[dartuil]

Sorry I didnt read the whole thread but basically what a dynamic campaign bring in DCS?

Sorry if you think that question is kinda strange.

It bring the game to generate ennemies lonely?

[Sryan]

Sorry I didnt read the whole thread but basically what a dynamic campaign bring in DCS?

Sorry if you think that question is kinda strange.

It bring the game to generate ennemies lonely?

 

1 The game makes up its own campaign

2 if you kill a bad guy, he's dead during the next mission. If you let him live, he will still fight during the next mission.

[Endy]

Sorry I didnt read the whole thread but basically what a dynamic campaign bring in DCS?

Sorry if you think that question is kinda strange.

It bring the game to generate ennemies lonely?

 

Many people would like to see something to the extent of how Falcon BMS handles it.

 

What Dynamic Campaign does there is basically simulate the whole conflict (for example between South and North Korea) including ground units, moving, fighting, taking control of areas, AI flights doing their stuff like sweeping, doing CAS missions etc.

 

The player is only a tiny cog in the war machine and the war can run its course even without player input. The player can also jump in and create a mission with AI wingmen or other players. Basically, the DC creates the whole dynamic environment for the player to play in, full of AI fighting etc. and does so in real time (with the ability to advance it faster of course, slow down etc.)

 

What it means in terms of single player, is that you can run a new campaign, watch it develop for a while, do a couple of missions, advance time faster for a bit and see how this progresses itself, jump in again etc. You have a constantly changing environment which you can influence by your actions in some way, full of AI "life" and you take part in a "real" war, not only in one scripted mission like in current DCS.

 

What it means in terms of multiplayer, is that you could have multiplayer servers running online wars, lasting 2-3 weeks, running them 24/7 even without player input. But the players can jump on the server at any time, easily create the mission, flightplan etc, and try to do their part. This works for both cooperative and player vs player, small and large scale and gives really huge possibilities.

 

It also saves a lot of time for players who prefer single or multiplayer, as you can create missions in such environment very quickly, without having to count on premade scenarios or heavily scripted ones that require a lot of work to do. And they make sense, and the environment can feel very real.

 

I would advise you to take a look how it looks in Falcon. It's really difficult to describe if you never flew there, but trust me, if DCS had this kind of DC engine then it would be a huge thing.

[chromium]

Endy, you gave the best description about how a DC should work properly.

[Endy]

Endy, you gave the best description about how a DC should work properly.

 

Thank you :) I would simply love to see something like that in DCS.

 

I like DCS a lot even now but a Dynamic Campaigm engine would just make it so much better and alive I think. Not to mention the ease of use in creating realistic missions in realistic war environments for all players, prefering single and multiplayer. That's why I think it may juyst be the most significant improvement DCS can get at the moment (now that it's got a new graphics engine.)

[dburne]

Thank you :) I would simply love to see something like that in DCS.

 

I like DCS a lot even now but a Dynamic Campaigm engine would just make it so much better and alive I think. Not to mention the ease of use in creating realistic missions in realistic war environments for all players, prefering single and multiplayer. That's why I think it may juyst be the most significant improvement DCS can get at the moment (now that it's got a new graphics engine.)

 

Agree wholeheartedly, as a SP guy who now has plenty of time to devote to flying ( recently retired), what you have described sounds very exciting to me and I would love to see something like that in DCS.

[winchesterdelta1]

Why is it not sticky anymore :(

[Grimes]

Why is it not sticky anymore :(

 

All of the stickies and megathreads were taking up half the front page of the wishlist. Anything that is popular will always find its way to the front again. Besides I doubt there is much more to add to the discussion other than someone new says that yes, they do indeed want one.

[winchesterdelta1]

That is fair. Thank you for the reply. I was always proud this one was a sticky :)

[lanmancz]

It also saves a lot of time for players who prefer single or multiplayer, as you can create missions in such environment very quickly, without having to count on premade scenarios or heavily scripted ones that require a lot of work to do. And they make sense, and the environment can feel very real.

 

This is so true. Lately I found that I probably spend 10x more time in mission editor and in Notepad++ scripting rather than actually flying which is not fun at all. Well that scripting bit is fun for me but that's just a professional deformation:). The thing is that I like to create heavily randomized missions for myself. Because it's not fun if you hand place every unit in game so you know exactly where everyone is and what is going to happen (that's good for training but not for actual combat flying). The problem is that the process of creating such mission is very tedious and in the end the mission is just a random shooting gallery anyway because creating some truly dynamic mission with some military logic behind it where everyone has their tasks and so on would require writing a whole framework and not just a bunch of scripts that randomly spawn ground and air units for both sides and let them furball. That's what I do. It's not very realistic but at least it's a bit dynamic in a sense that you never really know what's going to happen. Like if one side ends up with more (or better) units or units with better skills and so on.

 

Anyway, so on the other hand I recently started playing BMS after the original F4 was released on GOG and I love the dynamic campaign there. It's such a great feature that creates all of this automatically and dynamically. After tasting how good it is (and I'm not saying it's perfect but it's pretty damn good) this is number #1 feature for DCS on my wishlist, even as a full priced module. I would gladly pay for such addon. The mission editor in DCS is a great tool and all but creating a mission that is on somewhat larger scale than just a few units here and there is really time consuming.

[Dappman]

A dynamic campaign is essential to have in DCS. I just learned what it can do and it blows me away. I thought in a dynamic campaign you just get generated missions some what based on the outcome of the previous missions. It's not that at all.This is a tutorial example from Falcon BMS on planning a package. The entire war is running constantly. You don't even have to step into a plane you can play it just from the "commanders" view. In BMS online the war is running in real time 24/7.

 

[ame]

[/ame]
Edited January 14, 2016 by Dappman

[NineLine]

You don't even have to step into a plane you can play it just from the "commanders" view. In BMS online the war is running in real time 24/7

 

ED's main focus is aircraft simulation, I play this sim because I want to step into an aircraft. I dont want to sacrifice any of that for a mediocre RTS game. I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal, but I dont really need a RTS mini-game in the sim, least not in that sense.

[Endy]

ED's main focus is aircraft simulation, I play this sim because I want to step into an aircraft. I dont want to sacrifice any of that for a mediocre RTS game. I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal, but I dont really need a RTS mini-game in the sim, least not in that sense.

 

I think you may have misunderstood what he meant. The campaign view is there primarily to see how the war develops, movement of friendly and hostile ground forces, air defences, visible flights etc. - meaning a general view of the situation, not for the purpose of a "mediocre rts mini game".

 

If anything, the current DCS: Combined Arms is closer to being that rts mini game and I don't think ED sacrificed anything by adding it to the mix, do you? On the contrary, this has got nice potential to spice things up, especially in a multiplayer environment. If that was to be combined with a dynamic campaign the likes of which you can see in BMS, that would be the best. Now, having large scale, dynamic war ran by AI while at the same time having an ability to jump in and take personal control of some units on the map via Combined Arms, issue orders etc. would mean that DCS could have something that no other sim has.

[Dappman]

ED's main focus is aircraft simulation, I play this sim because I want to step into an aircraft. I dont want to sacrifice any of that for a mediocre RTS game. I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal, but I dont really need a RTS mini-game in the sim, least not in that sense.

 

Ok and I respect your opinion. I don't think it's a minigame, it's an overview of what is happening and the capability to plan missions in real time. Like a hugely advanced and dynamic form of the briefing before a mission in DCS. And even if it is a mini-game, what's wrong with that? Like I said you can play it like that, you absolutely don't have to. I was just pointing out how capable it is.

 

You say you don't want to sacrifice time spent in an aircraft. I'm not being a dick but have you actually tried this system? You don't have to sacrifice any more time with this system than you do in the pre-mission briefing in DCS. Again, not being a dick so don't take it that way.

 

The DC is very popular even with DCS users and for good reason. The only reason it didn't get even more of votes in the recent poll is because the majority who didn't vote for it haven't actually tried it. The large majority want this. We want it bad. BAD.

[QuiGon]

ED's main focus is aircraft simulation, I play this sim because I want to step into an aircraft. I dont want to sacrifice any of that for a mediocre RTS game. I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal, but I dont really need a RTS mini-game in the sim, least not in that sense.

 

I highly respect you Sithspawn, but here you are far off. Have you ever played Falcon? I'm asking because I think you don't really grasp what a true dynamic campaign really is. Like the two previous posters have already said it is not really a strategy game but more like a overview of the ongoing war. DCS CA is way closer to a strategy game than Falcons Dynamic Campaign. There is no need to sacrifice the deep aircraft simulation for it. It would only benefit from it :)

Edited January 14, 2016 by QuiGon

[wilbur81]

Many people would like to see something to the extent of how Falcon BMS handles it.

 

What Dynamic Campaign does there is basically simulate the whole conflict (for example between South and North Korea) including ground units, moving, fighting, taking control of areas, AI flights doing their stuff like sweeping, doing CAS missions etc.

 

The player is only a tiny cog in the war machine and the war can run its course even without player input. The player can also jump in and create a mission with AI wingmen or other players. Basically, the DC creates the whole dynamic environment for the player to play in, full of AI fighting etc. and does so in real time (with the ability to advance it faster of course, slow down etc.)

 

What it means in terms of single player, is that you can run a new campaign, watch it develop for a while, do a couple of missions, advance time faster for a bit and see how this progresses itself, jump in again etc. You have a constantly changing environment which you can influence by your actions in some way, full of AI "life" and you take part in a "real" war, not only in one scripted mission like in current DCS.

 

What it means in terms of multiplayer, is that you could have multiplayer servers running online wars, lasting 2-3 weeks, running them 24/7 even without player input. But the players can jump on the server at any time, easily create the mission, flightplan etc, and try to do their part. This works for both cooperative and player vs player, small and large scale and gives really huge possibilities.

 

It also saves a lot of time for players who prefer single or multiplayer, as you can create missions in such environment very quickly, without having to count on premade scenarios or heavily scripted ones that require a lot of work to do. And they make sense, and the environment can feel very real.

 

I would advise you to take a look how it looks in Falcon. It's really difficult to describe if you never flew there, but trust me, if DCS had this kind of DC engine then it would be a huge thing.

 

Dynamic Campaign would catapult DCS into a whole new realm of amazing simulation! I'm sure it would be VERY challenging to implement (maybe impossible with the current code?), but I would vote in a heartbeat to have all new aircraft in development (and the resources/man-power that are going into them) to be dropped and a DC established first with all hands on deck, working on its implementation.

[Sweep]

(...) I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal (...)

 

Hope you don't mind me editing that.

 

I think the problem with that is that you're still creating missions...with some sort of dynamic campaign generator it could be pretty simple for the player to use; I definitely agree about wanting to get in the pit and get going.

 

Unrelated, sorta: I wonder if ED's thought about making the mission generator do something like this, maybe like what Sith mentioned in the quote above...It probably wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be a big step in the right direction! :thumbup:

[wilbur81]

In this discussion about DC, I've just been thinking.... I wish there were more people (who had the time and the desire of course - Feefifofum comes to mind with his eye for an eye campaign) who would create missions/campaigns. The ME in DCS is fantastic, but EXTREMELY time-consuming...time that many or most of us do not have (or should not spend sitting in front of a screen). Plus, playing a mission/campaign that you've created yourself naturally takes much of the surprise/realism factor out of things, even with scripts. DC or no DC, more missions and campaigns would make this simulation even greater than it already is.

Edited January 14, 2016 by wilbur81

[Dappman]

For the record I would pay well over $100 for a proper DCS dynamic campaign.

[Home Fries]

ED's main focus is aircraft simulation, I play this sim because I want to step into an aircraft. I dont want to sacrifice any of that for a mediocre RTS game. I am all for dynamic in the sense that one mission impacts the next to an ultimate goal, but I dont really need a RTS mini-game in the sim, least not in that sense.

Sorry, Sith, but I'm with the Peanut Gallery on this one.

 

Far from being RTS lite, Falcon's dynamic campaign is the most immersive combat flight sim experience ever. That is not hyperbole; as much as I love DCS, Falcon 4.0 is the only sim that has actually given me flashbacks of operational flying. While many elements are duplicated in DCS (e.g. pilot comms, coordinated strikes, etc.), the fact that the Falcon engine does the entire war makes the sheer scale of the battlefield and quantity/diversity of units more intense than even the most dedicated DCS mission builder is going to be able to create.

 

The idea that you can play general and control the air war is more icing on the cake than core functionality (and in fact it wasn't even core functionality), though it does keep the same campaign from getting stale and also allows a manual bypass if the AI logic gets stuck in flawed thinking. However, controlling the big picture is strictly optional and the campaign engine works just fine without human intervention.

 

Just think about this: since Falcon 4.0 was released in 1998, AFAIK only one additional theater has been released with a fully fleshed-out campaign that you can win (most 3rd party theaters out there are just theaters with campaign frameworks or buggy campaigns). Basically, most Falcon 4.0 users have been flying the same Korea theater for the past 17 years, and yet they keep coming back to that dynamic campaign engine.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Home Fries