Dynamic Campaign Discussion Thread

[Speed]

My place is in the second group. As long as the planes stay ultra realistic i don't really care how ultra realistic the DC missions are excecuted. I can only hope it will be as realistic as possible. And if i want to fly ultra realistic non DC missions i will just download them from the awesome community.

 

Same here. I don't mind reduced realism in DC missions. The fun factor of DC missions lies in the replayability, and feeling of working towards a larger goal. Also note that in a DC you get rewarded for bringing the aircraft back to base, conserving weapons, and minimizing friendly losses of all types- so that those weapons and aircraft will be available when needed later. This incentive is only available in scripted missions if we play pretend. In a DC, it's for real. So in that specific and significant aspect, a DC is more realistic than scripted missions can ever be. But overall, in DC missions you will get reduced realism... so what? We'll still have scripted missions we can fly too :)

Edited October 14, 2011 by Speed

[Mr_Burns]

The missions really seem to be limitiming the game for me, I know it can not be all things to everyone but it just seems like every mission is the same, evade sam threat, blast something.

 

Recently reading (and watching on you tube) some soldiers accounts of JTAC and the CAS missions. There is a book called Roberts Ridge and another called 18 hours about Aussie SAS signaller in Operation Anaconda and Hellfire by Ed Macy (and his other book).

 

In 18 hours, the soldiers sat there all day calling in air support on top of themselves, to keep advancing troops at bay in the mountain valleys.

 

In Hellfire they were calling in missiles by JTAC giving their location, which building and calling a bomb that if it exploded to close would have taken out the Brits. (I know that was a Helo)

 

Roberst ridge was the same, down helos's calling fast air to do runs in certain directions with guns.

 

And what about precision strike, take out the middle car in a convoy.

 

It just seems the same and no me, despite the realism of the sim I feel detached from anything so the immersion is going too soon after I built my own pit.

 

Perhaps my problem is looking for something like Arma with DCS aircraft, the future today, but I am sure there could be more to the campaigns to make you care.

 

Anyone remember the Typhoon simulator where you had to manage a fleet of typhoons and pilots, if the pilots bailed there was a chance they could be rescued and returned to the pool after some recovery.

 

Just little things to make it more like a war effort.

 

These are all the tanks in operation today, we have the following aircraft, then at the end of the mission (which should finish when you do and auto calculate the movement of the tanks!) you could see who was left and what they would be doing tomorrow, how many days they had been on combat ops, what land is taken / lost, why you are blowing up a bridge and once you did it, how the cavarly took out the sitting ducks!

 

It just feels like its failing at potentially an easier bit to make than the aircraft (but im not a sortware coder!)

[213]

there's really no point to a dynamic campaign, it's very great effort for very minute gain.

 

dynamic campaigns really come in two varieties, semi realistic and flat out arcade. it's simply not consistent with what dcs is about.

[weasel75]

@Mr.Burns: for me the best campaign-experience was ww2online - not even close to the details of the DCS-aircrafts - but the campaigns are dynamic, constantly flowing, there are simple rules for ressources and AttackOrders, and (high-ranked) human players decide what to attack next, what to research, etc.

But this is MMO and also completely different from what the multiplayer-experience in DCS is.

 

@213: well, it is not like DCS is about total ultra and uncompromisingly simulation - this would be neither profitable nor possible - just consider vehicles and infantry, let alone AI and AI-planes. So maybe for a "dynamic" campaign some easier solution would allow to achieve this goal to some degree - e.g. keep the state of buildings from one mission to the next (damaged, burning, etc), have some very basic rules for resources (and maybe their management) and supply (routes)?

 

Anyway, I guess that most people enjoy a vivid and "living" sim-world, and even it is faked and very limited. This kind of immersive detail seems to be acknowledged - just check out how much the people pay attention to the car-traffic in X-Plane 10 ;)

... but I understand that DCS comes from a mission-based simulation/military-background and this approach might be very different from how other (consumer-market) sims/games would design their underlying engine.

[WarthogSmurf]

Perhaps my problem is looking for something like Arma with DCS aircraft,

 

That wouldnt be even such a bad idea after all. in ARMA the world is too small to do good strikes with an A-10 but for helicopters/ ppl it is great . Also in ARMA their a-10 flies like a super a-10c rather then the flight model of A-10. It is also why they made TOH.

[falcon_120]

I've always wondered if somehow wouldn't be posible to use some of the code of the falcon DC being open source (well ... kind of).I Mean they're totally differents games but the logic of flags conditions, resource management etc can't be used while programing your own game?

Anyway I supposed that even being posible the work to adapt this to DCS would be to high isn't it?

(As you see I was just thinking out loud :) )

[shagrat]

I would like to simply have a possibility to track damage and destruction of units (especially ground forces) from one mission to another.

Example may be a dump with vehicle unit unique ID with a flag?

 

Next mission reads the flag and so decides a Unit is spawning or not?

 

If FlagAlive(TANK073)=false then noSpawn

 

Now combine this with the logging of damaged Buildings in the post above and we have some opportunity to build campaigns that at least reflect attrition...

 

Just my two cent! :P

Edited January 21, 2012 by shagrat

[weasel75]

IIRC Falcon used "bubbles" (a sphere around the player) to handle the sheer amount of data of a full-blown dynamic campaign. Basically all divisions/flights/etc. were internally moved around the map with their movement being calculated via average speed over terrain and not based on the actual 3D-landscape down to the last polygon of the road. Outcomes of fights/engagements were calculated statistically (+/- random).

Just when the player approached those divisions/flights they became actually spawned into the 3D-world.

 

The idea might be reusable for DCS (or any other dynamic campaign generator), but I doubt that any parts of the code might be ported with reasonable effort.

 

But another idea: allowing an external campaign-engine (maybe even running on a remote computer) to connect to DCS (socket, shared memory, dynamic lib, etc) in order to spawn and remove units, add/remove waypoints and set the destruction-levels on buildings. DCS reports back the current status of human-controlled units (can already be done via LUA) and any destruction of other units/buildings to the engine.

 

The engine itself could be as sophisticated or flexible as desired, while using DCS as the actual simulator for single missions.

Lol, that would allow some crazy playground for anyone interested in developing dynamic campaigns.

[McVittees]

I would like to simply have a possibility to track damage and destruction of units (especially ground forces) from one mission to another.

Example may be a dump with vehicle unit unique ID with a flag?

 

Next mission reads the flag and so decides a Unit is spawning or not?

 

If FlagAlive(TANK073)=false then noSpawn

 

Now combine this with the logging of damaged Buildings in the post above and we have some opportunity to build campaigns that at least reflect attrition...

 

Just my two cent! :P

 

Completely agree. Tracking damage and unit statuses would be the next best thing to a DC.

[Nate--IRL--]

2- Flaming Cliffs 3. This will be a paid-for update to the Flaming Cliffs series and brings it to the same world, mission editor, AI, units, etc. as A-10C and Black Shark 2. We plan to include several upgrades to the aircraft, a resource management system, and several other new features. This will also make Flaming Cliffs online compatible with A-10C and Black Shark 2. Pricing will depend on what new features are included.

 

Nate

[EagleEye]

Nate

^^ I`m curious about that since the announcement of FC3. So you`ve answered my question right now.:surprise::thumbup: Hopefully it is not a subject to change or worser to remove.

Edited January 24, 2012 by EagleEye

[Jona33]

^^ I`m curious about that since the announcement of FC3. So you`ve answered my question right now.:surprise::thumbup: Hopefully it is not a subject to change or to remove.

 

Well it will be subject to change but I've got a feeling this is fairly high on their list.

[mattag08]

IIRC Falcon used "bubbles" (a sphere around the player) to handle the sheer amount of data of a full-blown dynamic campaign. Basically all divisions/flights/etc. were internally moved around the map with their movement being calculated via average speed over terrain and not based on the actual 3D-landscape down to the last polygon of the road. Outcomes of fights/engagements were calculated statistically (+/- random).

Just when the player approached those divisions/flights they became actually spawned into the 3D-world.

And what's even more impressive is that 99% of the player base had no idea what was going on for the longest time. The level of immersion was so high that it didn't even matter. It just--WORKED.

 

Take good notes ED.

[sobek]

It just--WORKED.

 

Errrrm, no. :)

[weasel75]

Errrrm, no. :)

 

Okay, so it did not work for the bad cop #2 ;)

(Why?)

 

But at least for me it worked quiet a while - actually, up to date, Falcon 4.0 was the most immersive (offline) flight-sim experience in my life ... watching all those tanks battle each other and then being able to contribute ... wow!

And when you came back, those destroyed buildings, bridges, etv. were still out of order! For me, that added an impressive amount of continuity and consistency to the game .... even if "faked".

 

... but in the end it is all just fake, isn't it? ;)

[sobek]

Okay, so it did not work for the bad cop #2 ;)

(Why?)

 

Read the thread, i've said it all before. ;)

[Cali]

After flying Falcon BMS I now understand why so many people want DC. Having the things change and not being in the same spot is what makes it so great. It's not just good for sp but also great in mp. I can fly one sortie in a campaign by myself and then the next sortie with a human wingman. The DC that F4 made was truly ahead of it's time!

[dooom]

After flying Falcon BMS I now understand why so many people want DC. Having the things change and not being in the same spot is what makes it so great. It's not just good for sp but also great in mp. I can fly one sortie in a campaign by myself and then the next sortie with a human wingman. The DC that F4 made was truly ahead of it's time!

 

I concur - I'd like to know if any other sim Ever came that close to a dc again

[weasel75]

Thing is - recalling the "old" times, a DC was very common, no matter how limited: F-16 Combat Pilot (Digital Integration 1988 ), Their Finest Hour (LucasArts 1989), Tornado (DI again 1993), ...

Lol, and those came also with some sort of resource-management.

 

It already showed back then: a DC can serve as a way to generate countless and yet unique missions

[dooom]

Here is an example of DC awesomeness.

 

I just lifted Kimpo at 2100 in BMS. My 4 ship departed north into DPRK on a BAI mission. We had two wing tanks, 4 agm65D, and 2 120aim. On the way I was passed by a flight of f15s chasing down a mig flight in our path. we held formation and began to scour the kill box in GMT/Snowplow mode looking for movers. I pick up a column moving along a road and slew my mavericks to have a look. Pickle 4 into the group as my wingmen go weapons free.

 

As I head home my FCR picks up another convoy - slightly out of the kill box but movers nonetheless. I have one AGM65 left so I pickle on a tank.

 

Arriving at Kimpo, I am held in orbit as no less than 3 flights are returning from sorties. Finally ATC waives me in with my wingmen. Upon landing I receive a censure into my records for a blue on blue. THe final target was a friendly column and I killed a M1A1.

 

I knew we had forward armour operating in the area and didnt declare my target when engaging out of the kill box. I actually felt bad about it but really was blown away once again by the sense of immersion.

 

If there was any way we could move to more realistic scenarios such as this in DCS, I would be a happy man. The headache of simulating the traffic and front i experienced in that one flight would be a nightmare in our current ME... I can only hope functionality and immersion continue to improve with the pending DCS titles.

[scheffchen]

Here is an example of DC awesomeness.

 

...

 

Great Story, Thanks a Lot

Lucky me I have bought falcon last weekend :))

[HerrKaputt]

Here is an example of DC awesomeness.

 

I just lifted Kimpo at 2100 in BMS. My 4 ship departed north into DPRK on a BAI mission. We had two wing tanks, 4 agm65D, and 2 120aim. On the way I was passed by a flight of f15s chasing down a mig flight in our path. we held formation and began to scour the kill box in GMT/Snowplow mode looking for movers. I pick up a column moving along a road and slew my mavericks to have a look. Pickle 4 into the group as my wingmen go weapons free.

 

As I head home my FCR picks up another convoy - slightly out of the kill box but movers nonetheless. I have one AGM65 left so I pickle on a tank.

 

Arriving at Kimpo, I am held in orbit as no less than 3 flights are returning from sorties. Finally ATC waives me in with my wingmen. Upon landing I receive a censure into my records for a blue on blue. THe final target was a friendly column and I killed a M1A1.

 

I knew we had forward armour operating in the area and didnt declare my target when engaging out of the kill box. I actually felt bad about it but really was blown away once again by the sense of immersion.

 

If there was any way we could move to more realistic scenarios such as this in DCS, I would be a happy man. The headache of simulating the traffic and front i experienced in that one flight would be a nightmare in our current ME... I can only hope functionality and immersion continue to improve with the pending DCS titles.

 

I have similar stories from EECH. DC makes a half-decent sim into a very immersive game... (not that F4 is "half-decent", I was talking about EECH)

Edited January 30, 2012 by HerrKaputt

[Cali]

Just posted a little bit again of a flight I had last night in the online BMS server http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1387628&postcount=1482

 

Tonight before I came to work, I had a few hours to spare. To I hoped into the online REDFLAG mission going on. There were a few other guys in TS and that were going to hop in the mission also....on NATO side. I created my flight, it was a single ship interdiction going to take out 2 cargo ships that were helping the redfor war effort and needed to be taken out. Love have the huge selection of weapons to choose from. I need to learn how to drop the GBU's and learn more about some of the other weapons they have. My home base is Yechon Air Base and the target was 200nm away, so I had a 400nm flight. My target was northwest from base. I really didn't know how much fuel I would need so I took 3 bags. Later I found out that 3 bags was a bit much and wish I had only taken my centerline and 2 Harms to take out an SA-5 that was bugging me and some SA-17 near the target area.

 

The flight was uneventful, just the pesky SAMS locking me up. No red aircraft anywhere near me . The other guy flying was northeast looking for ground targets also. Before I took off I had already set up my weapons, so I was good on that. I fenced in about 120nm from my target, you never know when something might pop up. I spotted my targets, they were next to the dock and the lights were on for me . I turn and line up for the first boat and drop my 84, I knew I hit it by the light from the explosion in my cockpit. So I gain some alt and get myself set up for the second ship. Nothing was firing at me, no AAA, the SA-17's were out of range...so I was good and AWACS said picture clear. Lined up and it was a repeat of the first attack run. I went back and put some bullets into both ships and buildings at the dock. I think I still had more then 8k of fuel, only burned 4k getting there. So, I turn towards home plate and hit the burners gaining alt cause I was down low. AWACS called bandits 60 miles away, but I wasn't going to venture deep into enemy airspace to tangle with them.

 

Redfor is not doing good in this war and getting pushed back. Long flight back home, listening to AWACS and other flights calling out whats going on. 28nm from base I called ATC and they vectored me in to land. Even though it was not very exciting, no bandits and no SAMS firing at me, it was a fun flight. Having other people flying and hearing all the other calls puts you in the war. Although it sucks flying alone, I really didn't feel like I was, but it would have been different if I had a wingman.

[dooom]

Having other people flying and hearing all the other calls puts you in the war. Although it sucks flying alone, I really didn't feel like I was, but it would have been different if I had a wingman.

 

I really got to hook up with you... I have yet to fly online and i want to but I seem to miss you guys on the TS you gave me.

 

That said - one thing that is remarkable about a DC is that it makes me actually play single player... I NEVER play single player in any sim title, always opting to the online MP experience.

 

However, as Cali put it so well... flying in a DC doesnt feel like you are flying alone thus making F4 BMS the only title I enjoy in SP as well.

 

My god DCS would be amazing if we had the DC.

[Bushmanni]

Are people confusing the AI radio chatter, ATC, AWACS and etc. communication awesomeness with DC in F4? To me it seems like the DC system is generating pretty unimpressive missions and ill-logical and procedural battlefield events but the radio chatter does make the environment feel alive nevertheless. So is the greatness of F4 DC more about the radio comms and player-AI interaction than the events and missions it generates?