My idea for improvements and increasing player count

What I'm missing, and strongly believe lots of other players are missing as well are story telling elements in the campaigns.

We are going to get dynamic campaigns, but based on everybody are speaking of it, it is actually dynamic mission, not the camping. There is not evolution between the missions at all.

What we really need is actually way how to store variables/states/flags between the mission in the campaign, so we can react/adjust mission based on outcome of the previous one, lie for example, was your wing man killed?

That would give you ability to attach player to his role and create characters. Look for example what IL2 is doing with their squads in their campaigns. The main problem why people are leaving in my opinions is that in the nutshell the mission are quite boring, go there, shoot it get back. The context in this case why you are doing and why you are fighting makes world of difference...

Also it would be nice to have some lobby or something between the missions, nit just a briefing screen. Again looks for example what IL2 is doing. The idea of the news paper and check on your squad status or HQ puts you right into the middle and you feel like you are part of something. If it make sense.

PS: I'm not against the dynamic mission at all. On the contrary I believe that it will be great addition as well, specially for the single player. But to have good stories is also extremely important and give more tools for 3rd party camping developers would make them much more interesting and over all increase sells and business revenue...

3 days, 82 views and nobody is telling how wrong I am... What hapened? Is my comment readable? Do you see it?

I'm surprised it's still up . Regardless of the post's merits , mentioning the competition by name is a no-no .

Why? I'm trowing it as just an example, so everybody know what I have on mind... Besides I listen to few interviews and ED guys confirming that they know about the IL2 and they monitor what they are doing... It make sense after all, they are similar products and they can take inspiration from or avoid things which do not work... Also from business perspective is good to be aware of what others are doing...

1.15 Discussions of other game companies products are forbidden. We do not allow the discussion, reviewing of, or comparison of other software here. Posting news updates or advertising other products or games is also forbidden (unless approved by an admin). Abuse of other companies and/or anyone related to those companies will not be tolerated. ED also reserves the right to remove any thread or post about another game or company it deems doesn't comply with this rule.

__________________

You are definitely not wrong.

To be fair, there definitely are campaigns that try very well to tell a story and have a few characters in them, but yes there are limits to what can be done in some ways.

If I was presented with the choice, though, of having more story-driven campaigns or a natively implemented dynamic campaign to plan my own missions in, I would go for the latter. Both ideas require methods of tracking the state of a lot of units between missions, I guess.

You are definitely not wrong.

 

To be fair, there definitely are campaigns that try very well to tell a story and have a few characters in them, but yes there are limits to what can be done in some ways.

 

If I was presented with the choice, though, of having more story-driven campaigns or a natively implemented dynamic campaign to plan my own missions in, I would go for the latter. Both ideas require methods of tracking the state of a lot of units between missions, I guess.

Thank you.

That I'm puzzled with is that when the people here talk about dynamic campain, they are technically talkign about continuosly (24/7) running dynamic mission, not the dynamic campain that I'm after...

The difference is that in the DM it is just one single never ending mission which do not require loading or unloading... What 'm talking about is the mission system like we have right now in the scripted campains, but witht he ability to preserve states between the individual missions it it make a sense

What I personally would like in a dynamic campaign is something in the spirit of what some other simulators of olden days had.

Missions that are either set as tasks to begin with, or are being planned by the player, just with the 'world' being set by a 'campaign AI' that moves ground units, air defences, CAPs and whatnot in accordance with its objectives and - I guess this would be a important - its current capabilities in terms of vehicle count, losses, supplies and available routes.

In other words: have separate missions, but - say - having destroyed all bridges over a river, the enemy ground forces would have to wait for repairs, advance with amphibious craft only or take a long detour, which would change how the frontlines moves in that area. That kind of thing.

What I personally would like in a dynamic campaign is something in the spirit of what some other simulators of olden days had.

 

Missions that are either set as tasks to begin with, or are being planned by the player, just with the 'world' being set by a 'campaign AI' that moves ground units, air defences, CAPs and whatnot in accordance with its objectives and - I guess this would be a important - its current capabilities in terms of vehicle count, losses, supplies and available routes.

 

In other words: have separate missions, but - say - having destroyed all bridges over a river, the enemy ground forces would have to wait for repairs, advance with amphibious craft only or take a long detour, which would change how the frontlines moves in that area. That kind of thing.

Oki, so you are for the dynamic missions as I call them as well. Perfect, there is nothing wrong with it and I would find that interesting as well...

Just want to give more tools for the story telling guys, specialy for the 3rd party partners which are selling the campains at the moment. That yould bring more revenue for everybody, as I belive.

Without wanting to digress ever further, I'm perfectly fine with the missions themselves not having much 'evolution' in them and working like classic missions. The 'dynamic' part for me ideally would happen in between the missions. Kind of turn-based, so to speak.

There definitely is a bit of synergy here. The problem with using the tools of persistent tracking of assets that I see is that the writing of the actual story would have to branch quite a lot to keep up with it.

1.15 Discussions of other game companies products are forbidden. We do not allow the discussion, reviewing of, or comparison of other software here.

Out of interest, why is that? Its like the dumbest thing ever to ignore your competition...like Boeing going "we're the ONLY aircraft manufacturer in the world...they will buy all our airplanes" :lol:

Comparison to other developers and other similar games is healthy..where else can we give valid examples of things that work, that CAN be implemented rather than just a wishlist. If BoX has perfect volumetric clouds (or whatever they call it) and the ED devs say 'no it can't be done', thats BS.

obviously within reason and using valid examples...but there shouldn't be a blank ban on any references you would think.

Out of interest, why is that? Its like the dumbest thing ever to ignore your competition...like Boeing going "we're the ONLY aircraft manufacturer in the world...they will buy all our airplanes" :lol:

 

Comparison to other developers and other similar games is healthy..where else can we give valid examples of things that work, that CAN be implemented rather than just a wishlist. If BoX has perfect volumetric clouds (or whatever they call it) and the ED devs say 'no it can't be done', thats BS.

 

obviously within reason and using valid examples...but there shouldn't be a blank ban on any references you would think.

Their house , their rules . I'm certain they know what's going on in other sims :)

Because in real life, combat campaigns have a fairly limited ''story'', mostly relegated to theater wide developments. There aren't ''plot twists'' and ''romance options'' or really much of anything going on. Usually, devs trying to shoehorn that stuff into a war game is just painful, cringey, and definitely forced.

@Pharoah

It has nothing to do with ''ignoring competition''. Do you really think they never watch commercials and rely on their armchair expert community members to inform them of industry happenings? That they don't like... have contacts with people in the same industry, in many cases IN THE SAME REGION of the world? The main reason is so they have a easy opportunity to terminate threads like ''GAME A does it sooo much better Y U SO BAD ED?!!!''

1.15 Discussions of other game companies products are forbidden. We do not allow the discussion, reviewing of, or comparison of other software here. Posting news updates or advertising other products or games is also forbidden (unless approved by an admin). Abuse of other companies and/or anyone related to those companies will not be tolerated. ED also reserves the right to remove any thread or post about another game or company it deems doesn't comply with this rule.

__________________

Maybe I misunderstand the rules, but I do not see how the above quote prevents you from using a feature in another game by way of example to illustrate an idea. I read the above rule as one that is specifically meant to prevent the DCS forums from being used by competitors to advertise their products or to slate DCS. Since the DCS dynamic campaign is in development, people are going to make suggestions on this forum and a lot of those will come from their experiences with other games. In fact, until we see what ED has in store for the dynamic campaign, our only reference will be other simulators and their own attempts at dynamic campaigns.

As I said, my interpretation may be wrong, but I very often see references to IL-2, BMS and many old, out of production simulators in posts that do not get censored. I can only presume that ED administrators know the difference between abuse of their forums for advertisement, and neutral discussions ultimately aimed at improving their product.

Because in real life, combat campaigns have a fairly limited ''story'', mostly relegated to theater wide developments. There aren't ''plot twists'' and ''romance options'' or really much of anything going on. Usually, devs trying to shoehorn that stuff into a war game is just painful, cringey, and definitely forced.

 

@Pharoah

It has nothing to do with ''ignoring competition''. Do you really think they never watch commercials and rely on their armchair expert community members to inform them of industry happenings? That they don't like... have contacts with people in the same industry, in many cases IN THE SAME REGION of the world? The main reason is so they have a easy opportunity to terminate threads like ''GAME A does it sooo much better Y U SO BAD ED?!!!''

Yes, you are right. By real combat pilot during the missions. Exactly my point. What I'm advocation is for the stories between the missions. Like what lead from one mission to another if it make sense.

The stories are exactly what is missing in my opinion to drive more peope to the game. Specialy more causal people...

Personally I would love to see actual strategic briefings for, and results/consequences of, missions in a dynamic campaign. Your supply ship gets hammered, and you dont get those fancy AIM-120Cs, and instead have to make due with Sidwinders, and Sparrows. Your fuel supply gets whacked, and now you can't fly as many jets. I also wish for a more scalable Ai. Maybe that moves the sliders to the right a bit with each successful mission. That way when you lose that squadron mate, you lose a more valuable team mate, and maybe have to make due with a less experienced ally.

Honestly the OPs wish could be broken down into a great many smaller wishes. I interpret as basically a desire for the dynamic campaign to give me a reasion to care about this mission succeeding or failing. And that's pretty reasonable in my estimation.

Yes, you are right. By real combat pilot during the missions. Exactly my point. What I'm advocation is for the stories between the missions. Like what lead from one mission to another if it make sense.

 

 

The stories are exactly what is missing in my opinion to drive more peope to the game. Specialy more causal people...

Ah, I see now what you mean.

What I'm missing, and strongly believe lots of other players are missing as well are story telling elements in the campaigns.

 

We are going to get dynamic campaigns, but based on everybody are speaking of it, it is actually dynamic mission, not the camping. There is not evolution between the missions at all.

Uhm, there are barely any information available so far on how the Dynamic Campaign for DCS will look like. We know ED was looking for a developer with experience on RTS games, and this following piece of information here.

How can you make such assumptions already if there is barely any information available so far? :huh:

Dynamic Campaign

Work on the dynamic campaign has been underway for over a year, and the progress has been steady on this very complex task. We understand that this is one of the most awaited features in DCS World and we are giving it the attention it deserves.

Much of the work is focused on the dynamic campaign creation tool layers as part of the Mission Editor, developing machine learning mechanics, and creating an AI neural network for the RTS element of the system. The machine learning and neural network tasks are particularly challenging, but we believe they should provide a unique dynamic campaign experience.

Edit:

What we really need is actually way how to store variables/states/flags between the mission in the campaign, so we can react/adjust mission based on outcome of the previous one, lie for example, was your wing man killed?

Btw, there is a user made Dynamic Campaign Engine, that does that already: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=153020

QuiCon > very easy... Because what I'm suggesting would not need the "neural network" nor "complex AI" just few windows to place your text on and extend the logbook capabilities where the campaign variables are stored... Very simple stuff nothing that would need years of development.

What they are doing is going to looks like much more like Falcon 4...

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing nor that I would not play it, just that would not add the story-telling options I believe are needed to get more wider audience to the game...

You see, if the main problem why normies do not stick to your product is that it is too complex for them, to add another layer of complexity to it will not make easier for them. They need something to care, to stick with them, give them reason to overcome the few first hurdles... Like the emotional attachment to the characters for example... Make it sense, please?

Unfortunately as it currently stands there is no competition for ED and as such they have the luxury of saying "play our game our way or don’t play modern combat flight sims". Once a competitive company comes along (looking at you micropros) then we could see a shift in mentality.

Healthy competition is needed.

Unfortunately as it currently stands there is no competition for ED and as such they have the luxury of saying "play our game our way or don’t play modern combat flight sims". Once a competitive company comes along (looking at you micropros) then we could see a shift in mentality.

 

Healthy competition is needed.

naaaah I do not want to be negative, ED is doing great job, I just want to influence them...

PS: as I stated it is my idea how to make thing better, it does not mean that I'm right and/or there are not other things which might work better...

Completely agree ED are doing a great job however there is no one out there that comes close to modern air combat simulation other than ED which is bad unfortunately..

Completely agree ED are doing a great job however there is no one out there that comes close to modern air combat simulation other than ED which is bad unfortunately..

Honestly dude, I have no idea where you see the issue... ED does a thing and they are best in it... Where's the problem again?

Back to my topic. I was kinda hopping that some of the forum moderators that do the summary of the topic for ED can suggest the idea or maybe somebody who have EDs ear, like some of the 3rd party partners for campaigns could puts some voice to make it happened...

The best part is that it is not so difficult to implement and it will do not overlap with what ED guys are doing right now, only enhance it, so why not have it both...

Come on ED do the best thing!

PS: They are best only in one specific area. As I pointed out story telling possibilities are in IL2 better, specially the campaign section, the part between mission when you are in lobby and see the newspapers and your squad mates etc. That section is what I would love to see in the DCS.

ED are doing an excellent job however there are parts of current MP missions (which is only what I play) which are missing ie.

- a proper dynamic campaign that places a LOT of focus on logistics. Planes/tanks/ships can't move without fuel, can't shoot without ammunition.

- a proper moving front line

- a proper tasking system ie. as IRL, you don't just jump in any free jet, load up whatever you want and go joyriding. No, there's supposed to be a set of proper orders for you or your squadron

- More maps. We really only have 2 maps for modern play. The others don't get used much or at all. Or if they are, they're usually empty.

- we need period specific stuff eg. Vietnam only or Korea only (incl map), etc. The current hodge-podge of 'its a sandbox' doesn't cut it for long.

ED are doing an excellent job however there are parts of current MP missions (which is only what I play) which are missing ie.

 

- a proper dynamic campaign that places a LOT of focus on logistics. Planes/tanks/ships can't move without fuel, can't shoot without ammunition.

- a proper moving front line

- a proper tasking system ie. as IRL, you don't just jump in any free jet, load up whatever you want and go joyriding. No, there's supposed to be a set of proper orders for you or your squadron

- More maps. We really only have 2 maps for modern play. The others don't get used much or at all. Or if they are, they're usually empty.

- we need period specific stuff eg. Vietnam only or Korea only (incl map), etc. The current hodge-podge of 'its a sandbox' doesn't cut it for long.

Sorry mate, you misss the point. I'm talking about the campigns you can purchase, download and play in SP and improvements for them. No MP. No offence, but personaly I'm into the stories, and whole MP stuff is just getting into the way for peoper SP story telling capabilities...