The Dynamic Campaign... WHEN?!?!?

This will greatly complicate the fight and could unbalance the campaign, we'll see how they tackle this problem.

Not really.

I already see the wailing and gnashing of teeth on GAW/PGAW where they did limitedly implement logistics. People are constantly chasing airfields for their fox3's or fuel tanks or whatever. And people do bitch, but they are still the most populated servers too. It also forces people to use something other than the "best of the bestest" hardware. For example when I fly there in the F18, and do ground attack, I never take Aim120's I take Aim7's, because I'm not planning on using them and if I get shot down I'm not depleting the ammo pool. Same for the ground attack hardware, If I'm sam hunting, its HARM's and JSOW-C's, but if I'm tank plinking its good ol mk82's.

One other thing I'd really like implemented is some sort of logical missions and persistence.

For example, I want the "campaign AI" (CAI) do something like the following in a "strategic air campaign" with few/no blue ground units

Generate a mission for helo's to insert an SF team to provide lasing behind enemy lines

Generate a top cover mission for those helos

Generate SEAD/Feint missions to distract the AI.

Tankers/AEW for those missions.

Then later, if thats successful that SF team is used by the AI to provide lasing on a high value strategic target.

And it generates

Strike mission

SEAD mission

CAP for those missions

Tanker/AEW support missions

Then as a follow on, the SF team needs to be extracted by Helos. Or if there are pilots shot down, CSAR missions are automatically generated to recover the pilots (human or AI).

Online each mission could be led by a single player, or players with AI planes backfilling unused slots in some logical fashion. I.e. in a 4 ship, you could have 2 humans and 2AI and depending on it, each guy could have an AI wingman, or it could be 2 human/2AI flights.

Life has gotten in the way of simming for a few years, but I am now slowly getting ready to get back into DCS (can't wait to try it out with VR). Coming across Wags' confirmation that ED is working on a dynamic campaign made me very happy.

What I personally like about the dynamic campaign experience is the immersion of what feels like a live environment - that you are only one flight from one of a whole bunch of packages, missions orient on overall objectives which may include escort/strikers/... that contribute to some overall larger goal - your mission runs on a carefully planned timetable vs the rest of your package - and the feeling you are participating in an actual theatre of war with plenty of radio chatter and traffic.

I care less about a "realistic" and "winnable" war. You can never make it entirely realistic anyways, without including effects of global politics, supply chain management and what not. As a single pilot you are but a small cog in a giant war machine, and the idea that your personal performance somehow changes the tides of war is not what I consider realism.

So what I would wish for: give us smoke and mirrors realism that _feels_ like being in a live, changing and unpredictable combat environment - which also reflects whether your side is considered by the campaign engine to be at an advantage or disadvantage. Ideally missions should also have persistent results, e.g. sunk battleships/carriers are permanently taken out, complex structures cannot be easily rebuilt and airfields take a little time to repair.

But when it comes to trying to fully simulate a real winnable war as I know some will want from a dynamic campaign engine - I think this is not feasible, and at the end of the day is not what matters from a combat piloting experience. DCS is complex enough already that trying to also impose a "Hearts of Iron" type grand strategy game layer on top of it simply becomes too much. And so I would encourage ED to focus on what matters - immersion, live combat environment, and the pure joy of flying combat missions.

Just my $0.10 on the matter :)

What makes me nervous is that I read at some points that a single guy was working on this. ED hired him specifically for the task.

However, the only news we read in months are always about new modules. Not much is shared about the world, mission tools and campaign. Briefly new modules are constantly added, but the sim still feel blend with no communications about where it is heading other than "we are planning to it at some point" which is mostly the answer about all desirable features in the sim. We have no clue about what is currently under work (other than new modules, including the carrier)

I would appreciate an update here and there on the future development ... some kind of high level planning so the customers would see that it is moving forward.

What makes me nervous is that I read at some points that a single guy was working on this. ED hired him specifically for the task.

 

However, the only news we read in months are always about new modules. Not much is shared about the world, mission tools and campaign. Briefly new modules are constantly added, but the sim still feel blend with no communications about where it is heading other than "we are planning to it at some point" which is mostly the answer about all desirable features in the sim. We have no clue about what is currently under work (other than new modules, including the carrier)

 

I would appreciate an update here and there on the future development ... some kind of high level planning so the customers would see that it is moving forward.

Agree, i stop playing the game till somethings happen here

What makes me nervous is that I read at some points that a single guy was working on this. ED hired him specifically for the task.

 

However, the only news we read in months are always about new modules. Not much is shared about the world, mission tools and campaign. Briefly new modules are constantly added, but the sim still feel blend with no communications about where it is heading other than "we are planning to it at some point" which is mostly the answer about all desirable features in the sim. We have no clue about what is currently under work (other than new modules, including the carrier)

 

I would appreciate an update here and there on the future development ... some kind of high level planning so the customers would see that it is moving forward.

I am not too nervous. It is only a little more than half a year ago that Wags wrote that they only recently found a guy, it is high priority, highly complex, will take time but not "5 years", and there will be news when there is something to tell. Combine those informations and it is not surprising that there is no update by this time. We've had to be patient about some DCS updates before, but they tend to deliver in the end.

I would imagine that retrofitting a war simulation type dynamic campaign to a platform that was not originally built for it, must be quite an architectural challenge - unless you "cheat" by having some simulation program that spits out loadable missions. Complex to model and complex to implement ... my guess is we will not be seeing this until some major release of DCS World. Which is just fine, I would rather have something good that becomes an integral part of the DCS experience than whatever the alternative would be.

 

I care less about a "realistic" and "winnable" war. You can never make it entirely realistic anyways, without including effects of global politics, supply chain management and what not. As a single pilot you are but a small cog in a giant war machine, and the idea that your personal performance somehow changes the tides of war is not what I consider realism.

 

Just my $0.10 on the matter :)

Hey, I flew two bombing missions in the F 18 last night and got a silver medal for one and a distinguished flying cross for the other. Now that’s realism...:megalol:

I agree entirely with your vision of a good dynamic campaign. I would love to see that.

I am not too nervous. It is only a little more than half a year ago that Wags wrote that they only recently found a guy, it is high priority, highly complex, will take time but not "5 years", and there will be news when there is something to tell. Combine those informations and it is not surprising that there is no update by this time. We've had to be patient about some DCS updates before, but they tend to deliver in the end.

 

 

 

I would imagine that retrofitting a war simulation type dynamic campaign to a platform that was not originally built for it, must be quite an architectural challenge - unless you "cheat" by having some simulation program that spits out loadable missions. Complex to model and complex to implement ... my guess is we will not be seeing this until some major release of DCS World. Which is just fine, I would rather have something good that becomes an integral part of the DCS experience than whatever the alternative would be.

War campaign simulation is knotty in complexity. I do not see many of its kind around that much in simulated games.

Certainly not 5 year according to Wags for us to get one in dcs. 1-4 years is a reasonable time period to look out for it.

It would be fantastic to see one added sooner than projected in any case.

Maybe some parts of the improvements are on the "surprise" list. Chill

Great perspective here Helios.

 

War campaign simulation is knotty in complexity. I do not see many of its kind around that much in simulated games.

Certainly not 5 year according to Wags for us to get one in dcs. 1-4 years is a reasonable time period to look out for it.

It would be fantastic to see one added sooner than projected in any case.

I don't think 5 years is that far off. It's definitely much more accurate than 1 year.

I dont think its about "1 pilot winning a war".

So lets say that over the next month the Red Forces are going to try and assault from the sea and the mountains Sochi-Adler as a key port and way to cut off the Blue Forces reinforcements to the East thus cutting the warzone in half and Bluefor needing to provide airlifts to the east.

You can take missions from CAP to defend attackers of your ship defences to CAS for attackers of your Land Defences and anything in between.

Where you dont take a mission, AI can fly it and the outcome is what it is. If you fly a couple of successful missions as a pilot on CAP they become more skilled and therefore more likely to win when you pass them over to AI whilst you try and get another pilot up for CAS, likewise if an AI survives a few battles they get better and you may chose not to send them on certain missions to protect them for others.

The whole thing is more than just one person changing a war, and if you dont own a module, tough, you have to assign AI to fly it!

Ehhh, one question:

Would that be an Add-On or included in the free DCS World ?

I'd buy it for 100€, no doubt, I am waiting for this since I know DCS, it's the ONE thing I miss the most.

I dont think its about "1 pilot winning a war".

 

 

So lets say that over the next month the Red Forces are going to try and assault from the sea and the mountains Sochi-Adler as a key port and way to cut off the Blue Forces reinforcements to the East thus cutting the warzone in half and Bluefor needing to provide airlifts to the east.

 

 

 

You can take missions from CAP to defend attackers of your ship defences to CAS for attackers of your Land Defences and anything in between.

 

 

Where you dont take a mission, AI can fly it and the outcome is what it is. If you fly a couple of successful missions as a pilot on CAP they become more skilled and therefore more likely to win when you pass them over to AI whilst you try and get another pilot up for CAS, likewise if an AI survives a few battles they get better and you may chose not to send them on certain missions to protect them for others.

 

 

The whole thing is more than just one person changing a war, and if you dont own a module, tough, you have to assign AI to fly it!

I would like something like this. You get some options for missions to fly, based on a given airplane module you own. F18, could be anything from CAP to SEAD/DEAD to strike etc. since its so versatile. F14 would likely be more fleet air defense or perhaps strike. Mig21, intercepts/escorts, maybe some ground attack etc. In each case you are part of a "package" getting support or giving support to other flights.

Eagle Dynamics Matt Wagner wrote “The campaign will be real-time and basically be an AI-driven RTS playing out that the player participates in" . I think that's the best way. I would love to see a real time RTS very similar to BMS, run aside and controlling the DCS 3D environment. As in BMS, the AI headquarters would issue missions run by defaults by AI pilots, and play alone the campaign. Then a player joining the server can check the list of incoming missions, take a seat in one of it (i.e. just replacing one of the AI pilot), and request that the mission be rescheduled to the next 10-20 (?) minutes, time for other real pilots to join the package. The headquarter AI could also be replaced by most decorated players. Ideally pilots should be somehow evaluated on their ability to follow as much as possible the flight plan, not only their kill rate. Obviously the RTS engine would needs to encapsulate and unspawn all the units that are out of radar range, so no need to compute complex engagements between ground units.

Sorry, I am just dreaming awake…

Ehhh, one question:

 

Would that be an Add-On or included in the free DCS World ?

 

I'd buy it for 100€, no doubt, I am waiting for this since I know DCS, it's the ONE thing I miss the most.

Now one knows yet (maybe not even the devs).

Now I have the F16 and almost all the planes for DCS it is time to have that dynamic campaign release. I know it will take time and we are far away from it, but I think only 1 person to make all the complex code woudln't be enough.

One thing I am fear of is the size of the maps. In BMS we have really big maps where the battle front moves. Here we are more little in space so campaigns may be very short in time (unless there are equal forces). Hope they find a way to amplify the current maps in future.

And to let us make the wait more confortable, you could make some semy dynamic campaigns. I know there are people that program "dynamic" campaigns in terms of number of units you can use or the enemy. Maybe not big theaters but something to have fun in the mean while.

And also another thing: Please make a save/load option in any fight stage in the currect missions campaigns we have.

Thanks!

Now I have the F16 and almost all the planes for DCS it is time to have that dynamic campaign release. I know it will take time and we are far away from it, but I think only 1 person to make all the complex code woudln't be enough.

 

One thing I am fear of is the size of the maps. In BMS we have really big maps where the battle front moves. Here we are more little in space so campaigns may be very short in time (unless there are equal forces). Hope they find a way to amplify the current maps in future.

 

And to let us make the wait more confortable, you could make some semy dynamic campaigns. I know there are people that program "dynamic" campaigns in terms of number of units you can use or the enemy. Maybe not big theaters but something to have fun in the mean while.

And also another thing: Please make a save/load option in any fight stage in the currect missions campaigns we have.

 

Thanks!

+1

everythings you say, and let me say,

also on a little map initially could be ok

Wags' answer to the thread's initial question from Oct 18th 2019:

https://www.mudspike.com/mudspike-ama-with-eagle-dynamics-senior-producer-matt-wagner/

"Our current estimate is that the dynamic campaign will be ready for beta test in 2021."

Huh, that fits my prediction I made in January on the first page of this thread pretty well:

I wouldn't expect the dynamic Campaign before 2020, maybe not even before 2021.

Wags' answer to the thread's initial question from Oct 18th 2019:

 

 

https://www.mudspike.com/mudspike-ama-with-eagle-dynamics-senior-producer-matt-wagner/

December 2021 :music_whistling:

December 2021 :music_whistling:

A very safe estimate. :)

A very safe estimate. :)

I try to have realistic expectations. And even more realistic ones with regards to DCS. That way I'm usually pleasantly surprised rather than the other way around.

As a mission designer that have been working with EDs different products since the flanker days, i'm a bit worried about if ED is aware of complete rework of AI that will have to be done in order to make a dynamic campaign working. I spends more time in the mission editor then in the cockpit, and part of that time is spent previewing AI behaviour in missions over and over again until you can get the behaviour you want in the mission. I feel that the AI is a joke, a bad bad joke. Everything you build has to be micromanaged to a level that you can not call the AI an AI anymore. And the parts where the AI actually has a bit of independent thinking, you often need to turn it off, or use community made scrips to micro manage it, like MOOSE, to get a behaviour that is not ridiculous. Even with all my skill and all the different tools used you still have AI that more often kills itself by not being able to for example manage fuel consumption and crashing due to running out of fuel, or not knowing when to pull up when getting in a dogfight or evading a missile, then to being hit by enemy fire. And don't even get me started on the ground AI... It is not even an AI, it is literally a way of moving targets around, and even that does not work. A common problem in my squadrons recent manually edited online dynamic campaign is that ground units just stop following orders, and get stuck with no way of making them move, at all. I really hope that ED realises that in order to make a dynamic campaign that will not just cause people to be disappointed and feel cheated they will have to totally rework the way the AI behaves or this will be money wasted. At least if it is to be a truly dynamic campaign where what you do actually affect the outcome of things, and not just a mission generator running with the ability to save in between missions. Because at this point the best way to win against the AI is just let them fly around killing themselves until they run out of air-frames. And wait for the ground AI to get stuck on a trees or buildings or just get bugged out so that the ground offensive is won.

As a mission designer that have been working with EDs different products since the flanker days, i'm a bit worried about if ED is aware of complete rework of AI that will have to be done in order to make a dynamic campaign working ...

Q. Are there any plans to expand Combined Arms? This hidden gem of a module can really alter the multiplayer landscape with a cunning user at the helm but hasn’t gained a large following.

A. Certainly, but before we can do so, there are other items that first need to be addressed:

- Detailed damage model system for ground units

- Improved ground unit AI decision making

- New and improved ground unit effects

- A much more detailed ground environment