will the new career mode kill scripted campaigns?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

How do you explain otherwise that Cliffs of Dover (now a study simulator) can handle hundreds of units moving?

 

-snip-

 

If you're using Cliffs as a study simulator you're gonna have a bad time... Unless you're focusing on fuel cock operation.

 

All of the modeling in Cliffs is a lot simpler - from ground handing, fluid dynamics (atmospheric) modeling, flight modeling, AI flight modeling, etc.

 

Can't make a 1:1 comparison between something intrinsically different.

[coconut]

Would tracking damage between missions really be possible in BoX campaigns? The problem I see is, that every building needs a fixed ID number that doesn't change between missions. The problem in BoX is, that these ID numbers get reassigned when new objects are added or deleted in a mission, so I am not sure how tracking damage could work in BoX, no matter if it is in a scripted or automatically generated campaign.  

 

You are right, but there are work-arounds, e.g. use positions.

[sinned]

I would with respect submit that the missions are/can indeed be connected, one to another.

How and to what extent is up to the builder and his style, wishes, time resources.

Gambit, can you elaborate on how this can be done via editor without extensive knowledge in coding? It sounds like editor offers this?

 

Mission built expertens such as Haas and Juri want to also know. This implies to me, editor does not offer such function by default.

[SYN_Haashashin]

What Gambit says is correct. There are different ways to connect missions one to another.

 

The "problem" come when you want a fully dynamic mission. For that you need all objects to be entities (and some/lots scripts??) to be fully dynamic. Let me explain that: All objects in the map, even the ones that are not part of the missions objectives, have to be activated as entities (which use CPU cicles) to be counted in the mission logs and I dont think the sim will run like that. Not because poor optimization but because the map is huge and the number of objects will be enormous and not many PC will be able to run it at decent FPS.

 

What Im talking about here is the possibility of destroying a bridge 100km+ away from your mission fly plan and that bridge will be destroyed for whole campaign. Which means you did got lost or something. Possible, it seems it is. Easy or reliable?? to be seen.

 

If we talk about events in a scripted mission (script is there and its the most importat word here) its up to the builder that it has an effect in next mission.

 

We are talking about scripted campaign right?? since it seems we are getting confuse or something. Scripted things can not be dynamic by definition.

 

Haash

[sinned]

Haash, the scope here is persistent arena regardless of dynamic or scripted.

 

 

Say I led a flight, and completely anniliated a wall of aaa in route to mission objective.

Next mission (say next mission flight happens the same day), will i see the same wall of aaa or is it possible to carry on the events that took place in the previous mission?

 

My definition of scripted campaign is a campaign that an outcome of a campaign and sequence of missions is predertermined. Dynamic, on the other hand, you have more influence over front lines and outcome of campaign.

 

Scripted should not be just a series of missions in which map objects are simply "copy and paste" with new objects are added and deleted and some stats updated.

 

My definition should not be far from consensus as when Janes FA18 launched, its campaign was defined as "scripted campaign", but its world was a persistent one.

[coconut]

 

 

Let me explain that: All objects in the map, even the ones that are not part of the missions objectives, have to be activated as entities (which use CPU cicles) to be counted in the mission logs

 

No, you only need them to be non-neutral. Entities are only needed if you want to tie mission logic to the group, or if you want AIs to attack them.

[SYN_Haashashin]

No, you only need them to be non-neutral. Entities are only needed if you want to tie mission logic to the group, or if you want AIs to attack them.

 

Cool, thats the asnwer I was looking for. I was mistaken then.

 

Anyways for a scripted campaign it may be useful.

 

Sinned, what you say (persistent arena) can be done, manually or by coding it seems. So its up to the builder as we have been saying.

[sinned]

Cool, thats the asnwer I was looking for. I was mistaken then.

 

Anyways for a scripted campaign it may be useful.

 

Sinned, what you say (persistent arena) can be done, manually or by coding it seems. So its up to the builder as we have been saying.

"I can't get information about what the player did in the mission and in accordance with this to change the next mission"

 

This is from B6. If B6, arguably one of the best scripted campaign maker at the moment, cannot do this, none of you can. Its not really up to makers taste or "choice".

Its about extra layer of coding ability.

 

I have only seen coconut did this with his extra coding. Lets drop the pretence by stop saying- this can be done via editor or "manually". Default mission editor doesnt offer persistency since players action cannot be tracked by default.

Btw, i am well aware from the start that this must be possible via coding so I have been saying pls take a look at coconuts server as it may be your catalyst of creative minds to take scripted campaign to the next level.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

How exactly necessary is it that damage ports over 1:1? Like BlackSix said, he manually creates damage in the next mission if the previous one involved an attack to a certain area.

 

In theory the easiest way to do it in a dynamic setting would be to create a logic in the career campaign that adds a degree of damage automatically (if that's possible in the BoX FMB, in 1946 you had the damage slider that could be applied to a certain area for example, while DCS can trigger destruction at the beginning of the mission). Something that computes:

 

Previous mission type ->

If patrol/air defence -> previous mission area -> mission successful? yes/no -> if yes, location undamaged next mission; if no, location damaged next mission

If escort/ground attack -> previous mission area -> mission successful? yes/no -> if yes, location damaged next mission; if no, location undamaged next mission

 

I don't know how the mission builder in Il-2 exactly works or how it handles such things, ditto for the campaign engine, but if coding and scripting are at least slightly flexible it should be possible. A few years ago there was a dynamic MiG-21 campaign in DCS programmed with a system where the player would land and report the result of the previous missions through a radio comms script. This information was taken in account by another script that influenced factors in the next mission.

 

Now, despite all of this being possible like coconut pulls off, the main question is when is it worth it to compute dynamic damage? Scripted mission builders can simulate that by adding damage to areas themselves, while dynamic missions seldom happen over the same objective within the time it takes to repair or replace units at the target. On top of that, since the pilot career will put you in the seat of an average Joe as opposed to Call of Duty One-Man Army, you will not be able to influence the outcome of battles, campaigns or the war by yourself.

[SYN_Haashashin]

Say I led a flight, and completely anniliated a wall of aaa in route to mission objective.

Next mission (say next mission flight happens the same day), will i see the same wall of aaa or is it possible to carry on the events that took place in the previous mission?

Its clear we are talking about a scripted SP missions right?? where you should follow a script (like any actor). Is that AAA part of that script/part of the objective you have assigned for that mission?? If the answer is no, then its impossible to carry it on the next mission in a SP mission. Are we talking about MP in this topic?? No, but if its in MP it can be done to an extent...coding it. If you are given a script and you jump it and do whatever you want, its nothing it can be done.

 

My definition of scripted campaign is a campaign that an outcome of a campaign and sequence of missions is predertermined. Dynamic, on the other hand, you have more influence over front lines and outcome of campaign.

For me;

 

- Scripted campaign: You are giving a number of missions, say 20, all handmade with a story line and everything fixed.

- Dynamic campaign: You are given auto-generated missions built on events of previous ones.

 

What you want, it seems to me, its a mix of both in SP. Possible to a degree if autogenerated missions like in PWCG, not in scripted campaigns.

 

I have only seen coconut did this with his extra coding. Lets drop the pretence by stop saying- this can be done via editor or "manually". Default mission editor doesnt offer persistency since players action cannot be tracked by default.

Btw, i am well aware from the start that this must be possible via coding so I have been saying pls take a look at coconuts server as it may be your catalyst of creative minds to take scripted campaign to the next level.

Yes, have seen that done...in MP!!. We are talking about SP here. I will tell you again, MP and SP are totally different beasts. About players actions...free will can not be tracked in SP scripted campaigns, but if you follow the script as you should in a scripted mission...it can be done. Also ME gives you ways to link mission rotation to an event...in MP!! since times of RoF, so nothing new there.

 

I think that now is just circle talking, is clear that in SP campaigns is not doable but in MP is possible to an extent by coding. That should settle the discussion.

 

Haash

[Cybermat47]

Btw, i am well aware from the start that this must be possible via coding so I have been saying pls take a look at coconuts server as it may be your catalyst of creative minds to take scripted campaign to the next level.

I find it odd that someone who hasn't made a campaign is telling experienced campaign makers what is and isn't possible...

[sinned]

"How exactly necessary is it that damage ports over 1:1?"

Juri, Haas who are very experienced and talented creators of sp campaign would LOVE to know how this can be achieved.

[edited]

 

Control yourself

Edited August 6, 2017 by SYN_Haashashin

[Juri_JS]

To be honest, for me as a mission builder, persistent damage is just a very minor issue, because to some extent I can do it manually in the mission editor. As far as I am concerned, the developers shouldn't waste any time and resources on it, as long as there are much more important features missing in scripted campaign mode - for example awards and promotions, more detailed campaign stats and the ability to show images and videos before and after a mission, without the need to add them in the mission itself.

My hope is, that some of these features will be created by the developers for career mode and will later be adopted for scripted campaign mode too.

Edited August 6, 2017 by Juri_JS

[Cybermat47]

"How exactly necessary is it that damage ports over 1:1?"

Juri, Haas who are very experienced and talented creators of sp campaign would LOVE to know how this can be achieved.

[edited]

It wouldn't be a sinned post without the trademark rudeness and presumption.

Edited August 6, 2017 by SYN_Haashashin

[sinned]

I find it odd that someone who hasn't made a campaign is telling experienced campaign makers what is and isn't possible...

For the same logic, no one should be posting on deveoper suggestion page except sim developers or flight modellers.

 

Nice try though.

[SYN_Haashashin]

To be honest, for me as a mission builder, persistent damage is just a very minor issue, because to some extent I can do it manually in the mission editor. As far as I am concerned, the developers shouldn't waste any time and resources on it, as long as there are much more important features missing in scripted campaign mode - for example awards and promotions, more detailed campaign stats and the ability to show images and videos before and after a mission, without the need to add them in the mission itself.

 

My hope is, that some of these features will be created by the developers for career mode and will later be adopted for scripted campaign mode too.

Totally agree with you.

[unreasonable]

I have enjoyed both scripted, dynamic and  non-dynamic career mode in various titles, so I see the as complementary rather than in direct competition.

 

The point about DCG was that it could create an huge number of outcomes in a campaign, whether the pilot did anything significant or not, since it was essentially an AI controlled war game in which the player took part. It is not so much the damage that the player does that needs to be persistent, but the strengths of all the air units should reflect previous losses plus a replacement rate.  The ground war was a little more abstracted, but since every "round" determined changes in the front resulting from the ground fighting, which were carried over, it gave an indefinite number of possible courses to any given campaign.  

 

Persistent damage could turn out to be an issue for the Pacific. Bridges can be repaired overnight by engineers, so they often had to be bombed repeatedly. Sink a named carrier, however, and it will seem more than a little odd if it is there in the next mission....

[Cybermat47]

For the same logic, no one should be posting on deveoper suggestion page except sim developers or flight modellers.

Nice try though.

Suggestions are just that - suggestions.

 

There's a difference between "hey, maybe you could do this?" and "why haven't you done this yet? I know you say it's impossible, but I know better than you".

[sinned]

"As far as I am concerned, the developers shouldn't waste any time and resources on it, as long as there are much more important features missing in scripted campaign mode "

 

Agreed, hence I ask HERE talented community members to consider incorporating this feature lest sp campaign become a stagnant product - a mere series of missions played in sequence.

Suggestions are just that - suggestions.

 

There's a difference between "hey, maybe you could do this?" and "why haven't you done this yet? I know you say it's impossible, but I know better than you".

Nope, to whom did i ask why havent you done this? If you want to put words into others mouth, check your "i know better than you" ego first.

 

Funny how you see rebuttals as "i know better than you" logic.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

the strengths of all the air units should reflect previous losses plus a replacement rate.

Agreed. That was confirmed in the previous DD, thankfully.

[SYN_Haashashin]

Agreed, hence I ask HERE talented community members to consider incorporating this feature.

I will asnwer you again, maybe not one of the talented ones but..., this feature cant be incorporated to SP scripted campaigns. You seems to miss the whole point about scripted campaign time after time. You may have better luck asking to Pat Wilson to incorporate it to his campaign generator, he is one talented coder.

 

 

sp campaign become a stagnant product - a mere series of missions played in sequence.

Ohh well...thats what you think about the SP scripted campaign...what else can be said.

 

Oh yeah, stop getting personal/bikering people!!

[sinned]

"Sink a named carrier, however, and it will seem more than a little odd if it is there in the next mission...."

 

There you go.

 

Without persistent arena and object logic, what will sp scripted pacific campaign entail? One call of duty oriented man doesnt change the course of battle, so the same sunk carrier magically respawns on day 2 mission or "you havent made sp campaigns so you have to sink the same carrier over and over?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Mate, respectfully, calm down. You can't sink a carrier on your own. In a scripted setting, you and your group will go and drop a few eggs on the carrier. After that, other flights will follow suit. If the carrier is to be sunk, in the next mission it won't be there and you'll know the combined efforts of multiple flights have caused it to sink or be permanently crippled. It's all good.

Edited August 6, 2017 by 55IAP_Lucas_From_Hell

[SYN_Haashashin]

Without persistent arena and object logic, what will sp scripted pacific campaign entail? One call of duty oriented man doesnt change the course of battle, so the same sunk carrier magically respawns on day 2 mission or "you havent made sp campaigns so you have to sink the same carrier over and over?

Is the carrier part of the script of the mission?? Your objective?? our you decided to sink it because you want to?? If the answer is: Yes, its part of the mission...and I built that Scripted campaign...that carrier wont be seen any more!! whats so hard to understand??. If you decided to sink it by yourself...well, I cant predict what all people will do, sorry, not that talented.

 

This topic is for scripted campaigns, its clear that what you asking is for an auto generated campaign, be it PWCG or the incoming BoX career. As I said, you are totally missing the point of this topic.

 

Haash

[sinned]

Ohh well...thats what you think about the SP scripted campaign...what else can be said.

 

Oh yeah, stop getting personal/bikering people!!

I posted here and not pat wilson because OP wants to opinions about his future sp premium campaign. I think it is helpful for him to know.

 

I also used the word "LEST" sp campaign become..... i trust you know what lest means and how it was used in context of my full sentence.

 

I apologize to you Haas if I sounded offensive to respectable sp builders. I really enjoy them and they are really great. I look forward to fritz life.

 

 

I will not post here further because i feel Bearcat is breathing heavy over my shoulder.

 

Ciao,

[unreasonable]

Is the carrier part of the script of the mission?? Your objective?? our you decided to sink it because you want it?? If the answer is Yes, its part of the mission...and I built that Scripted campaign...that carrier wont be seen any more!! whats so hard to understand. If you decided to sink it by yourself...well, I cant predict what all people will do, sorry, not that talented.

 

This topic is for scripted campaigns, its clear that what you asking is for a auto generated campaign, be PWCG or the incoming BoX career. As I said, you are missing the point totally of this topic.

 

Haash

 

The topic header is "Will new career mode kill scripted campaigns?".  So discussing their relative merits seems exactly the point of the thread.

 

I am fairly sure that the answer is no: but I am still curious as to how the new career mode will handle persistence issues: RoF's career mode does that well enough but only for the player squadron, as opposed to DCG's approach of an open ended wargame.  This was OK for RoF with it's (unrealistically) static front lines, but I am hoping that the new career mode can do better. 

[SYN_Haashashin]

I apologize to you Haas if I sounded offensive to respectable sp builders. I really enjoy them and they are really great. I look forward to fritz life.

No apologize needed. If you are looking forward to it, please go ahead and download it from the scripted campaign section of the forum

 

I will not post here further because i feel Bearcat is breathing heavy over my shoulder.

You do not have to worry about that, after all..Im a moderator to

 

The topic header is "Will new career mode kill scripted campaigns?".  So discussing their relative merits seems exactly the point of the thread.

Sorry unreasonable, my mistake. Shouldnt have said this topic, I meant the conversation about the scripted campaigns, not the whole thread. It evolved a lil off topic, sorry about that.

 

I am fairly sure that the answer is no: but I am still curious as to how the new career mode will handle persistence issues: RoF's career mode does that well enough but only for the player squadron, as opposed to DCG's approach of an open ended wargame.  This was OK for RoF with it's (unrealistically) static front lines, but I am hoping that the new career mode can do better. 

The team said something about been more "dynamic" (whatever that means) but Im curious to. After all, Im an old SP guy . And as Juri said, would love to have some aspects added to scripted campaigns (awards, promotions..)

 

Haash

[PatrickAWlson]

It is true that adding a dynamic campaign engine opens the risk of feature creep, and it's a substantial effort, but I also think people exaggerate the cost. You can implement something as simple as Risk or as complete as Heart of Iron, it's up to how much one wants to invest. It can be done without bankrupting a team, but it's also possible to make a combat flight sim without it.

 

 

 

 

BOS is limited to about 20 AI planes or so, and to 100 ground vehicles. These limits apply to all mission types, dynamic or not. Some may think it's more of a show-stopper in a dynamic setting, but I don't think so.

 

Tracking damage to buildings (as in "damaged vs non-damaged", no detailed damage) and persisting them is a non-issue as far as CPU and memory usage is concerned. It does require some programming knowledge, which is why you don't see many people doing it in 3rd party tools, but it's not intrinsically hard.

 

Note that persistence and triggers are unrelated. You don't need triggers or complex logic to have some buildings damaged at the start of the mission. It's simply a matter of changing a few default attributes of static groups.

 

What is difficult is the war game engine, and the AI you need for it. But all computations it requires can be done after the mission ends, so it's not too much of a problem if it takes a minute or two to do its thing.

 

Having already done it I can give you a decent estimate.  PWCG is about 80K lines of code.  Automated testing adds another 50%.  PWCG has modeled the history of the air war, some degree of the ground war, offers dynamic AI advancement, and a bunch of other stuff.  

 

PWCG does not simulate supply lines, resupply, dynamic state of ground objects (can't as they are not recorded in the logs - wouldn't be too hard if damage state of static objects was recorded), history of ground units, dynamic state of ground units, mapping of player success to the overall war (i.e. Germans are not going to win n matter what you do), and also lots of other stuff.

 

I would say that the dream dynamic campaign being envisioned would end up at 200K lines of code, plus at least 50K - 100K lines of test automation.  

 

Asking staff to produce a component that amounts to 200K - 300K lines of well written, tested, integrated code in a year is a pretty big ask.  Of course you don't do it that way.  You have a feature board that contains everything that they can think of, and you keep adding as you think of more.  Said board is prioritized and there is a line at some point - above is must do, below is nice to have.  You start with must do and you release that.  Then you gradually add nice to have on a prioritized basis, all while pushing towards ideal.  

 

IMHO 1C has done a great job to date on terms of incremental development, so there is no reason to believe that they will not do the same with the campaign.  What that means is don't freak out if release 1 doesn't have every bell and whistle that you want.  Keep asking, be willing to pay a little for it (none of this "it should have been there they owe it to me" crap), and they will deliver.

[PatrickAWlson]

You are right, but there are work-arounds, e.g. use positions.

 

The same is true of airplanes but they offer a description field that does appear in the logs.  I record every plane in the mission to my own file.  I then use the contents of the logs to map back to my own data file and now I know what happened to every pilot, observer, and plane in the mission.

 

The only thing missing for static objects is the fact that they are not logged in the log files.  If they were I could maintain the status of every building, bridge and outhouse in Russia.

 

With a lot of effort the ground units could be similarly maintained.  Those do get logged, so it is entirely possible to accurately recreate every unit at each of the battles.  Did I mention "lots of work"

[SharpeXB]

I prefer the RoF style Career to scripted campaigns, it's great that IL-2 offers both though.

The fact that the career mode isn't "dynamic" featuring a persistent environment isn't a big deal to me. Might be nice but not essential. Since the sim recreates real battles the player can only have so much believable effect. They can't move the front line or change the outcome of the war.

More important advantages of a Career Mode are:

- Endless variety and re-playability. Scripted campaigns are dull to replay. Repeating failed missions is tedious.

- The ability to fly any plane. Scripted campaigns are always limited to the few standard planes.

- Reward and career progression. Also the idea of approaching the sim a real, trying to survive vs just shoot up objectives.

IMO it's the Career Mode that really makes the "game" into a "sim" by putting the player in a realistic scenario of being an actual pilot vs just playing at missions.

[Yogiflight]

I would say it that way, the scripted campaign is like a 'One night stand', fast but short fun for the moment, and the campaign mode is like being married, it developes with time.

[sniperton]

BOS is limited to about 20 AI planes or so, and to 100 ground vehicles. These limits apply to all mission types, dynamic or not. Some may think it's more of a show-stopper in a dynamic setting, but I don't think so.

 

BTW if this 20 AI planes limitation really applies I wonder how any remarkable moment of the Battle of Midway can be recreated at all with some scent of historicity. Midway was attacked by 108 Japanese planes and was defended by 28 American fighters. Reducing the numbers proportionally, 1 F4F and 3 F2Fs should attack 5 D3As and 5 B5Ns escorted by 5 A6Ms (=19). You should also forget about making a simultaneous attack on multiple Japanese carriers: McClusky and Leslie should fight their own battles in a completely independent way, or both have to have only 3 to 6 planes each. Also the AA defences of any attacked carrier have to be weakened accordingly.

Edited August 6, 2017 by sniperton

[Gambit21]

How exactly necessary is it that damage ports over 1:1? Like BlackSix said, he manually creates damage in the next mission if the previous one involved an attack to a certain area.

 

 

Yep

[Gambit21]

To answer one of Sinned concerns, it's also a concern of mine as a campaign builder anticipating Midway.

I have asked Han for a simple branching functionality to the scripted campaign system.

Right now for Kuban the lack of it won't hamper me so much, for historical Midway scenarios it might not matter so much either, but for "what if" Midway scenarios than it would be a huge help.

 

First, from a historical perspective, we know what happened to each carrier and when, so that's easy to write into the mission progression. The player doesn't have to see a carrier sink during his own mission unless

your simulating THAT exact flight/mission. Myself I don't plant to make the player "the guy who scored the hit" or you can see the problems it poses. If you happen to score the killing blow...great, but I

can't plan on that. History will basically progress either way.

They are few, they are prominent, they are famous. So yes attention has to be paid to their state from mission to mission.

 

For "what if" alternate scenarios I'll want the ability to branch the campaign depending on whether or not a carrier was sunk during a player's mission, (not whether the player himself sunk it)

So maybe the attack happens in mission 3.

If the carrier is sunk the campaign progresses to mission 4 and the briefing reflects the sunk carrier.

If it was not sunk, the campaign branches to mission  '3B' (which I built for this purpose) where a second attack is mounted against that carrier. (the carrier is placed in a pre-damaged/smoking state reflecting attacks from the mission prior)

Depending on the results of this mission we can progress to '3C' if not sunk or if yes it branches back to 4.

 

This will be facilitated my mission objective MCU already in the sim, which the carrier then reports the event "OnKilled" or "OnCriticallyDamaged"

If no report, the campaign branches, if yes the campaign progresses along the linear path to mission 4.

 

It's pretty simple really.

The branching functionality can be as simple or complex as the designer wishes.

From a testing/debugging standpoint I myself would keep it simple, (one branch, then back to the original progression) otherwise the campaign would never get done.

So I might want to only give you one more shot at sinking the carrier (or the carrier being sunk during your mission for you to actually witness) and then we'll assume that even if you didn't see it sink,

a flight that arrived after you did the job and the next briefing and state of the battle field will reflect this.

 

There's more than one way to skin the cat.

Edited August 6, 2017 by Gambit21

[Gambit21]

For other persistence issues, that requires a bit of creativity on the part of the mission designer.

I have an A-20 campaign coming up (which I obviously can't start yet) where much attacking of convoys in cloudy valleys will occur.

 

So if I send you to an area to attack a convoy, or a certain sector to free-hunt, I'll do one of two things next mission...sometimes both.

I'll send you to a completely different region next time, or I'll make sure there are smoking, burning vehicles there on the next mission reflecting Russian attacks.

Depending on geography and other factors, I might do both.

(but there were vehicles in 2 adjacent valleys, and I didn't hit the vehicles in the second valley to the north and yet they're also burning you say?)

Well another flight obviously hit them....so don't worry about it!)

 

So the persistence thing...isn't really a "thing" from where I sit.

I know what I sent you to do, I know where you're supposed to be, and the next mission will reflect this one way or the other.

 

We can only do what we can do, but we an do a lot.

You part as the player is to play along, follow orders, and not expect to be able to go rogue, fly anywhere in the world and kill something expecting it to be sitting there smoking later if you

happen to go AWOL and look at it again.

Edited August 7, 2017 by Gambit21