Wowowow, I really like that post! 
The mission editor is a very powerful tool which I’m constantly playing with in order to utilize as best I can. I do agree with what most are saying here in terms of some issues having manifested themselves in single player. There are two things which I constantly come across in building missions which drive me nuts and I wish (when ED has time) they would fix.
-
AI wing-men and other AI flights you might be working with always run out of fuel when you need them to be there in the fight. I wish ED would give AI flights something like a cheat so that they don’t constantly go into burner trying to get in formation with you and lose all their fuel. AI wing-men is Falcon always managed their fuel properly. You never had to worry about them and could actually ask them in the communication menu what their fuel status was. Wish that would be available in DCS as well.
-
When going into combat, AI aircraft need to be able to ditch their outside fuel tanks. Also, there needs to be a separate communication menu for allowing me to tell my AI wing-men to drop their tanks as opposed to all their weapons.
Small changes like these would make a big difference in creating and playing single player missions, particularly ones which you and your group are making long fights to the AO.
Few thoughts of my own on the subject…
It’s possible to have a dynamic campaign that sucks. When anything and everything is moving forward and around, it gets pretty easy to lose sight of the overall goal. IMO, EECH had this problem – there was no structure and much of the goal was set by the player(s). LB2, by contrast, while not having a true dynamic campaign per se, had enough of a structure to it that the player(s) knew what they were working toward, even as the missions themselves didn’t seem to directly relate to that goal. If you’re familiar with op orders, that’s kind of what we’re going for here; a lot of the dynamic campaigns I’ve seen have lacked the “commander’s intent” bit that establishes why things are being done and the what the end goal is.
A good linear campaign can knock the socks off of a dynamic campaign by immersing the player, so that while there’s no changing supplies, other things going on in the background affecting the campaign, etc. the feeling is still there… If the campaign has been done right! In fact, when you get down to brass tacks, doing a dynamic campaign by itself is pretty straightforward, almost like a database in how it all comes together; that’s why, in my opinion, most dynamic campaigns fall apart.
The thing that always struck me about DCS is that it sells itself as a switchology simulator, not really a game. The steep learning curve involved for the simulation means that once you’ve mastered operating an aircraft, you’ve pretty much played the game. In LB2, you turned off the rotor brake with one key and went on your merry way; in IL2 you pressed i and got going; in so many of the classic sims, you barely had to press a few keys and do a few things before you finally got into the real action. I know, DCS does have accessibility options to allow that, but really, how many hardcore DCSers actually do that?
When we put together our AH-64 for ArmA2, the goal we had was to make it slightly more involved than just hitting a key or using an action, but not to the extreme as DCS. By doing something more than press E to start, but less than turn on the battery, sign to the crew chief to pump up the compressor, wait 5 minutes, wait for permission from the crew chief to start the APU, etc., you get a way to add immersion while still keeping the fun factor there. Lest we forget, in the real world, there’s more losses due to accidents than combat – and when you make it just like the real world, you end up with bogus stuff where you forgot to warm the APU right or give enough time for the engine to warm up and you blow up 5 minutes after takeoff because a compressor stalled or something like that, meaning you have to go back and spend another whole 30-45 minutes starting up, and… That’s just not fun for a lot of folks.
I suppose what I’m saying is that a dynamic campaign by itself won’t solve the problem of not having any fun. There has to be something behind it to drive it, something for the player(s) to work toward beyond just “bomb/blow up/patrol X” and track another boring database change.
2 Likes
I personally don’t praise a good dynamic campaign as more realistic. I praise it because it puts me inside a “great game” where I can be a small cog in a much bigger machine and where, most importantly, the machine make sense. What near_blind calls a “grand strategy game” is exactly correct. Honestly, the game underneath the sim could be Archon for all I care. I just want to feel like I am part of something. When I see a line of AI F-15s and A-10s in the way of my flight of F-16s on the way to the runway I get a tiny bit giddy. For 15 years I have begged for a GAME! And all they keep giving me are ever more impressive sandboxes. Importantly for “them”, I keep buying anyway.
3 Likes
For those that are wondering what he is talking about - Franze and Nodunit’s AH-64 and (even more importantly) the campaign that came with it was absolutely awesome. It had been awhile since I had played a campaign all the way through and I thoroughly enjoyed it:
4 Likes
Good points overall, but to those saying that the DCS SP campaigns have a cheat you need to figure out to beat them, go and play the M-2000C campaign @Baltic_Dragon made. I absolutely love it and it stands out as one of the best singleplayer efforts for DCS IMHO!
4 Likes
He is an artist when it comes to the mission editor.
3 Likes
Baltic most certainly is, his missions give the world, character, atmosphere, and a over ambience that it lacks when you don’t know how to work all the settings. It’s a praise I cannot sing enough because it should be an example of what to strife for and what is capable in the mission editor!
1 Like
I can’t deny that I would like to make missions like his 
3 Likes
The exception that proves the rule then?
I don’t have the M2k so I can’t comment on that one.
He also has campaigns out for the A-10C and F-15C. The former is just as beloved, the latter’s gaining a good reputation.
3 Likes
When going into combat, AI aircraft need to be able to ditch their outside fuel tanks. Also, there needs to be a separate communication menu for allowing me to tell my AI wing-men to drop their tanks as opposed to all their weapons.
A friend and I have taken up the F-15C lately. The radio command to your Flight/Wingmen to Jettison Weps really only results in them jettisoning their external tanks.
You can also tell them to Go To → Route and they will go fly the waypoints. I give AI wingmen 3 external tanks so they can keep with me w/o running out, so often.
Thanks WreckingCrew for the response. My own experience has been similar but also have noticed differences with certain aircraft modules. For example; my initial post on this was because I’ve been working on a F-86F mission. I set up my AI wingman with the same set-up as myself. A pair of fuel tanks on outer pylons and rockets on inner pylons. When we were getting close to the combat area, I used the “jettison weapons” command expecting my AI wingman to first jettison his fuel tanks and leave the rockets. AI wingman didn’t and jettisoned everything.
I have done as you’ve recommended with AI F-15C and you are correct, that works. Maybe it’s specific programming for that particular module?
Interesting take on the “go to route” command. I will have to try that.
So… interestingpost on reddit today (about a Russian job posting on the ED forums):
from Google Translate:
We are looking for a C ++ programmer with an understanding of the mechanics of real-time strategies.
Required work experience: 3-6 years
Full time, full day
Tasks:
- creating a software component of the strategy in real time;
- development of project architecture, programming components.
Requirements:
- programming in C ++ in the MS Visual Studio environment under Windows;
- experience working on games of the genre RTS from 3 years;
- knowledge and ability to apply graph theory;
- knowledge of the AI algorithms used in games;
- knowledge of Client-Server technologies;
- experience writing multithreaded applications.
The advantage will be:
- released commercial projects in the genre of RTS;
- knowledge of Java Script;
- knowledge of resource management algorithms for economic strategies;
- knowledge of various APIs: DirectX, Vulcan;
- free reading of the documentation in English.
##Conditions:
- registration on the LC RF
- probation period 3 months
- salary level based on interview results
- comfortable working conditions
- cohesive and professional team
Available to applicants with disabilities
5 Likes
So that means they are making the F-111 then ?
7 Likes
insert a NSFW pic of a man having done something unspeakable to his excited self.
IT IS $##% HAPPENING!!!11!!oneone!
yup, that one 
1 Like
A bit premature, if you ask me. 
They’ll have to find a fitting candidate (not a piece of cake looking at that resume), plus the project has to actually come to fruition.
1 Like