GDCE2 for AA

[kutya]

GDCE2 (Generic Dynamic Campaign Engine 2)

progress: 11%
developed by: The Fronline Assembly
sides: default AA, primary development for west side
date: present day (2006)
map: Sahrani
addons needed: most probably the Mapfact radio and some military symbols
release date: humanity will be extinct until then
description: a brand new version of GDCE, with totally reworked structure and gameplay. No promises, but everything placed on the map should have it's purpose, no eye candy.

This thread is about GDCE2. This thread will be used for discussion about it, until it is released. This will be similar to the GDCE thread in "OFP: addons & mods" discussion. Always check this first post of the thread about progress update.

For now, GDCE2 is in a project phase. If the plans will be realized in practice, it will have much greater depth than GDCE. Some of the new AA scripting possibilities are helping in this. It would be harder for conversion, because of great attention to detail. More info in the future.

Everyone's ideas are welcome. Just please give constructive ideas about a dynamic campaign, not about AA.

The Frontline Assembly is:
kutya - lead designer and almost everything else
Asso - support, beta testing, and many more

[kutya]

(reserved)

[colligpip]

Glad to hear that G.D.C.E. is being worked on for AA



Here are a few rambling thoughts about a Dynamic War -

Games that have good dynamic campaigns

1. il 2

2. Falcon 4

3. Commanche vs Havoc (EECH)


4.silent hunter 3 has a good campaign as well.

Of these Falcon 4 is the best with a whole war with supply chains and critical targets to knock out. The war runs in real time with multiple missions being genereated by the AI, the player picks one of these missions and the outcome of each mission affects the whole war with battle lines moving backwards and forwards depending on how well the player is doing. ( I supose it is kind of like a CTI but without so much building of bases and on a massive scale)



Could a front line style war be simulated with G.D.C.E. by having the ***missions affect a real time front line - you do well the front line moves foward you do badly the enemy advance ***could this be done with G.D.C.E?



I have played falcon 4 for years and long for a similar ground sim - is this posible in ofp. I also like the way in EECH (heli sim)you have certain high value targets that if you take out radically effect the dynamic war (this is in G.D.C.E already)

Basically I would like Missions + an ongoing realtime ***frontline that shifts back and foward depending on your skill at missions.


I hope these ideas arn't to far fetched for the AA engine just a few thoughts really.



I hope G.D.C.E has some sort of multiplayer co-op this time hint hint.

[kutya]

I was just in a middle of a dogfight in IL2 when you mailed

Actually there were 4 titles that made me developing GDCE:
- Falcon 4.0 & F4:AF
- IL2 (especially DCG)
- Total Air War (an older DID title)
- Gunship (an old heli sim, that maybe the older players remember)

My thinking is similar to yours. I found that I want to play a dynamic war, but on ground. I suppose that flight sim players are in general more serious than FPS players (don't flame me). I don't say there aren't serious players in the FPS genre, but they're a minority. Most casual players won't even touch flight sims, because "it's so hard" (same for OFP). So I think that's the reason why FPS lacks dyn camps. I hope we'll change that.

Quote[/b] ]Of these Falcon 4 is the best with a whole war with supply chains and critical targets to knock out. The war runs in real time with multiple missions being genereated by the AI, the player picks one of these missions and the outcome of each mission affects the whole war with battle lines moving backwards and forwards depending on how well the player is doing. ( I supose it is kind of like a CTI but without so much building of bases and on a massive scale)

I thinked similar, but:
- you wouldn't choose from missions, since you're a regular squad leader. You're given a mission whether you like it or not. (from start I had a regular grunt on my mind - that got promoted to a squad leader )
- no offense, but IMO CTI is more like an RTS in OFP engine. Well, I don't like RTS's. If Falcon4 is an RTS, GDCE2 will be too. I like when things are going on, and you're not a general (who somehow personally pariticipates in battles), just a regular guy, who needs to follow his orders.

What I had in my mind in short: I'll say the curse word: BattleField. The global engine (the global engine not gameplay! ) will be similar to it. There will be interest points that are controlled by one of the sides. Who controls more, gets more resources for repairing/healing units and requesting new ones from high command. But the whole thing should be MUCH more static than in BF. You would be usually stationed at an IP (interest point) at the frontline. So there would be an enemy IP neighbouring yours. It would be a high probability that you would have several missions at that place until you would occuppy that IP (or lose your own?). Of course you wouldn't advance by a line, but there would be a network of IP's. There wouldn't be a storyline, but you would have (more than in GDCE1) a sense that a war is going out there, whether you participate in it, or not. For now, this much. Even this was more than I wanted to reveal. Supply lines, high value targets... all planned...

In short imagine playing IL2 DCG on the ground.

My main concern is that, if ArmA contains the same savegame bug as OFP did, then GDCE2 (as a current idea) remains an abstraction.

EDIT: about MP: I don't know nothing about MP or COOP scripting (and I don't play those), so if nobody helps, that remains out.

[Snake Man]

Quote[/b] ]the outcome of each mission affects the whole war with battle lines moving backwards and forwards depending on how well the player is doing.

Only true on stock default Falcon 4.0, the newer SuperPAK patches added feature to disable the player rating/score to effect the whole campaign. I think its the most absolute top priority to use this feature, to disable players poor performance to downgrade AI's performance also.

Okay I know its nitpick thingy but just wanted to clear that up

Quote[/b] ]Basically I would like Missions + an ongoing realtime ***frontline that shifts back and foward depending on your skill at missions.

I haven't yet been able to comprehend how to script moving front lines. My random missions (see, I didn't use the dirty word here) usually are semi organized by the AI, but there is no front line to be mentioned about. I would definitely try to achieve such mission scripting.

Quote[/b] ]I suppose that flight sim players are in general more serious than FPS players (don't flame me). I don't say there aren't serious players in the FPS genre, but they're a minority. Most casual players won't even touch flight sims, because "it's so hard" (same for OFP).

In flight sim community there is Jet Fighter III and Falcon 4.

In FPS community there is quake and OFP.

Do I need to explain further?

Quote[/b] ]no offense, but IMO CTI is more like an RTS in OFP engine.

CTI, DM, TDM, CTF, LOL... yawn.

Quote[/b] ]Who controls more, gets more resources for repairing/healing units and requesting new ones from high command.

Not sure this is good idea in realism sense. I mean in Iraq, does US troops get more support and healing if they capture An Najaf faster? I don't think so

While I understand what you mean by this in OFP terms, if there is any way to avoid such "point hunting" it would be a good thing. I mean when the war starts you have all the assets you need (unless storyline comes to play of naval Task Force arriving in X days etc) and thats it, there is no more support coming if you keep the civilians happy. You have what you got and you have to work with that.

Quote[/b] ]but you would have (more than in GDCE1) a sense that a war is going out there

I'm no expert on GDCE1 but what I understand its just the target + few AI soldiers spawned around it just like rhe random mission alliance work. There is no WAR around the area where you're operting. When you return to base there is no chance that enemy has attacked it etc. You don't run into enemy patrol while moving into the objective.

Quote[/b] ]if ArmA contains the same savegame bug as OFP did, then GDCE2 (as a current idea) remains an abstraction.

Thats why you should do it as Campaign.

[kutya]

Quote[/b] ]Only true on stock default Falcon 4.0, the newer SuperPAK patches added feature to disable the player rating/score to effect the whole campaign. I think its the most absolute top priority to use this feature, to disable players poor performance to downgrade AI's performance also.

Okay I know its nitpick thingy but just wanted to clear that up

IMO, it's isn't nitpicking haha. No really. The player should affect the war EXACTLY by hees deeds. At least, GDCE2 will work that way. No compromise.

Quote[/b] ]I haven't yet been able to comprehend how to script moving front lines. My random missions (see, I didn't use the dirty word here) usually are semi organized by the AI, but there is no front line to be mentioned about. I would definitely try to achieve such mission scripting.

Never tried, but I suppose it could be achieved with a bit of trigonometry (like in F4:AF). But I don't intend to do it in GDCE. The fronline will move, but you will see only bases controlled by your side and eventually some of the enemies (if your side has enough recon info). This would be decided of course from the global situation (including the players ations, but as for every other unit).

Quote[/b] ]In flight sim community there is Jet Fighter III and Falcon 4.

In FPS community there is quake and OFP.

Do I need to explain further?

You're right. But IMO OFP/ARMA (abbreviation sickness) is way less dynamic (not random) than Falcon. In OFP all is scripted stuff. Of course it allows dynamic stuff, but Falcon allows too and there is a dyn camp included which proves that. Would you play Falcon that much, if it didn't have those really good dyn camps?

Quote[/b] ]Not sure this is good idea in realism sense. I mean in Iraq, does US troops get more support and healing if they capture An Najaf faster? I don't think so

While I understand what you mean by this in OFP terms, if there is any way to avoid such "point hunting" it would be a good thing. I mean when the war starts you have all the assets you need (unless storyline comes to play of naval Task Force arriving in X days etc) and thats it, there is no more support coming if you keep the civilians happy. You have what you got and you have to work with that.

Now this was really constuctive. I'll keep that in mind. Most games function in the way I described. But yes, if you died at Stalingrad willfully, it wouldn't mean that the Russians would bring more troops just because of your deeds. Will think about this.

Quote[/b] ]I'm no expert on GDCE1 but what I understand its just the target + few AI soldiers spawned around it just like rhe random mission alliance work. There is no WAR around the area where you're operting. When you return to base there is no chance that enemy has attacked it etc. You don't run into enemy patrol while moving into the objective.

It seems that I'm the only expert You're mostly right. But there aren't a few AI soldiers running about. If you set up DAC correctly you'll have a frontline, and on the whole territory (usually marked the fronline) you cannot be ever sure if you're safe. If you read some old post (BIS but don't know thread/user), you'll see that there are attacks on the base itself. If the enemy destroys the arty, it won't be available until reinforcements arrive. But this is a so rare possibility, that probably no GDCE player experienced this.

But this is a simple egoistic defence of my state-of-the-art work *** . Here, I'd like to discuss the next version, which has nothing to do with the previous one, except the idea.

Quote[/b] ]Thats why you should do it as Campaign.

But then I'd have to save every single soldier/health/gunshot/daytime/mission schedule/mission state/etc variable to be able to decently simulate the continuation of the war. Theoretically this is achievable, put in practice... (only if BIS would give me a full time job )

[colligpip]

How did you get email in ww2 *** ***


Its funny you should mention the dread word BF as I actually think the layout of interest points in it is quite a good way of simulating an ongoing real-time battle. ***Now combine this with the realism of AA and we have a really good dynamic mission.
I like the way in BF if you take out the airport there is no air support for the enemy take out the Arty no arty cover etc I would love this sort of thing in dynamic mission in AA- you could add in specific bunkers or radio stations that have to be taken out etc. And before anybody flames me i dont like the gameplay in BF just the attack certain tactical positions causes point loss for enemy element of it.

I wouldnt think the savegame bug still exisits it was such a major flaw in the game.

By the way Kutya have you seen the UPS script released in user missions its a really good urban patroll script may be handy just thought I would mention it.



ALso i often ran into enemy patrolls i didnt know about in GDCE 1. DAC was very good at this IMO

[kutya]

Hi colligpip

Quote[/b] ]By the way Kutya have you seen the UPS script released in user missions its a really good urban patroll script may be handy just thought I would mention it.

I saw the thread about UPS, but didn't loook at it. Thanks for the info.

Quote[/b] ]ALso i often ran into enemy patrolls i didnt know about in GDCE 1. DAC was very good at this IMO

Don't want to boast, but this is highly dependent on the mission maker.

[froggyluv]

I've always been a big fan of GDCE but have yet to play ArmA so I'm speaking in the dark here. I liked the way your men would accumulate points from succesfull kills etc... but in reality couldn't see much difference in their combat effectiveness. I think that had more to do with OFP's engine then anything else. I'd like to see this taken to a greater level somehow so that you'd have high incentive to keep your crack squads alive rather than just heading back to HQ to re-inforce. This would add a high degree of tactiacl planning and a small degree of emotion which I think is sorely lacking in most combat sims. Keep your buddies alive!

[MehMan]

Uhh, I am definatley looking forward to this.

I'd also like to see some AI fights, like AI fighting between themselves that would bring down some bases or intrest points. I'd make the war feeling come even more home since it wouldn't all depend on you and your squad.