Mission design tweaks?

[JeffreyEagan]

So myself and a few others in the community came up with some ideas we think could help with the server and make it more fun.

Things like bullseye moved to landmarks throughout the map, or giving one side an advantage over another. (One side gets mountains or gets more sam's with a larger cover) 

Sweeper came up with something like one side has to defend a certain area, while trying to defend against a large number of fighters from multiple sides.

SDsc0rch came up with an idea for having AWACS (LotATC) active after alpha is cleared.

Different weather scenarios, heavy fog, downpour, thunder/lightning, sunset turns into night (2H light, 2H night).

Or perhaps make the ground units actually hunt for their targets, not have them in one big group at each point.

CAS escort for two ground units? Something like an Abrams/Bradley scenario and A-10's have to clear areas with BMP's and infantry while dealing with IR/radar threats?

I'd like it if others could pitch stuff here too, maybe refine ideas.

[Sweeper]

Just to elaborate on that:

I was thinking of an RF-style combat area with one side full air to air (maybe with long flight times or reduced numbers for balance...?) against a mixed team of A/A and A/G* trying to destroy TAs protected by red air and a few SAMs/AA/whatever.

*And perhaps some JTACs.

Instead of the current TAs that are somewhat distant from enemy (and friendly...) fighters and well defended by SHORADs.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Sweeper

[SDsc0rch]

that's right - several of us were online and we were sharing ideas we thought could make the missions better

the 104th really is the only game in town - you are able to attract the numbers of ppl online which makes flying DCS so intense and enjoyable

here's what i was thinking...

currently ground-pounders are focused in one region of the map - and airdales are off in another area - and neither group really cares about or is impacted by the success/failure of the other ----- so when ground-pounders start calling for help, most airdales just shrug it off or ignore them

(and yeah, bullseye is smack dab in the middle of nowhere - why don't we make bullseye a landmark like a lake, or a prominent airfield or a mountain...)

what if the ground-pounder's success was tied to a reward for the airdales? say, A-10s have to transit to a TA, destroy a small number of targets, while airdales must defend them against opfor air ----- after successful strikes by BLUE ground-pounders, an AWACS/LOTATC is made available - or BLUE "earns" patriot and hawk sites - etc...

and then once that goal is achieved or not achieved, there's a new TA generated - not unlike the current progression of TAs

we often hear how everybody always chooses eagles and there's barely enough RED air ----- why don't we use that as a "feature" (not a "bug")?

following in sweeper's footsteps, in order to compensate for numerical disparity, RED air would enjoy certain advantages (airfield numbers and placement - AWACS existing at mission start - they get strategic-SAMs...)

and hinder BLUE - sure, BLUE is more numerous, but they only have SARH missiles, they have to tank on the way to the TA, they have to escort A-10s to their TA, etc...

 

yes, DCS has limitations - but its also quite flexible, and there's room for our imaginations to come up withchallenging scenarios

I'd be happy to pitch in and help if that would make it easier (i'm sure the staff is reading this and thinking.. HOW would we ever implement THAT?!?)

 

[Highway]

How can you predict server numbers to play this style of mission? Basically you can't.

This is exactly the reason why Ground Pounders are kept well away from where enemy/friendly fighters engage each other. 

I like your ideas as no doubt others will too, it's great to have a goal to the mission besides getting a number of kills, but until any of us can predict the number of players that will come on, what they will fly and what side they will pick, focused missions like what you are proposing won't work most of the time.

I'd just be happy to see Awacs and Tankers back. 

[104th_Maverick]

 

Thanks for these suggestions guys, they are all really good.

 

As you pointed out Scorch DCS does have its limitations, sadly there are also limitations within those limitations that most people don't know about.

 

We have to manage DCS in a different way than your casual user who creates a mission and hosts it or another Squadron who regularly hosts complex missions with up to 15 clients.  A complex mission that works with 15 people connected to it will crash every time we try to run it with a full server.  This ironically is where we fall short, because our server is so popular we are limited to what we can do in the missions, because DCS is a different beast when you start hosting more than 40 clients.  What works in Single Player or with 2-3 friends usually falls on its face when 45+ people connect to the server, I really can't emphasis enough just how different hosting a server for 53 people running 4 hour rotating missions is from hosting a server for 15-20 clients.  And this is what most people do not understand because they have not seen the data we have seen from hosting so many clients in missions with well over 1000 units.

 

Our server is not just randomly popular for no reason, we have been doing this for a long time, we hosted one of the most popular servers for years in FC2 also, we didn't miss a beat when FC3 was released, we shut down our FC2 Server and opened our DCS Server.

Lots of people fly in our server for different reasons but one of them is primarily the stability we bring while hosting so many people.  Another top reason is because lots of other people fly on it too and ultimately most of us would rather fly in a packed server than an empty one, especially if its PvP action you are looking for!  Its no accident that there is normally always clients connected to our server, our missions have been specifically designed to be able to work with low client numbers and high client numbers.... this is much more complex that you would think.

 

I went into a lot of detail a while back on ED forums about why our missions are set up the way they are and talk about some of the challenges we face when it comes to hosting. 

You can read about this here - http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2102399&postcount=87

 

Our server being popular today is not an accident or random as I mentioned earlier, its the result of years of hard work and an almost uncountable amount of time dedicated by our Squadron members, at times running the server can almost be a full time job.  Even to this day we still test things on a weekly basis to try and get it working in the server, 104th_RIPTIDE does a crazy amount of work in this area and sadly gets no credit at all apart from a pat on the back from us because no one ever finds about how much work we do behind the scenes.

 

Because of his work over the past few months we are now able to get LotATC working on our server after a fairly agonising period of testing.  This was no small task and involved working closely with the developer of the programme who blew us away with his dedication to help getting it working on our server.

He is also responsible for implementing the JTACs into the missions, something which is ongoing over this next week after the first one was added to Fireshield.

 

We'll have a chat about this on TS gents and I'll make things more clear as it really is a huge topic that I don't have time to type out, but the short story is most of your idea's wont work in our server

 

Again though, I will explain to all of you why that is the case.  And thanks for taking the time to submit these, if we can get some of them to work we will try, just dont expect it next week

Edited August 7, 2015 by 104th_Maverick

[AldoUSMC]

FIRST... for  the years on-and-off that I've flown as a pub on your Servers.. thanks and great work.. glad you folks are still around for the community.

If you like, I may be able to work with your mission designers to build some pics etc for target area briefs/intel for the ground pounders ... like me...

You could possibly include them as pics in the briefing screen or post to your website for each mission.

Can discuss how much detail you want to include and where it would fit best..... and if it would help in the Squadron's Opinion.

Let me know via e-mail and we'll go from there.

Semper Fi

AldoUSMC

[IronMike]

FIRST... for  the years on-and-off that I've flown as a pub on your Servers.. thanks and great work.. glad you folks are still around for the community.

If you like, I may be able to work with your mission designers to build some pics etc for target area briefs/intel for the ground pounders ... like me...

You could possibly include them as pics in the briefing screen or post to your website for each mission.

Can discuss how much detail you want to include and where it would fit best..... and if it would help in the Squadron's Opinion.

Let me know via e-mail and we'll go from there.

Semper Fi

AldoUSMC

Thanks Aldo, also for your loyalty over the years. we might definately get back at you, atm we unfortunately cannot include either briefings, nor pictures, since yet again we struggle with stability in 1.5

When the time comes, and things are fixed, such additions to briefings will for sure be welcome!

S!

[AldoUSMC]

Copy IronMike,

Feel free to PM me once you get it sorted out.

Semper Fi

AldoUSMC