[suBB]

Originally Posted by MarkShot

At the moment, I have put my grand schemes on back burner, since I have yet to play all the SC and DW missions hosted at SubGuru. Right now, I am still playing through the user missions for SC 1.08. Then, I will move on to SCX, SCU, and finally, LWAMI.

First, other people's scenarios although usually not very dynamic are dynamic, so to speak, the very first time you play them, and I have lots ahead of me.

Second, I am learning a lot about scenario design and the game engine by playing what others have done.

However, I still think a dynamic campaign set of scenarios or pre/post-processor would be a rebirth for these two sims. For example, SH2, was a relatively closed game system. The PA team through work done with Kriegstanz (a scenario templating engine) and pre-processors created SH/PA (Pacific Aces) and turned it into a true dynamic campaign. Sadly, like most great mods it was still hampered by original games bugs (like save games not working) and finally the arrival of SH3 killed off large scale community interest in the mod. At least, those of us who play SC/DW don't really need to worry about anything usurping these games. Yes, UBI could bring out a Cold War subsim, but it will be a hack on the SH3/4 engine focusing on graphics first and simulation second.

Before I begin, I can only account for LW/AMI, DW and MP missions and not SC & SP scenarios. Maybe this will help in your efforts of scenario design.

Here is what we’ve done in less than 2 years time regarding creating a scenario with in-game dynamics. But missing some vital points recently learned and verified. More points will be included in a features list of a MP map set currently WIP that will go into greater detail of new lessons learned and what we did to accomplish in-game dynamics.

The following points are:

Suppression of Predictability / Optimized In-Game Dynamics - I’ve learned that the only way to optimize in-game dynamics is to suppress predictability as much as possible. One big no-no that plays into predictability is spawning platforms as such to where detection WILL BE made by the same opposing platforms each time the map is loaded, or some period after heading into a general direction, or both. This doesn’t give players many options to choose from, which equates to limitation of tactics and strategy. Sooner or later the player will know the map as such that there really isn’t a need for tactics or strategy, only deployment of weapons. There are other ways to suppress predictability based on scenario design. The more you suppress predictability while balancing playability, the more you optimize in-game dynamics, something I call ‘optimized in-game dynamics’

LWAMI & AI – in achieving in-game dynamics I want to say we’ve accomplished our objective in harnessing what LW/AWI does for us in terms of AI. Sometimes AI has a mind of its own and at best to make ai contribute to in-game dynamics is use of RSB / DL combo along with RS tactic. The wider the area the more dynamic the experience, but be mindful of SSP type and balancing (more later). Thorough scripting can make AI just as effective as humans and use of scripts can make AI even more robust. It could be argued that AI can’t react and adapt to situations as a human can. But since LWAMI allows AI to be influenced by humans, in some regard AI can adapt to an ever-changing situation. IIRC that SC editor does not include scripts and AI is crappy, for those two reasons SC scenarios will fall on their face w/o use of lw/ami & DW. Since AI is AI, AI is limited to lack of reaction time and adaptation to an ever-changing situation. For that reason any scenario involving AI w/o at least 1 human ally would assume a linear performance curve.

Human Intervention – Simply put human intervention definitely makes up for Ais’ ability to react and adapt to the situation. Contributions of AI to in-game dynamics are limited by how robust you make them in editing, and nothing more.

Spawning & SSP / Sense of Freedom – Spawning should be as such to where it offsets ‘guaranteed detection’ so that form of predictability is reduced. In the same token be mindful of the SSP and not create a scenario that isn’t playable. By means of extensive testing under normal conditions of the map, a ‘base detection’ can be determined where SSP and spawning over the area are contributing factors to this number. Base detection should be optimized for 50%, which gives both sides 50% chance of countering each others’ tactics and strategy. What this does it gives players a true sense of freedom and room for their personal skill sets to contribute to the scenario and vary the opposing sides chance of success.

Hope this helps, good luck