Mission ideas

[Heatseeker 0]

Wathever the missions may be we definetly need the russia vs nato concept for the two equaly powerfull and balanced sides.

the invasion of some country, we could be part of the "preparation" team prior to invasion, sabotaging structures, gathering intel, assassination of politics, etc.

Then the big invasion, air raids on specific areas, marine insertions, tanks and infantry deploymant in the territory, capturing key points, establishing bases at strategic locations, capture and/or assassinate politicians, etc.

Small groups of civilian refugees escape into the most remote areas of the territory, nato starts getting involved, special forces operatives are sent into the territory and start doing recon of the area, training civilians to form a small resistance group, study the area and the best aproaches to invade the territory, satelites are diverted, preparation for the liberation begans.

Retaking the territory, nato launches a full air, ground and sea operation to counter the invasion forces, air force and navy air units start atacking enemy bases and get involved in intense dog fights with the russian migs.

Armor and infantry assaults, paratroopers, navy special forces start to engage the enemy. Refugee camps are established to assist the population while the intense combats take place... etc

We need OPF2 to be like the first one but bigger and more realistic, full scale war, all military branches, and i dont know about you guys but i want to be there where it happens, i dont want any RTS stuff with troop management and factorys and mines lol. I want missions where we grab the rifle or comand the troops in the field, to be pilot, crew, infantry, special op. etc. Drop the enemy flag, run in the jungle, be in the midle of a realistic full scale war.

If it were to make a strategy game ala C&C it should never be called OPF2 .

edit: oh yeah, if bis would have to focus the game on both strategy and in combat sides neither of them would be good enough has it would require too much work and development not only in mission/campaign design but also units and models that are of the same quality of what addon makers provide these days not to mention engine upgrades, gameplay, etc...

[sputnik monroe 102]

Personally my dream game would be a combination of the Enemy Engaged series and flashpoint. I can see where a lot of people would rather play a scripted campaign for the story though.

Right now we have 3 modes of play: Single Mission, campaign, and Multiplayer. I think the solution is simple, add dynamic campaign as a 4th mode of play. Everyone gets what they want then. The game still has single missions and the 3 scripted campaigns plus a dynamic campaign generator.

I honestly think a dynamic campaign would raise the lifespan of the game to near infinite. A dynamic campaign would send the replay factor into the heavens.

The real question is how do you use addons in a dynamic campaign. Following is my theory for implementing user made addons into your campaign.

Now as for the formations in the campaign if at the start you could edit them. For example the campaign your on has 20 enemy formations on the island, 5 of which are Motorized Infantry equiped with BMPs,BRDMs,Urals,and UAZs. Well when you start your campaign you can select one of the formations and it brings up a list of the vehicles and troops in that group. When you look through the list you can substitute out units for other units of the same class. So for example, you could swap out one or all of the BMPs in the selected formation with that shiny BTR80 you just downloaded.

I hope I made sense.

[ArchangelSKT 0]

In extending the ideas around the mission editor dynamic campaign thing I would like someting like :

you either chose or get a random set of objectives ( nr is decided by player ) then you chose a specific geographical area to which all objectives are randomly scattered within .

In other words you don`t know where the action will take place , you only set your starting point outside the chosen area and may leave a " buffer " zone in between if one wishes for safer travel at least for a while

Oh I`d love to see that , I`d have the game on my HD forever .

[GI_Rutger 0]

In the second episode of Band Of Brothers, Easy has to take out a few 105mm cannons. BIS has to make this kinda missions:

You're a airborne sergeant. American troops invaded Nogova, and you're getting orders to take out a few mortars. Grab some men and equipment, 'steal' a truck and take out those mortars. No air/airmored support, you're just a simple element in the big invasion.

[kazi 0]

Do Missions on the "Falklands War" bascially based in the same era as the origianl game, in 1982.

Britain vs Argentina

Argentina captures the islands, and the british troops on the island are forced to surrender, and put on an unknown part of the main island.

The British Forces then go to islands and the argentinians unleash the first assualt by air, then sea, then land.

[GI_Rutger 0]

No, the Falklands scenario looks pretty much the same as the CWC one. The OFP2 campaign has to be different. It would be cool if you are a terrorist/guerilla and you have to attack the Russians at all the possible ways: by sniping officers, blowing up convoys.

[Coins 0]

I'm sure if they made the logistics behind warfare more realistic (food, water, heating, healing, ammo, maintenance, fuel), we wouldn't have to bother scripting missions for protecting these targets because they'll actually have some importance for the defenders, for the AI and humans.

Do you notice we have barrels to represent fuel and water yet they have no use in the game? If we had to lug around a couple barrels each time we move camp, then it would make sense to keep the barrels together for protection and convenience and it would make sense for the enemy to want to destroy them.

Do you notice how when you get seriously injured, a field medic can heal you to 100% full health? If you are seriously injured, you should be air-lifted or transported to a field tent for surgery to get back to 100% health.

Do you notice how we have to either script people to stand around a campfire or make it an objective to approach a campfire? Do you notice how we can read maps in pitch dark in the middle of a forest without light? Soldiers should have to start a campfire every so often to warm up their joints and cook their food.

Do you notice how we never have to change or carry a spare tire? Or need extra parts to fix or salvage a boat?

If we make logistics more realistic, one simple mission can become very dynamic very fast.

[Phleep 0]

I'm sure if they made the logistics behind warfare more realistic (food, water, heating, healing, ammo, maintenance, fuel), we blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah one simple mission can become very dynamic very fast.

Having a game mode which includes logistics may be a little more pleasant than having it forced upon everyone who plays the game. Maybe the dynamic campaign mode suggested above could use it.

Possibly being a background commander coordinating troop activities at certain points on the map. Maybe a turn based multiplayer system similar to the boardgame RISK or Rise of Nations where you choose to assault certain towns alternately and it zooms in for the combat using appropriate resources. Maybe you can choose to be personally involved but risk dying and losing the game entirely.

Possibly a little too far off track for BIS but when logistics are introduced in such detail anyway it takes your mind too far off the primary theme of the game.

[Coins 0]

Yes, logistics should be optional. And the need for food, water, heating and maintenance shouldn't be too intense, and should have no effect on the performance of the soldier or vehicle unless at critically low levels. This way it's not worrying to a soldier unless it's quite obvious that he hasn't brought his canteen or a snack or he is on a cold mountaintop.

What it will do though, is give a soldier a reason to go to the local bar, start a campfire, do something in a base besides guarding it, get evacuated (if dehydrated, starved, hypothermic, critically injured), go hunting or foraging, build a shelter or return to base for replenishments.

With compartmental damage (if it's included), a pilot might want to look over his chopper to check if it's properly maintained, and if it's not, the helicopter might have to make an unexpected detour. Hangars might actually be used for something besides hiding.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Make a battle of WWII. I suggest the battle of Monte Casino. GREAT HISTORICAL POTENTIAL and GREAT ACTION POTENTIAL. Not to think about the Intro. All that happened during the battle can easily used in OFP2! Bu I guess happened too long ago

[Korpisoturi 0]

I heard it's set in Vietnam. I want to see these type of missions:

1)Bombing jungles with napalm.

2)LRRP

3)Helicopters.

4)River Patrol

[mistyronin 1181]

We should have real soldier life coming through, not, okay we're on Everon, let's take morton then montignac then the area is secure, oh no it isn't the Ruskies just camcreated a hind. Let's spend more time on islands, so you get to know them, and make friends with civvies while doing checkpoint duty. Let's also have an island where the resistance is working against you, you have to do patrols through sniper towns and bascially live the life of a UN soldier in Kosovo or a British soldier in Northern Ireland, where you are despised, but are trying to help.

It could be a great idea. I think that OFP2 should be a total soldier simulation.

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]I heard it's set in Vietnam.

It's taking place in multiple areas, and it's modern. So no Vietnam War missions.

Quote[/b] ]Make a battle of WWII.

Good idea, but that's a job for a mod. How many WWII mods are out there? I'm sure one could do a Monte Casino mission/mini-campaign.

[GI_Rutger 0]

Then the big invasion, air raids on specific areas, marine insertions, tanks and infantry deploymant in the territory, capturing key points, establishing bases at strategic locations, capture and/or assassinate politicians, etc.

If you have multiple campaigns, it would be cool if you have a full scale war campaign (a la CWC), a forgotten war campaign (like Resistance), and a peacekeeping campaign. The peacekeeping campaign would be cool: roadblocks, patrols, etc. But when you go on patrol in OFP1 you can bet your rolex on the fact that youre patrol is getting ambushed or sees anything suspicious. In a OFP2 peacekeeping mission, you patrol in the city, talk to some civi's etc.

[Kuja- 0]

I'm surprised noone has mentioned Falcon 4 - it has a wholly dynamic campaign engine, and models factors such as experience, fatigue, fuel, ammunition, electricity, transport networks, airfield status, C3 networks and so on.  Not only does it model the war, but the tasking engine orchestrates both sides of the battle to the unit level so that they have macro/micro objectives and fight the war in an intelligent way. It is possible to give individual units orders or edit their tasking to achieve specific objectives. The 2D/simulated war is continued into the 3D gamespace so the units you see fighting on the 2D map are the ones you see fighting as you fly over in 3D.

IL2's dynamic engine is frankly a piece of shit.  It is simplistic to the point where it essentially chooses a type of unit, a local spawn point, and makes you go after it, with progression occuring when you achieve a fixed number of kills or sorties.  A less-than-dynamic mission generator, really.

To see a dynamic engine of the calibre of F4 in OFP would be amazing.  It is much preferable to a linear campaign, in terms of realism and replayability.

[Gollum1 0]

We should have real soldier life coming through, not, okay we're on Everon, let's take morton then montignac then the area is secure, oh no it isn't the Ruskies just camcreated a hind. Let's spend more time on islands, so you get to know them, and make friends with civvies while doing checkpoint duty. Let's also have an island where the resistance is working against you, you have to do patrols through sniper towns and bascially live the life of a UN soldier in Kosovo or a British soldier in Northern Ireland, where you are despised, but are trying to help.

It could be a great idea. I think that OFP2 should be a total soldier simulation.

Of course this would be the ideal campaign for us OFP fans, but I'm afraid making friends with civilians and being ambushed by 5 guys every third mission wouldn't sell as much as an all-out war campaign, I think.

[Heatseeker 0]

I would like OPF2 to be more like VBS1 (i guess...), with small campaigns focused around real life operations, more realism!!!

We could have small 5/6 mission campaigns/scenarios focused on delivering a complex and realistic representation of diferent combat situations, that would be perfect for me.

The resistance campaign didnt do justice to this so called realistic simulation engine and was infact very bad.

I would gladly prefer to have 15 semirealistic missions like "Ambush" for example than a unrealistic campaign with bad plot, bad characters with strange voice acting and bad rambo missions, please make it more interesting than an ordinary "action" game.

No more red hammer/resistance action stuff please .

[BoweryBaker 0]

Just make the missions seem more like there is a real war going on meaning more ambience. More of driving through a town and seeing destroyed vehicles, dead bodies, thumbs up, stuff like that. The battle ambience noises in flashpoint were cheap and not high quality so improve those to sound like a real war. Make more scripted events like choppers coming in blowing stuff up, stuff like that while you're a soldier. Make it seem like a real war is actually happening everywhere around you and the fate of the world doesn't just rest on the hands of twelve people unless its some type of special operation but this is conventional warfare that is going on in flashpoint mostly. You can't hear radio signals directly in your ear unless your a BAS unit but you guys had that going on for normal infantry. Infantry commands should be directed from the commanders mouth, not a radio, and if he's using a radio he should have it pulled out and up to his mouth, likewise with pulling out a map. Thats another topic though, but the missions should be more of a total war simulation like its been said before. All of soldier duties. Lets see just about every job the military has played out in flashpoint.

[Friedchiken 0]

Maybe it would be interesting for consumers if OFP2 was designed like a "training-lite sim" like the Metal Gear VR stand-alone game.

Players would play stand-alone training-style scenarios like forest patrols or tactically-engaging battles (if rare in the real world).

I think OFP2 would be more engaging as a consumer military sim if it had a shorter-more focused campaign with a variety of stand-alone missions that challenge the player in a variety of tactical situations like how armies give mock scenarios to their officers to try out new strategies or to retrain officers.

Someone somewhere said that "fiction is life with the boring parts left out."  Even though ofp's campaign arguably fit that matra, more people discuss the merits of a standalone mission like Ambush than any mission in the original campaign.

I think 1/3 of the game should be the campaign while 2/3 should be composed of single missions.

This also makes sense from a developer's point of view.  It's easier psychologically to scrap an unfinished single mission than to sloppily finish an unfinished campaign in the event that time runs short and the publishers are breathing down the mission maker's back.

------------------------------------

Another the option is to make many mini-campaigns focusing one long "mission" each.

[funnyguy1 0]

It`ll be great to add the trainning campaign,

Not only in game first mission teaching you where your HP bar is situated, but like in VBS, the basic military training system, that every private must pass. It`ll be also a "super" value of the game, because you`ll have BASIC military training without leaving your room ;)

Maybe spec op training too ?

Like "driver-factory" mode in NeedForSpeed.

sorry for bad English (as usually )

[Friedchiken 0]

While OFP2 will be made as a "game" in mind, how about having some "simulation" type single missions just to entertain some of the more hobbiest gamers that will buy the game?

[BoweryBaker 0]

I'm definitely a hobbiest. I never play single player because i feel its not real enough. the commands come over a radio that everyone owns, and if you're near the enemy and your radio goes off he doesn't hear it. That's poor to me so for more realism i often only play missions with people, co op. Everything else just isn't realistic to me and thats what i crave, realism. I figure if i get good enough ill be a really good military mind, but thats not going to hurt anybody. I don't have a militia or an army or anything and even if I'm too fat to be a super soldier, but i'd feel more happy about myself if i had this fictional world with all real world features that enabled me to save the world under realistic circumstances and challenges. Certain factors that affect a person will never be in a game though. That's why i play these games, just to know that hey if i really tried hard i could be a good guy. I was born with asthma so i can't just join the army to get my chance so ofp is a dream come true. Tissues by the door.

[funnyguy1 0]

Here Is what I think.

1. Ofp was/is just a GAME, and some ppl bought it just for stuff like "red hammer/resistance"...

I love It, evil russian general - guba, Viktor Trosk - ex spec op things. It`s just a game with more or less realistic plot.

It`s also quite realistic game. I think resistance, heroes, and stuff is very nice. It make`s the game , let`s say, less real (in the good way).

There`s also a bunch of guys who like ofp just for it`s realism, and who didn`t care about the plot.

What we`re trying to do, here on this forums, is to make ofp2 closer to VBS1, i mean all those realism things, real missions and so on.

The best solution is imho to make campaign, with fictional plot, with all this "resistance/red hammer" stuff, and to satisfy all those hardcore guys who just adore the realism, simply create the military training campaign (as I said earlier), the real-war campaign or enlarge number of the "single missions" in game, simulating the real-war operations.

To assume:

2 campaigns:

a) fictional game campaign (not quite real, for players who didn`t care about campaign realism)

b) real-war operations campaign (for others; like me)

or more of the single player missions simulating the real-war

+ the basic military training:) (well, it`ll must be realistic)

regards

[Guest]

Just make the missions seem more like there is a real war going on meaning more ambience.  More of driving through a town and seeing destroyed vehicles, dead bodies, thumbs up, stuff like that.  The battle ambience noises in flashpoint were cheap and not high quality so improve those to sound like a real war.

It would be cool, if you could see the flashes on the horizon at night, just like in Band of Brothers. For example: you and your squad are riding with a hummer, getting closer to the battlefield. The closer you get, the louder the explosions get.

[Joker621 0]

dear Sirs,

just few ideas for OFP2. I don't know if them have already been considered, so excuse me.

1. It's better few stunning units/weapons/vehicles rather several units/weapons/vehicles

with standard details/textures/realism. This is true expecially for OPFOR (RED) side, always

undervalued.

2. Same thing for islands: better one or two islands very accurate, with seasoned textures,

etc. Can be good permit an editor option to "populate" cities and villages with civilians

and their activities (even here, it's better few men/women/cars/bus/etc. moving in real life

activities).

3. It's better to maintain OFP2 a combat simulation. I've read someone requesting recruitment,

training, carrer, 'love letters' and so. My little opinion is these features require time

(time that programmers can dedicate to improve the simulation's core).

Still, with time, the player want to by-pass these features to get quickly in combat.

Now, You understand my english is poor, so my scripts language knowledge, as many peoples.

For this reason

IT'S NECESSARY TO IMPROVE MISSION EDITOR

4. waypoint action. i.e.: at WP 02 I'd like embark my group on bmp. When I create that WP

for my group and select "get in", a message could ask me to select the vehicle where embark

my group. Just a simple 'click' on this vehicle and all is done. Same thing for aircrafts,

units, etc. Make missions in this way is very easy (not more scripts).

5. unit property. i.e.: when I create any unit, a new scroll list could be availaible to

select action, body position, etc., (not more scripts).

6. IT'S NECESSARY TO IMPROVE SUPPORT/REINFORCEMENT LOGIC. i.e.: I'd like to create some units

to reinforce my group. I could create one platoon, two APCs and one chopper, placing them

at my HQ. During the mission, if I will need some help, just a 'support' radio request, a

'click' on the map to locate where send support, and HQ AI will send suitable unit from that

available (could be APCs, or platoon).

Same concept can be applied to AI forces.

In this way, who makes the mission must just create some units at HQ. Will be AI to send

them as reinforce when necessary (not more scritps, activations, sensors, etc.).

Don't worry. All variables will be always present for skilled users, but novice will make

their own handsome mission in easy way.

7. It's necessary improve buildings concepts. Even here, it's better few stunning building

models, rather bad/inaccessible buildings. Not more bodies jutting through walls. All buildings

must be accessible. All building must be destroyed a bit for time. Please, see film library

of recent conflicts.

I hope that can help OFP2 programmers to maintain a very high standard in their products.

Best regards.