Great JIP mission ideas

[whisper 0]

A multiplayer DMA dynamic campaign.

That would be my priority, starting with DMA, and expanding, much, much deeper.

With ongoing "war", with a full decision & strategy process for each side, giving missions to connecting players, or IAs group if no player interested.

And the possiblity for players to also be involved in the decision process.

That's my dreamed multiplayer mission type for ArmA. I wetting myself with this idea since last July, but can't find the strength to even begin working on the IA decision system, since this part at least could be done already in OFP

[rundll.exe 12]

THe lobby idea is great. Maybe even BIS should host a server for this with only having the Lobby map forced on it 24-7.

In this "mission" you could go to a location for every game mode/mission.

Lets say you want to play a CTI, you walk/drive to Paraiso and meet other players that want to play CTI there at the bar. You have a chitchat about what mission and server you play, and move all to that server when agreed.

This location could be a "portal" to every game mode with help, info etc.

The only problem is how to edit that portal mission (maybe a forum thread, and a few ppl that put in the suggestions)

Would be awesome

[Jinef 2]

Dynamic Campaign.

Very long missions linked together to form an ongoing operational battle. Two player-commanders in control of a large force's logistics and operations, over a period of a few months.

[paragraphic l 2]

But with unlimited friendly respawns, the rule is you must got to the lobby server when dead until new batch of reinforcments are allowed to arrive, everyone on lobby server gets weps and on a chopper chopper flys off a tiny island south of warzone (easily made i suspect) then everyone switches server and a chopper is spawned in flight with them all in, (they have to choose the same gear etc) then leader can issue for them to land somewhere

Well maybe it's less of a hussle, to let people respawn on a base on an island and every 10 minutes or so an AI comes and pick everyone up or a helicopter spawns and you should wait untill you have enough people for reinforcement. But it all relays on the people you play with offcourse

Your idea is great and all when you use external voice chat systems, but ArmA will have improved VoIP and I prefer useing that if it's flawless implemented.

[chipper 0]

A never-ending Anderson Gunship Deathmatch with 64 players.

[Kirby 2]

The OFP:E JIP was a bit bugged (Youd blow a bridge and a new player would come in and ran accross air, you think their cheating buts it wasnt destroyed on their screen)

But in perfection: a massive on going battle (as mentioned) feturing 3 commanders leading 3 forces (US, Rus, Res? or US, Rus, PMC, that would be good, pay the PMC in game "money" to reenforce you, but the othe side has paid them more so they shoot you in back) and afuckovalot of players, going down the ranks from the people who have been voted leaders (ingame maybe) to people who havent got any attention on them yet. It would be awesome.

[TeRp 1]

A never-ending Anderson Gunship Deathmatch with 64 players.

I remember those matches, they were lagging like hell on the old netcode. And the mission was actually really bad, but somehow made a lot of fun.

[Commando84 0]

a guba hunt mission where you have players playing the roles of special ops team , invading army , defending army and Guba himself of course.

Maybe a extra twist would be civilian news reporters covering the war maybe broadcasting short 20 second movie clips about the locations of troops and if guba is nunlucky runs into view so the invading forces and their spec ops team get a hint of where he is. Gubas job could be to escape and evade and eventually reach a randomized exit location.

Where he gets to drive off or gets small group with him drive off in a boat, car, air craft or chopper that could be also randomized out of a small aray of vehicles depending of the location and all of course. The end objective for the invading army and special forces would be to kill or capture guba somehow and or take out special defenses or other strategic targets located around the island. I know the idea for mission sounds like extremely huge and i sound like total wacco for even tried to do it in ofp but i did it in a much smaller scale and had lots of fun in a lan test with a few friends. also gubas start location could be made random as well and Well guba wouldn't probably be named guba in armed assault but instead enemy general or dictator or president or whatever people want to.

i think with the terrean streaming and new unit limits and stuff that scenario could be possible with alot of work of course.

[tomcat_ 0]

so far though i haven't heard or read any news about the implementation of JIP in Arma. We know is going to be there but i don't know in what form.

For example what will happen to coop maps? Will we have unlimited respawns? If not will someone be able to disconnect and connect back to the server and respawn? Will it be adjustable up to the mission editor? Will it be like group respawn where if you have a 12 man team these are the lives you have and if someone joins and there is a bot alive on the team is taking this place?

[Kirby 2]

It'll most likley be like OFP:E

The admin can set JiP on or off and you cant "Spawn" only take over AI. unless the mission maker included spawning.

[coderdfox 0]

I'm sure it can be modded. Thats why ARMA will be great.

Jesus, CTI games that last 10 or more hours. Now thats a game. People log-on and advance a game, then someone has to eat/sleep and the tides of war change. LOL oh its going to be great.

[Snake Man 402]

feturing 3 commanders leading 3 forces (US, Rus, Res? or US, Rus, PMC, that would be good, pay the PMC in game "money" to reenforce you

Yes more money for me.

[crashdome 2]

LOL....

Re: Lobby Server

I like that idea... now we just need some animators to make some cool animations.

We could have an offtopic lobby for people to actually kill each other over some nasty and offending anims for after the "kill"... oh the humanity!

[walker 0]

Hi all

Speaking directly to this threads subject. This is normaly stuff I talk about on the CoC developer forums but I think the concept worthy of raising here on this occasion.

The obvious form of game play I expect evolve with the more professional level servers such as Zeus, CIA etc will be continuous multi-week PVP Co-op battles. With various squads assigned according time zone relieving each other in battle so that the battles are 24 hour.

There will be some software requirements that we at the CoC are interested in creating or have already built to support such a system. Logistics, network synchronisation etc.

I think we can create server farms maintained so that battles can be localised to time zones and geographical location and there an architecture based on Network Services that will required in order to negotiate server swap and update. It may need a truce time concept to enable us to do this say 10 minutes to synch servers and for players to be switched.

The new functionality and some lateral thinking should allow it to be made with the current improved ArmA network code and scripting capabilities.

The system will also allow us add in fall over and recover server capabilities and in the long term share tasks on servers. It will also be invaluable for use in VBS

Now can anyone tell us its impossible?

Because that always motivates everyone at the CoC.

Kind Regards Walker

[lwlooz 0]

Continous battles? Nah. Needs too much meta-gaming and a 100% CrashFree server as well as enough people that get along with each other and don't try to interpret rules their way.

Not as long as we don't have an MP saving function anyways. And considering that doesn't sell as well as Chinstraps and Radio-Antennas that swing in the wind,I bet that MP saving will end up in VBS as a "Military Training Tool not needed for Gaming".

I have all those nice JIP-scenarios in my mind as well,but is ArmA actually going to technically able to do that? I doubt it. Read my point about functionality doesn't sell.

I do look forward to the 4-8 hour battles with more units tho which are less of a PITA now with people coming back in and most importantly new people coming in as reinforcements.

[andersson 285]

Hi all

Speaking directly to this threads subject. This is normaly stuff I talk about on the CoC developer forums but I think the concept worthy of raising here on this occasion.

The obvious form of game play I expect evolve with the more professional level servers such as Zeus, CIA etc will be continuous multi-week PVP Co-op battles. With various squads assigned according time zone relieving each other in battle so that the battles are 24 hour.

There will be some software requirements that we at the CoC are interested in creating or have already built to support such a system. Logistics, network synchronisation etc.

I think we can create server farms maintained so that battles can be localised to time zones and geographical location and there an architecture based on Network Services that will required in order to negotiate server swap and update. It may need a truce time concept to enable us to do this say 10 minutes to synch servers and for players to be switched.

The new functionality and some lateral thinking should allow it to be made with the current improved ArmA network code and scripting capabilities.

The system will also allow us add in fall over and recover server capabilities and in the long term share tasks on servers. It will also be invaluable for use in VBS

Now can anyone tell us its impossible?

Because that always motivates everyone at the CoC.

Kind Regards Walker

THAT is impossible, thats a fact! No way it can be done...

[walker 0]

Hi lwlooz

Continous battles?  Nah. Needs too much meta-gaming and a 100% CrashFree server...

The idea is to have 2 or more servers connected together as a server farm. One acts as true server The others run in passive client mode till the 1st server fails or is or the token is passed by an admin wanting to change the RW geographical location of the server. All they are doing in this mode is replicating the world changes and storing client positions.

The technical problems are to pursuade a server to log on to another server or for a client to be shifted to server mode.

If a server fails or an Admin wants to shift to the RW location of server to a closer time zone where lag would be reduced the next server in the group takes over and players log on to the new server in JIP mode.

...as well as enough people that get along with each other and don't try to interpret rules their way...

You mean in like Eve on line or the other MMPOG? The key is to not set rules but to allow them to evolve or make them inherent in the environment.

I have all those nice JIP-scenarios in my mind as well,but is ArmA actually going to technically able to do that? I doubt it. Read my point about functionality doesn't sell.

Persistant world servers is the whole foundation of MMPOG a very successfull business model.

Kind Regards Walker

[paragraphic l 2]

For the sake of getting that actually done:

No way this will be possible with the ArmA engine!

But as lwlooz allready said, even on a Zeus or CIA server there will be people who think they are as serious, getting bored and then ruine it for others.

And with the swapping teams for time zones, well this means (for example) Europeans always play daytime and Americans always nighttime (does not apply the early birds and late nighters). It is realistic (in some form) but how often do big scale assaults keep going throughout the entire night?

[UNN 0]

Quote[/b] ]I doubt it. Read my point about functionality doesn't sell.

If BIS believed that, then we would not have OFP in it's current form. Fortunately not everyone is after maximum sales.

Although I have to say, it looks more likely in VBS than it does in Arma. Unless some of those VBS commands leek over to Arma? But I doubt it, otherwise the VBS players would have nothing to lord over (or spend x amount more <your local currency>) us OFP players I guess something has to justify that price tag?

I would not discount it just yet, we will have to wait and see what us plebs are given to play with.

[Jinef 2]

Ok, if it was technically possible. I think it would be out of the scope of Zeus ...

What would be far far far more useful is a saveMP game function.

[rundll.exe 12]

What would be far far far more useful is a saveMP game function.

How hard can this be? As you can save a SP game with everything on the map, this should be possible for the SERVER too right? (apart from the fact that the command does not work in MP)

Now the loading cant be hard too (its possible in SP) so the SERVER could load a game just as a SP game would. Then JIP should make it possible to make the players hop back in the "playable" slots.

Is it really so simple? or Do i miss something.

[paragraphic l 2]

well, if you want to continue playing with exact the same people from the exact same position, it's quite hard to do.

And maybe for playabillity it is better to have the save points, so you don't start in the middle of the battle field again. because if you save while bullets are flying around your head and of the other players and the server has to save all that data, it will be a bit much i guess.

[UNN 0]

Quote[/b] ]saveMP game function

The way I see it, anything that lets you write info to a client is useful. If each client could take the responsibility of administrating itself. Then all that’s needed is an external program to convey that info to the server via scripts or something?

[crashdome 2]

Persistant world servers is the whole foundation of MMPOG a very successfull business model.

Kind Regards Walker

Actually the persistant "hack'n'slash" model is what is successful. Unless that is what you are aiming for. Consistant battles with unrealisitic ladder-based character improvements and a few tweaks here and there to keep the community on it's toes... then yeah.. you'll be successful.

[crashdome 2]

Quote[/b] ]saveMP game function

The way I see it, anything that lets you write info to a client is useful. If each client could take the responsibility of administrating itself. Then all that’s needed is an external program to convey that info to the server via scripts or something?

I screamed for more XML support... but to no avail.

If they even supported a basic text based output - we could journey to different worlds with this engine. Also, include an easier way to inject data would be nice.

[EDIT] Yes I double posted.. I think after 5 years everyone should be allowed to break 1 rule [/EDIT]