Ichtiander

But you pointed out an easy solution to this problem in your post. You are in charge of different characters at different stages of the campaign. So you get to build strategy in one instance and then execute the plan on the battlefield in another. I concur that the AI has limitations that prevent it (in some situations) to correctly execute tasks and respond to unexpected developments. Even then, a strategy experience is well worth it, with multitudes of factors influencing the outcome of a battle.

I fully agree with this approach. However, as I see it, being offered to do a side mission does not test strategic skills per se. Arma 3 should take a step forward, with the player gradually becoming the commander. This role will entail (a) correctly arranging and co-ordinating battle formations; (b) Overseeing force buildup and maintenance (continuing flow of food, manpower, weapons and munitions); © correctly weighing the pro and cons of an alliance. In other words, the player should be tasked with making decisions that carry an opportunity cost.

The player should be given more control over campaign events. There should be discretion in building alliances, managing the economy, arms procurement and logistics. The economy is represented by the territory that your side controls on the island. It yields troops, which is a material factor in winning campaign battles. Scouting lets you know about enemy plans and affords possibility to pre-empt them. Weapons are captured on the battlefield, or gained in alliances. This type of gameplay throws up different types of strategic planning problems. Since the campaign can develop differently depending on player actions, it requires more work in terms of cutscenes representing different outcomes. However, cutscenes are only a small part of this work. The lion's share of effort is in building an exciting campaign structure with complex choices for the player.

In a mission involving a special ops team behind enemy lines, a movement speed function is needed that is influenced by 3 variables: food, sleeping bags and overall weight carried. The food resource lasts the team 3 days. The movement speed slightly declines during the 3 day travel. After that, it will reduce drastically as hunger begins to take its toll. If you have not reached extraction before a certain time, you automatically surrender. Sleeping Bags Sleeping bags are also factored into your strength. If you are spotted, you will be forced to drop some of your equipment to make an evasive manoeuvre. This will include sleeping bags. When you have broken away from the enemy contact, you are back to pursuing your objective. Now, your movement speed significantly increases due to a reduction in weight carried. But the cold temperatures in the night will drain you of energy. The movement speed will significantly decline. If you don’t reach extraction by the end of next day, you surrender. Resource Management If the team is spotted and forced to drop some equipment, the player will be tested on working out which other items have to go. Some of these are not within his discretion (i.e. radio must be kept). Lets take a hypothetical example of a team carrying its max limit. Not counting the nutrition factor, speed changes from 5 to 8 at the occurrence of event 1, from 8 to 10 at the occurrence of event 2 and gradually falls from 10 to 5 at the occurrence of event 3. Event 1: Spotted by hostiles. Team abandons 50% of MG ammo, 33% or 66% of food packs, AT launchers, claymores and sleeping bags. Total weight is reduced by about 35%. Event 2: After escaping, you may order to drop MGs with rest of heavy ammo, to bring down the total weight by another 25%. So long as the group travels together they evenly distribute the weight they are carrying. Event 3: Team is affected by low temperatures in the night.

Consider a covert team insertion with an objective of finding enemy mobile rocket launcher (“Targetâ€). The player is in charge of a small team. Equipment includes small-arms, AT, radio, food rations, sleeping bags, and miscellaneous items. They must interdict the Target within 3 days and destroy it with radio/laser marker or AT. The time is compressed so that 30 minutes of play time equals one day in the game world. Similarly, distances that you travel are abstracted. Otherwise playing it would take too long. Initially, the player's role is to navigate his group around the terrain, avoiding enemy patrols. You don’t have the exact Target position, but you have an idea of where it has been some time ago and rough estimations of where it could have travelled since then. Smoke trails and fresh tracks on the ground will indicate its recent presence. Climbing on to hills will increase visual range and your chances of spotting the target, but will drain more energy. The food resource lasts the team 3 days. The movement speed slightly declines during the 3 day travel. After that, it will reduce drastically as hunger begins to take its toll. If you have not reached extraction before a certain time, you automatically surrender. Remember, you are not necessarily moving in straight lines towards the target location as that will get you caught. You are stopping to scan the surroundings, going around suspected enemy patrols and all of this costs time. Sleeping Bags Sleeping bags are also factored into your strength. If you are spotted, you will be forced to drop some of your equipment to make an evasive manoeuvre. This will include sleeping bags. When you have broken away from the enemy contact, you are back to pursuing your objective. Now, your movement speed significantly increases due to a reduction in weight carried. But the cold temperatures in the night will drain you of energy. The movement speed will significantly decline. If you don’t reach extraction by the end of next day, you surrender. Resource Management If the team is spotted and forced to drop some equipment, the player will be tested on working out which other items have to go. Some of these are not within his discretion (i.e. radio must be kept). Lets take a hypothetical example of a team carrying its max limit. Not counting the nutrition factor, speed changes from 1 to 1.6 at the occurrence of event 1, from 1.6 to 2 at the occurrence of event 2 and gradually falls from 2 to 0.8 at the occurrence of event 3. Event 1: Spotted by hostiles. Team abandons 50 per cent of MG ammo, 33- 66 per cent of food packs, AT launchers, claymores and sleeping bags. Total weight is reduced by about 35%. Event 2: After escaping, you may order to drop MGs with rest of heavy ammo, to bring down the total weight by another 25%. So long as the group travels together they evenly distribute the weight they are carrying. Event 3: Team is affected by low temperatures in the night.

There is one unique gameplay scenario I have been working over some time. It is your specialty covert operation. How much mission making experience do you actually possess? I thought to collaborate on a project.

I have not long ago posted a thread where I tried to sell a singleplayer campaign concept. This concerned an important issue of mixing different types of gameplay and interweaving them with the plot to create a player influenced dynamic environment. Building even a short campaign is a difficult task, but the modding community could benefit greatly from sharing ideas on this topic. Here is an extract from that thread: Initially, the player learns the game world behaviour by trying certain actions and observing their effects. The effects should be systemic and not random to enable him to manipulate the environment (i.e. consider a lower tier enemy type that will flee as soon as it comes under a degree of strain). These different effects should be easily comprehensible and shown in stages. This approach is optimal because otherwise the player will be bogged down with information. The game can then become more challenging by bringing the different game elements together that produce harder to predict results and require analysis, trial and error. Before I open up about my scenarios I wanted to hear about some of your ideas on how to make the game more engaging beyond the "gun play".

Yes, I considered that this may influence future content releases. Going back to the concept, it is a hard-to-attain goal, but a worthy one given the blandness and repetition that many games suffer from. In my view there are some basic principles that can guide towards a good system. Initially, the player learns the game world behaviour by trying certain actions and observing their effects. The effects should be systemic and not random to enable him to manipulate the environment (i.e. consider a lower tier enemy type that will flee as soon as it comes under a degree of strain). These different effects should be easily comprehensible and shown in stages. The game can then become more complex by bringing the different game entities/factors together that produce harder to predict results and require analysis, trial and error.

One major element that simpler games lack are cleverly designed rule sets that require a certain degree of evaluation and planning to arrive at a correct execution sequence. In fact, many games lack even execution: they are merely predetermined scripted paths that test proficiency on a shooting course. A larger environment guarantees none of the above unless the rules are there to produce difficulties that leave only a limited number of correct decisions. In this regard I believe that the campaign would immensely benefit from high-scale strategic actions and smaller-scale tactical actions. With regards to the former, we are talking about limited game assets that the player has to organise in such a way so as to maximize their potential. For this, there needs to be intelligence that varies in its degree of detail and reliability: the player will interact with game actors whose information he needs to cross-reference and check against hard evidence on the ground. With regards to the latter, examples include: (a) squad that has a limited load capacity and needs to compromise least necessary items which are not immediately obvious (b) a force that needs to evade the enemy through certain context specific actions such as disinformation. Ofcourse, for the above to work at a setting that is both highly engaging and varied, a lot of work needs to go into designing the rulesets, testing them and making sure that they work properly without any loopholes. This is Arma's great potential and I am hopeful to see significant changes.