Mission ideas?

Party-approved discussion of ArmA 3
Post Reply
User avatar
Ralian
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:28 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Mission ideas?

Post by Ralian »

Hello all,

I know I have plenty of mission ideas that will probably be met with varying levels of enjoyment. I've already seen that with any mission there are people that want it to be changed in opposing ways (some say make it lighter out, some say keep it dark, etc.)

But I'd like to hear what sort of missions others would like to play but don't have the time to make. What sort of missions would you like to see more of? What's something that hasn't been done before that you'd like me to try? What's the best 'tried and true' formula for a mission in your opinion? I have plenty of mission ideas, but I'm still poking around for options :)
There are only three things I hate in this world: Ranting, Lists, and Irony.

User avatar
Ferrard Carson
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:08 am

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by Ferrard Carson »

Currently both our available missions and session composition are heavily weighted towards Cooperative missions. There is nothing inherently wrong in this, as it is generally less stressful than Adversarials despite greater complexity. I, nonetheless, would advocate for you (and other burgeoning mission-makers) to create a decent stock of Adversarials with which to murder one another. There's a few reasons for this:
  • I want more choice as a host when it comes to picking Adversarial missions.
  • Basic Adversarials are very easy to balance - put equal numbers of players on both sides with an equal lay of the terrain, and it's all up to the players after that.
  • Basic Adversarials are very easy to create from the F3 template. Delete the units you don't need, place the remainder around key terrain to fight over, and then write up a briefing and activate the CasCap triggers. Done.
  • The same basic Adversarial setup can be repeated in different locations for different gameplay and variety - see the MSR Delfinaki / Panochori / Pyrgos series of missions I created.
As for your other questions:

What's something that hasn't been done before but you'd like to see someone try?
Nothing really comes to mind. Usually I give it a go myself if I think of it. The stuff that I've abandoned was usually abandoned for a reason.

What's the best 'tried and true' formula for a mission in your opinion?
Simple Attack-Defend missions form the vast majority of our missions, whether they be Adversarial or Cooperative. Adversarials also tend to have a fair share of King-of-the-Hill style missions where both sides fight over the same key terrain. Both are relatively easy to create.

If you're asking about what's some "best practices" when it comes to mission-making, then these would be mine:
  • K.I.S.S. - Complex missions are like bug lights. They draw you in with "Man, wouldn't it be cool if FIA could hide their weapons and penalize CSAT for killing FIA players who haven't been confirmed to be carrying a weapon?" and then they beat you into a bloody pulp as you try to figure out how to make that work 100% of the time without fail.
  • In each simple mission you create, pick one thing that you're going to do out of the ordinary - Maybe you balance the Adversarial asymmetrically. Maybe you make the players deal with minefields. Maybe the players are flying in helos. Keep it to one thing, or maybe two at most, and you'll get a solid mission with definitive flavor, but not a mission that groans under the weight of its own complexity.
~ Ferrard
"Take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turnin' of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurtin' before she keels... makes her home."

User avatar
Kefirz
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by Kefirz »

If people remember Foxhound and Goose chase in A2, then we need that :D
''I am not going against tanks'' - Tryteyker, MAT gunner.
''Downboated so much, it's an u-boat now.'' - Boberro.
''Sorry, I meant hon hon hon baguette baguette Eiffel Tower'' - Mabbott

User avatar
SuicideKing
Host
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 1:29 pm
Location: India/US West
Contact:

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by SuicideKing »

Personally, I'd really like to see more missions with a flavour of starting from a base, or that give the feeling of being a part of something larger, even if it may not make sense from the point of view of the campaign narrative in Arma 3 (like NATO invading Altis, or AAF retaking territory from CSAT, etc.).

I think we don't have a lot of missions set in Kavala and the surrounding areas, especially to the mountains in the South West.

For adversarial missions, I think one major problem we face is a smaller player count per team (even when 40+ people turn up), so we only really have 20 people per team. Doesn't leave a lot of people to do role-playing stuff like handle logistics and supplies, for example. Maybe something we could see more in coop, like Carson's Quds Radio Hour.

I'm also thinking of how submarines can be used, for some sort of stealth/infiltration missions. Such missions could also be asymmetrical PvP, and we do have a mission like that with the mine specialists.

I was also thinking of something like AI assisted PvP, where the teams are split equal but one or both teams get AI support. For example, imagine an AAF defence of Kavala. AAF consists of two squads + AI patrols and garrisons + loitering civies. There could be a player/AI driven AAA in the castle, and the hospital could be another key spot to defend.

Attackers can choose to attack from the sea, ask for CAS (AI planes or player helos), artillery (with restrictions on civilian targets), mortars, etc.

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

There was some discussion in the Skype chat about giving COs a more non-linear experience, though that may require a base-driven approach. "Here are a bunch of vehicles to choose from, and here are your crew, where you choose to place them is up to you".

This could also lead the defenders to be more clueless about what will hit them - will they come by boat, submarine or helicopter? Etc.

Of course, this may lead to some issues with the ORBAT - Carson and Fer will aim their makarovs at me for doing that. :lol:

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

FINALLY, and this is tangentially related, I'm wondering if there's any way to sort of make "modules" for F3 or FA missions (what I mean is, for internal use).

For example, if someone wants to nerd out over ambiance (like, I've been thinking of how Greek war songs should be playing from loudspeakers if we invaded Kavala), then they could quickly package it such that it would be easy to use by others in missions. Being self contained and consistent with the base game, these wouldn't be mods or addons that are needed player side.

I suppose I'm thinking of something like Wolf's function library but more "in-editor", or easy to do without knowing much of Arma's scripting. Drop a module, sync it to some stuff, set a few params and you're done.

I'm new to this stuff so it's likely already possible...
themiddlevoid.wordpress.com

User avatar
Eagle_Eye
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:35 am
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by Eagle_Eye »

I think "modules" would need a mod to set up Suicideking.

There is nothing stopping you from writing self contained scripts though and making them available, so that people only have to put a line in the init of a unit or the init.sqf of the mission. (I have a few small scripts like this for placing objects randomly, setting up mission objectives, parachuting people for ex, which I copy and paste and change between missions.) It doesnt have to be as comprehensive as wolfenswans library to still be useful for others.

As an example if you could make a short script/workflow for adding sounds that would be great, as its something I would usually avoid to keep work time down, but would be great to be able to use on occassion.

User avatar
wolfenswan
Posts: 1209
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:59 pm

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by wolfenswan »

The mission editor allows exporting/importing the mission.sqm (i.e. the placed objects etc.). So people could just create a "mission" with nothing but the base objects, then you can import it into your other missions.

User avatar
Soviet
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:25 pm
Location: DTX

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by Soviet »

SuicideKing wrote:Personally, I'd really like to see more missions with a flavour of starting from a base, or that give the feeling of being a part of something larger, even if it may not make sense from the point of view of the campaign narrative in Arma 3 (like NATO invading Altis, or AAF retaking territory from CSAT, etc.).

I was also thinking of something like AI assisted PvP, where the teams are split equal but one or both teams get AI support. For example, imagine an AAF defence of Kavala. AAF consists of two squads + AI patrols and garrisons + loitering civies. There could be a player/AI driven AAA in the castle, and the hospital could be another key spot to defend.

Attackers can choose to attack from the sea, ask for CAS (AI planes or player helos), artillery (with restrictions on civilian targets), mortars, etc.

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

There was some discussion in the Skype chat about giving COs a more non-linear experience, though that may require a base-driven approach. "Here are a bunch of vehicles to choose from, and here are your crew, where you choose to place them is up to you".

This could also lead the defenders to be more clueless about what will hit them - will they come by boat, submarine or helicopter? Etc.

Of course, this may lead to some issues with the ORBAT - Carson and Fer will aim their makarovs at me for doing that. :lol:
This has my vote big time. Some of my favorite little bits so far have been on things like the beginning of Hornet's nest when we mount up in friendly territory. I think that adding AI, even when they don't do anything to actually help, lends a big sense of presence to the game. It gives a sense of territorial control, and adds to the feeling of 'striking out' from safe, secured territory into something much more dangerous. Just having a friendly AI checkpoint you start off at lends to the notion that you're the tip of the spear, leading the way for something much greater. I think making an adversarial where one side has a base like SK was talking about is a great idea, making it more of a fight for both parties as the AttackFor comes in with the big guns but has to fight through a large contingent of DefendFor to get the job done. While we bring impressive numbers to the table, adding in some AI for defenders or perhaps setting up an AI vs AI fight to the side would be a big help towards giving our battles a sense of 'flow,' with an actual frontline shifting back and forth. Say for example the AAF players start out in a central base, with several friendly checkpoints in the region. But NATO only has to take out say, three of the five ammo dumps within those checkpoints. So the AAF has no idea where they're headed or what they'll do until one of the smaller camps fires up a flare warning that they're under attack, and the AAF squad has to basically do the exact opposite of Quds Radio Hour and act as a QRF to rush in and help. But by the time they get there in their striders NATO may have already pulled off and moved to another target.

But like I said, if we shy away from that due to balance or fun-factor concerns, starting off amongst a greater army that doesn't come along for the ride, basically just window dressing, still makes everything you do for the rest of the mission feel much more epic in scope.

Also, I have to say, I weirdly loved the CSAT special forces hanging out in Appropriation Pt 2. A three-way battle is a sexy idea, but even past that, just having them as a presence made both teams 1. have to consider them as a variable in the battle, reacting to their presence and 2. gives the playable teams an opportunity to pit enemy against enemy, where both forces have to contend with something beyond anyone's control. Not saying a big tank battalion or a 'no-go' zone with a thousand AI, though that could be done right too, but even a small 3rd party patrol like that adds in so many complications to even a simple force-on-force that it can change the way we play the entire mission.
"I guess I really am Tigershark's cameraman..." -Sparks
"My flights are terrifying for my passengers and myself" -Ralian

User avatar
fer
Posts: 1586
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:16 am
Location: Emotional wreck

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by fer »

SuicideKing wrote:There was some discussion in the Skype chat about giving COs a more non-linear experience, though that may require a base-driven approach. "Here are a bunch of vehicles to choose from, and here are your crew, where you choose to place them is up to you".
I think I understand the attraction of this, as it could make for an even more immersive experience. However, the format and style of our sessions does not easily lend itself to this kind of mission for several reasons:
  • COs actually have very little time for planning. Absorbing a complex briefing, considering the terrain, contemplating a variety of attack options, making a selection and then finalising even the first phase of the plan - all these steps are hard to accomplish within the 3-5 minutes we usually tolerate for planning.
  • We are very bad a logistics. Wolfenswans' pre-mount component is baked into F3 to help us avoid wasting the first 5 minutes working out if everyone has mounted the correct vehicle. Mitigating factors such as ACRE, a cadre of more trained element leaders and MilSim-like discipline from guests are not options for us.
  • Our house style is to avoid 'gamey' missions in the main session (hence the existence of the 'after-party'), and our use of toys is always carefully considered (for example: we do not permit crunchies to magically know how to fly parked attack helicopters). Having a James Bond-esque warehouse of toys to choose from at the start of a mission is no more our style than indulging in crate worship.
  • Lastly, if you give the CO lots of options you must ensure the opposition is capable of putting up a credible defence in each scenario. For adversarial missions you can rely to a greater extent on the creativity of human opposition; but for a coop mission you have made the mission-making challenge several orders of magnitude harder.
All of these things are surmountable, but probably not without a degree of pre-planning and co-operation between the mission maker, hosts and CO. For example:
  • The mission maker can build a mission with the starting base, assets and briefing, but only slots for the command element.
  • Volunteers for the CO and DC/ASL roles can be found via the forum or Skype chat.
  • The CO and DC/ASL are allowed to load up the draft mission, perhaps even conduct UAV recon and the make their ORBAT and asset selection.
  • The mission maker finalises the ORBAT, enemy positions, triggers etc.
  • The mission is played in the next [Sunday] session.
Not everything here must be organised* by the Politburo, comrades. If a comrade mission maker is prepared to step up and organise such a collaboratively-authored mission he will be monitored supported by the Party.

User avatar
SuicideKing
Host
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 1:29 pm
Location: India/US West
Contact:

Re: Mission ideas?

Post by SuicideKing »

Thanks for the thoughts Fer. I'm working on such a (coop) mission at the moment (it is huge). It has just one objective, but can be approached however.

What I've done is:

Options:
Motorised/Mechanised Infantry + 2 tanks + 1 AAA.

Pre-Mounting:
CO, DC, SLs, First Fire Teams do not start mounted (as they could go to IFVs or trucks/hunters depending on what the host/CO wants).

Crews, Attachments, second fire teams, optional truck drivers are mounted. Of course, attachments may want to stick with squads, and they'll have to change vehicle in that case.

We were talking about this in chat the other day, and balance is still a question. My take is that it'll be tough either way - infantry have advantages in numbers and the fact that they won't be targeted by AT stuff, but needs to be protected from other vehicles and MG fire. Armour will get hit a lot by AT unless infantry takes care of it, but excels at long range combat across open terrain. Again, the mission has various paths to take, and it's up to the CO to take certain routes depending on what resources they have.

I'll probably Zeus it on the test server and see how things behave, because it's a slideshow on my computer. :lol:
themiddlevoid.wordpress.com

Post Reply