The full mission builder discussion.

[startrekmike]

Loft has recently given some information about how the release of the full mission builder will be handled, the idea is that we could not be getting a public release of the full mission builder and it would instead be released on a much smaller scale to a smaller group of already established mission makers (details about this are not really available).

 

  Now, I won't lie, from what I understand of the situation right now, I am a little scared, the idea of having a flight simulator without a full mission editor publicly available is pretty, well, pretty unconventional to say the least.

 

  Anyway, I don't know if Loft's decision is final, I don't know if that was just a idea that is being considered but if it does end up being the way it is done, I fear that this will entirely cut out any chance for smaller, non-established mission builders (who don't publicly release missions) to either make single player missions that they can enjoy or make online missions for their friends or squadron mates to enjoy.

 

  A flight sim lives and dies on the communities ability to make their own content and while I understand that the ROF editor was not well received, to not include it publicly would cut guys like me out of the loop who are slowly but surely learning it and have used it in the past to make missions that suit what my friends and I need. 

 

  Giving the editor to only a few seems like it would do well for larger, public servers (think Syndicate, New wings, Fast food) but unless those select editors are going to make taking requests for missions a full time job, I don't see how this will work for private servers and those that play privately among friends (or single player only).

 

  I am wondering what the community here thinks.

 

  Keep in mind please that I don't know all the facts, I only know what has been said by Loft and if I am wrong (as I freely admit I may be), I will gladly remove or edit this post accordingly to give proper information.)

 

  

[LBR=H-Ostermann]

What qualifies a person as a mission builder? I made many missions in IL (original) and part of the appeal of this game was the thought that an understandable and working mission builder, a la IL2, was going to be incorporated into this game.

 

 BTW, I grew up in Washington Park.

Edited May 10, 2014 by JG3Target

[ShamrockOneFive]

Where was this said exactly?

[startrekmike]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/6251-discussion-questions-developers/page-3?do=findComment&comment=115661

 

  If you read some of his posts from this point, you will see what I am referring to specifically.

[Rama]

Well. I can understand Loft's concern about the critics that will be raised by the FMB (same critics as with RoF FMB, but probably louder, since the WWII fight sim community is even more polemistic).

But I think that if the FMB is only given to a selected few, critics will be even harsher and louder.

I can be wrong of course, but my guess is that the FMB will be available to everybody at some point after the release.... sooner or later.

[Jason_Williams]

Guys,

 

Before this blows up into a nasty thread let me state our current position and some history behind it.

 

What the community at large wants in a mission editor is not what our full mission editor is. We released the ME to everyone for ROF as a courtesy and the result was a huge outcry for a simpler editor that we could not provide and still cannot provide to this day. So we said take your time and learn it if you really want to make missions. That was 5 years ago and the response from the community was tepid and only a handful of mission makers emerged in that time and became proficient. The demand continues to be give us an easier to understand ME. We have received hundreds of emails asking for tech support for our ROF ME of which we do not have the time to provide such support. We can argue all day about the positives and negatives of the wisdom of releasing the ROF ME to the public. There are differing opinions, but what the community usually fails to see is the impact such decisions have on the team. And we have a different perspective in that we see what you tell us directly and it is sometimes quite different from what you all tell each other on the forum. 

 

Also, when we announced BOS we got a ton of emails from experienced users wanting to make missions for us and try to make payware campaigns etc. The number one request was "Give us a simpler editor, we cannot understand your current one and even if we do, it is too burdensome to use efficiently." We told these users to go try to make missions with ROF editor and come back later. The result was no one came back to us and showed us they could make anything with it. So why would we think releasing such an editor for BOS would help sales if not even experienced mission makers can use it? All that told us was that we need a simpler editor in the long term.

 

What Loft essentially stated in his latest round of answering questions was this: Knowing what we do about the community's love or lack thereof for our current ROF-style ME, that we would work with those that we know can provide custom missions for the community without burdening the novice mission makers with our ROF-style ME. Which if we did, would only unleash another wave of tech support requests from angry users who can't figure it out and endlessly berate us in public for such a complicated design. And when we tell them that we do not provide such support they only get angrier. So, Loft and the rest of the team including me is trying to find a compromise that can give BOS users a stream of custom community made missions on top of the QMB and Campaign system which is where most users spend their time anyways.

 

As Loft stated and as I have stated before, we are on a tight schedule and a new ME that is more intuitive would be great, but to make that would take a lot of resources that we don't currently have.

 

So, in the end we are left with, give no one the ME and upset some people or give everyone the ME and deal with the confusion and negativity that will bring or find a compromise which is what we are looking at. Hopefully we can find the resources at some point to make a new ME that is simpler to use. But that depends on the popularity of the initial product. So that puts us in a chicken or the egg situation which is the same damn situation we have been in for years.

 

Jason

[SYN_Jedders]

Seems reasonable.

[No601_Prangster]

If you want to qualify as a mission builder then I'm sure your chances would be improved if you make some missions. You can download Rise of Flight for free, make some missions and post them up for the community. RoF players would love to have some more missions and you'll learn the Mission Editor in the process. Simples! 

[Panzerlang]

Guys,

 

Before this blows up into a nasty thread let me state our current position and some history behind it.

 

What the community at large wants in a mission editor is not what our full mission editor is. We released the ME to everyone for ROF as a courtesy and the result was a huge outcry for a simpler editor that we could not provide and still cannot provide to this day. So we said take your time and learn it if you really want to make missions. That was 5 years ago and the response from the community was tepid and only a handful of mission makers emerged in that time and became proficient. The demand continues to be give us an easier to understand ME. We have received hundreds of emails asking for tech support for our ROF ME of which we do not have the time to provide such support. We can argue all day about the positives and negatives of the wisdom of releasing the ROF ME to the public. There are differing opinions, but what the community usually fails to see is the impact such decisions have on the team. And we have a different perspective in that we see what you tell us directly and it is sometimes quite different from what you all tell each other on the forum. 

 

Also, when we announced BOS we got a ton of emails from experienced users wanting to make missions for us and try to make payware campaigns etc. The number one request was "Give us a simpler editor, we cannot understand your current one and even if we do, it is too burdensome to use efficiently." We told these users to go try to make missions with ROF editor and come back later. The result was no one came back to us and showed us they could make anything with it. So why would we think releasing such an editor for BOS would help sales if not even experienced mission makers can use it? All that told us was that we need a simpler editor in the long term.

 

What Loft essentially stated in his latest round of answering questions was this: Knowing what we do about the community's love or lack thereof for our current ROF-style ME, that we would work with those that we know can provide custom missions for the community without burdening the novice mission makers with our ROF-style ME. Which if we did, would only unleash another wave of tech support requests from angry users who can't figure it out and endlessly berate us in public for such a complicated design. And when we tell them that we do not provide such support they only get angrier. So, Loft and the rest of the team including me is trying to find a compromise that can give BOS users a stream of custom community made missions on top of the QMB and Campaign system which is where most users spend their time anyways.

 

As Loft stated and as I have stated before, we are on a tight schedule and a new ME that is more intuitive would be great, but to make that would take a lot of resources that we don't currently have.

 

So, in the end we are left with, give no one the ME and upset some people or give everyone the ME and deal with the confusion and negativity that will bring or find a compromise which is what we are looking at. Hopefully we can find the resources at some point to make a new ME that is simpler to use. But that depends on the popularity of the initial product. So that puts us in a chicken or the egg situation which is the same damn situation we have been in for years.

 

Jason

 

Why don't you train one person, on the proviso he trains another with the same stipulation and then those two train two others and so on? How long would it take to train somebody? And those early trainees could create a manual/tutorial. It can't be harder than Photoshop, surely.

[No601_Prangster]

Why don't you train one person, on the proviso he trains another with the same stipulation and then those two train two others and so on? How long would it take to train somebody? And those early trainees could create a manual/tutorial. It can't be harder than Photoshop, surely.

 

There is already a comprehensive manual for the RoF ME and plenty of tutorials available.

 

Edited May 10, 2014 by No601_Prangster

[startrekmike]

Jason, thank you for your in depth answer, I am happy to see honesty even if I can't agree with it myself.

 

  I suppose I really just wonder why you don't make the mission editor a separate download, perhaps even with a pretty heavy disclaimer before the user is even able to download it, something that will make the current situation clear without hurting those that have been privately using the editor in ROF (or learning, whichever the case may be) while still protecting you and the other developers from backlash.

 

  Not going to lie, this severely hurts the usefulness of the product for me in a online context, I don't play public servers and that is more than likely what most of the missions are going to be geared for (in terms of size and scope), I really just don't see how this is going to work in the long run, the mission makers are probably not going to be taking specific requests for missions that will work for everyone who needs them.

 

 

  I am sorry for the negativity, this is just such a blow after having no indication that this would be the case, I had assumed from prior communications made by you (on the simHQ forums) and others in the team that the ROF editor was what we were getting, I was fine with that and even started reading the lessons and watching tutorials, it is sad to see that I won't even have the choice to use it if I invest the time to learn it.

[dburne]

It concerns me as a single player as well. For me the bulk of my enjoyment is from user created missions and especially campaigns. I got more hours if enjoyment out of IL2 than any other game to date. And now getting much of the same our of some of the Cliffs campaigns.

 

I know it will offer a campaign/career. But the user made ones can offer so very much way beyond.

 

I hope this sim is very successful and they devote the resources into making a kick butt FMB that exceeds even IL2's

[Jason_Williams]

It concerns me as a single player as well. For me the bulk of my enjoyment is from user created missions and especially campaigns. I got more hours if enjoyment out of IL2 than any other game to date. And now getting much of the same our of some of the Cliffs campaigns.

 

I know it will offer a campaign/career. But the user made ones can offer so very much way beyond.

 

I hope this sim is very successful and they devote the resources into making a kick butt FMB that exceeds even IL2's

 

Right so the very same people who gave you most of your enjoyment with ROF would under this select program still be able to make missions for you.

 

Jason

[DD_Arthur]

 

  I suppose I really just wonder why you don't make the mission editor a separate download, perhaps even with a pretty heavy disclaimer before the user is even able to download it, something that will make the current situation clear without hurting those that have been privately using the editor in ROF (or learning, whichever the case may be) while still protecting you and the other developers from backlash.

 

 

 Whilst I can understand the developers position I think the above is seriously worth considering as a reasonable compromise.  However, the development and release of a dedicated mission building tool should be viewed as a priority item.  Its an important part of the structure of any flight sim that wants to take itself seriously.  

[Jason_Williams]

It's already a separate .exe and that generates a ton of complaints. We've considered all options and try as we might in the past to inform people of what the ME is, it doesn't help.

 

We'll try what Loft mentioned first and see how it goes. Those that do have access may be able to train others later on if we don't get to make a new ME with a simpler interface. 

 

Jason

[334th_L0C0]

..and we can't have a "Full Mission Builder" like we do in the old IL2?

 

The old IL2 now uses triggers that even a preschooler can figure out.  I am so confused as to why we keep going backwards with the things we can do, ie skins, and now the FMB that the IL2 vets have enjoyed for over a decade.

 

If this is truly "IL2", how could a "user friendly" FMB not be in the budget from the start?  It's absolutely essential to the sim's longevity.

Edited May 11, 2014 by 9./JG54_EZ

[ShamrockOneFive]

Jason, thanks for the in depth response. It is appreciated greatly!

 

I'm not sure how I feel about this. In general I agree with most of the development decisions the 777 guys have had to make. Limited time, resources, a small community of potential customers... it's a rough spot to be in and the product is outstanding. That said, I have to agree with some of the guys that the FMB in IL-2 and subsequent addons was a masterstroke by Oleg's team. It's simple enough to work with that you can bang out missions in fairly short order and at the same time its complex enough to allow for a decent level of stuff to be done. RoF and IL-2 BoS are a different beast from the mission perspective but I got to say that a future post BoS priority will need to be in this area.

 

The FMB is why servers like UK-Dedicated/Battlefields operated IL-2 missions for so long (and continue to do so) is because its so easy for me to pump out a quality mission for the guys to enjoy. I likely will sign up for the mission builder access and I'm glad that we have some options but I caution against not giving a more completely featured FMB system a spot on the project chart somewhere. I say this as the author of a dozen single player campaigns and well over a hundred or two hundred different dogfight scenarios for online.

[1./JG42Nephris]

This way of dealing with the ME cuts e.g. our squadron completely off BOS.

Most squadrons have regular evenings, so called trinaing days, on which certain scenarios are trained like the easy ones "start & land"  or more complex like blind navigation and all that stuff. For another instance the german community had in Il2 1946 the "Jagdfliegerschule", it is reassembling dedicated for BoS and called VFS, which is basically a flight school.

 

Imagine the frustration of a squadron, that you have to ask each time a more or less foreign community member to  create a mission with certain task which then again need to be corrected or the completely setup doesent fit and whole mission is desired to be reassembled.

I cant imagine that this way will last very long, as it would become a full time job for a handfull of community members with access to ME to serve remaing community members, squadrons and single players with desired mission scenarios and changes to them.

 

Online war initiators are dependant to ME users and cant work independant.

A squad m8, already study the mission files to create a kind of DCG for BoS, for now he kicked the work and went back to Clodo, as the future way looks frustrated for him, as he dont want to be dependant to anyone in creating something in his freetime.The workflow moves down to a minimum.

 

Pls rethink this way.

Still, in my opinion, those who cant deal with the RoF ME are just to "lazy" in investing too much time into the editor.

Fantastic youtube tutorials out there that made me understand the ME quiet fast.

The result was, our squadron met once a week for some custom made  to fly together.

The point that not much custom missions  went as online source, is to keep the work for oneself.

 

I once asked the guy who initiated the Vintage mission stuff by email, and he just answered, he would give his misisons away, but i should feel free to join the server. That exactly willl probably will happen, if the ME is given to some users only.

Misusing the priority to create missions is  a fine way to fill ones own servers or joining certain forums etc.

 

 

Maybe you can create a form a user needs to sign to be able to download the ME.

But pls dont go the way you are planing at the moment.

[Feathered_IV]

One of the biggest reasons the old Il-2 is still bringing in revenue today is the accessible FMB that even now sees new content made available almost daily. Rise of Flight has seen about five user made campaigns in the last five years by comparison. I'm sure if the devs were in a position to provide a more intuitive front end to their FMB they would. It's just a shame that the added complexity of moderns sims tends to carve the heart out of what once made them great.

[dburne]

It's already a separate .exe and that generates a ton of complaints. We've considered all options and try as we might in the past to inform people of what the ME is, it doesn't help.

 

We'll try what Loft mentioned first and see how it goes. Those that do have access may be able to train others later on if we don't get to make a new ME with a simpler interface. 

 

Jason

 

That is certainly understandable, while there are some that would take the time to dig in and learn it, there would be many, many others that would complain and seek  support. Double edged sword.

 

Ideally, and hopefully, at some point in the not to far off future you guys can see the way to develop a really good intuitive FMB.

 

Thanks for responding to our concerns.

[Bando]

Let's fly the game first.

It is not out yet, and when it hits the markets, we better do our best to inform eveyone around us and hope they buy the sim to.

We are not many, we are not legion, we are BOS(s).

[FlatSpinMan]

Interesting to read the reasons, JW.

As everyone there played IL2, I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision to make. Not my favourite decision but I understand the rationale.

With this latest update, I really get a sense of how tight things are in terms of time and budget.

 

Players/Mission builders - as someone above suggested, if you really want to use the FMB, why not practice on ROF, upload some missions, then apply (or whatever it is that you do) to get the BoS one? That way you're learning the tools and contributing to the sim community, and it is much more likely to succeed in your getting access than posting about what a bad idea limiting access is.

 

 

Btw, I've seen some people mention making requests of authorized mission makers. I didnt get the impression that that was how it worked. My impression was that people would build missions which would be fed into the game, perhaps via updates. Could be wrong of course.

[startrekmike]

Interesting to read the reasons, JW.

As everyone there played IL2, I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision to make. Not my favourite decision but I understand the rationale.

With this latest update, I really get a sense of how tight things are in terms of time and budget.

 

Players/Mission builders - as someone above suggested, if you really want to use the FMB, why not practice on ROF, upload some missions, then apply (or whatever it is that you do) to get the BoS one? That way you're learning the tools and contributing to the sim community, and it is much more likely to succeed in your getting access than posting about what a bad idea limiting access is.

 

 

Btw, I've seen some people mention making requests of authorized mission makers. I didnt get the impression that that was how it worked. My impression was that people would build missions which would be fed into the game, perhaps via updates. Could be wrong of course.

 

 

  I think the issue really is that there are plenty of folks who just make missions for themselves or for very small groups, making a mission that fits exactly what you or your friends want is not the same as making a mission that you might feel comfortable uploading publicly.

 

  This is the thing really, I think most of the ROF players here can guess (roughly) who some of the folks who get the FMB will be, they are the ones who have been doing it for years and have established themselves in the community, not everyone desires such exposure just to get access to a FMB.

 

  For myself, I just make missions for my friends and I, I don't make stuff that I would want to submit to the greater ROF community because it is either not going to be up to the expectations set by the experienced mission makers or it simply won't be compatible with any group or player other than my own.

[FlatSpinMan]

I understand your point completely, but given the info we've just received, my suggestion seems to be the one way to gain access to the FMB.

[LukeFF]

If this is truly "IL2", how could a "user friendly" FMB not be in the budget from the start?  It's absolutely essential to the sim's longevity.

 

Because it's a different set of guys working with an entirely different engine that was developed years after IL2's was. Your question is kind of like someone asking, "How can this truly be IL2 if Oleg Maddox isn't involved?" Unlike IL2's mission builder, the mission one packaged with ROF was originally meant to only be an internal tool used by the developers.

[JtD]

Why don't you recruit from the community for FMB technical support so that you don't have to go through the emails personally?

Why don't you recruit from the community for programming a decent FMB?

Why is everything about the small minority that "we know from RoF"? Do you know you're kicking most of your customers in the teeth with statements like that?

[JZG_Viking]

Any chance of turning the ME into an open source project?

[FS_Fenice_1965]

Jason answers are reasonable, anyway there may be alternative solutions.
1) A contest in the community, to find human resources able to help building a new mission editor.
2) A kickstarter campaign, to find money resources to hire a new component of the team dedicated to new editor.

3) A new payed product launched in early access form, like BOS.

Another thing is to be considered. The lack of a FMB is a problem for private servers who are inclined to make a personal and original offer to their communities. If they will not have an instrument to build and develop missions, they will hardly provide a platform for this sim. The release of a dedicated server is useless if there is no way to build own scenarios.
There are many IL2 communities built around servers that count thousands of players on their forums, some active, some following internal forums, some stll linked to their communities (also by strong friendship relations) who aren't playing but that will come back if attracted by a new sim, if they will have the opportunity to do that within their beloved community. In multiplayer communities the interest for a particular sim comes second to the interest of playing with known people. Sim is a vehicle to play within a specific community, within established human relations.

The number of Il2 players on the lobby is misleading. There is a huge mass of IL2 simmers that have not be transferred to other sims, given the mess happened with CLOD.

Not to talk of the fact that the number of players still active on the lobby is superior and in the worst case comaparable to that of every sim around.

 

If we consider this, providing a mission editor even if it is the same of ROF may be the less hurting solution, given the fact that usually this communities have already talented mission builders able to learn the different editors.
Asking the staff of these servers to give up part of the already limited time they use to handle their servers, providing always fresh contents, to invest in learning ROF editor without the sure perspective of being selected between the people provided with mission bulder is too much imho.



 

Edited May 11, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[SYN_Jedders]

We need to stop looking at this title as anything other than a brand new venture starting from scratch. This isn't Rof or Clod or IL2:1946 this is something built from the ground up by a small team with limited funds.

 

Everything that gets released will be subject to change given a decent level of economic return and time. This game will develop new content, some developer made, some community made over many years.

 

I have seen the release of many titles in the sim world, not just flight, and they rarely resemble their release candidates weeks or months after inception. BoS will be no different. For now we have to have a few people make the missions for us, big deal!. There are some really talented folks out there with years of experience under their belts who will do just that. To name only one I'm sure PWCG will be around fairly quickly and remember this, joining an mp server will download that mission to your hard drive for you to tweak...no one is saying these missions aren't for sharing.

 

Rather than becoming worried about not having the me or being able to create missions for ourselves in the short term, let's maybe work together to share what we do have and create something good and usable for the future. Team fusion have shown how powerful a focused community can be!. Let's pool our knowledge, share our work and strive for a usable, simple ME for the near future.

[FS_Fenice_1965]

It is correct that we cannot compare this sim to projects that have been out for years.

We cannot expect the same level or quantity of options at the beginning.

 

It is also true that in actual times it is unlikely that any project will be allowed to have long time to evolve.

Many of us were willing to give time to CLOD to evolve in the future years, but business hadn't given the same time.

 

Then a balance is needed between lack of options and full options.

 

FMB is crucial in this.

 

Getting pre-made contents made by others doesn't satisfy creativity, and creativity expression, in different forms, is what pushes people to play.

 

Also we cannot ignore that transferring IL2 crowd to this sim is crucial for the success if the sim itself.

IL2 multiplayer communities are a "social network" larger than any other sim around. Every effort to let them transfer on BOS needs to be made.

This is what they are waiting for.

IL2 communities like ours, the Battlefield servers, Spits vs 109s, or the "Aces of" servers are making a day by day frontier war to keep simmers interested, waiting to be ready to travel them towards BOS.

This has been successfull for the servers able to create fresh interest mainly with new missions, always updated with new features and complexity allowed by improvements in hardware.

 

At the moment the main reason of diminishing attendance in the lobby aren't other sims.

People are stopping playing IL2 going towards other businesses, or which is even more interesting, posting on internal forums without playing.

The latter meaning that there's still interest being liked to the community but that there's no appealing offer in the gameplay area.

Communities like Spits vs 109, the Aces servers or Battlefield's (I do not want to talk of ours....and sorry if I have forgotten someone's equally meaningful) really know how to satisfy their crowds.

They have an own stile and a "know how" about creating missions that has become similar to a brand.

Flying on Spits vs 109, or in Battlefield or in the Aces server, or in SKies of Valor is immediatly recognizable by the kind of missions they propose.

We cannot think to satisfy the thousands of people gathered around these communities with pre made contents, built with missions pre made by other minds.

It's like thinking people used to wear always tailored dresses with a specific stile, starting to wear mass market dresses from one day to another.

Different stiles, equally good maybe, but if we want to address this market we need to give these people instruments to continue tailoring these dresses. 

 

We cannot also ask them to train only on ROF mission builder. Building missions is a fun but in the same time stressfull job. Building missions for ROF means studying WWI era, gathering infos and sources on that era..is not a jock...not to talk that not all are fun of the WWI period.

On the opposite side there are tons of mission bulders with tons of matherial already gathered from previous works, with lot of passion for the WWII period. I do not think that in the ROF part of the community there are so many people with the same amount of matherial about WWII.

Practice with ROF mission builder is only part of the skill needed...what about WWII researches ?

Edited May 11, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[FlatSpinMan]

Well, WW2 research doesn't require an FMB, so people can do that now.

 

Again, no doubt the team want an easier FMB, but the problem is RESOURCES. There's a million great suggestions on these boards which I'm sure the Devs would love to implement, but the current reality seems to be that they simply cannot do so.

[334th_L0C0]

@ Luke..  Sorry if I didn't word it right, I didn't mean the exact same FMB that Oleg made.   A user friendly mission builder is all I meant.  This should have been planned from the beginning imo, but it sounds as if they've just used the ROF's mission builder. 

 

@ Jedders..   I think you are mistaken.. As I read and re read Jason's post, it seems to me that this IS truly ROF we bought, and not IL2.  There is a poll here at the forum asking which sim we come from.. It is IL2 that has the majority, yet all the perks of IL2 (skinning, and mission building) are way different, where as they seem to be the exact same as ROF. 

 

To sum it up in which will probably be my last post here,  I feel like I've just lost about 30% of interest in this discussion about the FMB, and the sad part is I've already lost roughly 30% of my interest when I read a discussion about skins not too long ago.  The 40% that I still appreciate?   The sim looks great.. great clouds, nice reflections and effects. The only problem is, it's got no "soul".  Two weeks ago I was thinking about buying a fellow squad mate BOS.  Now I'm wishing I didn't even buy one for myself.

 

I'm just one guy.. I realize that, but I am an IL2 veteran ("veteran" doesn't have anything to do with my skill level, just the amount of years I played ) , and if I feel this way, how many others do?  (I don't need an actual answer to that question here, I just worry for the sim)

 

Hoping things change sooner than later.

[LuftManu]

Not releasing the ME would be the worst decision to this project, and of course , if this is true, it will down in sales, and if 1 year, would be dead.

 

Release the same Me as in ROF, the interested people would learn it, and in the future think another way, Open source, New ME. IF you cut the wings of the community, the community will cut the wings of the sim

 

Dev,please, listen to us, you felt proud of the Work with the users right? I think if you can listen to us another time, things will get fixed , the communty is talented , and would find the way to use the old ME , or enhance it in a "Open Source of the ME", but release the ME.

Edited May 11, 2014 by 15[Span]/Manu_vc

[SCG_Neun]

Well, as a single player the lack of a FMB would concern me a whole lot more if I hadn't seen the excellent career campaigns contained in ROF.  If we can have something similar here in BOS this would suit me fine. It would be great, short of not including it to all.....to have it available to the select mission builders out there...I think we all pretty well know who they are....or the option to download the builder as a standalone component separate from the actual release.  I could be wrong....but I think there are a lot of single players out here, and we need great command features, excellent AI, and historical missions.....  Not including it in some form, would be a mistake.

Edited May 11, 2014 by JagdNeun

[FS_Fenice_1965]

Well, WW2 research doesn't require an FMB, so people can do that now.

 

Again, no doubt the team want an easier FMB, but the problem is RESOURCES. There's a million great suggestions on these boards which I'm sure the Devs would love to implement, but the current reality seems to be that they simply cannot do so.

It is true WW2 research doesn't require FMB, so we can rely on people who - in large part - lack that research and come from interest mainly in wwwi to start filling the gap with years of application within IL2 community.

My humble hopinion is that another thing is pointing on IL2 community which has research already done, has gathered tons of matherials, has already applied this knowledge to scenarios, has a massive interest on doing that because thay are mainly wwii enthusiasts.

If we rely on the ROF community and mission builders which come mainly from a WWI area, we are sure losing a great part of the people and of the resources already gathered.

I am not saying that there aren't good wwii mission builders inside ROF community, but I doubt that they can compete in numbers with IL2 community on the wwii field.

The cultural heritage of IL2 community is already done and ready to use and may give a significative push to the success of the simulation if put on the field form the beginning or even better before.

Give them dedicated servers, give them the usual mission editor at launch or, even better, before the launch, and they will prepare a great crowd platform for the sim.

Edited May 11, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[Gitano_Fraile]

creo la comunidad de IL2, es mucho mayor de la que se ve en los servidores publicos. El condor un una comunidad Sudamericana que solo muy pocos de sus integrantes vuelan en estos tipos de servidores, pero tenemos campañas cooperativas y FoF creada por nosotros.

Creo que la ausencia de un ME implicaria un desinteres en el juego, ya que no podria compartir el tiempo (escaso que poseo o poseemos) con mis camaradas. 

Con respecto al tipo de ME, creo que cada soft nuevo que se lanza implica una complejidad inicial en el aprendizaje, pero se va subsanando con el tiempo de uso, y si a eso agregamos de que ya esta depurado por su uso en el ROF, creo que solo es prectica lo que hace falta.

En realidad espero que se lance el ME, lo considero crucial para poder seguir disfrutando con mis amigos de buenos momentos

 

aca dejo los link de las campañas en el ala IL2 del ECV56CONDOR

saludos

 

cooperativas http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/gcc/

FoF http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/cw/map.php

 

saludos

 

-----------------------------------------------Traductor Google--------------------------------------------------------------

 

I think the community of IL2, is much greater than that seen in public servants. The South American condor one one community only a few of its members flying in these types of servers, but we FoF cooperative campaigns and created by us. 

I think the absence of ME imply a disinterest in the game, and that could not share time (poor to possess or own) with my comrades. 

Regarding the type of ME, I think every new software that is thrown involves an initial complexity in learning, but it's going correcting over time of use, and if we add that already refined by use in ROF, I think that's just what it takes PRACTICE. 

I really hope that the ME was released, I consider it crucial to continue enjoying good times my friends 

 

here I leave the link campaigns in IL2 wing ECV56CONDOR 

regards 

 

cooperatives http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/gcc/ 

FoF http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/cw/map.php 

 

regards

[ParaB]

Yes, the mission editor in RoF is a pain in the butt to use. Still. after a weekend or two (and much gnashing of teeth)  I managed to put together a basic, simple mission. If I can do it other people can do it, too.

 

To NOT release the editor would IMO be a big mistake.

 

Don't underestimate the community. I'm pretty sure that e.g. templates for various missions could be created and then be modified with reasonable efforts for the mission builders.

[FS_Fenice_1965]

 

 

 I think the community of IL2, is much greater than that seen in public servants

 

You are right Moro (~S~ to your comrades I often see online..).

Then there's another large community able to be involved, as well as the one living on public servers, that needs the same instrument.

A perfectable ME is better than no ME at all.

Edited May 11, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

Jason, I know the team and yourself appear to be in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation with releasing an ME.

 

All I can say is this.  I am not a programmer.  I used FMB in IL2 1946 to create training missions and coops for our squad.  When we got into ROF, I tried my hand at the ME.  Yes, it is complex and yes, it is cumbersome to work with.  BUT,  over time I figured it out and I made training missions and coops again for the squad.  Maybe I didn't take advantage of all the goodies that lie inside it, but enough to get me through.

 

Bottom line is that I think the "too complex" issue is a little over blown, especially if I could figure it out.  What if you provide it but put a big splash screen warning people that the program is intended for programmers and/or the technically inclined for content development and 1CGS, 777, etc. will not under any circumstances provide support.

 

Food for thought.

[limeymcscrote]

Could we maybe have an option to save quick missions we create as single missions? This would allow us to build a library of single missions for later play, and they could also then be edited later if/when a mission builder is released.