The single player campaign thread WITHOUT talking about unlocks

[Dakpilot]

Even with the decent visibility in BoS do you NEED 100 aircraft around you... with 20 around it is more than enough to keep track of for me, and the only way to get 100 plus AI is if they have scripted FM which is no fun at all

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Vaxxtx]

Even with the decent visibility in BoS do you NEED 100 aircraft around you... with 20 around it is more than enough to keep track of for me, and the only way to get 100 plus AI is if they have scripted FM which is no fun at all

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Guess my hope of higher standards in 2014 is different than yours.

 

Again the rush to market approach might be showing some flaws in engine limitations that might have consequences later in player made content.

[Finkeren]

Greedy? Nothing greedy about wanting realistic air engagements. 3 plane bomber formations were common during BoS?

No, but neither were 100+ formations

 

I'm saying 30-50 planes in one mission (which I think might be posible with a bit more optimization) should be enough to create some pretty realistic scenarios.

[Vaxxtx]

No, but neither were 100+ formations

 

I'm saying 30-50 planes in one mission (which I think might be posible with a bit more optimization) should be enough to create some pretty realistic scenarios.

Right. And like I said above, this might limit what can be made and that's a large concern for me. 30 to 50 is still a small amount and are you taking into account ground units, sstatic objects, as well?

 

If this does not worry you and you are happy with small scale that's awesome. Like I said, I was hoping for more in the way of other Sims large scale.

[Finkeren]

Right. And like I said above, this might limit what can be made and that's a large concern for me. 30 to 50 is still a small amount and are you taking into account ground units, sstatic objects, as well?

 

If this does not worry you and you are happy with small scale that's awesome. Like I said, I was hoping for more in the way of other Sims large scale.

50 planes in a mission is not "small scale". That's like some of the bigger missions in the (much much simpler) European Air War from '98, which I think still holds the record for most active AI objects in a flight sim.

 

And no, I'm not counting ground objects. An early pre-alpha test of BoS showed, that the engine handled 70 tanks in a huge battle just fine. That was pre-alpha, with optimizations loads more should be posible.

[Mugwump]

I really wish they'd bring back custom difficulty settings and just allow me to choose how I play the game.  I don't really care about the XP multiplier.  Give me custom settings and make my choices equal the same as normal, but allow me to choose.

 

I also dislike the fact that "expert" still includes the technochat and displays unit positions on the map by default.  I know I can turn this off with a few key clicks but rather than having to do so each time I start a mission, I'd rather be able to set it globally via the customization menu.

[kaboki]

 

 

I also dislike the fact that "expert" still includes the technochat and displays unit positions on the map by default.  I know I can turn this off with a few key clicks but rather than having to do so each time I start a mission, I'd rather be able to set it globally via the customization menu.

 

You can turn of the technochat and never see it again. Go too settings>Flight interface>Ingame Messages and turn it off. Don't know about the map, but atleast thats one annoying thing removed:).

 

But I find it strange that it's even displayed in "expert" mode, reminds me of a WT design decision...

Edited October 5, 2014 by kaboki

[Vaxxtx]

50 planes in a mission is not "small scale". That's like some of the bigger missions in the (much much simpler) European Air War from '98, which I think still holds the record for most active AI objects in a flight sim.

 

And no, I'm not counting ground objects. An early pre-alpha test of BoS showed, that the engine handled 70 tanks in a huge battle just fine. That was pre-alpha, with optimizations loads more should be posible.

Its small scale IMO. I thought BOB2 had the record of ai in a flight Sim.

 

Like I said if you are content, great. I'd you don't see that this could limit player made content, great.

 

I was hoping that since its a new game that it could match, or surpass the scale of other sims. Is that really so odd?

[indiaciki]

altitudes at mission briefing are completely missing. 

[Dakpilot]

Somewhere in a thread here someone made note of +-100 ground objects/targets more than enough for a single load of ordnance in a mission

 

Did a great little mission bombing a railway station surrounded by more targets than you could shake a stick at...really enjoyable and as good fun to play as any of the good user made single missions from old IL-2//and that is really a compliment!

 

personally I prefer the slightly smaller missions with AI that have full FM than baked and scripted fm, used to hate old Il-2 when the AI could do things a player could not. To me that is a big plus point

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[dave9810]

My only problems

 

1. AI act the same way as RoF AI - I was on ground attack mission flying the Yak-1. My wingman said "attacking enemy fighter, close". I spotted the enemy fight and saw tracer fire. Next thing i see is 5 friendlies chasing 1 enemy. THIS NEEDS TO CHANGE.

2. Similar to the first point, collided with friendly wingman out of nowhere because he wanted to kill the fighter I just shot down.

[Blackcloud]

50 planes in a mission is not "small scale". That's like some of the bigger missions in the (much much simpler) European Air War from '98, which I think still holds the record for most active AI objects in a flight sim.

 

And no, I'm not counting ground objects. An early pre-alpha test of BoS showed, that the engine handled 70 tanks in a huge battle just fine. That was pre-alpha, with optimizations loads more should be posible.

 

Seriously think about that for a sec.  European Air War, which was made in 1998, has the record.  That is 16 years ago. Sure the graphics and flight model are better here but the gameplay is so much worse.  I do not understand why something that was possible sixteen years ago is apparently impossible now.  Shouldn't things get better over time.

[Rjel]

I think if these campaign missions had been presented as single player missions, people would be having a blast. I just flew a ground strike mission against an airfield in a Bf-109G2 flight of four escorted by a group of F4s. On the way in we got jumped by a couple of Laggs that the F4s took care off. I was over the airfield for almost 10 minutes, which was pretty heavily defended. I destroyed four enemy A/C on the ground along with a couple of trucks and a gun emplacement. Lots of AA scattered around the sky. I even strafed a couple of the running men. Didn't hit them but I came close. They didn't run any faster I noticed.

 

Too bad so many are dismissing these missions as dull and boring. I had a blast. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I really didn't enjoy it as much as I thought.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Rjel

[Ace_Pilto]

It looks a little too simple to me.

 

I haven't played it yet so I can't comment too much but I was hoping to at least be able to join a squadron and play out a career in the normal way so I'm disappointed there before I even start which is unfortunate. I just don't how hooking together some random missions and calling it a campaign really works but if the missions are varied and well made then that will be some consolation.

 

It's strange that we have something that removes two of the key elements of a good campaign, namely: 1) immersion of the player in the world as a character and 2) Providing them with a progressive structure as that simulates the course a real pilot would take in the relevant situation. I suppose this campaign attempts to immerse us in a wider sense but that philosophy doesn't really gel with the traditional type of career that single player types really want so I'm pessimistic that it will be well received by offline, campaign oriented players.

 

I think We should get Heinkill, Pat Wilson and Boelcke together in a room (Among others I could name, Lowengrin, Asura, EnjoyR, The Desastersoft Team and the 1C guy who made DCG and co as well as the many skin excellent artists I've met around the internet),  give them some of the BoS budget  (or a kick starter campaign) and then the world can see what a real campaign should be like.

[unreasonable]

that mission in the air and you carry on like nothing happened.

 

The primary goal of each mission within a SP campaign should be about survival, but without a supporting system which places you in a squadron to emphasise that all we are left with is missions of a hollow experience where our success or failure is of no true consequence.

100% agree with your post, but note that the xp system could give a mechanism to encourage this ... namely the xp and unlocks could be reset to zero if you get killed or captured! People would think about survival much more then, at least the 3 people still left playing...

[Afwastus]

I had a blast. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I really didn't enjoy it as much as I thought.

 

Nah, what someone will say is "I'm glad you enjoyed playing the game the way you wanted, if I only I could actually play the game in the way I wanted."

 

If you enjoyed the missions, then I am happy for you (seriously, not trying to be sarcastic here). It's not that I think no one enjoys the SP missions. However, I don't enjoy them, therefore I find it annoying when I have to play them to unlock stuff. 

 

I'm trying to find a way to make this super clear: You play the game the way you want to play it and I should be able to play the game the way I want to play it.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Afwastus

[Vaxxtx]

It looks a little too simple to me.

 

I haven't played it yet so I can't comment too much but I was hoping to at least be able to join a squadron and play out a career in the normal way so I'm disappointed there before I even start which is unfortunate. I just don't how hooking together some random missions and calling it a campaign really works but if the missions are varied and well made then that will be some consolation.

 

It's strange that we have something that removes two of the key elements of a good campaign, namely: 1) immersion of the player in the world as a character and 2) Providing them with a progressive structure as that simulates the course a real pilot would take in the relevant situation. I suppose this campaign attempts to immerse us in a wider sense but that philosophy doesn't really gel with the traditional type of career that single player types really want so I'm pessimistic that it will be well received by offline, campaign oriented players.

 

I think We should get Heinkill, Pat Wilson and Boelcke together in a room (Among others I could name, Lowengrin, Asura, EnjoyR, The Desastersoft Team and the 1C guy who made DCG and co as well as the many skin excellent artists I've met around the internet),  give them some of the BoS budget  (or a kick starter campaign) and then the world can see what a real campaign should be like.

 

I would pay any amount of $$$ for that dream team. Seriously.

 

But to be real, even with a dream team like that, it would be an uphill battle unless I am totally mistaken about the BoS/RoF engine limitations. But you just named every single mission/campaign modder that made the sims they worked on stand out and last as long as they did. Talented crew of folks.

 

 

 

 

 

FSM: EDITED UNNECCESSARY PERSONAL COMMENT

Edited October 6, 2014 by FlatSpinMan

[Blackcloud]

I think if these campaign missions had been presented as single player missions, people would be having a blast. I just flew a ground strike mission against an airfield in a Bf-109G2 flight of four escorted by a group of F4s. On the way in we got jumped by a couple of Laggs that the F4s took care off. I was over the airfield for almost 10 minutes, which was pretty heavily defended. I destroyed four enemy A/C on the ground along with a couple of trucks and a gun emplacement. Lots of AA scattered around the sky. I even strafed a couple of the running men. Didn't hit them but I came close. They didn't run any faster I noticed.

 

Too bad so many are dismissing these missions as dull and boring. I had a blast. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I really didn't enjoy it as much as I thought.

 

I think you are dead right here, Rjel.  But that is the problem.  It wasn't marketed as a single mission generator (of which it would be an awesome iteration), It was marketed as a campaign. And a campaign it is not.

 

If I pay money to buy a Ferrari I am not go to be happy when I have a VW Beetle delivered, regardless of whether is a good car in its own right.

[LLv24_Zami]

I think if these campaign missions had been presented as single player missions, people would be having a blast. I just flew a ground strike mission against an airfield in a Bf-109G2 flight of four escorted by a group of F4s. On the way in we got jumped by a couple of Laggs that the F4s took care off. I was over the airfield for almost 10 minutes, which was pretty heavily defended. I destroyed four enemy A/C on the ground along with a couple of trucks and a gun emplacement. Lots of AA scattered around the sky. I even strafed a couple of the running men. Didn't hit them but I came close. They didn't run any faster I noticed.

 

Too bad so many are dismissing these missions as dull and boring. I had a blast. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I really didn't enjoy it as much as I thought.

 

I had a similar airfield strike mission with Messerschmitt and it was really fun. There have been other very good ground attack missions also. Escort missions could use some more variables, allways 3xHe111 on German side. Intercept is usually 1-3 Pe-2 and couple escorts.

[Feathered_IV]

I find I'm flyng three times the distance to intercept a third if the aircraft that can be encountered in QMB. I hope the devs have got big things in store for the campaign in the future.

[unreasonable]

Couple of early observations on the friendly AI.

 

1) As soon as you get to the action zone and they spot enemy a/c they break off formation and attack without orders. You have to get the "follow me" order out immediately or they will be scattered all over the sky and any tactical ideas you might have had are out of the window. This is the same as RoF IIRC, but it gets out of control much faster what with the higher speeds.

 

I have no problem with them attacking enemies that get very close, but the default should be to stay in formation until ordered otherwise.

 

2) Formations - unless I am missing something obvious there is no finger four or line abreast. Instead we have RoF's echelon left, right, V and column. Of these only the V is any use, but the way it is implemented the AI wingmen form up too far behind the leader so they are very hard to keep insight. Which makes point 1 worse.

 

Please 777 give us at least a finger four formation.

[Feathered_IV]

Wow. Maybe we are jumping the gun (in the absence of news) and this sort of campaign is still the intention of the developers. I hope they will share a bit more information about their intentions.

[FlatSpinMan]

I think if these campaign missions had been presented as single player missions, people would be having a blast. I just flew a ground strike mission against an airfield in a Bf-109G2 flight of four escorted by a group of F4s. On the way in we got jumped by a couple of Laggs that the F4s took care off. I was over the airfield for almost 10 minutes, which was pretty heavily defended. I destroyed four enemy A/C on the ground along with a couple of trucks and a gun emplacement. Lots of AA scattered around the sky. I even strafed a couple of the running men. Didn't hit them but I came close. They didn't run any faster I noticed.

 

Too bad so many are dismissing these missions as dull and boring. I had a blast. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I really didn't enjoy it as much as I thought.

This is an interesting point. I was actually playing my own private little campaign through the QMB for a while. 

[HBB*Hunger]

Thats it! That is the solution!!!!!
RENAME THE NOW CALLED "CAMPAIGN" TO "SP-MISSIONS". And then get a real campaign/career mode started and not some kind of aqmb with EDITED SWEAR WORD immersion.

[LLv24_Zami]

When you unlock a skin and select it, whole flight uses it which is real immersion killer. Every plane with exactly same markings. And they should have used eastern front skins, there is some strange desert versions. Skins look great though.

[unreasonable]

The pity of it is that I really do not think that the SP campaign needs a huge amount of "chrome" to give those of us who want more of a human story enough to get our imaginations going. At a minimum I would need to feel that I was:

 

1) In a specific unit. Note that it is not essential that this was a unit present at the real BoS, after all we a re-imagining an alternative history here. Similarly it does not matter if the unit was or was not at a specific base, since that is also purely contingent.

 

2) In a plane with markings appropriate for that unit, had it been in the battle.

 

3) A person with a name and rank. I really do not need a biography, I can imagine those details for myself.

 

4) The other AI pilots in my squadron also have names and ranks

 

5) Victories, deaths etc are recorded and used as the base for awards.

 

How hard can this be? RoF did it just fine, and BoS could have a much simpler approach since the timescale and location are so limited, so no need for example, for changes in plane type, airfield transfers. The argument that this all takes enormous resources etc seems unbelievable, it is just a little book-keeping.

 

Once you have this in place you can invest time in a specific pilot and DiD starts to mean something.

 

Remember the main point about Groundhog Day? The experience was so dispiriting that the protagonist kept committing suicide over and over again.

[Trooper117]

The Campaign... I have to say, what campaign?

As people have already alluded to, we are simply flying a disconnected series of 'single missions' with no real immersion factor.

 

1. If I'm on 'campaign' I should be with a particular aviation regiment that is doing it's best to defeat the enemy in its given role.

2. I should be receiving orders each day that make me feel that if I'm successful I have had an impact on the enemy.

3. I should also be worrying about my 'young pilots'. Did they all make it back ok? If they were wounded will they be back flying soon? Do I feel sad if I have lost a promising pilot who was my wingman?

4.What about the state of my aircraft? Am I flying an 'old crate' that is prone to mechanical problems, and are we soon to be replacing our old heaps for more up to date aircraft?

5. What do I know about the state of the enemy and in particular of the enemy aviation units that I'm facing? Are they an elite formation of flyers or just a decimated and weakened force. Are there aces within their formation that are a real danger to my flight if encountered?

 

I could go on and on. These are just some of the things I should be feeling if I'm to fully enjoy my combat tour, but instead we have a very sterile environment that I am simply following in a 'rinse and repeat' cycle.

I do understand that the campaign (such as it is) is a beta version and may be different to the finished article, so there is a ray of hope yet

Any flight sim game developer that can give me some of the above mentioned points will certainly get my money for the foreseeable future.

[89-]

 

Are enemy airfields populated if you you were to fly over them, would you encounter flak and scrambling fighters? Would you see parked planes there?

 

 

 

Did anyone loook at enemy airfileds? Not that your mission task was to attack airfield, but you could be just flying past it- would the enemy airfield be populated and would it scramble fighters attack you with flak or would it be deserted like in ROF?   

Edited October 6, 2014 by 89-

[ParaB]

Did anyone loook at enemy airfileds? Not that your mission task was to attack airfield, but you could be just flying past it- would the enemy airfield be populated and would it scramble fighters attack you with flak or would it be deserted like in ROF?   

 

I passed two enemy airfields in a campaign mission to bomb some artillery positions and got attacked by AA (and later searchlights) from those airfields.

 

In the same mission my flight (4x Ju-87) was escorted by 2x 109s. 1st enemy air contact was a flight of 2 Laggs in the mission area, followed by another 2 on our way back (that didn't engage but run) and another 2 shortly before reached our home airfield.Add in a couple of dozen ground units and the mission felt quite alive despite the ground units concentrated in the mission area.

[malcheus]

In expert mode it is very difficult to find enemy airplanes, I have an idea of the general direction they're supposed to be flying, but not the faintest clue about their altitude.

Usually I maintain a transit altitude of 3km (Yak), which is a bit above the clouds, but there's no telling whether the target planes are above or below the clouds.

 

So then I resolved into using normal difficulty, and turning off auto engine management from the start; which works fine, although a bit too easy.

It's also nice to have visual clues as to whether your landing is going to be accepted.

 

Talking of which, the option to end a mission mid-air is really stupid, if you ask me. Landing is an integral part of flying, and also a very difficult thing in BoS. 

In my case, I crash on landing quite often (destroying the propellor or gear and then belly sliding to a stand-still).

It really sucks to be penalised more for that, than for ending mid-air.

In my oppinion, a failed landing (ie. crash landing on the airfield) should give the same XP as ending mid-air, so as to motivate players to try and land;

or remove the mid-air end mission altogether; this was supposed to be a sim, right?

[SCG_Neun]

In expert mode it is very difficult to find enemy airplanes, I have an idea of the general direction they're supposed to be flying, but not the faintest clue about their altitude.

Usually I maintain a transit altitude of 3km (Yak), which is a bit above the clouds, but there's no telling whether the target planes are above or below the clouds.

 

So then I resolved into using normal difficulty, and turning off auto engine management from the start; which works fine, although a bit too easy.

It's also nice to have visual clues as to whether your landing is going to be accepted.

 

Talking of which, the option to end a mission mid-air is really stupid, if you ask me. Landing is an integral part of flying, and also a very difficult thing in BoS. 

In my case, I crash on landing quite often (destroying the propellor or gear and then belly sliding to a stand-still).

It really sucks to be penalised more for that, than for ending mid-air.

In my oppinion, a failed landing (ie. crash landing on the airfield) should give the same XP as ending mid-air, so as to motivate players to try and land;

or remove the mid-air end mission altogether; this was supposed to be a sim, right?

Great points about landing verses...mid-air ending of a mission.  Totally agree.  Maybe this is something they can correct.

[89-]

I passed two enemy airfields in a campaign mission to bomb some artillery positions and got attacked by AA (and later searchlights) from those airfields.

 

In the same mission my flight (4x Ju-87) was escorted by 2x 109s. 1st enemy air contact was a flight of 2 Laggs in the mission area, followed by another 2 on our way back (that didn't engage but run) and another 2 shortly before reached our home airfield.Add in a couple of dozen ground units and the mission felt quite alive despite the ground units concentrated in the mission area.

 

Sounds cool! But did you see fighters on that enemy airfield? Scrambling fighters, parked planes, anything like that? 

 

 

 

In expert mode it is very difficult to find enemy airplanes, I have an idea of the general direction they're supposed to be flying, but not the faintest clue about their altitude.

 

 

 

Talking of which, the option to end a mission mid-air is really stupid, if you ask me. 

or remove the mid-air end mission altogether; this was supposed to be a sim, right?

 

I'm sure that mission altitude will be added soon as it was there in barebones ROF briefings. Its not a complex algorithm to add.

 

As for ending missions mid-flight- its an option, just like pausing the game, using autopilot etc. Dont like- don't use and so on

Edited October 6, 2014 by 89-

[heinkill]

 

I think We should get Heinkill, Pat Wilson and Boelcke together in a room (Among others I could name, Lowengrin, Asura, EnjoyR, The Desastersoft Team and the 1C guy who made DCG and co as well as the many skin excellent artists I've met around the internet),  give them some of the BoS budget  (or a kick starter campaign) and then the world can see what a real campaign should be like.

 

That's a virtual room right? I aint going into a physical room with those guys unless there is a boatload of iced beers, the Canterbury Bulldogs  (NSFW) cheerleaders and a wheelbarrow of jello as well.

 

H

Edited October 6, 2014 by heinkill

[Dakpilot]

Oh dear...I am not sure I will want to play any of the missions created from that get together...the Canterbury Bulldogs chearleaders seem to have started out as men!!  

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Blitzen]

Have you seen this thread?

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11209-campaign-mode-skeptics-view/

 

Thanks for posting this- worth the read!

[ParaB]

 

Sounds cool! But did you see fighters on that enemy airfield? Scrambling fighters, parked planes, anything like that? 

 

 

Can't say since I was busy dodging flak and trying to make it back home.

 

I'll make sure to check out an enemy AF when I fly the next mission.

[dave9810]

The pity of it is that I really do not think that the SP campaign needs a huge amount of "chrome" to give those of us who want more of a human story enough to get our imaginations going. At a minimum I would need to feel that I was:

 

1) In a specific unit. Note that it is not essential that this was a unit present at the real BoS, after all we a re-imagining an alternative history here. Similarly it does not matter if the unit was or was not at a specific base, since that is also purely contingent.

 

2) In a plane with markings appropriate for that unit, had it been in the battle.

 

3) A person with a name and rank. I really do not need a biography, I can imagine those details for myself.

 

4) The other AI pilots in my squadron also have names and ranks

 

5) Victories, deaths etc are recorded and used as the base for awards.

 

How hard can this be? RoF did it just fine, and BoS could have a much simpler approach since the timescale and location are so limited, so no need for example, for changes in plane type, airfield transfers. The argument that this all takes enormous resources etc seems unbelievable, it is just a little book-keeping.

 

Once you have this in place you can invest time in a specific pilot and DiD starts to mean something.

 

Remember the main point about Groundhog Day? The experience was so dispiriting that the protagonist kept committing suicide over and over again.

 

Agreed, i would love to see the RoF style campaign in BoS. It just adds a huge amount of immersion for me.

[=SqSq=Sulaco]

The Campaign... I have to say, what campaign?

As people have already alluded to, we are simply flying a disconnected series of 'single missions' with no real immersion factor.

 

1. If I'm on 'campaign' I should be with a particular aviation regiment that is doing it's best to defeat the enemy in its given role.

2. I should be receiving orders each day that make me feel that if I'm successful I have had an impact on the enemy.

3. I should also be worrying about my 'young pilots'. Did they all make it back ok? If they were wounded will they be back flying soon? Do I feel sad if I have lost a promising pilot who was my wingman?

4.What about the state of my aircraft? Am I flying an 'old crate' that is prone to mechanical problems, and are we soon to be replacing our old heaps for more up to date aircraft?

5. What do I know about the state of the enemy and in particular of the enemy aviation units that I'm facing? Are they an elite formation of flyers or just a decimated and weakened force. Are there aces within their formation that are a real danger to my flight if encountered?

 

I could go on and on. These are just some of the things I should be feeling if I'm to fully enjoy my combat tour, but instead we have a very sterile environment that I am simply following in a 'rinse and repeat' cycle.

I do understand that the campaign (such as it is) is a beta version and may be different to the finished article, so there is a ray of hope yet

Any flight sim game developer that can give me some of the above mentioned points will certainly get my money for the foreseeable future.

+1

[89-]

Can't say since I was busy dodging flak and trying to make it back home.

 

I'll make sure to check out an enemy AF when I fly the next mission.

Thanks!

It ticked me off no end that every single airfield in ROF was completely and utterly dead, so I wonder if BOS made progress there.

[LLv24_Zami]

 

Sounds cool! But did you see fighters on that enemy airfield? Scrambling fighters, parked planes, anything like that?  

 

I havent seen any planes on enemy airfields except static ones. AA is present usually but no scrambling planes or anything like that. Planes just appear into air if you see any on mission.