Jump to content

Constructive approach to handle unliked features, and call for new ones. [aka unlocks/campaign]


Recommended Posts

Since many of the channels turned into childish flamewars with people pushing themselves into senseless hatedripping spirals of nonsens by repeating the same stuff over and over again and totaly loosing their manners and/ or forgetting their original aim:  supply the devs with constructive feedback to improve the game , i thought there is an urgent need to create this channel. 

 

Iam very disapointed how this great community turned into an impatient mannerless throng of people. Everybody calm down, there some lonly pilots who wrote down very well what the problems are, but all the good opinions and approaches are lost in a endless shitstorm.  

 

This in mind i invite everyone to write down: what in HIS opionion need to be done to fix actual deficiency or what he likes about the feature . There is NO need for 10000 comments about the unlock system, autopilotrestriction and time accelerationlimits.  Why not do a survey or just a list of pro /con ?  

 

Without any doubt, communication in a respectfull and constructive way leads to a greater benefit for all than bloody shitstorms that no one likes to read. 

 

 

 

 

Here we go:

 

0. Immprove your communication:

After all this negative feedback, why not tell the people that you will sit together and talk about what we said and comeback soon with an decision or compromise. Would stop many people keep on flaming if you would know you are realy aware of what many people said. You need us. 

 

1. Unlocksystem:

For the singleplayer a nice and modern way to go, and i realy like achievements and stuff. NO way for the multiplayer as many people said. -> Solution: seperate SP from MP, how your SP system work is your decision but what we are playing should be ours. 

 

2. Campaign:

It has a very solid system underlying. The ability to create missions serverside within special parameters is the basic for dynamic campaigns and easy implementation of new content. In the actual scale it is to less -> Solution: add more types of mission, and more custom choices to decide about.  More difficulty to choose (more planes/enemys etc.). No one should forget that a system that creates serverside missions is much more expensive that a easy 20/30 mission campaign. (depending on how hist. correct of course)

 

3. Gap of immersion in the Campaign:

Maybe add a narrative campaign later via dlc, as we know you decided against a story until now for the -advantage- of a complex randomised serverside missionbuilder.  Since you got all tools to develop missions very easy out of the blue, and a well written narrative historic campaign with 20-30 missions is not expansive (narrators cost somewhat about 1500€ to write 20 pages, less if they just retell a story that realy happend so you just need to drop down the required targets and winconditions and paint some routes and here we go)

 

 

DON´T forget. The game itself is the SAME loved sim everyone praised the last weeks and with an easy seperation of MP and SP and some communication most people would be happy again. Many of you out there wrote so many nice thinks in the past to thank the devs for their work but suddenly forgot everything that was achieved until yet.

 

I hope for some opinions how to use the given and (maybe)change it to something that will pleasure all.

  • Upvote 20
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. When AI calls out enemy, have them alert us to elevations of the enemy in addition to distance and direction

 

2. For intercept missions give us elevation (even if rough) example: Intercept 3x HE-111's between 3000-4000

 

3. Allow us to edit our load outs after briefing, as it stands we can create a loadout for a ground attack but don't know what we're attacking until we're locked into a kit.

 

4. It would be nice to be surprised once in a while with a scramble mission. Maybe post-mission briefing we could be hit with a red pop-up that says SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE. If we accept the Scramble mission we could be locked into flying a fighter with a fixed loadout and low fuel and sent up to immediately head off the threat.

  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. When AI calls out enemy, have them alert us to elevations of the enemy in addition to distance and direction

 

2. For intercept missions give us elevation (even if rough) example: Intercept 3x HE-111's between 3000-4000

 

3. Allow us to edit our load outs after briefing, as it stands we can create a loadout for a ground attack but don't know what we're attacking until we're locked into a kit.

 

4. It would be nice to be surprised once in a while with a scramble mission. Maybe post-mission briefing we could be hit with a red pop-up that says SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE. If we accept the Scramble mission we could be locked into flying a fighter with a fixed loadout and low fuel and sent up to immediately head off the threat.

These are all good suggestions, especially number 3. I think in all scenarios you should be able to choose your loadout after you know what your mission is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A number of small incremental improvements I would appreciate in the last 10%:

 

- Give us a specific control key for the chat box so that we can fly without HUD yet still see the radio messages (for non-Russian, non-German speakers).

 

- Give us a finger-four or line abreast formation - scrap the echelon if the possible number is limited. These are historically better for the period.

 

- Stop the AI wingmen from breaking away to attack as soon as they see enemies (unless the enemies are very close).

 

- Add altitude bands to the mission briefings for intercept missions at least.

 

- Stop the AI from turning landing lights on during its landing approach.

 

- Allow some points for successful take-off and landing even if mission objective failed.

 

- Allow a safe landing to close out a successful mission without having to fly to the exit point.

 

- Fix bug (or just make criteria clearer) for when landing successfully will trigger the mission success event.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- When flying ground attack missions it would be nice to see enemy intercepter starting from the airfield which will then get bound by "our" escort  or shot by us before takeoff.  

 

- the new aimsupport should be an option in the menu not something we need to deactivate always. As well as all other supportsystems in the normal mode could be permant disabled. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

- Fix the sound hit bug

- Fix the hit bug that causes rounds to explode behind a plane (when they count as hits)

 

Both these bugs appear to be due to there being a "lag" of sorts in between when a round hits and when effects both visual and sound based trigger.

Edited by Afwastus
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the amount of time and effort that's gone in the SP campaign, they're not going to just remove unlocks. I wouldn't mind if they did, but they won't.
I just think that unlocks should be for multiplayer and singleplayer, so as not to alienate and fracture squadrons and the MP community.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you guys talking about is improved Rof career and this is not going to happen. They dont have enough resorces and if they have.... This is how they feel is the right, modern, immersive experience.

Nonsense. Most of the suggestions are small incremental changes within the context of the given SP mode. You may not like what they are doing but please do not use that as an excuse to derail the OP's thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything In the game for me is a solid foundation. The campaign has alot of potential and the graphics and FMs are wonderful. My constructive criticism however is as follows:

 

1. There needs to be some sort of narrative drive to the campaign I.E pilot names, squadrons, historical accuracy. This is all possible with the current campaign as a base however it may take some time.

 

2. The unlock feature bothers me for the following reasons.

I dont mind the unlocks in the campaign as it drives you to take off again. But it has no place in MP or QMB

MP is restricted by the system and many people who play multiplayer have no interest in the single player at all. So will never unlock the rewards based on the current system.

QMB is effectively a testing ground. Pilots can set up a virtual scenario or repeatedly drill themselves in tactics or use of certain weaponry or loadouts. This is impossible currently with the system of unlocks we have in place at the moment. (Even Call of Duty has a training mode where all weapons, skins and perks are unlocked so the player can practice against bots or in a private lobby with friends.)

 

3. The current decision to have such a unlock feature does not take in to account the time restrictions of a large portion of the player base. Many members of the community simply do not have the time want or desire to "Grind" through an unlock system in order to get the unlocks or skins they wish to use. Most importantly the above is applied to a game mode that many (Not All) have no interest in playing

 

Apart from these three points the game is solid and a good foundation to be built upon.

Edited by SYN_Adamfp3
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I for my part really do like the campaign in different chapters that provide some historical background (the video clips are a bit propaganda-hollywood-style narrative what I do not like so much but I can live with it I guess).

 

I personally would alter the unlock system in following manner:

 

- no need to unlock things that are simple field mods (like head rest removal or new windscreen)

 

- offer some items that are real enhancements and no field mods after having completed X missions as a sort of "new delivery from factory to the squadron"

 

- if necessary allow new paintings on airplane if a certain number of kills / ground kills have been achieved.

 

- delete this siklly xp gathering and leveling up. 

 

- Standard and advanced loadout should be available for bombers anyway. Maybe some special heavy bombs has to be "unlocked".

 

- If you really insist on maintaining the unlock system: Have a separate unlock system for SP and MP so that MP only players can unlock their stuff without having to spend hours in SP.

 

A must have is ability to have user-made skins in SP and MP. It's a HUGE disappointment if we cannot have that. So I am not sure how far unlocking skins through certain achievements is in the right direction.

Edited by sturmkraehe
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong:

 

1.) the unlock system has been in planning from the start. Details of it sorted out on the way to 100%.

2.) a general development route had to be set out from the start, else everything would've gone down shambles.

3.) Early access user comments/suggestions could, regarding the aforementioned points, only be taken as limited measures. 

 

Thus, we, the backers, are only eligible to comments or changes on a small "tactical" scale. We cannot change the whole strategy,

in which 1c/777 develops the game.

 

As such, the community can give hints and ask for means to change or ease the approach to our common goal, the release,

but it can never alter the strategy of the "high command".

 

Whether this strategy might seem questionable or logical, is one's personal opinion.

But be reminded, it's not the community's task to change. We only change the feel of it, not the overall concept.

 

The concept is and stays put. Like it or not.

The dev team is working under immense stress right now, IMO, for as the XMas sales season nears quickly.

 

As such, our debating about what to change in future patches is a nice thing to begin with, but can be only seen as

"nice-to-have" for a certain time to come.

 

I'm not resenting this "friendly discussion" idea, quite the opposite! After reading and partaking in the last "forum battle" about

the unlocks, I highly regard this as a good and useful idea.

 

I hope this will be picked up and stickied in near future! :salute:

Edited by SK_Bearkiller72
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As such, the community can give hints and ask for means to change or ease the approach to our common goal, the release,

but it can never alter the strategy of the "high command".

 

I'd offer, that such a mentality has historically been the cause of quite a large number of infamous losses. Relative to this setting, Stalingrad, I'd say it ended pretty badly for the Germans when they weren't allowed to go against what HQ said.  ;)

 

Concerning this topic, I think that so long as any critique is well thought out and calmly stated, it makes sense that people should express what they don't like about the game even if it is something that's seen by the developers as a fundamental aspect of their strategy.  :salute:

Edited by Afwastus
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As such, @Afwastus , you are absolutely right. But neither we, nor some 6th Army Gefreiter could have changed the overall strategy of the battle.

The course is set. The plan has been made, the banks have been assured, the team is on it's (over hours) way into the christmas season.

 

We as "founders", "backers" - "TITLES" can only do cosmetics: tell what we like and what not.

 

The alternative is mutiny. You, as a descendant of a proud and seafaring race might like the idea of throwing the captain overboard,

but stemming from a landwarriors breed, I'd like to plan a little ahead, wait for the crops to come in.

 

And if they're not, rest 110% assured, you and me will be Brothers in Arms. ;)

Edited by SK_Bearkiller72
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still trying to figure out what exactly the devs are trying to achieve by restricting MP options by SP progression. And I can't come to a reasonable conclusion. I do not subscribe to the philosophy that it's here to torture us online players though it sometimes looks like. Does it serve a pupose outside our entertainment? Is it somehow related to their business model? And how? It's more than clear the reason is not what has been announced by Zak. The campaign doesn't teach new players to land the aircraft. It's not a tutorial by any means. It's basically an obstacle to gameplay preffered by MP folks... OK but why?

 

My suggestion is simple: MP content and availability of planes, mods, loadouts shall be a subject of decesion of mission builders. Linking it to SP is a design flaw.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As such, @Afwastus , you are absolutely right. But neither we, nor some 6th Army Gefreiter could have changed the overall strategy of the battle.

The course is set. The plan has been made, the banks have been assured, the team is on it's (over hours) way into the christmas season.

 

We as "founders", "backers" - "TITLES" can only do cosmetics: tell what we like and what not.

 

The alternative is mutiny. You, as a descendant of a proud and seafaring race might like the idea of throwing the captain overboard,

but stemming from a landwarriors breed, I'd like to plan a little ahead, wait for the crops to come in.

 

And if they're not, rest 110% assured, you and me will be Brothers in Arms. ;)

S!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you guys are right. Nothing we did not know, nothing that stops me playing and loving the game. The incentiv was just about dealing with the problem that most people had/have in a better way ;). Iam the dumb goat eating what it gets and sometime meeehh about the greener gras beyond the fence. Never forget, wishes and dreams can be the foundation of our own future. :) 

 

 

Campaign: 

 

The information that are written in yellow when reaching waypint /action point could be given via radio. Like " We reached the frontline" "Roger, procced with your mission and destroy xyz"    "Okay return to base and get your ass out of this hell"  

 

Would realy improve the immersion. Better then this odd yellow ;)

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's go back to suggestions?

- Scramble mission for ground attack units - Short ranged ground attack missions to stop enemy tank / mechanised group that broke through the lines and is closing to players own airfield / rampaging on nearby friendly airfield. Did happen to Germans in late stages of Stalingrad war, possibly to Soviets in early stages.

- Instead of removing faster time acceleration from campaign completely, use feature you already have in RoF photo recon missions that disables time acceleration in proximity of target. With this mechanism, stop time acceleration from working within, say, 15 kms of action area and maybe players airfield. This way acceleration will be possible, but only when cruising far away from points of interest.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

ive been out of the loop for awhile and one of the squad mates said i should check out the campaign.

 

i agree with the OP on his points.

 

for me

the unlock system is tolerable in single player,but as a squad,we wouldnt be interested in it.

the historical atmosphere in the UI and briefings is.....well..........,i dont know what it is,but,it aint 1942.

i dont get what happened,last time i checked on the progress of the game design i was confident it would fill the expectations of the likes of us.

someone also mentioned that you have to unlock stuff to fly in MP with a desired equipment or plane,i said to myself,they were joking.who the hell would do that?

 

now im wavering a tad,and,feel happier with my decision not to jump straight into the fray as a founder as i did with the previous dissapointment.

i know its early days for the campaign,but,i fear this is the model we are going to get regardless?

 

AG51 and III/JG11(aswell as others) fought many an online campaign against each other for 2 or more years on a regular basis.

we were(JG11) hoping for more of the same type of online campaign action to be accessable in this title.it appears it may not be the case?

 

i would like someone who knows abit more about the online campaign options to comment or clarify.but from what ive seen so far in the current build,leaves me underwhelmed.

of course i will still buy the product to support the flight sim industry,im just not sure if it will cut the fighter pilot mustard.

 

please convince me otherwise

 

Regards

III/JG11_Simmox

 

clearly i was looking for a improved version of the older title we all know

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a number of plans I have read about, this is one of them

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/10235-boswar-open-test/?hl=%2Bboswar&do=findComment&comment=157859

 

"Effectively we have a map surface in 3D with textures including trees. After that every object like a house, piece of fence, signpost is an object. Some objects are composite to aid fast mission building like a section of village. You can also group objects together for convenience in moving and copying. Most of these objects have damage models (perhaps all, I've not checked).

 

Every object can be left to be neutral or you can 'enable' it by affecting to to a country, in which case it becomes a stats worthy target.

 

After that you have complex objects capable of interacting with players like planes, vehicles, trains, boats, baloons.

 

Then you have effects and triggers. To give you an idea of the power we are dealing with I can light a fire in the fireplace in a house and make smoke come out of the chimney when and if a friendly plane flies within 3000 metres of the house.

 

I have used the old IL2 FMB for around 10 years and this ROF/BOS mission editor is factorial 2 more powerful. A mission file often contains thousands of manipulable objects not hundreds. However that means you need skillful mission building otherwise you can build an unflyable mission (exactly as happened often using 1946).

 

Here I have been talking about the base technology we are using, but the key behind BOSWAR is that we automate the sequential mission building of a campaign so that you are manipulating groups of objects as simple counters on the map, dragging around a few waypoints then BOSWAR generates an optimised mission with all of the triggers timers and links set up for you."

 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/6470-boswar-testing-tonight-2100-cet/?hl=%2Bboswar&do=findComment&comment=126482

 

And talk of this tool for creating dynamic MP missions coming to BoS

 

http://riseofflight.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=347&t=44102

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

 

Edited by Dakpilot
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another campaign daydream. At the moment map is divided between action area and  fly-over "not-action" rest of the map, to be cruised through as fast as possible (so much that many players would prefer to use time acceleration to skip it) . To bring more life to "rest of the map", increase immersion and reduce predictability, we could have

Change of orders: Rare variant of interception or ground attack mission. After passing exit point and before reaching action point, player receives orders to ignore old target and attack new more important one, close to player's current location (airborne or vehicles, depending on mission type). New target spawns nearby and player is vectored to it, as if player was already on action point. This could be done by spawning action point at players location or (if they are not movable) placing hidden action point at players predicted route, waiting to be triggered. When done, player proceeds to old exit point. 

 

Edited by Trupobaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure this has already been mentioned but what is wrong with having a plain old patrol mission, when you do not know whether the enemy activity will be a fighter sweep, a lone recce plane, massed bomber attack etc? Or all - or none?

 

Given the way the choice of missions is presented, anyone who does not want the uncertainty can simply avoid this.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

2. The unlock feature bothers me for the following reasons. I dont mind the unlocks in the campaign as it drives you to take off again. But it has no place in MP or QMB MP is restricted by the system and many people who play multiplayer have no interest in the single player at all. So will never unlock the rewards based on the current system. QMB is effectively a testing ground. Pilots can set up a virtual scenario or repeatedly drill themselves in tactics or use of certain weaponry or loadouts. This is impossible currently with the system of unlocks we have in place at the moment. (Even Call of Duty has a training mode where all weapons, skins and perks are unlocked so the player can practice against bots or in a private lobby with friends.)
 

 

This

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, this is democracy in full force! ;)

I love SP and COOP missions and I am happy for the moment with the campaign and QMB. :mellow:

 

More details in the after combat reports could also help in the immersion impresion of the game. Type of aircraft destroyed, homologation of victory or not! :sleep:

 

And maybe for the MP some COOP missions. :rolleyes:

 

Last but not least a FMB so everyone could try to create some missions for MP or SP or MP COOP ! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
VYou need us.
1. Unlocksystem: For the singleplayer a nice and modern way to go, and i realy like achievements and stuff. NO way for the multiplayer as many people said. -> Solution: seperate SP from MP, how your SP system work is your decision but what we are playing should be ours.

 

Fully agree with this and most of what OP said, be good to see one of those on the team who believes unlocks have a place in MP explain to us why they think that.

Edited by BFsSmurfy
Link to post
Share on other sites

You will get no explanation now. But I can give you a rather simple theory:

1) You buy the plane for say $10 and purchase each unlock, buying only what you want. Or pay bargain price of say $20 for plane with all unlocks.

2) You buy plane for $20 and you need to complete 20 hours of grind to unlock all the unlocks or you can purchase 2x, 4x or 10x skill boost per mission to unlock the unlocks you want in less time for either in game currency or the mighty dollar.

But I am just guessing and I doubt the pay model will be with us on release but very soon afterwards with a "We need the funds to produce the planes, ground targets and new maps..."

It is the only conceivable reason why they are sticking to a system so unliked.

Frankly I do not care, I just wish they would just be honest, say why and get it over with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...