Campaign a few thoughts

[Potenz]

After 20+ mission on the campaign i can say that it is a good system with great potential

as the devs keeps working and adding content every day with every update, it is an enjoyable

offline experience.

 

there's a few points also where i find it weak and i'm sure that could be improved by the team.

 

1_ Briefings, are quite empty, need a bit more info on the mission, and not just what every waypoint does.

2_ flight pàth, it needs more free will, the only mandatory waypoint or zone should be the action zone (this is for expert mode) 

and not be mandatory the exit point.

3_ mission success/failed, here is the thing that i don't like, not even a bit, the mission should be just that, if you encounter the

targets whatever it is you get the exp points for destroying it, but the success/fail thing to advance in the campaign is just a killer

for this offline mode, mostly in expert mode where you need to use your eyes to navigate and find the enemy.

4_ ranks/promotions/medals, i'm sure that this will be added in time, but i have to point out the absence of it.

5_ historical squadrons deployment, this is a feature that most of the people that plays for the historical facts if the sim or roll 

playing would love to see.

6_ opportunity targets, would be great to see trains, trucks, recon/transport planes when returning or going to target area.

 

 

i think this is all by now, the overall of the campaign is very very good, the point number 3 is the most important to change IMHO.

 

Potz

[Pizzicato]

Good post.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Pizzicato

[jaydee]

After 20+ mission on the campaign i can say that it is a good system with great potential

as the devs keeps working and adding content every day with every update, it is an enjoyable

offline experience.

 

there's a few points also where i find it weak and i'm sure that could be improved by the team.

 

1_ Briefings, are quite empty, need a bit more info on the mission, and not just what every waypoint does.

2_ flight pàth, it needs more free will, the only mandatory waypoint or zone should be the action zone (this is for expert mode) 

and not be mandatory the exit point.

3_ mission success/failed, here is the thing that i don't like, not even a bit, the mission should be just that, if you encounter the

targets whatever it is you get the exp points for destroying it, but the success/fail thing to advance in the campaign is just a killer

for this offline mode, mostly in expert mode where you need to use your eyes to navigate and find the enemy.

4_ ranks/promotions/medals, i'm sure that this will be added in time, but i have to point out the absence of it.

5_ historical squadrons deployment, this is a feature that most of the people that plays for the historical facts if the sim or roll 

playing would love to see.

6_ opportunity targets, would be great to see trains, trucks, recon/transport planes when returning or going to target area.

 

 

i think this is all by now, the overall of the campaign is very very good, the point number 3 is the most important to change IMHO.

 

Potz

Hi Potz . Good points.

After Todays update I flew a Campaign Mission. Halfway to the Action Point,flying at 4000m I saw tracers off too my right and below @2000m.I swung round and saw 3 planes fighting it out. I was too high to identify them.By the time I went down I saw a 109 and a LA belching smoke. The 109 crashed. Then I saw the La trailing smoke.In chat I got "Target Destroyed" twice.

So I went back to my Flightplan to the Action Point. I thought,maybe,I missed the Bombers I was Intercepting.

On reaching the Action Point,I got the message "Bombers South-East". I nearly fried my engine climbing again. I got one.

I was looking over my shoulder all the way home.

This has never happened to me in Campaign before.

It changed the whole Immersion factor for me.

Maybe somethings  changed the Devs haven't told us about ?

~S~

[Reflected]

#6 is already in place, but otherwise I agree!

 

Here are the suggestions I just posted in another thread:

 

 

-          More variety of missions. Right now it’s escort/ intercept (always the same planes, same routine) or ground attack. How about adding Airfield attacks / scramble/ Fighter sweep, etc…

-          More variety within current missions. Escort is always escorting Heinkels, and I always meet 3-4 Peshkas plus a few Lagg-s on intercept missions. What about attacking Il-s at low level? Or escorting Stukas that attack tanks?  More randomness in numbers would also be welcome.

-          Give us back the possibility to use time acceleration please. Seriously, who flies full missions at only 2x? I don’t see any point, only disadvantages.

-          Give us the possibility to proceed with the mission if we survive. As soon as your plane is shot up you might as well hit esc, no need to bail out or crash land. But why not? As long as we’re alive on our side of the line, it should be OK.

-          Give us the possibility to fly in different positions of the formation.

[LLv24_Zami]

Good suggestions! I agree

[Dakpilot]

Change "Action point" to "Target area" and a lot more people would be happy

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

I think the stats are broken.

 

awards?

 

 

hours I have over 65 hours and the game show 1

 

Edited October 16, 2014 by 71st_Mastiff

[I/JG27_Rollo]

Good suggestions!

 

 

6_ opportunity targets, would be great to see trains, trucks, recon/transport planes when returning or going to target area.

Those are actually already there to some degree.

In my mission from yesterday (escorting Heinkels) I've been able to find and engage some MG emplacements and a column of BA-64.

When watching the replay I was surprised, how many aircraft I missed. Aside from the Yaks that were attacking the bombers, there were also some Pe-2s and some IL-2s in the area which I never saw.

Edited October 16, 2014 by I/JG27_Rollo

[FlatSpinMan]

Mastiff - the last update zeroed all pilot hours. I forget the reason, but it was mentioned in one of the mini-updates.

[pilotpierre]

Mastiff - the last update zeroed all pilot hours. I forget the reason, but it was mentioned in one of the mini-updates.

They are not updating though.

[Elanus]

 

 

They are not updating though.

 

Same by me.

[FG28Kodiak]

Same by me, too.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

VVS campaign done and all planes there unlocked. Took a while, please NO MORE unlocks!

[Boxin]

They are not updating though.

Same problem.

 

I also encountered a problem where I had finished the mission and flew home, landed, and the only option I had was to "Cancel Mission", though it indicated in the green square the mission was complete.

The only way I could end the mission to salvage some progress was to eject, therefore only giving me 50%XP 

This happened twice.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Boxin

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Seen this as well, even today. Bombs missed so strafed the planes designated as target. TASK COMPLETED on screen and at exit point = Cancel mission?! Great.

Edited October 16, 2014 by LLv34_Flanker

[FlatSpinMan]

Right. Sounds like bug report time then.

[Potenz]

Same problem.

 

I also encountered a problem where I had finished the mission and flew home, landed, and the only option I had was to "Cancel Mission", though it indicated in the green square the mission was complete.

The only way I could end the mission to salvage some progress was to eject, therefore only giving me 50%XP 

This happened twice.

 

 

S!

 

 Seen this as well, even today. Bombs missed so strafed the planes designated as target. TASK COMPLETED on screen and at exit point = Cancel mission?! Great.

that's exactly what i mean with the success/failed missions, the mission can be successful or not, but that doesn't has to conditionate

your progress on the campaign, just the amount of exp you earn.

[Feathered_IV]

Change "Action point" to "Target area" and a lot more people would be happy

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

I extracted the briefing files and have been looking at correcting grammar and innapropriate labels like that.  Hopefully I can show the devs and pass it on.

[unreasonable]

that's exactly what i mean with the success/failed missions, the mission can be successful or not, but that doesn't has to conditionate

your progress on the campaign, just the amount of exp you earn.

 

There is no campaign other than the xp.

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

Hi Potz . Good points.

After Todays update I flew a Campaign Mission. Halfway to the Action Point,flying at 4000m I saw tracers off too my right and below @2000m.I swung round and saw 3 planes fighting it out. I was too high to identify them.By the time I went down I saw a 109 and a LA belching smoke. The 109 crashed. Then I saw the La trailing smoke.In chat I got "Target Destroyed" twice.

So I went back to my Flightplan to the Action Point. I thought,maybe,I missed the Bombers I was Intercepting.

On reaching the Action Point,I got the message "Bombers South-East". I nearly fried my engine climbing again. I got one.

I was looking over my shoulder all the way home.

This has never happened to me in Campaign before.

It changed the whole Immersion factor for me.

Maybe somethings  changed the Devs haven't told us about ?

~S~

 

Jaycee I ignore the side gumballs till I'm done with the main mission requirements because those bombers like to fly high. They do eventually come down but I too have redwalled my aircraft chasing them. This also why on bomber intercepts I follow the flight plan to gain as much altitude as I can.

 

Someone mentioned the the side action, air and ground, have increased. I'm not sure but they are there indeed.

 

Chief

[IIN8II]

2_ flight pàth, it needs more free will, the only mandatory waypoint or zone should be the action zone (this is for expert mode) 

and not be mandatory the exit point.

From what I understand I believe that this is already the case.

You can skip the exit waypoint as long as you land at your home base and still get full mission credit.

flew a mission with the yak skipping the exit point and heading straight for the home base. I still received full credit.

[Potenz]

nope exit point is mandatory on some missions in order to get a mission acomplished and keep on going

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

nope exit point is mandatory on some missions in order to get a mission acomplished and keep on going

now thats a bug, I know what you mean, this has happened to me from time to time.

[Potenz]

now thats a bug, I know what you mean, this has happened to me from time to time.

bug or not IMHO is something that's not needed i like more the old Il2 or RoF style, where you can plan your own flight path with no restriction

even on the airfield you land just has to be an allied one.

[keeno]

Hi all,

 

I'm really enjoying the campaign also, playing expert and full mission, I'm not finding it as easy as some have posted.

 

I had a great mission today flying a Ju87, bombed a target and set off merrily on my way home hardly paying any atention to what was going on and suddenly tracer fire from the ground was flying past the canopy, I nearly feel off my chair when i heard a few loud metallic thuds as my plane was hit and my wing began to look like swiss cheese. A quick check from the rear gunner position and my plane was streaming black smoke, I'd bee hit in the engine too. I managed to nurse the plane back to crash land close to base.  

 

Its touches like this when you think you've made it and you're home free and the game springs a nasty surprise on you .

 

Great!

[Potenz]

yeah that's the nice things on missions, it remains me the old il2 campaign

[unreasonable]

I like the missions, I think they are fun to fly, and they will get better since it is easy for 1CGS to add new types, increase variety of targets etc. The exit point business is annoying, but it only matters for xp. Once you have unlocked everything and are simply flying for fun, this will no longer matter.

 

The problem with the SP is that there are no consequences, no linkage between missions. Bad design.

[Reflected]

Another annoying point: Mission routes are always longer than needed, because whatever base you choose, the target area is on the other side of the front line. Say, you select airfield "A", then you have to fly 80km to a target area that's near airfield "B", and vice versa.

[andyw248]

Maybe somethings  changed the Devs haven't told us about ?

 

I had a similar experience in a campaign mission the other day. It was an escort mission. Somehow I had lost the bombers that I was supposed to protect. All of a sudden I notice three bombers eastbound. I closed in, they were Heinkels, so I opened fire and damaged one of them.

 

Now, was this good or bad? I had left the bombers that I should have protected, just to get a kill. But anyway, it was a nice surprise; the campaign missions are not as scripted as one might think

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 You can easily game the missions. Enemy flights spawn near of above target area. Engage them and draw away from your escorted bombers until they reach their exit point. After that they can all be shot down for that matter, but still a success. Go on a killing bonanza after bombers are out of the way. All the action is conveniently along the main route you fly, go any further and there is nothing. The campaign creates a decent illusion of action, but far from being a struggle with hundreds of thousand os men and all the equipment strung in a fierce battle. Smoke screen..

[Dakpilot]

S!

 

 The campaign creates a decent illusion of action, but far from being a struggle with hundreds of thousand os men and all the equipment strung in a fierce battle. Smoke screen..

 

That is what we are stuck with, with todays (and tomorrows) tech, other game engines are able to have more aircraft and objects...but at what expense..no weather no trees and no AI/FM?

Take your choice, but for me a believable realistic environment is more important than a slightly bigger scale of battle 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Falcon 4.0 creates a far more better illusion of a raging battle when you fly over the Korean peninsula in the campaign. It does not need to include actual units, just effects in that area, pretty much how Falcon 4.0 does it. There is a "bubble" where units are included, but outside everything is calculated only. But the effects are there.  BoS has them as the somewhat strange artillery strikes shooting in general area of the city, like there were no artillery spotters at all and now and then some MG fire or flares popping up out of nowhere. Immaculately clean snow everywhere. Blaming the tech is somewhat pointless, if Falcon 4.0 from 1998 can do it what stops more modern games from doing it? Just asking..

[BraveSirRobin]

 if Falcon 4.0 from 1998 can do it what stops more modern games from doing it? Just asking..

 

The fact that the campaign bankrupted the Falcon 4.0 development company is probably a factor.

[SCG_Neun]

That is what we are stuck with, with todays (and tomorrows) tech, other game engines are able to have more aircraft and objects...but at what expense..no weather no trees and no AI/FM?

Take your choice, but for me a believable realistic environment is more important than a slightly bigger scale of battle 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

For me as well.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Has nothing to do with the fact that the guy who made the campaing could squeeze into the CPU cycles at that time..and we did not have Haswell-E's or similar Why make something new when it is cheaper to just use a smoke screen or an illusion 

Edited October 17, 2014 by LLv34_Flanker

[Dakpilot]

S!

 

 Falcon 4.0 creates a far more better illusion of a raging battle when you fly over the Korean peninsula in the campaign. It does not need to include actual units, just effects in that area

 

Okay misunderstood you, that is mission building..if it is possible in BoS to have smoke come out of a chimney when an aircraft is 3km away using triggers then there is no reason that missions cannot be built in BoS with that level of immersion. Just need the time and will to produce them

Again many of the Mission builders from IL-2 1946 did an amazing job of creating "Battle atmosphere"

With the advanced triggers available in BoS we can hope for better things in the future when the "core game" is finished.

I guess it is a bit of a chicken and egg issue...which should come first ...without good immersive missions a brilliant core/working game engine is no good, but brilliant immersive missions are of no use if the core game engine is faulty . Of course we want both but for some reason..budget...employee numbers?, it seems hard to achieve both at the same time

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 At least they could make the campaign so that within the chapters if I destroy something it also stays destroyed. Instantly fixed bridges and buildings, infinite number of AI planes and all that just breaks the immersion. No dynamic campaign, fine with that if the one delivered at least tries to give a feeling of you as a player making at least some impact rather than see the previously bombed depot spotless and intact etc.

[unreasonable]

It is the RoF engine, the SP campaign there is exactly the same in this respect.

 

In an ideal flight-sim campaign, the underlying engine would be conducting a wargame scenario from GG's War in the East or some such, with AI units called up in the 3D world as required depending on the players' position. The RoF engine cannot do that so we are where we are.

 

If you play the missions broadly within the spirit that they were intended, I think they are not too bad, but with plenty of room for improvement.

[unreasonable]

For me the way to get immersion is through the DiD on "full real" route, while making a good faith effort to achieve the mission goals.

 

Once you have invested a few hours into a pilot you start to be much more interested in survival rather than bagging that extra kill. People who go on about the AI being "baby seals" are I think missing the point because they only look at the individual missions rather than the cumulative effect of being exposed to small risks over and over again. When your 100 flying hours pilot dies because his wingman crashed into him (my last IL-2 1946 DCG campaign ) you feel a terrible sense of loss.

 

Not everyone has the time for this of course, but it is a shame that BoS as currently structured does little to support this style of play.

[J2_Trupobaw]

Unreasonable - keep your own log, reset it when pilot dies.

I agree with most of what OP said, except...

2. You can skip first waypoint entirely if you want to. Exit point... I accept it as closest safe ground from action area, not in threat of being overrun. The place I need to crawl to with dying engine before I dare to bail out or belly land, so that i can expect to be met by friendlies. Makes sense to see escorted planes to that point, too. As pointed above, if your plane is undamaged you can most often go straight for your airfield. 

3. Disagree, this isn't WW1 where your duty was to patrol front and down any enemy planes you see. The targets are not assigned randomly, planes are sent to destroy something specific or stop enemy from destroying something specific. If I am sent to support infrantry advance at specific sector but bomb flak positions on random airfield instead, or go to stop bomber raid and get escorts instead of bombers, I have failed to protect whatever I was sent to protect and hurt my own side to get some random kills. Targets of opportunity are just that.

Perhaps there should be a free hunt mission where you just go to kill whatever you meet. 
 

Edited October 17, 2014 by Trupobaw