Jump to content
IckyATLAS

Developer Diary for the Mission Editor

Recommended Posts

This is a humble request to Jason.

I would appreciate a lot that we get from time to time some news about any coming planned improvement for the ME.

The development of the game is moving quickly but I am afraid the ME lags very much behind, or this is what it seems.

 

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would gladly look forward to any improvements of the very clunky mission editor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I would highly appreciate if 1C could give this unwieldy ME a more customer-friendly user interface.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about spending a little bit of time to learn how to handle it?

You seriously underestimate this powerful ME. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You seem very confident they haven't, Hunger.

Edited by theOden
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can learn to use this games MB in few weeks or days depending how dedicated you are, there is good manuals already, but compared to il-2 1946 or il-2 clod MB using this MB is boring task and more like a job, i spend some time to learn it and then just stop using it, i dont expec any changes to this game MB, as it works and its not to complex to learn, only its not fun to use like previous versions of il-2 had.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The _________ __________ __ a ______ ____________  _______ of _______. Furthermore, _______ _________ is ____________.The _________ is _________. ____  __________ is __ ______________.

 

That's my opinion. :)

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

SYN_Vander's "Easy Mission Generator"  is a glimpse of what could be done by the team, or an ambitious coder, if applied to the entire mission builder.

No one is arguing that the MB isn't powerful, it's just that it is the realm of of folks that do IT, or coding, all the time, which enables them to unravel the intricacies of the bloody thing.  I've tried, several times, to figure it out.  The best I can do is modify to a small extent missions that I have purloined from others, and even that is a painful, time consuming drudgery.

 

What is needed is an easy to use GUI overlay with drop down choice boxes and simple "point and click" placement of objects, both static and AI.  Not the insane add object, make it live by adding several connecting command boxes with silly lines running all over the place...  It's just not user friendly in the least, and really is the greatest impediment to having a large community of mission makers pumping out content, for off and online players.

Edited by BlitzPig_EL
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

The _________ __________ __ a ______ ____________  _______ of _______. Furthermore, _______ _________ is ____________.The _________ is _________. ____  __________ is __ ______________.

 

That's my opinion. :)

 

 

Oh yea? I completely disagree. 😀

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Thad said:

 

Oh yea? I completely disagree. 😀

 

The ________ __________ is __ __ _ _____ _________ ______________; this  __ _____  ____  and ___ ________.

 

If you would take the time to read my posts, including my statement above, with a bit more care, I think you will see where I am coming from.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's add a few comments (personal and subjective opinion here) to avoid any misunderstanding 🙂 

I find the ME excellent and much more powerful that what we had with the previous IL2 series. I am using it since a long time now and am globally very satisfied on the tool concept as such. Yes it does take time to master it but that is a perfectly normal process. The manual made by Jim and others is excellent and very complete. There are also some excellent tutorials on youtube (an excellent series is in french). I was able to do my first working mission (complete from start to end)  from scratch, with tutorial and manual in less than four hours. The learning curve is excellent and you progress very quickly to a decent level. And let me say you do not need to be a coder or a programmer to be able to use the ME. You must just accept that it takes time to be a good craftsman whatever the skill.

 

There are nevertheless many elements and functionalities that are either missing or not working properly in the ME. Many elements have been mentioned over time on various threads and posts.

 

Jason does an excellent job in keeping a roadmap and giving regular updates, bug corrections, improvements on the game. What I would love is that we get a little also of this but for the ME. Now It can be that the ME used by the devs to create the future campaigns for BOBP or FC is a more complete in terms of libraries and an upgraded version in terms of functionalities than the ME that we have. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally agree with IckyATLAS. Yes, it does take some effort, thought and time to master the basics. But like Icky stated the Editior and Multiplay Server Manual  and Pranksters'  Mission Building Guide are great helps. For that matter, I learned the basics by going through Prankster's guide step by step several times. Eventually things began to make sense. I now consider myself a almost competent tank mission builder.

 

Almost anyone can learn to build missions if the desire it there, but like we have stated, it will take some time, thought and hours of effort to do so. :salute: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they could make it like arma3 Eden 3d ME it would be great, i believe it would greatly benefit to SP aswell MP providing endless community made content!

It could be wise business decision and popularity booster imo.

Current ME just don't drags me enough to learn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

SYN_Vander's "Easy Mission Generator"  is a glimpse of what could be done by the team, or an ambitious coder, if applied to the entire mission builder.

No one is arguing that the MB isn't powerful, it's just that it is the realm of of folks that do IT, or coding, all the time, which enables them to unravel the intricacies of the bloody thing.  I've tried, several times, to figure it out.  The best I can do is modify to a small extent missions that I have purloined from others, and even that is a painful, time consuming drudgery.

 

What is needed is an easy to use GUI overlay with drop down choice boxes and simple "point and click" placement of objects, both static and AI.  Not the insane add object, make it live by adding several connecting command boxes with silly lines running all over the place...  It's just not user friendly in the least, and really is the greatest impediment to having a large community of mission makers pumping out content, for off and online players.

The easy mission generator from Vander is a very good tool, but as you can read it in the name, it's easy. You can't do some complex mission with it, and tune it like you want.

 

So using more GUI like Vander does, would limited the editor, and will be more frustrating for those who take the time to learn and understand the logic of the mission editor.

Edited by Habu
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few features I would like to see added to the editor:

 

- Undo option

 

- An "Object fired flare" event in Complex Triggers for each flare color

 

- "OnPlaneFiredFlare Event" in the Selected Object Menu (one for each flare color)

 

- A "destruction tool", that allows you to click on an object to change its status to "damaged"

 

- An option to trigger events in a mission by radio commands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen to a Undo capability. :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree for the undo feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Habu said:

The easy mission generator from Vander is a very good tool, but as you can read it in the name, it's easy. You can't do some complex mission with it, and tune it like you want.

 

So using more GUI like Vander does, would limited the editor, and will be more frustrating for those who take the time to learn and understand the logic of the mission editor.

Well, that is your opinion.  The beauty of an easily accessible GUI is that it would be optional, and if you want to take days to make a mission, fine, go for it, I applaud your initiative and abilities, honestly I do.  However, I don't have the time or the patience.  Why hinder me just to prove that you can do it?  This isn't an epeen measuring contest, it's all about increasing the amount of content available, and making things easier for people.  There are LOTS of people that want to play the sim in the way they want to be able to use it, why limit their fun? 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good QMB like the one in IL2-1946 SAS Mod would render this discussion moot.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every 3-4 updates there is normally some changes, additions and fixes to the ME. It is defo not something they have forgotten about. 

 

That being said it does have a very steep learning curve that makes it hard to use if you have limited time or motivation. 

 

I would more than welcome an "intermediate mission builder".

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

I would more than welcome an "intermediate mission builder".

If you mean something more complex than the QMB and less complex / more intuititive than the ME, I'd be for it.

If your free time is limited, it's not a real option to spend long hours with the ME at the cost of flying.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

People have a tendency to believe that powerful ME means difficult interface. 

Look at cod and DCS they are extremely easy for basic building. But to do more you need to learn and spend time.  And it take a while even in these to do it properly

In this case ME was not ment to be public. 

I can imagine it is something that could be difficult to make more easy. 

But for my sake a few years back. I managed on my own without any input to make a simple mission. 

 

Edited by LuseKofte
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LuseKofte said:

People have a tendency to believe that powerful ME means difficult interface. 

Look at cod and DCS they are extremely easy for basic building. But to do more you need to learn and spend time.  And it take a while even in these to do it properly

In this case ME was not ment to be public. 

I can imagine it is something that could be difficult to make more easy. 

But for my sake a few years back. I managed on my own without any input to make a simple mission. 

 

I disagree.

 

A mission editor is link to your way of thinking. If you have the same logic as the editor, it will be fine for you.That's why for some one ME is easier than another one. For you the mission editor from Clodo and DCS is better. Not for me. For me, they are limited, and i don't like them. I didn't have the same skill as i have with Rof/BoS editor. You said it's easy to build something with these editor, not for me. For me, the Rof/Bos editor is easier.  And for the interface, i hate the clodo and dcs interface, for me it's not user friendly. 

 

But i know that some people can do some fantastic mission with these tools, but not me. So why should i ask that DCS should change their Mission editor to my logic. That's not fair. Each simulator has their own mission editor, which have their own logic. Why do you want that all editor works with the same way. Game are different, so editor can be different.

 

Why do you want that there is no changement, and should stay as you know it in other simulator. If you really want to build a mission, and when i say really want, it's other thing than word writte on a forum as many, you already done.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The problem with it isn't that it is powerful or complex.  The fact that it is complex could be a stumbling block to a portion of users but would not be insurmountable to even most of those.

 

The problem with the ME is:
It is clunky in some ways (no undo option, no option to select objects in the tree the same as on the screen, an easy/straightforward way to ungroup things, no way to reorder the tree (that I know of) are just some examples of this) and, holy crap, testing missions is such a pain as you can't have both the ME and the game open at the same time.....so much time spent opening, closing, opening, closing.....just to learn how to do something new properly.

 

There are options that are broken, or not implemented, or not implemented in a way that makes sense

The documentation is incomplete and not up to date.  The fact that most of us that have learned what we do know about how to use it comes from user based tutorials and a cobbled together user guide updated from ROF is testament to this.

If there was an up to date, comprehensive user manual was available, the "complex" part of the issue wouldn't even be so much of an issue.

Edited by BM357_TinMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much like the game, everyone is going to have different views on the ME and how easy or complex it is to use.

What is easy to learn for one may be impossible for another, and everything in between.

 

Perhaps if 1CGS did provide more  communication on the ME, such as an occasional DD for it, more folks might be tempted to have a go with it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, BM357_TinMan said:

The problem with it isn't that it is powerful or complex.  The fact that it is complex could be a stumbling block to a portion of users but would not be insurmountable to even most of those.

 

The problem with the ME is:
It is clunky in some ways (no undo option, no option to select objects in the tree the same as on the screen, an easy/straightforward way to ungroup things, no way to reorder the tree (that I know of) are just some examples of this) and, holy crap, testing missions is such a pain as you can't have both the ME and the game open at the same time.....so much time spent opening, closing, opening, closing.....just to learn how to do something new properly.

 

There are options that are broken, or not implemented, or not implemented in a way that makes sense

The documentation is incomplete and not up to date.  The fact that most of us that have learned what we do know about how to use it comes from user based tutorials and a cobbled together user guide updated from ROF is testament to this.

If there was an up to date, comprehensive user manual was available, the "complex" part of the issue wouldn't even be so much of an issue.

Have a look at JimTM's manual. It's really useful for those who really want building mission.

Having the game and the editor open at the same time is a wrong argument. You said that you lost time to close your editor and launch the game. I would like to know what you are testing, because it should take you less than 1 minutes to close and run the game. When i ran tests most of the time, it took me almost 20 minutes. So what is one minute compared to 20 minutes of test.

 

For options which are broken, which one, do a report on the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having the game and the editor open at the same time it's possible.

You must open the game first and then the ME. You will receive a notice about the consumption of resources.
With the game open you can modify a mission and reopen it in the game in a relatively short time. (You can not open a new mission without restarting the game)
Still, I agree with BM357_TinMan. The ME is very unfriendly and not intuitive at all. This is inversely proportional to their capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried the "having both open" thing several months ago and, unless something has changed, this is nothing more than a work around that mostly works.  It is NOT the way it is designed to work and doesn't always work correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I edit for years and I have never had problems. I do not know anyone who has problems but there is always a first time.
Having the 2 programs open can generate bugs on the surface of the terrain and make it impossible to edit in this way. Maybe for minor modifications at the last minute is more useful.

 

996551689_WhatsAppImage2019-03-17at11_59_55.thumb.jpeg.3e51647982ad779ba899cf031a0926c5.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Guys I’ve talked with Jason about the editor. He wants it stable as a priority.

Don't expect much else, and frankly it doesn’t  need much else. What it does need isn’t brought up by those who complain about it. Anyway don’t hold your breath for an editor DD.

 

For the most part a dedicated builder will put the time in to figure it out. Casual builders most times will not - the worthwhile content comes from a dedicated builder anyway generally speaking. 

 

DCS editor is easier - so where are the 200 campaigns that should be built by now? How many F-15 Red Flag etc campaigns do I have to choose from? Answer - too few to bother with the install.

 

BoS editor is not calculus or Algebra. The logic is very linear for the most part, like water valves or electrical circuits and not very complex once you grasp how it thinks. 

 

That at said I acknowledge the difference in brains/how we think etc. That will always factor in. That said the editor shouldn’t be too big of a leap.

 

So far I’ve only seen one guy on here (forum, not this thread) who is just too stupid to use it, and it sure as heck isn’t you Canuckster. 

Edited by Gambit21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not agree with you Gambit.
You can't measure an editor by the number of campaigns built.
I and many people like to play coop. Now I play more time coop missions than on servers.
DCS is the same, there are many people who fly coop missions.
Probably more than 200 campaigns coops. So according to your rule of measuring the ME is a failure.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, -=PHX=-Trenkos said:

I do not agree with you Gambit.
You can't measure an editor by the number of campaigns built.
 

 

Logic disconnect 

I measure the editor by the 900 - 1000 hours that I’ve spent with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

So far I’ve only seen one guy on here (forum, not this thread) who is just too stupid to use it, and it sure as heck isn’t you Canuckster. 

 

Who you calling a Canuckster, ya Pacific Northwesterner, you. :P

 

It's not a question of being stupid, it's that ____ __________ __________ is ____ ___________ for ____ ___________ _________ and _________ ____________ ____, and I think that's pretty clear.

 

Most importantly,  ___ ___ _____. And _ _________ ______, otherwise, _______ _______ if _______ _ is ____ ___________. I don't see how you could possibly disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...as yes a partial measure of the value of a simpler (less powerful editor) I sure as hell can use the number of completed, high quality campaigns...again as a partial indicator only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Logic disconnect 

I measure the editor by the 900 - 1000 hours that I’ve spent with it.

 

Ah, so you equate actual time spent learning and using the Mission Editor as validation of your contentions?

 

Well, I simply cannot and will not disagree with that. :salute:

 

 

smiley-apc.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Who you calling a Canuckster, ya Pacific Northwesterner, you. :P

 

It's not a question of being stupid, it's that ____ __________ __________ is ____ ___________ for ____ ___________ _________ and _________ ____________ ____, and I think that's pretty clear.

 

Most importantly,  ___ ___ _____. And _ _________ ______, otherwise, _______ _______ if _______ _ is ____ ___________. I don't see how you could possibly disagree.

 

I agree with ________ and ________.

Mostly.

 

Disagree with __________ and ___________ and __________.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I agree with ________ and ________.

Mostly.

 

Disagree with __________ and ___________ and __________.

 

I appreciate you taking time time to read my post, and I understand why you agreed. I think I put forward valid points. 

 

And i respect your disagreements, you are highly knowledgeable on this issue, but I stand by what I said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

DCS editor is easier - so where are the 200 campaigns that

DCS is not much easier if you want to build a campaign. In fact it is pretty complicated if you scratch the surface. Same goes for cod. Pretty much coding to do. It is just easy in the small stuff. Like old old 2 you did not get fatigue by building the missions. You get it for bugs and ai that is not working. Timing and testing. By populate your mission. 

The general idea that campaign building is easy come from those never tried it in any ME. 

The bottleneck is the incredible amount of patience, endless need for inventing new and interesting things for the user to solve and do. Not too easy and absolutely by all means not too hard. 

But you know all that. 

AI behavior is a problem in all brands I have been involved in. Mission builders do not grow on trees and they never last long

 

and the relentless ingratitude and demands

Edited by LuseKofte
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find building from scatch a huge chore with the current ME. However, Syn's co-op generator Can create a well defined mission, and I can use the ME to fine-tune things the way I like them.

 

This being said, I think there is room, at some point, for the inclusion of a similar tool that is natve to the GB suite - not to replace the more powerful ME, but to augment ME. The idea is to use the (let's call it) MELite to build the basic bones of an otherwise funtional mission. And then those who can - or want - may use the more powerful "Avanced" ME to flesh-out the mission... Or those savvy enough can simply use only the original ME from start to finish.

 

I'm not saying this should be a priority (since we already have Syn's well-done creator), but it is something to consider for future projects.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...