Career mode - is it boring for you?

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Thing is, some medals have to be earned by completing the mission requirements. What's more, there's nothing gamey or irrelevant about that - every nation out there did distinguish between successful and unsuccessful missions when it came to handing out quite a few of these awards. So, completing missions is both a metric that gives the player an incentive to complete missions, and it is entirely historical. Like I said, I could rattle off a whole ream of awards currently in the game that in reality had a "missions completed" requirement.

That's all fine Luke, but what @unreasonable wrote was more about the mission accomplished for staying over the target for a certain time, not for destroying your target.

Absolutely agreed, that destroying your assigned target should have an influence on earning medals and promotions, but not circling over the target area after you destroyed everything down there, for x minutes.

[unreasonable]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

 

Thing is, some medals have to be earned by completing the mission requirements. What's more, there's nothing gamey or irrelevant about that - every nation out there did distinguish between successful and unsuccessful missions when it came to handing out quite a few of these awards. So, completing missions is both a metric that gives the player an incentive to complete missions, and it is entirely historical. Like I said, I could rattle off a whole ream of awards currently in the game that in reality had a "missions completed" requirement.

 

And that, IMO, is what makes the award system in career mode so varied and robust. You can be the glory hound who doesn't care about his comrades and pile up the awards at their expense, or you can play it safer and earn awards by being a good teammate and completing the mission objectives. The choice is yours.

 

Indeed, but they did not project a message onto your windscreen during the sortie.  If you do not find that "gamey" we will just have to disagree.   That sort of thing should be in the debrief only, or in a radio message from the flight leader, if it is plausible that he could tell if the mission conditions had been completed.

 

I actually quite like the careers and appreciate your efforts on the details.  I think that those wanting a more story-book experience of varied missions are better off with scripted campaigns, where these sorts of "Kill Yamamoto" missions are easier to include.  If you could have the occasional hand crafted unusual mission inserted into a career, I certainly would not object: but my reading of pilot memoirs suggests that the vast majority of sorties really were riffs on a few basic chords.  As for RPG elements with nurturing wingmen etc: given their flying behaviour, I just try not to get too emotionally attached to them.  

 

My biggest complaints about the careers are not so much that they are boring, but that too much in them spoils immersion, which is not the same thing.  

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by unreasonable

[Pikestance]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Not every plane uses the exact same default skin (especially on the Soviet side). That said, the reason you don't see more skins is because they've not been created yet. The developers have said they would like to create skinpacks, so hopefully that will resolve the problem (by comparison, Rise of Flight has a prolific number of squadron-specific skins).

 

You took the wrong thing away from my comment. 

Instead of creating historical skins of specific pilots, create skins of the units portrayed in the game. Personally, I rather not wear someone else's suit though matter how nice the suit looks on me. It doesn't make any sense to have a career mode and not have the proper skins for the included units. 

 

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

What we have in game is unfortunately all that can be done at the moment. I've done my best to spruce up the briefings a bit, but there is only so much that can be done here

 

This is a strange claim considering that Pat Wilson's mod does a better job. 

 

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Every nation has different criteria for earning wound badges. For the Germans, it's your 1st, 3rd, and 5th wounds.

 

LOL, I was being facetious. The hang nail should had been a give away.  

 

Thanks for the response. 

 

[vonGraf]

19 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Another point, I remember having read, that in career ground attack missions you have to stay a certain time over the target until you are allowed to RTB.

 

Yes, that's true but it's no problem as a flight leader to order 'follow me' (6) to the group after one or two attacks and fly to the next waypoint. Couldn't see any drawbacks. The message 'mission completed' shows up some minutes later on the way back then.

[Yogiflight]

33 minutes ago, vonGraf said:

 

Yes, that's true but it's no problem as a flight leader to order 'follow me' (6) to the group after one or two attacks and fly to the next waypoint. Couldn't see any drawbacks. The message 'mission completed' shows up some minutes later on the way back then.

Ok, but that is when flying as leader, but if you start a career as newbie, you will have to stay with your flight until you and/or your flight get slaughtered by the then arriving enemy fighters.

Of course you could simply return on your own, but that can't be what career missions should be about.

[vonGraf]

36 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Ok, but that is when flying as leader, but if you start a career as newbie, you will have to stay with your flight until you and/or your flight get slaughtered by the then arriving enemy fighters.

Of course you could simply return on your own, but that can't be what career missions should be about.

 

Yo, that's of course right.

 

[Pikestance]

In my experiences in career mode, missions had a definite end. 

[Guest deleted@210880]

13 hours ago, unreasonable said:

My biggest complaints about the careers are not so much that they are boring, but that too much in them spoils immersion, which is not the same thing.

 

That is a very valid point

 

____________________________________________________________________________

(Now, not directedly specifically at the above quote)

 

I repeat that the whole thing about newbie or leader is very important for me. Career = progess = increasing stats, rank, new airbases and aircraft.  Granted, this is all there, but, if you 'can't' fly as a newbie because your leader doesn't give commands/help and you are effectively dumb yourself from no communications of your own it means a key element is missing of the career.

 

And I think I am of the opinion that the most important current requirement for change in SP is the radio command structure:clarification (or fixing) of current ones and the addition of new ones. I know VVS may not have had rad5os sometimes, but something needs to replace the understanding and agreements that pilots would have made before flight and limited signs they could give each other. 

 

I think it is soon clear to anyone who flies a SP mission what is needed for fighters, ground attackers and bombers, both as newbie rank and leader,.... particularly if you have played any of the 'old' games that seemed to understand what is needed as a baseline better.  You quickly find youreslf asking 'why are they doing that' 'where have they gone now'  or crying out 'jesus, not that one, the one on your 6', etc.

 

I hope the improvements will come, because the command structure at the moment at times feels little better than CloD's original landing permission

[PatrickAWlson]

A lot of people commenting here are conflating career mode with mission design and AI.  They are three highly related but still very different subjects.

 

AI is what the planes decide to do on their own.  The in mission experience, be it a single mission or a career mission, is greatly impacted by this, but AI issues are not career mode.  Any AI improvements are going to have impact  everywhere, from single missions to career to MP where AI planes are still used.  AI is not career mode.  It will impact the career mode experience but it is a separate topic.

 

IMHO the current AI is some of the best I have seen ... and it is still obviously lacking.  I was really down on 1C's AI for awhile because it stagnated for years.  Now i give 1C credit for a steady stream of improvements.  I doubt the AI will ever be perfect but IMHO it is much improved.  No problems calling out where it still needs some TLC but the efforts to date should also be acknowledged.

 

Mission design is a trickier.  I believe this subject has to be separated from career mode on the boundary of capability.  If something is not possible given current mission design capabilities then that is also not career mode.  Mission design could also use some TLC, especially around the capabilities of spawned objects.  

 

So what is a fair ding on career mode?

Anything that is possible with existing mission design but not provided in career missions.

Anything about the career career experience that could be made more realistic an immersive but has not.

So skins, briefings, medals, promotions, mission content and design that is possible but not used, AI pilot handling ... anything that adds or detracts from immersion that a career designer can actually accomplish - that is all fair game.

 

Not fair game is asking for something that cannot be done given the state of the game at the moment.

[Guest deleted@210880]

@PatrickAWlson

 

I'm not sure I totally get the last point about making a distinction and things being fair game. I can see how differrent elements contribute to the career and have different possibilities for change.

 

But, this thread seems to be a 'complaint' about the career being boring, to which some have made their suggestions of what is required to change this. I think it is fair to talk about things that may not already be in the current game state, unless it has been specified that comments in the thread should 'only refer to things that can be added or altered in the current game state'. If mission design limitations are hampering carreer mode being entertaining, then for me it is fair to raise something that may rely on it in a thread like this. Those who have the understanding of how missions are made will be able to interpret what various people's wants actually rely on. I woudl assume that many peopel liek me have no idea what is and isn't possible, so can't pre-filter their thoughts and comments based on this.

 

Your PWCG already tries to address so many things possible in the game in current state, generally I consider any threads outside of those in the PWCG section to be 'requests' for things to be considered/added regardless of the state/limitations of the game.

 

I suppose what I am jabbering on about is that for me* "Career" = "Single Player" and I see it solely form a users pont of view.

 

QMB is for practice. Scripted can be briefly entertaining but there's just something about scripted that doesn't click into the single player 'ideal' for me. So when someone says "career", it means "single player" to me.

 

* Yes this is very much just one personal opinion and isnt a real definition.

[unreasonable]

9 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

So what is a fair ding on career mode?

Anything that is possible with existing mission design but not provided in career missions.

Anything about the career career experience that could be made more realistic an immersive but has not.

So skins, briefings, medals, promotions, mission content and design that is possible but not used, AI pilot handling ... anything that adds or detracts from immersion that a career designer can actually accomplish - that is all fair game.

 

Not fair game is asking for something that cannot be done given the state of the game at the moment.

 

I think you are being overly technocratic - not surprising as you are a technocrat!

 

Your list is fine as a sorting tool for designers to decide where to place their valuable effort, given a flow of suggestions.  You obviously have to develop a thick skin when someone asks for, or criticizes, something when you have explained many times already that you cannot make the requested change.  It must be frustrating at times.

 

But I agree with @John_Yossarian - you cannot expect people who do not do career, campaign or mission design themselves to make these distinctions. That is 99.9% of the player base. How can they possibly know what a career designer can actually accomplish?  I have been flying this game and similar for decades, I can build simple missions, but I would not be able to make all of these distinctions accurately. 

 

The only thing I think is not fair game, is repeatedly asking for, or whining about, changes that the individual concerned has been told, either by the developer or other members of the forum with a reference to a dev's statement,  cannot or will not be made.  

[Fabioccio]

Hi, quck reply. Career is really good (like in RoF) The problem for me is the time wasted traveling long distances. Some missions have 120km to reach action. I have few free time at day to stay 45 min only to do 1 mission! Time acceleration is a joke, 8x that is like a 2,5x .

S!

[unreasonable]

1 hour ago, Fabioccio said:

Hi, quck reply. Career is really good (like in RoF) The problem for me is the time wasted traveling long distances. Some missions have 120km to reach action. I have few free time at day to stay 45 min only to do 1 mission! Time acceleration is a joke, 8x that is like a 2,5x .

S!

 

This is because even with time acceleration turned on, the PC still has to make all the same calculations for all of the objects in the mission, each of which have their own AI beavering away.

In a very simple self made mission with few objects you can get up to 8X  The career missions have many objects, so there will be a cap on time acceleration. 

 

Options to reduce time per mission:  see if reducing the activity level on the front to "sparse" (I think it is called) improves acceleration.  Make sure you pick a squadron that is very close to the front to reduce transit times. I think there is an air start option as well (?) which will cut down the time you need per mission.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

[UFA_Bagel]

On 5/4/2020 at 2:18 PM, Feathered_IV said:

Even during the airbridge phase, I have never once seen an all important Ju-52. 

I have recently discovered that Platzschutzstaffel, that was specifically tasked with protecting the Pitomnik airfield and supporting the airlift, in the game, does get Ju-52 cover missions where you meet them far from the airfield and must guarantee their safe landing at Pitomnik.

Edited August 2, 2020 by elegz

[DRosa]

I'm trying to find myself in Career, I'm new to the game. But at first it seems incredible, I really liked the concept of dynamicity that we found. I disagree with you about feeling empty. Just yesterday I was on a ground attack mission with my squadron of Yaks, halfway through we were intercepted by a squadron of 109 already expected by me, I'm not stupid, I'm not going to stay for dogfight with 200 kilos of bombs on my wings, so I dove straight for another 30 km to the target, dropped the bombs and tried to get back into battle. But on the way I found another squadron of migs battling another squadron of 109s, I ended up joining the battle, not long after, the remnants of my squadron who were leaving the first dogfight, came to help too. It was very interesting to analyze all this. But I'm still having some problems in this mode, it seems that my weapons don't have any damage, that I have to land 500 shots on some enemy until he decides that his plane is no longer able to fly.

[Sitaro]

I also fly exclusively multiplayer. There has yet to be anyone to make a game with an AI that I wanted to play against. It's just way too boring because the AI is just too predictable.  Playing multiplayer, you really never know what the enemy is going to do, where they will be, or when they will appear. 

[Knarley-Bob]

   To the OP......

I'd suggest trying that in a P-47 on those settings...........? R.I.P.

 

[spreckair]

I only fly single player so far, and in career mode, and still enjoy it a lot warts and all.  I fly opposing sides in parallel to keep things interesting and to compare each side.  I began with the Moscow campaign with a Luftwaffe pilot and with a Soviet pilot, and I play each day on each side; I am in the middle of Kuban now.  This has helped to keep it more interesting for me.  I even think I fought against my other pilot once, although I am not sure.

[JG7_X-Man]

In the past versions of updates Career mode has been a lot more fun. [fake English accent] I think maybe a mixture for higher probability of Rodeos/Rhubarbs instead of every mission being a Ramrod/Circus of some sorts would be the sweet spot[/fake English accent]. Damn I love women that use the "Glottal T"! 

[LukeFF]

14 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

I think maybe a mixture for higher probability of Rodeos/Rhubarbs instead of every mission being a Ramrod/Circus of some sorts would be the sweet spot

 

The mission probability is based on a tabulation of the exact missions each unit flew. So, if say a squadron flew 100 missions in a given time period and 60 of those were bomber escort missions, then the probability of a bomber escort mission being generated in career mode will be 60 percent. ?

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

AI is pretty lame. It's ok but for the most part if flies telemetry off your input and does things that are absolutely ridiculous like the negative G barrel roll after a defensive dive. After which they will climb again. It's just stupid. AI and actual dynamic campaign needs work as far as single player goes. As for MP optimizing the mechanical aspects of the game (lag or efficient net code or whatever would allow actual great missions like Combat Box to run well for majority of players) would go a long way to improve the product overall.

 

Also friendly AI is dumb as sh$t mostly. Does not add to immersion much at all.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138

[[CPT]Pike*HarryM]

It really is no fun/not immersive to have missions that turn out so, but that is OK next day all pilots and planes are replaced...

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

On 2/2/2023 at 6:09 PM, [CPT]Pike*HarryM said:

It really is no fun/not immersive to have missions that turn out so, but that is OK next day all pilots and planes are replaced...

 

Unfortunately, this is the exact replica of most of my missions in Typhoon Normandy career. Each ground attack sortie is intercepted and on medium difficulty the whole squadron gets usually wiped out. Would it be possible for ground attack careers to have some lower probability of interception? Not to mention that when intercepted the flight drops bombs and the mission is busted. 

[JG7_X-Man]

On 1/25/2023 at 12:28 PM, LukeFF said:

 

The mission probability is based on a tabulation of the exact missions each unit flew. So, if say a squadron flew 100 missions in a given time period and 60 of those were bomber escort missions, then the probability of a bomber escort mission being generated in career mode will be 60 percent. ?

 

Nice to know! So If I choose any JG 26 unit during any given period, the percent of missions generated should mimic actual missions flown (...relatively) according to Donald Caldwell's JG 26 Luftwaffe Fighter Wing War Diary Vol 2: 1943 - 45? Does this even include combatant units?

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Nice to know! So If I choose any JG 26 unit during any given period, the percent of missions generated should mimic actual missions flown (...relatively) according to Donald Caldwell's JG 26 Luftwaffe Fighter Wing War Diary Vol 2: 1943 - 45? Does this even include combatant units?

 

Yes, most of the Luftwaffe day fighter mission percentages for Normandy are based on Caldwell's book, since for this time period it gives by far the best look at what sort of missions the Germans were flying every day (also, for the invasion period, I picked up a book on JG 3 that goes into somewhat deep detail about what missions they were flying). For Bodenplatte, I also have Axel Urbanke's book on III./JG 54. KG 51 and KG 76 also have detailed accounts of their sortie lists from both time periods, so those also are factored into the Luftwaffe night bombing and Me 262 missions.

 

If by combatant units you mean what units the player will be intercepted by, the game just picks a squadron that's tagged as Fighter from the configuration files and will insert it into the mission as an enemy flight. Same deal if they are to intercept bombers - the game picks a bomber squadron from the list of available units and inserts it into the mission.

Edited February 13, 2023 by LukeFF

[JG7_X-Man]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, most of the Luftwaffe day fighter mission percentages for Normandy are based on Caldwell's book, since for this time period it gives by far the best look at what sort of missions the Germans were flying every day (also, for the invasion period, I picked up a book on JG 3 that goes into somewhat deep detail about what missions they were flying). For Bodenplatte, I also have Axel Urbanke's book on III./JG 54. KG 51 and KG 76 also have detailed accounts of their sortie lists from both time periods, so those also are factored into the Luftwaffe night bombing and Me 262 missions.

 

If by combatant units you mean what units the player will be intercepted by, the game just picks a squadron that's tagged as Fighter from the configuration files and will insert it into the mission as an enemy flight. Same deal if they are to intercept bombers - the game picks a bomber squadron from the list of available units and inserts it into the mission.

 

Thank you for that very through response! You were spot on with my "combatant units" question! Can't thank you and the team enough for your hard work!

[T24_Martin]

"The daily life of a fighter pilot is actually quite monotonous - the sweeps, the long waiting hours and the readiness, the missions as dive bomber, in the free fighter, in the escort or as a low-flying pilot always followed each other and basically always remained the same. After all, if you disregard a few incidental geographic and tactical details - nothing resembles an air combat so much as just another air combat!

 

Pierre Clostermann 

 

Fits this topic perfectly!

Edited February 13, 2023 by T24_Martin
Wrong language

[GADDY]

I'm in the Baseplate period and as I have bought the collectable Spitfires (both of them available in Steam) I'm only flying them. Sadly, this means being in a Canadian unit a long way back and having to fly very far just to get across the front lines. By the time we've gotten to the designated area, then patrolled the triangle, limping back over our own lines is the real challenge - not the mission. The others in the flight are calling 'Bingo Fuel' while actually over the target area if we've had air contact, with over 100 miles back to base field. As I said, just trying to fly as carefully as possible so as to make a forced landing over our lines, is the real tough part. 

While I'm talking Spitfire's, I actually felt sick to my stomach to see that on the store page, there's a version of the 14 Spitfire with drop tanks and a teardrop canopy. This isn't on Steam and had it been I'd have bought it rather than the Mk14 I just bought, I have to admit to feeling very strongly about having to buy a third collectable Spitfire, just to get drop tanks. Thanks for taking the time to read this. 

[GADDY]

On 5/4/2020 at 6:48 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

It's all about how much you want to be immersed. <SNIP>

I'm the biggest immersion junkie on the planet and absolutely hate 'speed players' in other games - such as Fallout - where some idiot posts 'I beat the game on 3 hours'. Not only is that attitude a mystery to me, it's also a waste of money. In that game, I literally watched a guy on You Tube sprint past weapons, computers that tell the back story to the game, as well a a few important items. He also dismissed every screen of text - explaining how the story was developing - as though they were annoying bugs landing on his arm. I just thought 'Why?'

So, immersion is a big factor with me, I love to be really there, which may explain my love of Silent Hunter III, and latterly Train Sim World 3. The point I'm trying to make, is that my flight never stays as a team for long in the Bodenplatte period I'm playing.  Our base is so far back (I only fly my Spitfires VB and Mk XIV) and seeing as there's only one squadron flying that Spit, then just making it back over the lines takes very careful flying with no drop tanks. Making it back to our home field is impossible unless flying at 1500Rpm all the way there and back.  All I hear is 'Bingo fuel' and when we get back there are seldom more than 2 or 3 of us not killed or captured. That makes getting attached to wing mates difficult. In fact, I've lost so many friends that I'm beginning to 'fly angry' - which is never a good idea - and feel I may have to see the squadron's psychiatrist soon, if we don't get some damn drop tanks. 

 

 

[Yogiflight]

23 minutes ago, SGSteveGad said:

I have to admit to feeling very strongly about having to buy a third collectable Spitfire, just to get drop tanks.

The good news for you is, you can spare the money. There are no drop tanks in Il-2. It is just a picture.

 

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

the game just picks a squadron that's tagged as Fighter from the configuration files and will insert it into the mission as an enemy flight.

which is a bit of a pitty in so far as you constantly encounter British aircrafts deep in the American sector, in both BON and BOBP.

[LukeFF]

28 minutes ago, SGSteveGad said:

While I'm talking Spitfire's, I actually felt sick to my stomach to see that on the store page, there's a version of the 14 Spitfire with drop tanks and a teardrop canopy. This isn't on Steam and had it been I'd have bought it rather than the Mk14 I just bought, I have to admit to feeling very strongly about having to buy a third collectable Spitfire, just to get drop tanks.

 

There are no Mark XIV Spitfires for sale that come with drop tanks.

Just now, Yogiflight said:

which is a bit of a pitty in so far as you constantly encounter British aircrafts deep in the American sector, in both BON and BOBP.

 

Understood, but I imagine that it would take quite a bit of reconfiguration of the mission templates so that sort of thing doesn't occur.

[GADDY]

3 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

There are no Mark XIV Spitfires for sale that come with drop tanks.

 

Understood, but I imagine that it would take quite a bit of reconfiguration of the mission templates so that sort of thing doesn't occur.

I think I may have misread the store page. It was the extra 64 gallon tank in the rear that threw me. You see, that's how crazy it's making me, imagining I read drop tanks on the teardrop version store page. My bad, as my transatlantic friends would say. Thanks for putting me right. 

https://il2sturmovik.com/store/collector-planes/

 

[GADDY]

6 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

There are no Mark XIV Spitfires for sale that come with drop tanks.

 

Understood, but I imagine that it would take quite a bit of reconfiguration of the mission templates so that sort of thing doesn't occur.

It's one of those agonising little things, barely making it back and always with a 'Forced landing' ending to what would have been a great sortie. I'm kind of my own worst enemy in this sim, as I absolutely won't fly any aircraft that doesn't come with an RAF label on it, and having moved from the VB to the Mk14, my options are rather limited. I looked in vain for a squadron closer to the lines, and even looked at buying the Hurricane collector plane, but that doesn't figure in the period of baseplate I'm in. I could have joined a Punjabi squadron - a little closer - but I stuck with the 41st squadron, based in Diest, Belgium. On the plus side, I know know quite a bit about the real-life 41st by now and gotten to 'know' some of the pilots from the 41st.  Our mascot - Wimpy', a Bull Terrier with the tip of one ear missing - is a bonus too. I think what I'm going to do, is start a career in Normandy and play through to Bodenplatte - taking whatever comes - and with the realisation that, in war, you don't always get what you want. Many thanks for your comments and suggestions. This community really is a large part of all that's great about this sim. Anyway, I have to fly. Thanks again.

[KevPBur]

@SGSteveGad  I'm currently flying a Spit MkIX for RCAF No 412 Sqn. Currently based at Heesch but moved around in small hops getting closer to Nijmigen. I'm rarely needing more than 60% fuel for missions. Many being 5-10 mins flight to target area.

Of course, it's an older Spit but it's the best sounding and looking version before middle age spread set in!

[PatrickAWlson]

On 6/2/2020 at 4:37 AM, ACG_Pike said:

I must be in the minority; Pat Wilson's career I felt like it was just me and squadron with a random enemy flight over there.

 

Every squadron in  PWCG is fully staffed and maintained.  Every pilot not directly included in the mission flies a virtual mission where things might happen.  AI pilots can become great aces or not.  They advance in skill over time based on missions flown and victories scored.  If you transfer out of a squadron and then return back to it, the same pilots will be there - at least the ones that are still alive.  The survivors will have advanced, scored victories, etc. during your absence.

 

Because AI pilots improve over time it is worth your while to invest in their success.  Let your squadron mates die every time and you will always be flying with novices.  Help them survive and you will be flying with veterans and aces.

 

In addition to staffing, equipment is also dynamically managed.  Behind the scenes PWCG has a full logistics tail of men and aircraft.  Aircraft are manufactured, then sent to a depot, and finally to front line units.  Same with new pilots.  This causes short term shortages at the front.

 

Anyhow- not saying that PWCG is for everybody.  It is a little (hopefully a very little) bit of extra work to switch between programs.  The in game career mode makes different choices and trade offs, so it goes without saying that people may prefer one or the other.  Only responding to give an idea of just a few of the things in PWCG that were done to create the feeling of a living world.

[Pikestance]

On 5/14/2023 at 5:14 AM, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Every squadron in  PWCG is fully staffed and maintained.  Every pilot not directly included in the mission flies a virtual mission where things might happen.  AI pilots can become great aces or not.  They advance in skill over time based on missions flown and victories scored.  If you transfer out of a squadron and then return back to it, the same pilots will be there - at least the ones that are still alive.  The survivors will have advanced, scored victories, etc. during your absence.

 

Because AI pilots improve over time it is worth your while to invest in their success.  Let your squadron mates die every time and you will always be flying with novices.  Help them survive and you will be flying with veterans and aces.

 

In addition to staffing, equipment is also dynamically managed.  Behind the scenes PWCG has a full logistics tail of men and aircraft.  Aircraft are manufactured, then sent to a depot, and finally to front line units.  Same with new pilots.  This causes short term shortages at the front.

 

Anyhow- not saying that PWCG is for everybody.  It is a little (hopefully a very little) bit of extra work to switch between programs.  The in game career mode makes different choices and trade offs, so it goes without saying that people may prefer one or the other.  Only responding to give an idea of just a few of the things in PWCG that were done to create the feeling of a living world.

 

I actually like both for different reasons as you pointed out. 

[kraut1]

5 hours ago, ACG_Pike said:

 

I actually like both for different reasons as you pointed out. 

Yes, for me the same:

careers: in general okay, some with too long missions for me, my current favorite career is Battle of Kuban. BoN career I will try soon.

PWCG has the most sophisticated squadron management.

And my 3rd alternative:

when I want to have short missions with total flight time of 15 - 40 minutes without time acceleration or with low plane numbers I create missions with EMG by Vander with random parameters and fill the results in a Excel logbook.

And I use this type of career  for other theaters of war careers e.g. Battle of France, Tunisia, Italy or Papua New Guinea. And I can add mission results flown with other flight sims e.g. 1946 or CLOD.

Edited August 5, 2023 by kraut1

[spreckair]

On 5/13/2023 at 5:14 PM, PatrickAWlson said:

Because AI pilots improve over time it is worth your while to invest in their success.

I haven't flown in PWCG yet but look forward to trying it out.  Do the AI pilots invest back in your success, or is that too much to ask?  I have yet to have an AI shoot an enemy off of my tail before I die.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Career is not boring, there are variety of mission types and oppents, what is stopping me  playing single player is AI. 

[PatrickAWlson]

18 hours ago, spreckair said:

I haven't flown in PWCG yet but look forward to trying it out.  Do the AI pilots invest back in your success, or is that too much to ask?  I have yet to have an AI shoot an enemy off of my tail before I die.

 

PWCG is effectively a mission generator.  It does not alter in game code in any way and therefore the AI will still be the AI.  Except for one very important thing. 

 

Every pilot on all sides is tracked.  The longer they survive the better they get.  Try to fly to keep your AI pilots alive and soon you will be flying with veterans and aces.  In the game the AI quality level absolutely matters.  A flight of the player and three AI veterans will tear apart an opposing flight of novices.