PDA

View Full Version : PF must be Dynamic??



Nanuk66
07-20-2004, 04:08 AM
Basically what are your thought on this?

The Pacific sea war is very much different to the eastern front war (if i didnt already know http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) where in the latter its a case of a moving front and the changes are usually represented by a move in airfield location. You are travelling throu time going from Poland to inner Russia and then slowly moving to Berlin.

There is nothing to change this timeline.

However i see the carrier wars to be alot different. Surely different events can be performed within the timeline to drastically change it?
An example would be to sink a particular ship on a sortie that didnt actually sink at that timeframe, and whether this would have any consequences to the campaign as a whole? I mean i imagine attacking huge taskforces of ships and being able to 'de-rail' from the mission objective and land my bombs/fish on any ship that i want. If i sink it and i gonna see the same ship in the taskforce next time i attack it in a mission or two's time?
I hope not.

Sorry if this is doesnt make too much sense or if its been discussed before.
I just cant see how PF cant be dynamic!

-----------------------------
English lesson 101:
The word is 'Lose' not 'Loose'. e.g.
That IL2 is gonna lose the fight against that 109.
That IL2's wing looks loose, its gonna fall off.
If i dive too vertically i will lose my wing. k thx.
------------------------------

Nanuk66
07-20-2004, 04:08 AM
Basically what are your thought on this?

The Pacific sea war is very much different to the eastern front war (if i didnt already know http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) where in the latter its a case of a moving front and the changes are usually represented by a move in airfield location. You are travelling throu time going from Poland to inner Russia and then slowly moving to Berlin.

There is nothing to change this timeline.

However i see the carrier wars to be alot different. Surely different events can be performed within the timeline to drastically change it?
An example would be to sink a particular ship on a sortie that didnt actually sink at that timeframe, and whether this would have any consequences to the campaign as a whole? I mean i imagine attacking huge taskforces of ships and being able to 'de-rail' from the mission objective and land my bombs/fish on any ship that i want. If i sink it and i gonna see the same ship in the taskforce next time i attack it in a mission or two's time?
I hope not.

Sorry if this is doesnt make too much sense or if its been discussed before.
I just cant see how PF cant be dynamic!

-----------------------------
English lesson 101:
The word is 'Lose' not 'Loose'. e.g.
That IL2 is gonna lose the fight against that 109.
That IL2's wing looks loose, its gonna fall off.
If i dive too vertically i will lose my wing. k thx.
------------------------------

spoonfish
07-20-2004, 04:16 AM
I think it has to be and I'm sure its already been thought about. Would not be much of a fun campaign without it being dynamic.

I wonder what happens if, for example, a carrier is heavily damaged in a battle and out of action for 6 months I think the game will need to take this into account as well.

I'd also like to see a decent post-mission briefing/stats detailing ships sunk, damaged, airgroup casualties etc.

GT182
07-20-2004, 10:43 AM
If it's a true dynamic campaign as in B17 Flying Fortress "The Mighty 8th", I imagine things will rebuild as they did in that game. But not sure as I haven't heard anything about PF having a true dynamic campaign.. yet.

"GT182" / "Stab/JG51_vonSpinmeister"
www.bombs-away.net/forums (http://www.bombs-away.net/forums)
"Fly to Survive, Survive to Fly"

Baco-ECV56
07-20-2004, 03:05 PM
This is a good point, and ih hasnt benn brought up before...

I belive that if a campaign is flown, it should be dynamic, if not then we don´t have a campaign, but a series of single missions chained toguether.

Say you are tasked to fly CAP for the Enterprise (witch was never sunk) and you loose the mission an the carrier was crippled. It would meak no sense to take of from it in the next mission, would it?

The onlly posible way to have a balance would be to make your next mission 6 months later ( ala red Barron II when you were wounded and missed that part of the war...)

I wish, that we could have a Dynamic campaign a la PAW, where you had your units available, and that was all you had for the duration of that campaign...

But that is a huge tecnical chalenge for the team and I belive that it is just not posible with the current FB´s engine.

Another topic that will have to wait till we see how did the team implemented thsi kind of features...

My take is that we will have no persistent damage or persistent unit availability in PF.
Pity since Thta would be the best WWII flight sim since PAW and SWOTL, regarding campaigns...

Latico
07-20-2004, 09:47 PM
Baco, You haven't flown the "Pilot Carreer" campaign in FB, have you?

I was wounded twice during "my" career and the next mission after would always note in teh brief that I was "returning to active duty after recovering from wounds" and their would be a skip of about a month or 2 in my flight log.

I believe that some of you are mistakenly expecting the Dev's to create Campaigns for us. I suspect that the best campaigns will be created by users of PF that have good knowlegde of the historical battles, using the FMB.

Unfortunately, I doubt t6hat the game will be able to make the sort of adjustments that have been requested in this thread. As I see it, the only way to have a campaign work the way you want would be to have a custom mission built and then flown. After the first mission has been flown, reports would have to be turned in as to what was destroyed/damaged. Then the next mission could be built from the post info of the last mission. I believe there is already a squadron that is doing this now in FB, for online coop mission campaigns. Seems to be the only way to create a realistic affect of the result of one mission to the next.

Baco-ECV56
07-21-2004, 12:33 PM
Yeap, Latico, you are quite right, I have never flown a Pilots carrer in FB.
And regarding the method you describe for a totally dynamic campaign, That is exactlly what I have been doing this last two years for my squad.
It works perfectlly having the gratest inmersion, konwing that every mission counts and that the result of our actions afect the development of the campaign.

My onlly problem is that if done "manually" its a LOT of work, hehe.

What we do now is to have a given number of units, (ground/sea/air) and a production capacity to measure reinforcements. When we fly a mission created in the FMB, we use a parser to detect what units were hit, or lost, and work on the next mission with those numbers.

Once the parser finds the units hit, we delete them from the mission prior to that flight, and add the reinforcements. Unfortunatlly reinforments must be added manually from the FMB, and THAt is a real pain, hehehe.

The problem is that to build a new FMB mission for the next mission in the campaign, takes time and a big effort, so we cant fly say, two or three missions a night, making the progress of the camapign painfully slow.

The inmersion is awsom, but the work behind it is tireying.

I was hoping that sometime along the development of FB we would get a damage persistent dynamic campaign so we would not have to work our buts off, to have an inmersive camapign http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

PF is a good oportunity for such a campaign since ussually for a given battle you have a given number of naval units. Making it a lot more managable that a ground battle, where reinforcements keep pouring into the theater via air, rail or road.

Of course a Dynamic manual campaign for PF should be a lot less work, since you have a lot less important assets, making our job easier.

You didn´t get a new carrier or cruiser every month. So the number of untis will be a lot more managable. I still have the problem with ground units, onlly instead of working out a reinforcement rule taking into consideration railroad and roads network, I will have to implement a shipping system. (and do a little research about how did the troops get to the theater).

All of this done manually results in inconsitances and bugs in the system, and aggain a lot of work behind the stage.

I was really looking fordward to get some kind of automatation with this proces in PF, but since it IS based on the FB engine I absolutelly know that it might be imposible to implement.

But don´t get me wrong, Pilot carrers are grate and a good feature to give more life to FB.

I fly onlly On line, and use QMB or specially designed FMB for training onlly.

That´s why I am very very thankfull for the Dynamic Campaigns on line, but we need a bit more of strategic content in our campaings and that is why we feel the need to do manual campaigns.

On line DGC are grate but in the end just a quest for points, enstead of a quest for territory or a strategic or tactical advantage that can be seen or that it might influence the next set of missions.

NDGC are VEF like missions but since there is no map or any other mechanism to see the development of a particular campaign, it has no inmersion factor for us. The onlly thing that matters in on line DGC is the points you get.

Dreaming mode on:
- I would love a system that would keep track of the mayor vessels in the Theater or "Map".
- A system taht would produce reinforcemts.
- a system that would tie the fronterr markers to troops in the vecinity
- Some graphic interface to show the disposition of your own forces (other than the FMB).
- Some briefing automatation a la VEF or Bellum.

- And a quick mission builder for that particular campaign engine. The atual on line Campaigns system is good, onlly we have no idea about the strategic situation, except for that odd text in the briefing for a particular mission, witch ois useless since we can not choose what target to atack.

It would be wonderfull to have a graphic interface to see where your task forces and ground troops are, and the lines of reinforcements you have. then have an interface to select where to attack (recon missions to find the enemy taskforces would be grate), and then choose with waht avaiable asstes to conduct such attack. Than the engine should note the dammage done and delette the units hit from teh Campaign database, to buils a new situation database from witch to build the next missionwith the mentioned quick mission builder.

That would be heaven endeed.

Dreaming mode off.
But I know that even thow I do not considerit imposible, it is beyond the plans of the Dev team, and beyond the deadline for release...

[This message was edited by Baco-ECV56 on Wed July 21 2004 at 11:58 AM.]

Baco-ECV56
07-21-2004, 01:00 PM
People, let me state thatI was just brainstorming here and this is not a request nor a posible feature for PF given the release date and FB engine limitatition.

I have those facts perfectlly clear.