PDA

View Full Version : what so dynamic about the campaign?



oscar0072004
02-07-2005, 03:29 PM
i,m flying a b25 campaign and i get the same missions over and over again . normally i have to bomb supply trucks next to an airstrip , or i have to bomb aa intstallations , or i have to bomb armour . but i never had any other missions . the missions allways take place on 2 same locations allways have only 2 flight routes a long one to the right of the map and a not so long one to the airstrip. so what,s so dynamic about the campaign?

oscar0072004
02-07-2005, 03:29 PM
i,m flying a b25 campaign and i get the same missions over and over again . normally i have to bomb supply trucks next to an airstrip , or i have to bomb aa intstallations , or i have to bomb armour . but i never had any other missions . the missions allways take place on 2 same locations allways have only 2 flight routes a long one to the right of the map and a not so long one to the airstrip. so what,s so dynamic about the campaign?

Atomic_Marten
02-07-2005, 04:39 PM
I have played 40 missions on three target locations only (yeah New Guinea maphttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). Yeah.. can be boring I have learned location of every hill on my way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

"Dynamic"? It can be dynamic if you choose easy settings, where you can score over 1000 points in one mission. Then war is over.. so you can make an impact.

Other than that, my conclusion is that good made static campaign under these circumstances would be better than dynamic one that we have. But that is just my opinion. I have briefly played "Operation Fall Blau" add-onn, which features good static campaign.

The only step down is lack of squadron mates, but since they last long like snow in spring, that is not so big shortage of static campaign.

Like I say my opinion is that under this circumstances good static campaign would be better. It is true that we all would be flying same missions, but.. at least they won't be boring when played campaign for the first time.

Chuck_Older
02-07-2005, 05:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by oscar0072004:
i,m flying a b25 campaign and i get the same missions over and over again . normally i have to bomb supply trucks next to an airstrip , or i have to bomb aa intstallations , or i have to bomb armour . but i never had any other missions . the missions allways take place on 2 same locations allways have only 2 flight routes a long one to the right of the map and a not so long one to the airstrip. so what,s so dynamic about the campaign? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you think that 'dynamic campaign' means?

Many players seem to think it means a breathlessly interesting experience from the minute they start their engines until they touch down.

If that were true, I wouldn't play the sim...because that's just not very realistic. I will not argue that this is what it was really like to be a B-25 pilot, becuse there were all sorts of small nuances that made evey mission unique, but it is true that they revisited targets often.

The 'dynamic campaign' is completely misunderstood. Most players seem to make up their own minds what this term means before they even get the box open. Then, after they build up what they think it means, they get disappointed, and somethimes even mad, and take it out on the boards

The sim keeps stats on aircraft available to your sqaudron, your personal stats, including promotions, reprimands, and awards, as well as a log of your flights, and in PF, a 'war diary'. The sim keeps track of your AI squadmates, and beleive it or not, if they survive for long enough, they actually do get better. Also, if you play a campaign in which there are smaller 'sub-campaigns', you may be re-assigned and change aircraft. You may change your base of operations, as well.

That's what is so dynamic about the campaign.

Now, if you say that some things should happen, like you destroy so many of one aircraft type it becomes a rarity in the campaign for a while, I would agree. But I would also not say that because this doesn't happen, it is not a dynamic campaign. There are many, many scripted things in the sim. It's one of the trade-offs made, for better or worse. The 'dynamic' you had in mind and the 'dynamic' 1C:Maddox Games had in mind may not be the same thing. You think 'dynamic' in terms of missions, they think 'dynamic' in terms of how those missions are managed and put together. For instance: you get promoted. You're no longer a wingman, you control your flight. Then you're promoted again, and you command two flights of planes, not just your own. That's a dynamic the sim keeps track of.

Atomic_Marten
02-07-2005, 05:21 PM
Chuck you said well, and that is good description of current dynamic campaign system.

And IMHO dynamic system is about promotions, yours and your squadmates (I admit that destruction certain number of aircraft can make them 'rare' birds to see, but that isn't so noticeable). Without that.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chuck_Older
02-07-2005, 05:25 PM
Can you actually see a reduction in type of enemy a/c? I might have been confusing you, I didn't think you could do that

The FB campaigns are much better than the PF campaigns, in my opinion

It's a bit of work, but more folks should make their own static campaigns. There would be a huge pool of stuff to choose from, from the thrill-a-minute, to the 'wow this is too realsitic and I'm sick of flying across the Pacific'

Atomic_Marten
02-07-2005, 05:43 PM
I can see reduction at my squadron. For example if we get badly hammered by enemy in one mission (for example 8 a/c flight and only 2 returned home). Next mission will most likely be 4 a/c flight.(that is, if squadron is already suffered losses. Then you see (for example) message: your squadron has only 7 a/c left).

I have also noticed that if we lost only *ONE* a/c in one mission that won't hurt reserves.(it seems that one aircraft per mission is 'regeneration' rate -- don't know how else to explain that).

Atomic_Marten
02-07-2005, 05:49 PM
Also within campaign folder, there is damage.dat file which records damage infliced on all kinds of objects -- I think purpose of that is to make 'shortage' of certain objects in some way. How it is functioning exactly, I do not know..

cueceleches
02-08-2005, 02:29 AM
Well, I do enjoy DC quite a lot. I´m actually flying 4 different campaigns, and in every one, each 10 or 12 missions, I usually change locations, specially in PTO campaigns. On the other hand, for one given campaign, I usually fly a bunch of different missions:

I.E, RN campaign starting at Iwo Jima: I started it with the Hellcat, made several escort, CAS and sweep missions. Then moved on to the Home Islands, changed to the Seafire, and actually made escort and bombing missions...

Quite a lot of fun IMHO.

Gato__Loco
02-08-2005, 09:51 AM
I agree that the standard dynamic campaign generator (DGEN) in PF are not very good (although it has inmproved a bit in the latest patches). DGEN tends to generate repeated missions, some without much sense. For example, flying through New Guinea for two hours to bomb a line of trucks sitting quietly on a beach.
I really don't care if the program keeps track of all objects and kills if that does not have a noticeable effect on the campaigns generated. Yes, DGEN reduces the number of planes in my squadron if we get shot down a lot, and promotes pilots that survive for a while. But I don't think the campaign is much more dynamic than that. It seems to be rather random, and in many cases with few options.
I use Paul Lowengrin's IL2 Dynamic Campaign Generator instead (DCG).

http://www.lowengrin.com/news.php

Paul's software does a much better job. For example, it keeps tracks of the planes destroyed, and can assing an older version of a plane to a squadron if the newer versions are all shot down (or can ground the squadron if there are no planes availables). It keeps track of fuel depots, slowing down the advance of tanks and truck columns if fuel depots are destroyed. If a tank column is destroyed, then the next town is not taken and the front does not advance in that area. If you pound an enemy airfield then it will "hold" less planes in the next missions until it is repaired. Tanks, trucks, trains, ships have an actual influence in the movement of the front (and on how the next mission is generated) thanks to land and sea traffic routes, instead of being just bomb targets. Finally, the war itself is dynamic, in the sense that the campaign moves to a new map depending on where the front moves.
The best feature is that by using DCG's panels, you can modify the campaign you are flying, adding or removing squadrons, selecting wich planes each squadron flies (including your own, which means you can switch planes in the middle of a campaign), adding new car and truck columns, etc.
DCG has a few bugs and can be tricky to set up, but Paul does a superb job providing updates and support.

Atomic_Marten
02-08-2005, 11:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gato__Loco:
I agree that the standard dynamic campaign generator (DGEN) in PF are not very good (although it has inmproved a bit in the latest patches). DGEN tends to generate repeated missions, some without much sense. For example, flying through New Guinea for two hours to bomb a line of trucks sitting quietly on a beach.
I really don't care if the program keeps track of all objects and kills if that does not have a noticeable effect on the campaigns generated. Yes, DGEN reduces the number of planes in my squadron if we get shot down a lot, and promotes pilots that survive for a while. But I don't think the campaign is much more dynamic than that. It seems to be rather random, and in many cases with few options.
I use Paul Lowengrin's IL2 Dynamic Campaign Generator instead (DCG).

http://www.lowengrin.com/news.php

Paul's software does a much better job. For example, it keeps tracks of the planes destroyed, and can assing an older version of a plane to a squadron if the newer versions are all shot down (or can ground the squadron if there are no planes availables). It keeps track of fuel depots, slowing down the advance of tanks and truck columns if fuel depots are destroyed. If a tank column is destroyed, then the next town is not taken and the front does not advance in that area. If you pound an enemy airfield then it will "hold" less planes in the next missions until it is repaired. Tanks, trucks, trains, ships have an actual influence in the movement of the front (and on how the next mission is generated) thanks to land and sea traffic routes, instead of being just bomb targets. Finally, the war itself is dynamic, in the sense that the campaign moves to a new map depending on where the front moves.
The best feature is that by using DCG's panels, you can modify the campaign you are flying, adding or removing squadrons, selecting wich planes each squadron flies (including your own, which means you can switch planes in the middle of a campaign), adding new car and truck columns, etc.
DCG has a few bugs and can be tricky to set up, but Paul does a superb job providing updates and support. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Seems like good program. I have heard about Pau's program b4, but I have never used it in campaign.(few FMB's and that's it).

But seeing your post, I can see that it can be really big improvement in campaign.

I'd like to know if it have some compatibility issues when playing with merged version of the game, and also can campaign length be on 'default' setting (very long, I prefer that one), or is there another way to setup campaign length?

Gato__Loco
02-08-2005, 02:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
I'd like to know if it have some compatibility issues when playing with merged version of the game, and also can campaign length be on 'default' setting (very long, I prefer that one), or is there another way to setup campaign length? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Atomic,
DGC requires merged FB-AEP-PF to run, because it uses some PF planes and objects for campaigns in Europe (for example the A-20). I don't think it can run on PF alone. Also, the campaign length is not set, because it depends on how long it takes for the axis or allies to take over each map, and that depends on the results of each mission. Also, in some cases the axis or allies will have superiority and then the campaign will move relatively quickly. In others, when forces are relatively even, the campaigns get longer. But because you can edit the campaigns on the fly, you could for example add more German tanks columns if the axis are being overrun (simulating the arrival of a new division to the area, for example), and make it more even. DCG provides a nice interface to modify your campaign easely.

If you are thinking about trying DCG, just be sure to read the documentation first. It may be a bit tricky to set up. But people on the DCG forum are very helpful.

jbt308
02-08-2005, 02:16 PM
Ya know what, don't take this the wrong way, but what you guys are talking about is really quite upsetting. I remember playing Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe back in the early 90's, and the multiple campaign modes in that far outstriped those of anything Maddox has ever put out. You talk about plane monitoring, people advancing, getting medals, Jesus, haven't you guys ever played any of the Dynamix games from the 90's and late 80's???? Those are the basics man! When you say something has a dynamic campaign, there should be something that shows that you're forces are doing something, not some generalization/generic code that brings up reinforcements, or grounds squadrons. Come on. People don't like criticizing Maddox, because in fairness, they have made an excellent flight sim model. But the wrapper, yeah, the wrapper needs some work. I wanna bomb ball-bearing factories, I wanna see the affects of destroying those. Without criticism, things won't get better, they'll wallow in complacency. Maddox has got the planes and flight dynamics down, put in a good campaign mode, and people will be ecstatic.

That's my two cents. I've been playing flight sims since the mid-80's, and have noticed a steady decline in gameplay. Game mechanics have gotten better, and attention to detail is good, but a lot of the games just aren't as fun to play.

Chuck_Older
02-08-2005, 02:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jbt308:
Ya know what, don't take this the wrong way, but what you guys are talking about is really quite upsetting. I remember playing Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe back in the early 90's, and the multiple campaign modes in that far outstriped those of anything Maddox has ever put out. You talk about plane monitoring, people advancing, getting medals, Jesus, haven't you guys ever played any of the Dynamix games from the 90's and late 80's???? Those are the basics man! When you say something has a dynamic campaign, there should be something that shows that you're forces are doing something, not some generalization/generic code that brings up reinforcements, or grounds squadrons. Come on. People don't like criticizing Maddox, because in fairness, they have made an excellent flight sim model. But the wrapper, yeah, the wrapper needs some work. I wanna bomb ball-bearing factories, I wanna see the affects of destroying those. Without criticism, things won't get better, they'll wallow in complacency. Maddox has got the planes and flight dynamics down, put in a good campaign mode, and people will be ecstatic.

That's my two cents. I've been playing flight sims since the mid-80's, and have noticed a steady decline in gameplay. Game mechanics have gotten better, and attention to detail is good, but a lot of the games just aren't as fun to play. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was playing wire-frame sims before Wild Bill Stealey or Dynamix made a flight sim, so take that for what it's worth

What the Il-2 series lacks in your opinion, that other sims had...can I ask a question here? Are there any other aspects to FB or PF besides those that you say they lack? Are any areas of FB or PF better that AotP, Falcon, or any of those didn't have?

You mention Dynamix sims, and I can only assume you feel the campaings were more detailed than in a Maddox sim...was there one I missed? Do you seriously mean to tell me that the campaings were more detailed in Aces over Europe? Please provide examples here. I recall flying via autopilot for long stretches, then being thrilled to see the Eiffel Tower, a skeletal monster looming over a blocky Paris. But I do not reacl that with the exception of having more real estate to fly over, any aspect od the sim that was truly 'dynamic' in the way you plainly mean, with the exception that ONCE I saw a convoy on a raod randomly. I don't recall weather at all, not just the static weather we have in FB

If you wish to make your statements viable, you're going to have to present something besides "Don't you recall Dynamix sims", because I recall them very well, as well as the Microprose sims, which had certain elements of a shoot-'em-up, which was fine and good, technology wasn't quite up to par to do much else. They were fun.

To you this is defending Oleg? To me this is: back yourself up when you say something is so.

I'll give an example of something than never, ever happened in a Dynamix sim: camo changes on aircraft depending upon season. There's another 'campaign dynamic' that is completely missed by most folks.

Constructive criticism is one thing- I think that FS2004 has some aspects that kick fb's @ss, particularly and most importantlt weather. But just alluding to a sim that is a decade and a half old as having a superior campaign...if you can't back that up with a little proof, I can't call that constructive, I call it frivolous opinion

One thing you either don't know or have forgotten is that the Il2 series is long in the tooth, no matter how good or bad. The sim was designed as a tactical simulation, not a strategic one. Flight modelling was put on premium, not map scale

Sure, I want to escort Bombers from Martlesham Heath to Bremen, then strafe some trains and barges in Belgium.

The sim wasn't designed to do that

Does anyone recall that, or is it just me??

TacticalYak3
02-08-2005, 02:42 PM
I agree. While Maddox Games does a number of things very well, what would IL-2 be online without scripted Dogfight missions thanks to third-party folks.

And while I think DGen is a good generator, I prefer Paul's DCG for it's easy customization and detailed stats tracking. It's approach is based upon the ground war, and adds IMO an interesting and immersive experience.

Looking forward to what Maddox will hopefully do with BOB with regards to campaigns.

TactS!

Chuck_Older
02-08-2005, 02:48 PM
Agreed, TacYak

I hope the two campaign type scenario is adopted- one that follows History, and the other that allows History to be changed

The only other must-have, in my opinion, is a way to link maps together, so they have no 'edge' anymore. I would even settle for a message that says "loading new map" and an automatic game pause

I'm making a campaign set in Burma and China right now, and the maps are so restrictive, it's made me change the locations of actual places, and even the times that actual things happened, just so the player can stay on a map!

One thing that the FB series seriously lacks is the Trigger. You know, if you fly here, a trigger is set off, and something happens

That one thing would silence a lot of the 'where is the dynamic campaign?!' questions, because something obviously caused by the player would happen

jbt308
02-08-2005, 03:14 PM
Look, I'm not calling anyone out. And you're right, much of what I posted is based on personal opinion, that being that the older sims, to me, were much more fun to play. Much more immersive. I actually cared if my pilot made it back after being shot down in Red Baron. I was thrilled when I won the Iron Cross after taking down some B-17's after having to scramble the fighters. Yes, you are absolutely right, it is all opinion.

What I think I wasn't able to really spcify was this. And I'll use SWOTL as my base. In that game, you could play a general. You could make decisions about what was bombed and when. And if you so chose, you could participate. You are absolutely right, games before the 90's just didn't have the computing power to do justice to flight dynamics, so something had to suffer, that's fine. But the campaing that you could control meant something. What I'm reading here is that yes, the Maddox engine has something built in that, like you stated, will change the camo on the plane, or ground squadrons should their numbers be depleted. That's great, honestly.

It's been so long, I can't remember the details. Ya know what, you're probably right, and I'm wrong, and to honest, I could care less. I was just trying to say that to me, those earlier sims had so much more character and soul than Maddox products. I understand you're not defending him, you're asking for examples, and I can't think of anything concrete to give you. I just know that when I flew Eindeckers in Red Baron, or Avengers in AoP, it felt good, and I felt as if I were helping the war effort. It sounds stupid, and yes, its my opinion.

Like I said, the Maddox guys have done a great job on the planes, and as you've stated, that was their main focus. You asked if those older games did anyting better, and yes, they did. The had, for the most part, a better presentation, and regarding SWOTL, a much better campaign mode. I don't know the sort of detail you want me to get into. But I do remember that you had direct control over every airwing on whatever side you chose. You could direct the wayponts, escorts, etc.. for bombers and fighter groups. You could assign what targets to attack, and you could designate landing fields. Hell, you could fly from England to Prague if you wanted. Obviously the level of detail was much reduced, but that was more a technical limitation.

You're right, IL2 is old. Its popularity has far outpaced its initial intentions, and thats fine. I think in the end, what I would like to see is something in a game that gives you possitive feedback on your accomplishments. Give me war stats, give me stupid newspaper headlines saying that the Oil refinery in Bremen has been knocked out. If my plane goes down behind enemy lines, give me the chance to at least make it back, or recover in the hospital(ala RB). Maddox has more than improved on most aspects of game dynamics. I remember the first time my wings came of in Yeagers because of a high speed dive, and I was frickin flabergasted.

And again, you're right, this sim might not be the place to have super-large maps where you can do some of the things I've talked about. But the truth is, it's not that big of a leap to incorporate those things.

I'm tired, I'm going home now.

mortoma
02-08-2005, 04:10 PM
Red Baron II/3D!! Now that thing had a great campaign system. Too bad the graphics are so dated or I'd still play it. You actually felt you were a real pilot in a squadron with other guys. Not so with FB+AEP+PF.................

jbt308
02-08-2005, 04:50 PM
Heya Mort, I don't have the link currently, but there's a guy offering an updated version of RBII, he's completely re-textured the whole game, and re-worked a lot of the flight physics. Apparently, he's been working on it for years, I think it costs roughly $50. I'll try and find the link.

Think I found it:
http://www.plgrafix.com/

DuxCorvan
02-09-2005, 03:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>what so dynamic about the campaign? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can turn autopilot on, and move dynamicly and frantically up and down your room, waiting for the planes to reach action... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

EnGaurde
02-09-2005, 04:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> i,m flying a b25 campaign and i get the same missions over and over again . normally i have to bomb supply trucks next to an airstrip , or i have to bomb aa intstallations , or i have to bomb armour . but i never had any other missions . the missions allways take place on 2 same locations allways have only 2 flight routes a long one to the right of the map and a not so long one to the airstrip. so what,s so dynamic about the campaign? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

youre a bomber.

you.... er.... "bomb"... stuff.

essentially you fly straight lines to waypoints, then you fly a very straight line till your bomb-go-away-from-the-plane-and-kill-the-enemy-now guy tells the bombs to, well, go away from the plane and kill the enemy.

*cough*

ok, wrong theatre, but in the vietnam war, the same bamboo bridge was demolished constantly as the enemy simply rebuilt it.

i wonder if THEY thought they were flying the same mission.

ive always read that combat flying is 3 hours of boredom and 10 minutes of sheer terror.

sheesh. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

seems to me you are playing the 3 hours and due to your comfy computer chair and due to your complete lack of World War + Conscription, are missing out on the 10 minutes of terror? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

maybe, just maybe flight sims that simulate the flying duty of real airmen arnt Fun All The Time....

is your real life job Fun All The Time?

lemme guess... you want a brutally accurate sim that doesnt include the smell of freshly ripped open guts mixed with cordite, week old dead men, your own BO as you havent the water to spare to wash as youre waiting on a supply plane that may or may not have been shot down, boring patrol missions, and other yukky stuff?

do you want a console game or a .... "sim"?

*waiting for complaints that its too "simmy"*

EnGaurde
02-09-2005, 04:44 AM
further to my last post, your target should be your only concern.

they should all look the same from up there anyway.

jeep, man, building... meh

Target.

Canasoppa
02-09-2005, 05:02 AM
OT

Falcon 4.0 has dynamic campaign http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lumpi668
02-09-2005, 05:24 AM
There are only two things i miss in PF:
-being able to die and go on in this campaign with a different Pilot, like in the old Amiga game "Wings", maybe with a little time pass by while your new alterego travels to the front...
-especially in the FP maps, like the B-25 campaign, more things on the ground, not just the 5 airstrips and your target if it is a convoy...