PDA

View Full Version : We need an improved FMB in BOB - FOR SURE!



nearmiss
08-21-2006, 04:19 PM
Currently I've bought every add-on to this sim, except for 4.05M.

During the past 2+ years I've made a lot of postings on these UBI boards about the FMB. It's not been of enough interest to 1C:Maddox to improve the Il2 series FMB.

Online play becomes boring fast. The current FMB is so tedious and time consuming to build missions, I along with many others, have quit mission building.

I'm not mad or disgruntled, afterall it is your priviledge to provide what you want in your sim products.

If you provide a competent software tool for building missions you'll make a lot of users very happy.

We need a full featured FMB at least equal to the MSFT CFS2 or Jane's WW2 Fighters mission builders.

Chuck_Older
08-21-2006, 04:42 PM
Triggers are a ~must~!!!!

The ability to choose the damage level of all aircraft when the mission starts is a must!

Skins for static aircraft are a must!

Please **do NOT** make maps that already have barrels on airfields, or that already have trains on shunts at railheads! This is a MUST!

Allow mission builders to choose the state of AI awareness independent of AI flying skill. This is a must, to have awareness state set before contact is made. Aware and alert enemy aces MUST check six every so often, and neophyte wingmen should be oblivious before lead starts flying!

Allow machine gun/cannon armament to be set at a level independent of bomb load. No ammo for MGs should not mean also no bombs! Setting ammo quantity is a MUST


Allow a click and drag feature similar to windows so that large groups of objects can be moved as a group! Allow us to copy selected groups in a similar fashion. This is a MUST

Photos in Mission Biefings are a <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">MUST-HAVE FEATURE!</span>

Allowing the players to refer to the briefings in-flight is a must

Aircraft should not be limited to the numbers 01 through 16!

Aircraft should have default markings- but user-made custom markings similar to how noseart/skins function now should be an option

More than four aircraft in a group is a MUST! Selecting their formation in the creation of the mission is a **MUST**! Allowing them to change formation at a way point is a MUST!

Secondary targets for bombers at GATTACK points!

STRAFE options at GATTACK points!


the FMB we have is OK but so sadly lacking! Check out old games like Operation:Flashpoint and see their mission editor for some things that make mission building a much easier proposition...like the good old basic trigger, and the ability to randomly place units in a set radius, and to randomly set their number. We MUST have similar things in the BoB Mission Builder

Chuck_Older
08-21-2006, 04:47 PM
OH-

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">make the software for building a map available. I don't care if it costs 100 bucks, give me the software and allow me to upload my own maps for official submission. I am a genius, I will figure out how to use the map making software if you let me</span>

Chuck_Older
08-21-2006, 05:19 PM
Let us make our own airfields. I don't mean test runways, I mean we should be able to make our own Bodney that looks like Bodney

VW-IceFire
08-21-2006, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by nearmiss:
Currently I've bought every add-on to this sim, except for 4.05M.

During the past 2+ years I've made a lot of postings on these UBI boards about the FMB. It's not been of enough interest to 1C:Maddox to improve the Il2 series FMB.

Online play becomes boring fast. The current FMB is so tedious and time consuming to build missions, I along with many others, have quit mission building.

I'm not mad or disgruntled, afterall it is your priviledge to provide what you want in your sim products.

If you provide a competent software tool for building missions you'll make a lot of users very happy.

We need a full featured FMB at least equal to the MSFT CFS2 or Jane's WW2 Fighters mission builders.
Aside from triggers...the FMB I find is extremely easy to use and very intuitive in its own quirky way. The 3D view is really neat and the object placement system quickly becomes second nature. Its so easy to use I wonder why others aren't using it.

My biggest gripes include no scripting system.

Pentallion
08-21-2006, 05:51 PM
Yep, the FMB is very nice, BUT it needs triggers. The things Older wants would be nice to, but mostly TRIGGERS!!!

nearmiss
08-21-2006, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nearmiss:
Currently I've bought every add-on to this sim, except for 4.05M.

During the past 2+ years I've made a lot of postings on these UBI boards about the FMB. It's not been of enough interest to 1C:Maddox to improve the Il2 series FMB.

Online play becomes boring fast. The current FMB is so tedious and time consuming to build missions, I along with many others, have quit mission building.

I'm not mad or disgruntled, afterall it is your priviledge to provide what you want in your sim products.

If you provide a competent software tool for building missions you'll make a lot of users very happy.

We need a full featured FMB at least equal to the MSFT CFS2 or Jane's WW2 Fighters mission builders.
Aside from triggers...the FMB I find is extremely easy to use and very intuitive in its own quirky way. The 3D view is really neat and the object placement system quickly becomes second nature. Its so easy to use I wonder why others aren't using it.

My biggest gripes include no scripting system. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not arguing here... I respect what you say.

I'd like to add there are issues with the actual usage of the FMB that are tedious as well.

1. Clicking on objects doesn't always work

2. Moving objects doesn't always work

3. The sliders on each side are difficult to use, because the slider is so small.

4. You can't erase missions without going into windows explorer.

5. Objects have to be move individually.

6. Zooming in an out on objects doesn't work correctly often.

7. Zooming in and out on maps can cause problems.

8. I've clicked on objects many times and the program would not release them when I tried releasing them to move onto other items.

8. There are many more little irky problems that make the FMB a pain to use. Let's be honest, there are many things that just don't work correctly all the time. These kinds of things should have at least been corrected about 2+ years ago.

==============

A DESPAWN waypoint to remove aircraft could make a huge difference in missions. You wouldn't have to do workarounds, i.e., crashing aircraft into mountains to get them out of the mission when they're no longer needed.

Triggers are an absolute necessity to really make missions more exciting.

I basically have just campaigned for a FMB at least equal to or better than MSFT CFS2 or the Jane's WW2 Fighters mission builders. There are many additional features that would be exciting to have that's sure.

I just hope Oleg reads this and gives priority to the Mission Builder tools in the upcoming BOB.

I have alot of admiration for you guys that have held on and worked through all the difficulties of Mission Building in IL2 series.
Many of you, I've had numerous discussions with over the past couple years and I've always been amazed at your patience and loyalty to this sim.(beyond my loyaly)

Cheers and my best to all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Tater-SW-
08-21-2006, 08:10 PM
What chuck said.

Also, (I have a gajillion page thread on the subject, too) it would be nice to have, in addition to "destroy", the ability to completely remove anything on the ground. Ie: we could make Pearl Harbor actually look slightly like Pearl Harbor if we could REMOVE all the **** the less than skilled mapmaker placed around. That sort of thing.

I'd also like to see a DUMB PLANE waypoint. What I mean is that the plane does what you tell it to. It doesn't worry that it is too low, or about to hit a mountain, it does what the waypoint says, PERIOD. Like when I tell it to drop bombs, it drops them even if the plane is 10m off the ground without popping up, etc.

tater

-HH- Beebop
08-21-2006, 10:42 PM
Another vote for "What Chuck Said".
Especially map making tools. And before anyone jumps up and says that will give us maps of Uranus, remember that when maps are uploaded for use there can be "Historical" maps and "Fun/Fantasy" maps. Like plane skins, pick and choose what you like.
I often ask myself, "Self, how much better would "When Tigers Could Fly" have been if Chuck could have made maps instead of adapting maps?" (And a masterful job of adapting he did too!)

lowfighter
08-22-2006, 04:56 AM
I just hope that at least some of the suggestions above will come with BoB.
One more wish: ability to destroy in FMB also items from "Stationary objects" "Artilery" etc.

LEXX_Luthor
08-22-2006, 07:02 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Chuck_Older::

<span class="ev_code_yellow">make the software for building a map available. I don't care if it costs 100 bucks, give me the software and allow me to upload my own maps for official submission. I am a genius, I will figure out how to use the map making software if you let me</span>
In yet another Blunder of Britain, Oleg poasted that he will open map making to the community -- but only for "small" maps which I assume means tiny arcade Dogfight maps.

This is BIZZARE. Only Online dogfight shooter servers make use of "small" dogfight shooter maps, while *both* Online War and Offline campaign play can share very large 3rd Party map modding ability, and BoB's success will depend on Offline player sales if there is no Online Pay-To-Play.

Oleg says the restriction to small maps is to preserve salse of future combat theaters which is totally ignorant of what is going on in the flight sim market -- the aircraft (and ground/ship) units define the combat theater and those should be closed to open modding. The closed development of aircraft models especially should drive future sales. Let the community take care of the rest and sales will flower.

lowfighter
08-22-2006, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
The 3D view is really neat and the object placement system quickly becomes second nature. Its so easy to use I wonder why others aren't using it.



True Icefire, operating in 3D speeds up quite a lot the object placement. I'm wondering too how many are aware of this?

F6_Ace
08-22-2006, 10:35 AM
We need an FM, never mind an improved one.

nearmiss
08-22-2006, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by F6_Ace:
We need an FM, never mind an improved one.

When I read this posting it reminds me of times when I'd be having an interesting discussion with a group of guys. Then up walks some clown who makes some kind of un-intelligible remark or other...not even aware of the discussion
taking place. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

F6_Ace
08-22-2006, 11:34 AM
You're right - I didn't read any of the previous posts and thought that an off the cuff remark would amuse myself.

Next point?

Gitano1979
08-22-2006, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Let us make our own airfields. I don't mean test runways, I mean we should be able to make our own Bodney that looks like Bodney

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

also AI planes taxiing to runway together with player in coops.

I450IVex
08-22-2006, 01:51 PM
Full EAX sound, having 5.1 and 5.1 headphones is hardly worth it at the moment.

DuxCorvan
08-22-2006, 02:01 PM
We need an improved *everything* in SoW/BoB. That's why they're making it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chuck_Older
08-22-2006, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by F6_Ace:
You're right - I didn't read any of the previous posts and thought that an off the cuff remark would amuse myself.

Next point?

How's this for a point, superstar?

Shut your cry-hole for a change http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Chuck_Older
08-22-2006, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by I450IVex:
Full EAX sound, having 5.1 and 5.1 headphones is hardly worth it at the moment.

Agreed, but that's not an issue that needs to be addressed in the Full Mission Builder, that's hardware and software support

Frequent_Flyer
08-22-2006, 09:33 PM
A breifing at the end of the mission that would relate to me the aircraft I destroyed, where I dropped him. Give me credit for a damaged e/a, if my victory was scored over an ace. What the rest of my flight accomplished. The number of rounds I expended.Similar to what happens in the campaign breifing but for a single mission made with the FMB. It would also be great to be able to set the weather over the target. You take off in good weather and its storming over the target. Set it like we set the 'Front' markers.

Lodovik
08-23-2006, 12:05 AM
Ba-bump.

nearmiss
08-23-2006, 02:32 PM
Triggers should include a probability factor selection for results.

IF X Happens then event X @ 50% happens, or event Y @ 25% happens, or event Z @ 25% happens

When values total 100% there are no more choices.

Also logical operators such as equals, not equals, and, or, etc.

Triggers will make a huge difference in the sim, even static triggers, but dynamic triggers with a probability function would add greatly to making very mission unique.

Alternate Waypoints that could be triggered for changing flights in the mission... friendly and enemy.

Waypoints with radius operators and probability selector as above, i.e. weather defined to a waypoint with a selector to define start time for weather within a selected specific radius of the waypoint. Selected...meaning the mission builder selects.

A competent set of comms with a broad selection of things selectable on the fly, i.e., disengage next waypoint, disengage return to base, engage fighters, engage bombers, ground targets first,etc. I can't tell you how many times my whole flight was shot down by FLAK, because target was not destroyed they would not disengage.

Fires,explosions,smoke that could be placed like objects, but complete cycle for these type of objects selectable for start/end time.

Artillery that could actually fire realworld distances (WW2 distances). This would mean artillery could be targeting airbases miles away. THis could force some very interesting missions, especially if you were trying to secure a base that was constantly being shelled.
Setting trajectory on artillery and long range weapons might answer that if the muzzle velocity was close to full real.

I'm not sure with the way maps work realworld weapons travel distance could be duplicated, but at least this could be enhanced to something more sensible than the current line of site thing.

A complete array of detroyed objects that could be placed without having to destroy them in the missions. War is a dirty business, and the pristine landscapes of Il2 between cities has always been strange.

A click and drag to enclose a group of objects and move them all at once to another location, duplicate or delete them as one item.

This a biggy....

Allow mission builder to specify AI performance with a percent possibility applied to skill levels.

If you are approaching an enemy aircraft from the rear, the AI would start Jinking 30% of the time, but continue to fly as before 70% of the time. It is so irritating regardless of when you hit the six of an enemy plane within .40 KM he starts jinking and evading every single time.

-----------------

I've not experienced a random or percentage generator being applied over a broad range of AI performance or triggers, but it sure would provide a lot of changes within a mission. You could even replay a mission many times without duplicating it twice in most cases.

I mentioned radius areas for weather from a waypoint. Events could be triggered by aircraft entering, be inside or leaving a radius area of a waypoint,i.e. If you wanted to trigger a SPAWN event for a flight of bombers as you entered a described radius area from a waypoint.
If you had a couple of flights of bombers you no longer needed, because they were going back to base. You would conserve processor and memory when the bombers entered the described radius of a waypoint. The bombers would DE-SPAWN on entry.(be automatically removed from the mission with not discernible action taking place)

Bearcat99
08-26-2006, 07:45 PM
Duuuuhhhhh...........

nearmiss
08-26-2006, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Duuuuhhhhh...........

Okkkkkkkk now what?

I can't believe you've run out of something to say bud. I know I didn't say it all..

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

LEXX_Luthor
08-26-2006, 10:16 PM
*bump*

Combat air patrol waypoints -- aircraft orbit around a waypoint until out of fuel or out of ammo...or until the AI have just enough fuel to return to base.

* We assume BoB AI aircraft will calculate fuel use fairly properly. For the larger Air War simulation, this is more important than modelling the player's fuel tank selection micro-management.

Make factories seperate type of Building Object from houses and barns, with user defined draw distance to both. We could then set factories to be visible from 30,000 feet and 10 miles away, but let the houses be invisible. That would allow smooth bomb runs on the more military targets like factories. I don't think this is really an FMB issue though. But I was thinking about this recently.

nearmiss
08-27-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
*bump*

Combat air patrol waypoints -- aircraft orbit around a waypoint until out of fuel or out of ammo...or until the AI have just enough fuel to return to base.

* We assume BoB AI aircraft will calculate fuel use fairly properly. For the larger Air War simulation, this is more important than modelling the player's fuel tank selection micro-management.


We had those kind of waypoints in CFS2 mission builder.




Make factories seperate type of Building Object from houses and barns, with user defined draw distance to both. We could then set factories to be visible from 30,000 feet and 10 miles away, but let the houses be invisible. That would allow smooth bomb runs on the more military targets like factories. I don't think this is really an FMB issue though. But I was thinking about this recently.

I think this is very good. I'd also like to see smoke and fires from greater distances. It would be better still if the fire and smoke was on a start/finish timer as well.

-----------------

I'd like to be able to lay out a bunch of fire and smoke objects, specific viewing distance, and start/finish time. The viewing distance may have been a problem a year ago, but todate most of us have upgraded and it's just not that big an issue.

It would also be nice to have colored smoke for tagging target areas. It was common for ground troops or pre-attack aircraft to place smoke for aircraft and artillery to get range and placement on target areas.

A comprehensive set of Comms that could actually trigger events, and have some real control over AI performance.

-----------------------

Applying most of the things we discuss on this thread would probably make this into a world class sim, especially for us "Offline" players.

I can't tell you how many times I would have loved to be able to despawn aircraft/s. I've built numerous missions where I needed to remove the bombers from the mission after they'd dropped their payloads. I needed to free up memory to add other exciting elements to the mission.

Like every mission builder I did a workaround. I ran the no longer needed bombers into mountains and other stuff to take them out of the mission. I did have to listen to all their moans and groans as they crashed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
It was difficult to remove all the bombers regardless of how you did the workaround, one or two always seemed to survive. What a hoot http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

Snyde-Dastardly
08-27-2006, 02:28 PM
Id love to see a catagorized objects menu. The object list we have now is a major pain in my ars!

nearmiss
08-27-2006, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Snyde-Dastardly:
Id love to see a catagorized objects menu. The object list we have now is a major pain in my ars!

Excellent point! It would be so much easier if aircraft were by Country category, Objects by type, etc.

Scrolling all the choices in FMB is a major time waster.

bigchump
09-02-2006, 04:39 AM
The ability to save missions-in-progress would be nice. For mission builders, it would allow us to debug EASIER if we could save just before whatever causes that nasty mission crash. For end users the benefits are obvious.

nearmiss
09-04-2006, 10:29 PM
I just got finished flying several missions and I felt I'd been there before. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

The AI on both sides are just determined to hang around a bad situation until they're all toast.

Only way they'll quit is when the enemy has finally gotten out of range...whatever that is.

The FMB definitely needs the ability to program both sides during missions.

Now this might be thought of as AI, which it is and really isn't. The FMB could have triggers on both sides that could be set, and certain events would take place of those triggers were set.

Anyway... The Offline play is about like it always was. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

Tater-SW-
09-04-2006, 10:44 PM
More control of the AI would be nice.

The ability to force it to do stuff (drop ord NOW, fly at this alt, PERIOD, etc).

The ability to control pilot vs gunner AI skill levels.

The ability to set some threshhold of damage before they RTB/run away.

Those sorts of things.

tater

nearmiss
09-05-2006, 01:25 PM
I have used a workaround that did help on both sides. I only applied 15% fuel to the aircraft in the mission. The aircraft were close to Bingo when they engaged. The friendly and enemy were already almost outta gas. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Tricky me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

The really funny part is workarounds have always been the way to get things done within the FMB. Mission builders are all savvy workarounders.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I should also say... There have been many times I don't think fuel levels made any difference at all.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Bearcat99
09-08-2006, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by nearmiss:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Duuuuhhhhh...........

Okkkkkkkk now what?

I can't believe you've run out of something to say bud. I know I didn't say it all..

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMAO... nahh It's just so obvious that we need that and there were so many great suggestions... all I could say was duuuuhhhh that and how about the AI being able to give you avecto to its location... hopefully in a few years this new AI chip coming out soon will be incorporated into sims as well....

Tater-SW-
09-08-2006, 10:31 AM
If there are several different types of AI code (fighter, fighter-bomber, dive bomber, level bomber, torpedo bomber, recon, etc), don't hard-link the AI to the plane type, but have it as a variable in the "properties" for the flight. That way mission builders can experiment with applying different AI code to planes to see if they get a desired behavior (since we all know that the AI has a mind of it's own, lol).

tater

Dunkelgrun
09-08-2006, 10:36 AM
How about 1C:Maddox employing somebody who is skilled at mapmaking, and who actually cares about the end product?
That way the mission builders would only have to build the missions, not half of the bloody landscape as well.
AFAIK Ian Boys isn't working on the BoB maps... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Cheers!

PS Agree with all of the wishlists above http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Bearcat99
09-09-2006, 09:55 PM
Wean do that now... with the basic landscape there.. all you need is sonmeone to put the objects on and share the template...

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2006, 09:49 AM
The Objects vanish from view in 5 or so kilometers. You have to fly on top of these Objects to see them. That's why I never bothered much with "templates" and moved on to another sim that does allow the creation of very long range Air War simulation grafix effects -- granted, that "open" sim is quite closed while FB/PF is open in some critical respects (ie...Lowengrin's DCG). So no, we can't do much to create an enhanced and immersive Air War simulation environment with these FB/PF maps and grafix. We can't even Delete the developer placed objects from our maps if we wish, with one very important exception...!!

For many, the most useful map modding ability ever offered by Oleg/Luthier was never planned as such -- somehow they let through the ability for the community to Delete thousands of framerate killing PF Palm Tree Objects with the FMB Destruction slider, at least for Offline play, as crazyivan said the "trick" won't work Online. I dunno.

The infamous Pacific Fighters killing PTO -- Palm Tree Objects, and everybody thought PTO was an abbreviation of Pacific Theater of Operations. Not so! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Chuck_Older
09-12-2006, 10:04 AM
When viewing an object in the FMB, what we DON'T need is to have the list snap shut because your cursor strayed outside the window- you all know what I mean

It would also be nice to have windows that you open for things like view object and edit conditions to work like windows...you can minimise them for example, and if you click and drag the window to the upper right hand corner, the next time you open that window, it should be at the size you left it, and it should be where you left it

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">We also need the ability to DELETE missions from the FMB!</span>

LEXX_Luthor
09-12-2006, 10:11 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Chuck::
When viewing an object in the FMB, what we DON'T need is to have the list snap shut because your cursor strayed outside the window- <span class="ev_code_yellow">you all know what I mean </span>
We know. When I would scroll through the List of aircraft at il2skins, looking for skin mods to download, I was SOOO nervous about letting my mouse stray outside the il2skins aircraft list box -- seeing the familiar FB/PF aircraft names in a list triggered a fright response in me. I had been Psycho conditioned into this Paranoid behavior like Pavlov's puppy by using Oleg's FMB so much.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Tater-SW-
09-12-2006, 05:24 PM
Either the static planes need an abbriviated "real" (flying AI) DM, or we need the ability to park AI planes where we like so they stay there on the ground. I prefer the former method, since it is kind of a waste to have AI units tied up as static planes. OTOH, the "X hits, then BOOM, blown up state" is really really lacking. Using "real" planes as strafign targets shows how very much more complicated real strafing is (knowing if you damaged them, etc).

tater

Chuck_Older
09-15-2006, 08:34 AM
Here's a great one-

Have all names on all maps, all town, city, airfield, river, etc names be on a layer that can be turned on or off. This will allow maps to be used for areas other than those they represent. Another step would be to have a mission-maker defined layer that allows the mission maker to place his or her own text on the map. So for example, on the Kuban map, I could turn off the 'real names' layer, turn on the 'player names' layer, and then put my own names on towns, rivers, etc

The ability to turn "off" airfields would be nice too, so that some of the maps with an abundance of airfields could be toned down

nearmiss
09-16-2006, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Here's a great one-

Have all names on all maps, all town, city, airfield, river, etc names be on a layer that can be turned on or off. This will allow maps to be used for areas other than those they represent. Another step would be to have a mission-maker defined layer that allows the mission maker to place his or her own text on the map. So for example, on the Kuban map, I could turn off the 'real names' layer, turn on the 'player names' layer, and then put my own names on towns, rivers, etc

The ability to turn "off" airfields would be nice too, so that some of the maps with an abundance of airfields could be toned down

This is good stuff. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Heck, who wants to fly the Crimea to represent South Britain for a Battle of Britain Campaign/Mission. The map says Kirch or Feyodosia, or etc. It's just real hard to get into that. LOL

Biggin Hill is kinda hard to find in the Crimea. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif