PDA

View Full Version : Realism aspect for Storm of War



CornbreadPattie
02-17-2007, 10:32 PM
PC flight sims are games. There are objectives and ways to get them.

War isn't a game. It is similar in that there are objectives and ways to get them, but you don't get points for doing so.

Here's my point. I would like stricter rules for getting credit for kills on Storm of War. The downed aircraft needs to be within a certain range of view for an AI pilot or ground crew to confirm your claim. Or you need to catch it on gun camera going down, or get a shot of the pilot in his parachute, or dead.

In the Battle of Britain film wasn't used widely by the RAF and much of it was never released. So maybe we should focus more on having the downed plane crash within a certain range of view of the nearest AI aircraft.

After landing the scenerio should go like this:

1) 'click' exit mission
2) Visit airbase screen. Click to enter claims. Type '1, 2, 3' or however many planes you want to claim.
3) Next mission.
4) Next Mission.
5) "Dear [rank].[pilot_name],
You have been awarded kills for 1 Me 109, 1 Ju 88, and one Me 109 probably killed. Congradulations.

Sincerely,
[Officer In Charge]"

6) Repeat, repeat, repeat!

I'm not asking to view gun camera footage in SoW. That might be asking for too much. But I would at least like the option for "long kill requests" and an option to remove the "Enemy Aircraft Destroyed, Enemy Tank Destroyed, Enemy Ship Destroyed, Enemy Car Destroyed, Enemy AAA Destroyed."


Thanks again,

Oscar

CornbreadPattie
02-17-2007, 10:32 PM
PC flight sims are games. There are objectives and ways to get them.

War isn't a game. It is similar in that there are objectives and ways to get them, but you don't get points for doing so.

Here's my point. I would like stricter rules for getting credit for kills on Storm of War. The downed aircraft needs to be within a certain range of view for an AI pilot or ground crew to confirm your claim. Or you need to catch it on gun camera going down, or get a shot of the pilot in his parachute, or dead.

In the Battle of Britain film wasn't used widely by the RAF and much of it was never released. So maybe we should focus more on having the downed plane crash within a certain range of view of the nearest AI aircraft.

After landing the scenerio should go like this:

1) 'click' exit mission
2) Visit airbase screen. Click to enter claims. Type '1, 2, 3' or however many planes you want to claim.
3) Next mission.
4) Next Mission.
5) "Dear [rank].[pilot_name],
You have been awarded kills for 1 Me 109, 1 Ju 88, and one Me 109 probably killed. Congradulations.

Sincerely,
[Officer In Charge]"

6) Repeat, repeat, repeat!

I'm not asking to view gun camera footage in SoW. That might be asking for too much. But I would at least like the option for "long kill requests" and an option to remove the "Enemy Aircraft Destroyed, Enemy Tank Destroyed, Enemy Ship Destroyed, Enemy Car Destroyed, Enemy AAA Destroyed."


Thanks again,

Oscar

SeaFireLIV
02-18-2007, 03:33 AM
er... I just wanted to say that i agree with your sig.... We got overruled I think...

Scorpion.233
02-18-2007, 04:15 AM
Why the hell would you want that? Realism is fine to a certain extend, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

FritzGryphon
02-18-2007, 04:54 AM
I think the word you're looking for is 'immersion'.

For the same reason people put fans blowing in their face while they play, to have an imaginary fellow tell you how many kills he thinks you've gotten.

Foo.bar
02-18-2007, 04:55 AM
Interesting and charmant idea. Agree.

XyZspineZyX
02-18-2007, 05:26 AM
It's not such a bad idea. It might be simpler to need to have X Y and Z conditions apply to get a victory if your wingman doesn't come home, so that you have more of an incentive to keep your squadmates alive

Another small feature could easily be in comms, where there is a button for 'Confirm kill?' and your wingman or wingmen could simply call out "Yessir, down in flames, well done!" or "Confirmed, skipper" or "Negative, no visual". That might dovetail nicely with the ability to tun gun switches "Off" and camera switches "on", so you can snap 'photos' of the wreckage if the visual is not confirmed by a squadmate

That starts me on comms, where it might be nice to alert your whole flight to bogies, hell AotP had that, but I digress...

BadA1m
02-18-2007, 08:25 PM
Wow, no flames yet, and it's been over 10 minutes. I'm impressed! Great Ideas, I like the uncertanty of it all, just like real life.

I remember Oleg saying somwhere that the AI command structure will be expanded for BOB, let's just hope it's well thought out and easy to use.

rugame
02-19-2007, 03:11 AM
i like it..

+1

arrow80
02-19-2007, 10:21 AM
and for coms, we should also get default engine for voice activated commands

Philipscdrw
02-19-2007, 11:35 AM
It's a nice idea...

Taking it further, it would be brilliant if the sim engine and the menus were seperated and the interface between them published, so anyone could make a program which gives the user a nice specialised interface (for campaigns, DF servers, etc), gives a map to the SoW game engine, and receives/monitors certain data from the engine as/after you fly. Then, if you write a campaign, you could set whichever logic you like to score kills.

I really want to see the end of the 'Enemy Aircraft Destroyed' text - it's very counter-immersive!

Manu-6S
02-28-2007, 09:00 AM
Good one CornbreadPattie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

JerryFodder
02-28-2007, 10:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Philipscdrw:
It's a nice idea...

Taking it further, it would be brilliant if the sim engine and the menus were seperated and the interface between them published, so anyone could make a program which gives the user a nice specialised interface (for campaigns, DF servers, etc), gives a map to the SoW game engine, and receives/monitors certain data from the engine as/after you fly. Then, if you write a campaign, you could set whichever logic you like to score kills.

I really want to see the end of the 'Enemy Aircraft Destroyed' text - it's very counter-immersive! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


This is absolutely spot on except there should be default scoring that can be disabled. I fear it's all too late - this code would've already been written I suspect.

Waldo.Pepper
02-28-2007, 12:36 PM
+1 I approve.

Mysticpuma2003
02-28-2007, 12:48 PM
Clever idea, would also be nice online as-well, bare with me.

It would be an incentive to fly as a duo or finger-four and at the end of a sortie when you hit refly, you could enter a visual kill for your team-mate.

I know nothing about coding, but I could see it open to exploit, so the only way I can see getting around it, would be for the game engine to only offer you the chance to input a confirmed kill, if when the enemy was hit, your plane had been seen by the game to be within visual (dot) range of the friendly attack on the bandit.

The more I type it out, the more complicated I can see it getting, and it would need some serious tweaking to get it right, but again as FritzGryphon said, it's all about immersion.

Anyway, back to the original, good idea, cheers, MP.

RAF74_Raptor
02-28-2007, 09:55 PM
I agree I like it

Breeze147
03-01-2007, 06:04 AM
For fuller immersion we could simulate picking up the cute WAF in the office and digging some mud for our turtles. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

otpisan
03-01-2007, 07:45 AM
Would be nice to have such options, IMHO:

- no Enemy Aircraft Destroyed
- other pilot confirmation
- guncam
- etc.

OTOH, what about dogfighting at higher altitudes, 5-8 km, for example? How could that be confirmed, in real life or in-game, if the damage is some smoke from the engine or a few holes and a spin?

There is/was always a possibility of a recovery, far lower, and low-power flight / glide to the home base, IMO.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

ploughman
03-01-2007, 08:36 AM
Well I'm hoping for two scores. One for technical skill and one for artistic merit.

p-11.cAce
03-01-2007, 08:56 AM
Score stats are often an area for heated debate - and short of finding some really GREAT admins whatever system you use needs to be as automated as possible which means well defined "if this than this" coded for every possible "kill" scenario. The 334th is working out ideas for stats formulas based on the current scoring system with an emphasis on "bringing the bird home in one piece" and K/D ratios as opposed to just outright top score.

The problem online is that the average guy who can fly for hours a day every day is going to score higher (generally) than the ace who squeezes in a few hours a week.

I imagine that the SoW score system will basically mirror what we have now - so imho the focus should be on figuring out how to best balance: K/D ratio, hours flown, kills per hour, crashes/landings/bails, and accuracy against total kills.

Heck given unlimited flight time even I could probably come out well on pure number of "raw" kills (though my K/D, accuracy, and kills per hour would be sad indeed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif)

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-01-2007, 08:58 AM
I realize there's simply much thinking-outside-the-box going on here, but at the risk of losing some immersion, we need to realize that many potential buyers (and current community members) view this as a pc game and because of limitations of viewscreen size, wide diversity of pc performance that developers need to consider, and differing levels of devotion some things are just not going to happen.

I know if I'm flying at 7k and in a nice little scrap where I get multiple/good strikes on my adversary it'll count as a kill...and it should. In RL, if I'm in a 109 and over London the Tommy just might be able to deadstick and land and perhaps that wouldn't count as a kill...but it should.

IMO, trying to implement too many of the 'what-if' possibilities under the guise of "...it could happen" isn't immersion, it's an immersion-killer.


TB