Friday 2010-11-26 Dev. update and Discussion

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by IFnXI

I`ll try to translate word by word this sentence about dynamic campaign:

"...Нету динамической кампании, как таковой, которую любят аркадные игроки очень, хотя в последних аркадах я их вообще не вижу, там просто маленький набор миссий и все."

"...There is no dynamic campaign, as such, wich arcade players likes very much, although in recent arcades I don`t see one in general, there is just small set of missions and that's all"

May be I missed something in context, but as I understand there is fully static campaign. About dynamic campain - only that words wich I translated.

P.S. I guess, it could be better, if Oleg clarify a question with one's own hand.

You're right, this sounds like it was pulled out of the context. If it turns out to be true, which again I somehow doubt, it would go against everything Oleg has said so far.

As others have said - Oleg already stated on more than one occasion that you won't be able to win as LW. Based on your latest input - the only logical conclusion I can make is that we might get somewhat "scripted" campaign (based on that book) with dynamic missions. Based on that book.

Can you translate more of the interview for us please?

After some more thought - has Oleg ever confirmed (talked about) the dynamical campaign in the BoB??

[IFnXI]

Originally Posted by T}{OR

Can you translate more of the interview for us please?

Unfortunately, full translation takes to much time. So I can translate only short abstracts of interview.

[Flanker35M]

S!

csThor..I know what you mean. But we know a LOT more than Lufties or Raffites at the time. And BoB started strategically earlier, in France already. I am sure everyone has read their history

Say a player is Geschwader Kommodore of SKG210 and destroys the Home Chain and/or other radar towers succesfully, opening a path for the bombers. How can RAF then direct full force on attacking bombers? And if all the frontline fields are bombed useless LW would have air superiority over southern England etc. Of course a VERY simplified example, but you get the pic

Falcon 4.0 and Falcon 4.0:Allied Force has the dynamic campaign that has not been surpassed by any sim yet. Rowan's BoB II has one too yet it has limitations on LW side as it was primarily aimed to be RAF side. Nevertheless dynamic. What SoW will have is to be seen, but high hopes that not a series of canned missions where previous outcome has no effect on next etc. Would be dull if you bombed a Sector comm center hampering Sector Command operations and in next mission all is good again..

SoW delivers a totally new experience after IL-2 in many areas, as seen on updates. Let's hope other areas are up to it as well. Content is a big part of ANY game. So fingers crossed and thumbs up SoW will become THE bench for the next decade and beyond.

[SlipBall]

I remember what turned out to be a very active debate in a poll over at the zoo. Oleg had asked Faustnik to do the poll, to find out what would be perfered dynamic campaign or etc.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

csThor..I know what you mean. But we know a LOT more than Lufties or Raffites at the time. And BoB started strategically earlier, in France already. I am sure everyone has read their history

So? Numerical superiority alone is not a guarantee to win a battle. Ask Dareios III at Gaugamela, ask Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro at Cannae, ask Marshal Bazaine at Mars-la-Tour. All of these enjoyed a convincing numerical superiority before the battle ... and still suffered a crushing defeat. Numerical superiority gives one side merely more options but they still have to employ them in a meaningful way.

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

Say a player is Geschwader Kommodore of SKG210 and destroys the Home Chain and/or other radar towers succesfully, opening a path for the bombers. How can RAF then direct full force on attacking bombers? And if all the frontline fields are bombed useless LW would have air superiority over southern England etc. Of course a VERY simplified example, but you get the pic

First its Erprobungsgruppe 210 () and my response would be "So?". You're still a subordinate to Luftflotte 2 and get your operation orders from there. So you don't have a say in what's your target and all you can do is fulfill the order as good as you can while keeping your men alive.

So we're back at the strategic decisions which are being made by people who aren't flying combat missions anymore. Besides the Luftwaffe did not have the insights we have today, the significance of the Radar stations was not understood and they were difficult to hit so after a while it seemed wasted effort to go after them. But again ... this is not on the layer a flight sim can and should depict, this is strategy.

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

Falcon 4.0 and Falcon 4.0:Allied Force has the dynamic campaign that has not been surpassed by any sim yet. Rowan's BoB II has one too yet it has limitations on LW side as it was primarily aimed to be RAF side. Nevertheless dynamic. What SoW will have is to be seen, but high hopes that not a series of canned missions where previous outcome has no effect on next etc. Would be dull if you bombed a Sector comm center hampering Sector Command operations and in next mission all is good again..

I don't understand why people bring up Falcon 4 for a good campaign. Yes, it had a brilliant engine with a lot of dynamics but it utterly failed to create immersion for me. Maybe I'm too old-school but I happen to severely dislike switching units and flights, free choosing of missions, entering cockpits while already airborne and a general lack of anything that makes me believe I am a small pilot in a great conflict. In that respect, meaning making me believe I am part of a living and breathing world, I still rate Red Baron II as the very best campaign I ever played.

[Flanker35M]

S!

SoW will be at level of a squadron then, understandable. In Rowan's game you can play as a strategic game too, thus change outcome of the BoB. Even in SWOTL you could

I merely gave a simplified example that IF the 210, for example, had been successfull then the bombers would have a bit more time before being intercepted. That is a lot in terms of warfare. Damage is done already if the attacking force is egressing.

Why Falcon 4.0? Because it has a dynamic campaign, plain and simple. Everything around you went on even you would just sit and watch the map. You were a mere asset in the war. That is what still makes F 4.0 great.

What would be a let down in SoW is that it would be a scripted series of missions with an outcome written in stone regardless your actions. Just let the plane Autopilot all missions, what's the difference? Just a game with exceptional graphics but that's it. We've seen BoB before and would SoW be any different in that string? Been there, done that.

With extreme sarcasm..Was the wait of 6 years worth at all when all we get is fancy graphics and a set of features, but with no real content? Why fly for Luftwaffe at all when the only challenge would be not to die in the string of canned missions? That would offer zero replay value as the outcome is already known.

Above statement aside I believe SoW will offer a lot more and be the next sim to fly for years to come. Oleg and his team pulled this off with IL-2 so SoW will be no exception.

[BadAim]

All of this is just too speculative. When Oleg is ready he tell tell us. Whatever the fact, we'll have the other 1n short order anyway. There will be mission builders building missions, and I won't be surprised to see a version of DCG for SOW eventually. We'll soon be inundated with every possible outcome of the battle........

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

Why Falcon 4.0? Because it has a dynamic campaign, plain and simple. Everything around you went on even you would just sit and watch the map. You were a mere asset in the war. That is what still makes F 4.0 great.

That, in itself, is not a virtue but a part of it. Quite frankly if the devs fail to transport that stuff (= what we call immersion) then the effort, while laudable, is a failed effort. And Falcon 4 was a failed effort in my opinion as it was as interesting as watching paint dry.

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

With extreme sarcasm..Was the wait of 6 years worth at all when all we get is fancy graphics and a set of features, but with no real content? Why fly for Luftwaffe at all when the only challenge would be not to die in the string of canned missions? That would offer zero replay value as the outcome is already known.

Here we disagree. I very much consider the idea that flying alone (and the performance of a single pilot to boot) could influence a confrontation such as the BoB is ludicrous to the umpteenth degree.
What I want for the campaign is accuracy in the details ... meaning for example that an Oberstleutnant (such as "Vati" Mölders) had authority over his Geschwader but he had no say in the general conduct of the battle. Various ranks have various layers of responsibility (my phrase) and I'd like to see that represented ... I want, to make a long story short, a good representation of what the everyday life of a pilot was like back then ... and not some gamey "let's ignore that Göring and Hitler are idiots and win the BoB with our knowledge and hindsight".

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by csThor

Here we disagree. I very much consider the idea that flying alone (and the performance of a single pilot to boot) could influence a confrontation such as the BoB is ludicrous to the umpteenth degree.
What I want for the campaign is accuracy in the details ... meaning for example that an Oberstleutnant (such as "Vati" Mölders) had authority over his Geschwader but he had no say in the general conduct of the battle. Various ranks have various layers of responsibility (my phrase) and I'd like to see that represented ... I want, to make a long story short, a good representation of what the everyday life of a pilot was like back then ... and not some gamey "let's ignore that Göring and Hitler are idiots and win the BoB with our knowledge and hindsight".

^^
This,

pretty much sums up my way of thinking as well. I do hope all you said here makes it into SoW. Having control of your own squadron and not taking part in overall war changing decisions sound just right to me if BoB is to be focused on historical accuracy.

Also, last time I heard this is a plane simulator and not a strategic game.

[nynek]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

SoW will be at level of a squadron then, understandable. In Rowan's game you can play as a strategic game too, thus change outcome of the BoB. Even in SWOTL you could

I merely gave a simplified example that IF the 210, for example, had been successfull then the bombers would have a bit more time before being intercepted. That is a lot in terms of warfare. Damage is done already if the attacking force is egressing.

Why Falcon 4.0? Because it has a dynamic campaign, plain and simple. Everything around you went on even you would just sit and watch the map. You were a mere asset in the war. That is what still makes F 4.0 great.

What would be a let down in SoW is that it would be a scripted series of missions with an outcome written in stone regardless your actions. Just let the plane Autopilot all missions, what's the difference? Just a game with exceptional graphics but that's it. We've seen BoB before and would SoW be any different in that string? Been there, done that.

With extreme sarcasm..Was the wait of 6 years worth at all when all we get is fancy graphics and a set of features, but with no real content? Why fly for Luftwaffe at all when the only challenge would be not to die in the string of canned missions? That would offer zero replay value as the outcome is already known.

Above statement aside I believe SoW will offer a lot more and be the next sim to fly for years to come. Oleg and his team pulled this off with IL-2 so SoW will be no exception.

---
With all due respect to You Flanker but I think You made cardinal mistake comparing real history events SOW with totally fictional time frame Falcon game. In the past, dynamic campaign was all over my lips. I wanted to be in charge and see effects of my shooting. Thing is after a while I found Mission4today site and I started dwld some of Their stuff. One day I found myself in Hurri plus 3 against 20+ Heinkels with 12 Bf as a bodyguards. And You know what, I didn't have time ponder about what'll be tomorrow because I was hard at thinking (about 5 second) how to stop those bombers and SURVIVE. Flanker I'm sure You witnessed some forum wars about FM, lack of ashtray in Galland Bf and so on and on. We strive for realism in performances, looks, ballistics so why not in HISTORY. Our holly grail in this game should be to finish a game alive and if it is too easy for You turn off or on those buttons in realism and try to fly campaign from the day You bought the SOW.
That's my personal view on those things what You thinking ?

nynek