Yep, i don't think anyone here considers the ATAG guys responsible for the state of the game. It would be foolish on our part to do so. I mean, they provide a public server out of their own pocket and what they have works 99% of the time, it would be terribly ungrateful on our part if we were going "ATAG fix me some missions i like better, k thnx bye"
Like Bliss says, things go hand in hand. As the game improves, the community as a whole will be able to do more. What i'm proposing is that all of us chose a field we like and stick to it, so that as time goes by we can all do the same or better in less time.
I think that we are getting a good exchange of ideas here and maybe we can gather some proposals to submit to 1c, so that they focus on them once the graphics and stability optimizations are finished and contained in an official patch.
The consensus seems to be that we need the proper "setting" first and foremost, something that will coerce players to fly the scenario and cooperate to make it happen. To do this it must be enjoyable for players and possible for mission builders to construct.
This implies having suitable mission types, which in turn implies a historically plausible relationship between the aircraft in the sim. What i mean by that is that even though it's impossible to get FMs 100% correct, as long as the relative strengths and weaknesses between individual aircraft are modeled, along with having the missions to make them useful, things will get a lot better.
Overall, from where i'm standing this means 2-3 specific things, starting from the easier fixes and moving to the more difficult ones.
1) Fix the bombers once and for all.
This makes people fly them more, which in turn gives the fighter pilots more interesting things to do, even with the current state of the dedicated server and without needing to construct new missions.
It's one thing to fly solo in an 88 and dive bomb or go skimming the tress in a 110, both against heavily protected targets in suicide runs, it's a totally different thing to have 4-5 people in bombers along with a few escorts.
The missions remain the same, but the way to accomplish the objectives becomes more realistic and more fun. Bomber pilots coordinate among themselves, the fighter pilots can join in to give an escort, the other team will try to organize a defence, etc.
So, even when flying the exact same missions under the same dedicated server code, we now have more things to do and more interesting gameplay.
This will keep us all busy until the following happen, plus it builds up a core of players that can then train more into the whole idea of making an ad-hoc sortie in a semi-realistic manner.
Even if the bomber FMs are not 100% correct yet it's ok. What we urgently need is the simple stuff: working autopilots, working bombsights and a new AI mode that simulates the bombardier talking the pilot through the bomb run (so that people can level bomb even when their bomber has no autopilot).
In other words, i don't mind for now if the service ceiling on the 88 is a bit too low or the 111 is a bit too slow, as long as they can be used to aim through the sight and drop bombs on target.
2) Debug the FMB and the methods (aka scripting commands) supplied with the interface.
If the previous is happening and they also fix the FMB and scripts, the mission designers then have an incentive to build on top of their existing missions. If it's streamlined, well documented and possible to get results, more and more people will do it. And since it's reusable pieces of code, after a while we'll be able to mix and match.
Say i'm coding a script that takes stock of fuel levels in an airbase, adding and subtracting fuel to the base fuel dump whenever aircraft spawn or land back to it. No fuel = no flying from that base. I give the code to the server admins, they test it, like it and use it, possibly even improve it and correct a couple of bugs.
Another guy comes along and wants to take this further, he gets my code and another person's code that spawns AI convoys and combines them: now, when your airbase is low on fuel an AI truck convoy will spawn to resupply the base. Suddenly, the RAF pilot has something to protect and the LW pilot something to bomb.
Yet another guy comes along and expands this whole idea. Why not do the same with the amount of aircraft and pilots (virtual lives) for each team?
And another one with an even better idea...why not expand this to make a complete supply chain?
Before you know it, we now have a chain of events upon which hinges our ability to fly our favorite aircraft from our favorite airbase. If the base is low on fuel and the convoy doesn't reach the base i can't fly, if the refinery where the convoy spawns is low as well then an AI ship convoy spawning at the edge of the map must make it to port, if the Supermarine factory is bombed my team gets -X% replenishment rate for Spitfires and the same for spare parts (damaged planes get in the "hangar" queue and return to action once repaired), similarly bombing the training airfields affects how many virtual lives your team replenished per day. And so on and so forth.
Well, if we have all this it's pretty clear we don't need specific mission objectives anymore and this will also be easier on the mission designers. What we'll have at that point is a set of starting conditions for each team and a set of victory conditions. Et voila, here's the dynamic online campaign.
But for all of this to work, we need to have the FMB and the scripting tools debugged. Otherwise, it's like Bliss says: fighting around the bugs to make the simple stuff work doesn't leave time to make more complex missions.
3) Dedicated server and netcode optimizations.
Pretty self explanatory. The previous two are a combination between 1C fixing bugs and us doing something with the tools we're given. This final one is squarely on 1C's lap to fix.
Best of all, if this course of action is pursued the offline players benefit too: corrected flyables and more people dabbling in mission design and scripting is good for both offliners and onliners.
So what do you guys think? If this sounds a good course of action to you, we can ask 1C to fix these things in the mentioned order (from easiest to hardest) once they are done with the upcoming patch.