Will SoW be boring and superficial?

[csThor]

You misunderstand me. Most of the aircraft configured for the recon role were permanently equipped as recon. What I mean is not to have a "recon loadout" but dedicated recon aircraft types - so not just a P-38 with cams but a F-5 and no Ju 88 A flying as recon but a Ju 88 D. Doing it "right" would certainly force the developer to think things through - including spending brain time on how to incorporate recon missions into gameplay

[tater]

My appologies, I thought I made it clear that dedicated recon types would be prefered. If a given plane only became a recon platform via replacing one or more weapons with a camera, with no real changes, the sticking the camera in as a load would be fine.

I'm sure bombers were used this way in the SWPA since they were short on planes. They'd stick a camera up in the glazed front of a B-17 and take pictures. If there were fighyters so modified, then cut a new window behind the cockpit and add the camera load (if they knew that was a variant, they could make the figher with the camera hole waiting, then create the recon variant by opening the hole, sticking the camera in, and dumping ammo/guns as needed.

[I/ZG52_Gaga]

These voices of agony are definitely justified.

I strongly believe that we are hostage to the wishes of the trigger happy bunch that is single minded and obsessed with shooting at something and watch it blow.

It's very sad that this regime of halfwits is the the main stream that decides for the rest of the virtual pilots that want & need more than riding the fastest AC & shoot at something without this helping them to solve their real life "Shortcomings" if you know what I mean ......

We definitely need and expect more than just overmodeled Allied AC and undermodeled Axis AC to make a game interesting....

[tater]

One really important AI capability required for the BoB is British RADAR.

Not some kind of icons on the map that move with GPS precision in real time, but actual RADAR the way pilots would experience it. You get scrambled. You get radio reports telling you where to go, NOT telling you where the enemy is, necessarily.

The FMB need to have the ability to control what, and how radar data is given to a given squadron. In general, they need to have the ability to have time based messages of any kind desired (ideally with a folder you can simply add audio files to). Triggers could also be used to call audio files.

Reach 20k feet, and a trigger goes off saying, "proceed NW to London and climb to angels 23." When you get inside some radius near london (applied in the FMB), a trigger vectors you somewhere else, etc.

Failure to properly implement RAF command and control would shatter immersion, IMO.

Another technical feature that affects immersion. Kill crediting.

Video game instant, perfect score keeping is very weak, IMO. Kill credits should be based upon if the plane had a gun camera in RL, if another, friendly aircraft was within some range to confirm the kill, and also if the kill was made over home territory where you can examine the wreckage.

Ideally, it would be neat to see a debriefing screen after a mission. You'd be asked a series of questions on the screen and you answer via pull-down menus.

Did you see enemy aircraft (and how many)? pull down: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+, 10+, 20+, 40+, 100+]

Did you engage enemy aircraft (and how many)? [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+, 20+]

Did you damage any enemy aircraft (and how many)? [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+, 20+]

What types were damaged? [types with numbers entered by player]

Did you shoot down any enemy aircraft (and how many)? [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20+]

What types were destroyed? [types with numbers entered by player]

Did you see any friendly shoot down enemy aircraft?[list of friendly planes by ID painted on plane (RF • A, etc)]
(this would then pull up a sub menu asking what TYPE for each friendly that you saw make a shoot down)

Did your aircraft sustain damage? [Y, N]

Where were you hit? [check boxes for fuselage, wings, engine, etc]

It would use the questionnaire to credit you with kills and damages based upon confirmation rules. Damages would be taken at face value, probably. Unconfirmed kills would get damage credit. Note that online, your debrief could affect the kill crediting of a friendly player.

tater

[brando]

"..... Note that online, your debrief could affect the kill crediting of a friendly player."

For that reason I would hope that the game might include an option to pass on using this system, not that I can find anything wrong with it, just because I can imagine a lot of fliers not co-operating.

Imagine a scramble and melee at 20,000 feet. I engage an enemy and down him (well I can wish ) and this is witnessed by one other person. However, this person gets blasted in next minute and leaves the arena (as so many do) without filling out a debrief. I think this would cause a little 'tension' in Hyperlobby, don't you?

It certainly has promise for offline and perhaps squadron matches online though, a nice idea

cheers

B

[robtek]

one thing that shurely was hated by all pilots is paperwork, especially debriefs.
one needs really to tend towards masochismus to do that in a game one plays for fun.

[tater]

It's one screen with a handful of pulldowns. My guess is that you'd fill it out in maybe 10-15 seconds, tops. I realize 15 seconds is too long for many to wait to get into the next dirt-brushing furball, but such servers would not chose to use this option.

I, for one, would be fascinated to look at server data for claimed kills vs real kills.

Like any ideas, these are TOOLS that mission/campaign/server/online war builders can chose to use.

tater