Poacher886

I agree with you. Though, while it is obvious we all want an accurate flight model of the A10 and systems, we want a sim here and not an arcade game! i don't feel the accruracy of the missions is quite so important, far more important in my opinion is to have an ebb and flow that we are part off. While no-one expects (or wants) a single A10 pilot to win a war all by himself, single missions which have no continuity / consequence to the campaign hold no value. I find it very hard to get excited about knocking a convoy of tanks out, on-route to my key target knowing that it make no difference to my next mission, the conflict, or me!! Unfortunately without some sort of dynamic campaign, its just you versus the computer with the reward of "Mission successful" at the end :noexpression:. I would rather have flown three times to knock an instalation out, but failed every time due to superiour enemy protection, and inadequate flying skills on my part ,and see the consequence of my failier as the campaign evolves...a real feeling disapointment and envolvment, knowing a failier means you just hit the start button again, hold no weight with it. Something almost as convincing a dynamic campaign could be conducted, if the mission editier allowed for randomness of enemy. Lets say you pick a convoy of enemy tanks to travel from point A to point B, your key target is these tanks. You will not no which route they will travel as it is random, based on terrain etc. added to this, SAM sites are laid down at random locations, enemy aircraft and forces are laid down at random, the only gurantee, is that there will be a convoy of tanks traveling from point A to point B. If you could sting 50+ missions of this type together then you could simulate, some sort of campaign feeling, Though obviously each mission would have no effect or result on any other), the randomness of the enemy would give it replayablity, and would mean that you would not know the enemys positions regardless of weither you created the mission or not. It does'nt hold a candle to a real dynamic campaign, but might be convincing enough. ANother poster mentioned the excellent dynamic campaign of "Falcon allied force", this proves what i already know....dynamic campaign can easily be put together.

To those that are saying a "Dynamic" campaign is either not possible or behond current capabilites... ALL SIMS back in the "hay-day" of flight sims during the 90's had dynamic campaigns!!! Seriously, when i first bought IL2 about 10yrs ago, i was horified to find it had a static campaign!! The last modern flight sim i played was EF2000, about 14yrs ago....it had a dynamic campign going on permently. The war was raging all the time and you could view the AWACS map to see the development of this in "REAL TIME"....your missions were given to you based on curent positons..including having to take of and land at an airbase closer to home in retreat if the enemy were doing well and over-run your forward airbases. Your destruction of key enemy forces / fuel depots / aircraft etc would directly (but in proportion) effect the advance / retreat of the enemy, it was a living breathing war....you could even decide when to take of to your target by watching the AWACS map and waiting for a quieter period!! Honestly..while no-one can stop the march of Graphics, the gaming industry took a huge leap backwards after the 90's, when it became a business and not a passion of the dev's. Deadlines had to be met, money had to be made, and inovation took a serious back seat to the rest....it marked the slow decline of PC gaming. Flight Sims used to be king,,,the FPS games of their day...15yrs later, im wishing the campaigns were as good as the were a decade and a half ago, considering the power difference of modern computers, like the Americans would say....go figure.

A Linear campaign with random generated missions would survice!. I read somewhere from the dev's that in order to ensure the quality of missions they did not make it dynamic...i could'nt disagree more. Flying a few quiet missions to the target and back with minimal even non-existant enemy, would be quite satisfying knowing that the next all hell can break loose. NOT knowing what is around the corner, will keep you alert and immersed in the conflict, where as scripted repeatable missions will spell out "IM AM A GAME" and slap it around your face!! The quality of the mission is ruined in my opinion by knowing it is all laid on rails for me. I want to feel like an A10 pilot conducting my tour in a conflict, not a sim gamer having a go at completing some missions.

Although a dynamic campaign is ideal, its not absoloutely essensial...as someone said earlier, lots of so-called dynamic campaigns are actually a clever use of fixed missions. Example: I start a campaign with a mission and succeed, then on to the next and so on....when i get to the fith mission, to lets say destroy a fuel depot, i survive the mission, but fail to destroy the depot. Now the orders might be "It has to be destroyed so we are going for a re-run", that fine; and realistic. But if i fly towards the depot, and know "this is the bit where the Mig comes out to receive me, then, its not fine and my immersion will be blown to point of leaving the game! Also, if i start a new campaign and know that in the fith mission i have to go and blow the depot which is defended by a Mig, then my immersion is blown and i will leave the game. However, If the sim has a box load of missions which play in no fixed order, or with many random triggers, (in line with the campaign of course), then each campaign start will appear completely different and fool me into the desirable dynamic "Real" feel of being a pilot in a conflict. If you add to that, some random generation of enemy aircraft / ground forces, so that even playing the same mission twice will play out differently, then you have a convincing sim with added longivety... It was the lack of this that made the IL2 series a good sim and not a great sim. While i accept their will be a hardcore of simmer's who don't care about anything other than the flying experience, i would bet i speak for the majority who perfer at least a little gaming in their sim.

Im still a little confused.... I wont be making any missions, for the reasons i mentioned....there's no suprise. So i guess that means im left with the ones in the box..hopefully hundreds joined together so it feels like im on a campaign! You see, when i play sims, i stick by a strict rule: DEAD is DEAD, i never hit the replay button, if i did, it would de-value the whole point of the sim for me. As i start going through various missions (either sucessfully or not) but alive, I start to get attached to my sucess and campaign, which generates a bit of caution and fear of getting knocked out. This provides a small taste of realism for me and adds value to both me and the missions. The point being if i've flown 5 sucessful missions then get dead, i will start a fresh campaign, but if i have to fly through the same missions again, with near perfectly same enemy's then i would tire of the sim quickly.. Thus why i say for me its all about the campaign and how it works..

Thanks, guy's im still interested! Even if the the campaign missions are linear but based on 'triggers' in the game and personell performance would probably survice...i just dont like to feel im playing a sim that runs on rails. If you recieved the same missions twice for instance, would that Mig always appear at the same mountain pass etc, or does your actions change the 'In-mission' occurences? Thanks

Thanks, what about the rest?

Hi, Im no stranger to flight sims, infact it was F19 Stealth fighter on the Amiga all those years back that got me hooked, closely followed by EF2000 (Eurofighter) for my first "propper" PC, however; EF2000 was my last "Modern" flight sim, where getting hooked on stratergy games and both the IL2 / Silent hunter series wooed me away...till now! After seeing the undeniably beautiful screen shots posted on the IL2 forum, it has sparked a flicker of excitment about modern aircraft again, and its great to see the once god of computer gaming "The sim" is still alive and kicking, and being done with DX11 to boot!! Anyway, i've skimmed the details about the sim, but it has left me with some questions concerning what to me is the most important part of it...the campaign. See; I have little interest in creating a mission, (which takes the suprise out of it anyway), flying it, landing, then rinse and repeat...... I like to feel, im in a dynamic conflict, and making a difference, i like to feel my actions (along with others) are having an effect on the enemy, I like to know, that if i destroy a signicant SAM sight, that it won't re-appear the next day. I like to be given my mission, and be allowed to kit my aircraft out for the given mission as i see fit...and decide on how i will tackle this mission and from which direction. I like to feel like a 'real' pilot, based at which ever airbase carring out his daily duty's / missions as ordered, smirking at the destroyed carcus of a tank i destroyed a week ago as i fly over its remains!! you get the picture. So, finally to my questions....Is the campaign dynamic?, over what time period does the conflict last?, are there a set amount of missions, or does it continue till your dead or old?, are the missions randomly generated or will they always be the same? Whats this i read about controlling ground forces..is this a straergy game aswell!!, do the Enemy AI have an agender, apart form providing targets for you?, can your airbases be over-run by the enemy forcing an airbase change? Can the conflict be one and lost? Does it playout differently each time?, does destroying enemy fighters/run-ways/tanks ect actually effect the conflict at all? Can you kit your own aircraft out before missions?,Does a sucessful enemy, start limiting your forces both in air and land. I could go on, but i guess, this is enough to tell me if i'll be buying or not ....i do hope it has alot of what im interested in because im quite excited about a return to technology. Thanks for yor answers