Do you like realistic mission lengh in campaigns

[jpm1]

do you like campaigns with missions where it takes 15 min or more to get to the combat zone

[pauldy]

Depends on the type of aircraft to be used i think.

 

Fast action is good for frontliner aircraft like the MiG-29, the Su-25 or the A-10.

Long ones fit the Flanker or the Eagle.

[X-man]

I like it.

[Pilotasso]

There are alot of people complaining about mission length. It may be a symptom that this is a survey, not harcore SIM thus at least half of the pople want to get into the air for some quick shots.

 

Most of the time I dont have time to play long missions but yes, when I can afford a day from morning to afternoon I like to invest on a realistic mission both in AG and AA.

 

Cheers

[Vekkinho]

In fact 15 minutes to get to the combat zone isn't a long inbound, but yes it suits fighters like Fulcrum as it exactly how it should be IRL. It's a frontline fighter which means it's deployed just behind the FLOT which places it into action straight away after cleanup! Same goes probably with both Su-25 and 25T!

 

Flankers and Eagles are the ones not necesarilly deployed near the FLOT as they have much greater combat range. They usually fly from airbases that are at some distance from the action, so during the climbout to a let's say 7500m they keep straight heading towards the combat zone. They are both air superiority fighters that fly fighter sweeps or CAPs and their presence over the FLOT is only necessary in case of enemy flights in that area. Their patrol routes are rarely placed within enemy controled airspace as there's no need in exposing them to a SAM threats in case there's no air activity on the other side.

 

I remember a 1996 "Deny Flight" operation over Bosnia when NATO birds flew CAP/Fighter sweep sorties. NATO fighters came in from Aviano AB in Italy which is like 300-450 km away from the heat, and they loitered in the airspace controlled by Croats and Bosnians, entering Serbian territory only if there was somebody to be shot down!

 

So yes, long inbound routes are realism, placing a IFR Tanker halfway down to the action is too!

[jpm1]

Depends on the type of aircraft to be used i think.

 

Fast action is good for frontliner aircraft like the MiG-29, the Su-25 or the A-10.

Long ones fit the Flanker or the Eagle.

 

in fact i posted a question in general but i've the idea of exploiting the answers for my site (sig) , you wouldn't have missed it . i like both long and short missions myself depending of my mood but i know some out there don't like not to say can't stand long missions that's why i ask . but long missions are cool you take time to follow the procedures and once you get to the battlefield after a 20 min flight you don't want to get shot down i like it

 

thanks for the answers

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

It depends what mood I am in and how long I've got. Sometimes I am in the mood for quick action. Other times I do like long missions if there are things for me to think about.

 

A well designed long mission can keep your full attention as you fly to the target area - it can have interesting terrain to fly over in daylight, might be at sunrise or sunset and simply look beautiful as I fly to the target area, might be at night and I suddenly see friendly aircraft dropping flares. I may get spiked by enemy AWACS, long range SAM's, etc causing me to think about what threat they are to me.

[RedTiger]

I voted yes, but:

 

1. Really what you should also ask is for opinions on threat intensity. The extremes would be WWIII circa 1985 or whether its something like policing the no-fly zone in Iraq.

 

2. The relationship between the two. Mission length can have a very strong an inverse relationship with threat intensity. I think it is a safe assumption that flying a mission over 2 hours only get shot down will not be viewed as fun unless that person is a masochistic fanatic. There's a very good chance that the player's sim session will end right there and there will be less motivation to pick up that mission later...ESPECIALLY in a sim that does not have triggers or any random elements in the mission.

 

Vekkinho's example is perfect because I can relate it to my experiences with F4AF. I can tell you I NEVER flew the Allied Force campaigns. Falcon 4.0 simulates a kind of "hyper-reality". It says so even in the original instruction manual. ;) The idea is that it eliminates some of the less intense missions a fighter pilot might experience in favor of more action. A side effect is that it can be rough on those first couple of days, lots of bandits, lots of SAMS and AAA. The thought of putting up with all this AND having to fly from Italy and back, refueling at the tanker both ways was a big turn-off. I just stuck with the Korean campaign since the missions were relatively short and going to the tanker was almost never necessary.

 

It would also depend on the type of mission. Put me in an F-15 in a long mission and I might not mind. I've made missions in LOMAC that have required refueling at the tanker and have been plenty intense. If I like what I'm doing, I'll likely enjoy longer missions more. :D

Edited June 15, 2009 by RedTiger

[Silent Warrior]

Hm... 15 minutes is fine by me... when the aircraft in question has autopilot. 15 minutes' worth of fighting to get the Su-25 (not 25T) to where it should be would frustrate the hell out of me. (Especially as I frequently get shot down by stray bloody Iglas...)

[Boberro]

For me I prefer shorter lenght but from to time I like play longer, especially when I fly in group.

 

Short range I mean about max 100 km to combat zone.

 

I like short range in Lo beacouse long flight is simple much more boring.

 

In Falcon I can play long way well... why? Cos you can click cockpit, having fun... checking radar various modes ect. In LO you just fly, press 2 mode and that's all.

[jpm1]

ok , for my last campaign i slightly increased the number of missions . there's everything long/short missions , huge amount of units , night etc .. longest missions doesn't need more than 30 min to reach the combat zone first (and can be easily skipped if you are getting bored at it) . cherry on the cake the campaign isn't classified and USA & Russia are on the same side so you can easily replace the SU-25 by the if you're a hog lover . i'll probably make 50+ or 100 missions campaigns later

 

Edit : i've tested the campaign well but on such big campaigns i may have missed a bug so if you find some please tell me

Edited June 20, 2009 by jpm1

[jpm1]

i've just finished a 63 missions campaign now i have to test it . Russia and USA are in the same side you'll be able to choose any aircraft you want . the thing that "scares" me the most it's the invisible statics , from now and on i'll try to avoid statics as much as possible at least not to assign them as goals , it'll drastically reduce the testing time .

 

Cheers .

[mbolan]

It's not the 15 minute flight time that's really the issue. The problem as I see it, is when one arrives at combat only to be blasted out of the air. This means another 15 minutes all of which can add up to a LOT of flying but not much learning by surviving different scenarios.

 

Perhaps an option that if shot down, one could start nearer the action?

[Roche]

I just played an A10 mission , don't rememeber the name of it, I was placed in TURKEY in the other side where there is one sole airfield more than 500KM from the action!! and no KC...a very bad joke from the author guess it was a mistake.

Anyway 10-15 minutes to see some action is ideal for me.

[jpm1]

It's not the 15 minute flight time that's really the issue. The problem as I see it, is when one arrives at combat only to be blasted out of the air. This means another 15 minutes all of which can add up to a LOT of flying but not much learning by surviving different scenarios.

 

Perhaps an option that if shot down, one could start nearer the action?

 

my campaigns/missions aren't classified (except one one where i messed up while testing and didn't wanted to recreate the whole thing) so you can't use the time compression

 

I just played an A10 mission , don't rememeber the name of it, I was placed in TURKEY in the other side where there is one sole airfield more than 500KM from the action!! and no KC...a very bad joke from the author guess it was a mistake.

Anyway 10-15 minutes to see some action is ideal for me.

 

it depends some like it . in the 60+ campaign i've just made there's one mission that needs 1h30 to get on the combat zone with a refuel stop at an allied airfield and 1h30 to get back i prefer to warn you but the mission can easily be skipped as the only goal is your survability (what in general i always do in long mission as i don't want to annoy the ones that didn't like long missions) . In general the longest missions of my campaigns does not exceed 15-20 min to reach the combat zone

[A.S]

Have you ever felt the intense environmental adventure in preparing, planing and flying an AF campaign with me ? :music_whistling: :smilewink: ...it might "overload" you but also struggle you

with a "WoW" ...hehe

 

(Those who did...know what im saying and why its not boring AT ALL if you cant fire in quake-manner the first missiles soon after takeoff...*joking*)

[Boberro]

I just played an A10 mission , don't rememeber the name of it, I was placed in TURKEY in the other side where there is one sole airfield more than 500KM from the action!! and no KC...a very bad joke from the author guess it was a mistake.

Anyway 10-15 minutes to see some action is ideal for me.

 

 

Hahah I iagine it was funny ^^^

 

However in real life it is normal lenght ;]

[jpm1]

i've just finished a 63 missions campaign now i have to test it ...

 

i was testing , i couldn't prevent myself to record it's a close air support mission mission 3

 

[Endoplasmic Reticulum]

Have you ever felt the intense environmental adventure in preparing, planing and flying an AF campaign with me ? :music_whistling: :smilewink: ...it might "overload" you but also struggle you

with a "WoW" ...hehe

 

(Those who did...know what im saying and why its not boring AT ALL if you cant fire in quake-manner the first missiles soon after takeoff...*joking*)

 

That's one of the points why I think that Falcon 4 is still unmatched regarding realism, mission planing/preparation and dynamic campaign:joystick:. And realism is key to me. Although you have more friendly territory fly over until reaching the action point when war goes on, it's never become boring. You have so many things to check and prepare in the cockpit that time passes very quickly. I wished Lock On had this too.

 

I enjoy the time in the Hokum-cockpit very much. Standing ovations to the BS-Team. Great, really great.

 

They could implement an option into Lock On, so that you can choose whether you want to start on the Airfield, or in the air, 15 minutes away from the action point. I think this would be important for all simmers that don't want to be overruled in a phase of a mission which I personally like very much:pilotfly:.

 

Just my 3 cents. Take it, or leave it ;)

[jpm1]

That's one of the points why I think that Falcon 4 is still unmatched regarding realism, mission planing/preparation and dynamic campaign:joystick:. And realism is key to me. Although you have more friendly territory fly over until reaching the action point when war goes on, it's never become boring. You have so many things to check and prepare in the cockpit that time passes very quickly. I wished Lock On had this too.

 

I enjoy the time in the Hokum-cockpit very much. Standing ovations to the BS-Team. Great, really great.

 

They could implement an option into Lock On, so that you can choose whether you want to start on the Airfield, or in the air, 15 minutes away from the action point. I think this would be important for all simmers that don't want to be overruled in a phase of a mission which I personally like very much:pilotfly:.

 

Just my 3 cents. Take it, or leave it ;)

 

Thanks for the feedback ! i think and i'll go adding more and more long missions in campaigns in the future and keep doing easy or fast individual missions so that the player have both choice . Cheers