"Vergeev Group" campaign demo version

[JaBoG32_Prinzartus]

Feedback from the Demo campaign:

I was a little disappointed by the translation quality of the engl. misson briefing texts.

The Mission themselves are great!

[FGSchtuzer]

Feedback from the Demo campaign:

I was a little disappointed by the translation quality of the engl. misson briefing texts.

The Mission themselves are great!

 

Good to hear that!

What exactly did you dislike in translation? Errors, style, etc?

[JaBoG32_Prinzartus]

Good to hear that!

What exactly did you dislike in translation? Errors, style, etc?

Style, rather. I would need to read them again to be more specic. It has been a while. But I remember that I stumbled over phrases, which just did not sound correct to me. But as long as no native english speaker joins my opinion, I guess it is just fine.

[dsobbe]

Good to hear that!

What exactly did you dislike in translation? Errors, style, etc?

 

I am a native American English speaker. So, I'll toss my opinion in on the translations. I had no problems with grammar or the communication of information. Some terms like "tug", used in the demo's first mission, were unusual. But, fairly easy to figure out. Most often, differences in grammar, style and terms, along with an accent, add flavor and a sense of presence to Black Shark. And to those who worry about their mastery of English, or lack of it, remember what the actor Ricardo Montlbond once said, "Whenever you are speaking with someone with an accent you are speaking with someone who knows one more language than yourself". Well said in my book.

In the demo I noticed that if I failed a mission I had to repeat the previous mission to continue. That is the same format used in the original Georgian Oil Wars Campaign. It often resulted in seemingly endless former mission repeating, which gets stale real fast. I would prefer it if you used the format of the Georgian Havoc Campaign, where only the failed mission repeats until successful. That, to me, seems less punishing. Although, it would be great if someone came up with an even better failed mission campaign procedure than either of those. That's just my opinion.

The demo missions and their envirnments are outstanding and I look forward to the campaign. Thank you for your efforts.

[FGSchtuzer]

Style, rather....But I remember that I stumbled over phrases, which just did not sound correct to me. But as long as no native english speaker joins my opinion, I guess it is just fine.

 

Most often, differences in grammar, style and terms, along with an accent, add flavor and a sense of presence to Black Shark.

 

Exactly! While we try to adapt the language, structure of sentences etc. to everyday English, this is still Russian military language with all its features, terms and phrases. Since you're flying Russian helo for Russian airforce in this campaign this looks rather natural. In any case, JaBoG32_Prinzartus, you will get used to that very fast.

 

In the demo I noticed that if I failed a mission I had to repeat the previous mission to continue. That is the same format used in the original Georgian Oil Wars Campaign. It often resulted in seemingly endless former mission repeating, which gets stale real fast. I would prefer it if you used the format of the Georgian Havoc Campaign, where only the failed mission repeats until successful. That, to me, seems less punishing. Although, it would be great if someone came up with an even better failed mission campaign procedure than either of those. That's just my opinion.

 

Actually, a big part of Russian thread is devoted to discussion of the above (we've got 14 pages there already :smartass: ).

I'll give you squeezed essence of that discussion later today when I have more time.

 

The demo missions and their envirnments are outstanding and I look forward to the campaign. Thank you for your efforts.

Thanks for feedback.

[dsobbe]

=FG=Schtuzer

 

I may be wrong but, it appears that in the demo the waypoints selected on the PVI don't match the heading bug on the HSI. The heading bug incorrectly points to the prior waypoint. For example, if I select waypoint 2 on the PVI the heading bug will point to waypoint 1. So, if I want to fly TO waypoint 2, I must select waypoint 1. Then, the heading bug will point to waypoint 2. The "target points" in the PVI are correct and do match up with the heading bug in the HSI, which correctly points TO the target. These indications appear in all three demo missions.

I staggered around the countryside in the fog for awhile before figuring that out in the first mission. Without the moving map plot line in the ABRIS and the DME as cross checks I might have flown off the edge of the earth.

[FGSchtuzer]

In the demo I noticed that if I failed a mission I had to repeat the previous mission to continue. That is the same format used in the original Georgian Oil Wars Campaign. It often resulted in seemingly endless former mission repeating, which gets stale real fast. I would prefer it if you used the format of the Georgian Havoc Campaign, where only the failed mission repeats until successful. That, to me, seems less punishing. Although, it would be great if someone came up with an even better failed mission campaign procedure than either of those. That's just my opinion.

 

Back to this question. The simulator engine says to load previous mission if scores are under 50%, reload the same mission if score equals to 50% and load next one if score is above that.There are few options that have their own pluses and minuses.

 

1) Current principle. To give 0% score and let the pilot earn the score 50% and more with % bonuses depending on the complexity of each submission. Simple and just but gives a risk of falling back if for some reason (subjective or objective) mission can not be completed.

 

2) To give 50% score at the very beginning so that no roll-back is possible under any condition. No technical problem with that but from the authors' point of view - why should pilot get 50% just for sitting nicely in the cockpit, why not require from the pilot earning of these minimum 50%?

This will also prompt the player to get more serious and "realistic" - he must prepare his time and tools (and family :D) to complete the mission once it's started.

 

3) To set 50% score at start-up but give additional % after some group of tasks is completed. What I know from leroni who is in fact programming the missions that there are peculiarities on programming side that make this solution not so straightforward.

 

We're now testing one of the alternative solutions - if it works fine, we will try to realize that before release (remember - any change is not just change of code but also testing time).

[dsobbe]

Thanks for the followup. Having done some beta testing for a software company working on aircraft structural layout software I appreciate how a small code change or correction can have a domino effect on development time. There may never be a perfect scoring method. But, at least its good to know that it is a known issue and being worked on by better minds than my own.

[FGSchtuzer]

=FG=Schtuzer

 

I may be wrong but, it appears that in the demo the waypoints selected on the PVI don't match the heading bug on the HSI. The heading bug incorrectly points to the prior waypoint. For example, if I select waypoint 2 on the PVI the heading bug will point to waypoint 1. So, if I want to fly TO waypoint 2, I must select waypoint 1. Then, the heading bug will point to waypoint 2. The "target points" in the PVI are correct and do match up with the heading bug in the HSI, which correctly points TO the target. These indications appear in all three demo missions.

 

Sorry for answering this late - I just missed your post while typing an answer on points in campaign question.

 

This is because of difference in starting points for ABRIS and for PVI.

For ABRIS the first WP1 is always airfield (indicated as АЭР1, at least in Russian version). And WP1 for PVI starts from WP2 in ABRIS. Therefore to fly to WP3 in ABRIS you need to select WP2 in PVI.

This works not only for our campaign, it works for all missions.

 

When you open mission in the editor and select the route, you can see a text field to the right where for each selected WP on the map a corresponding WP for PVI is indicated.

 

ABRIS is not connected to other systems - it helps only for visual control. Navigation systems and related stuff, autopilot are linked to PVI.

 

Is this your problem?

[dsobbe]

I accept your explanation of how the ABRIS and PVI work. But, in other authors missions I observe that the waypoint number in the ABRIS displayed route, PVI and heading bugs in the HUD and HSI all agree. Maybe I'm just not seeing it correctly.

Thanks

[zdXu]

Anyone knows the meaning of these numbers?

Are these days of a year?

[nemises]

I believe it is the day number (ie day 96 or day 98), however I cannot remember where the numbering starts from...possibly mid summer northern hemisphere...

[ZaltysZ]

So, how is this project evolving? When we should expect the release?

[Chizh]

Anyone knows the meaning of these numbers?

Are these days of a year?

 

I believe it is the day number (ie day 96 or day 98), however I cannot remember where the numbering starts from...possibly mid summer northern hemisphere...

This digits means day after default date - 1-st June.

[zdXu]

Sochi-Adler, 5. September

 

Vergeev Group, mission #13, date 05.09.xx, DCSBSdate: #98

 

Astronomical Applications Dept. / U. S. Naval Observatory

Rise and Set for the Sun for 2009

            o  ,    o  ,                                     SOCHI ADLER                              Astronomical Applications Dept.
Location: E039 56, N43 27                          Rise and Set for the Sun for 2009                   U. S. Naval Observatory        
                                                                                                      Washington, DC  20392-5420     
                                                     Zone:  3h East of Greenwich                                                     
                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                     
      Jan.       Feb.       Mar.       Apr.       May        June       July       Aug.       Sept.      Oct.       Nov.       Dec.  
Day Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set  Rise  Set
    h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m   h m  h m
01  0753 1655  0736 1732  0657 1809  0602 1847  0513 1922  0442 1954  0443 2005  0510 1943  0544 1856  0618 1802  0656 1712  0733 1645
02  0753 1656  0735 1733  0655 1810  0601 1848  0512 1923  0442 1955  0444 2005  0511 1942  0545 1854  0619 1800  0657 1710  0734 1645
03  0753 1657  0734 1735  0654 1812  0559 1849  0511 1924  0442 1956  0444 2004  0512 1940  0546 1852  0620 1758  0658 1709  0735 1645
04  0753 1658  0733 1736  0652 1813  0557 1850  0509 1926  0441 1956  0445 2004  0513 1939  0547 1850  0621 1756  0659 1708  0736 1645
05  0753 1659  0732 1737  0650 1814  0555 1852  0508 1927  0441 1957  0446 2004  0514 1938  0549 1849  0622 1754  0701 1707  0737 1644
06  0753 1700  0731 1739  0648 1815  0553 1853  0507 1928  0440 1958  0446 2004  0515 1936  0550 1847  0623 1753  0702 1705  0738 1644
07  0753 1701  0729 1740  0647 1817  0552 1854  0505 1929  0440 1959  0447 2003  0516 1935  0551 1845  0625 1751  0703 1704  0739 1644
08  0753 1702  0728 1741  0645 1818  0550 1855  0504 1930  0440 1959  0448 2003  0517 1934  0552 1843  0626 1749  0705 1703  0740 1644
09  0752 1703  0727 1743  0643 1819  0548 1856  0503 1931  0440 2000  0448 2002  0518 1932  0553 1842  0627 1747  0706 1702  0741 1644
10  0752 1704  0726 1744  0642 1820  0547 1857  0502 1932  0439 2000  0449 2002  0520 1931  0554 1840  0628 1746  0707 1701  0742 1644
11  0752 1705  0724 1745  0640 1822  0545 1859  0500 1934  0439 2001  0450 2001  0521 1930  0555 1838  0629 1744  0709 1700  0743 1644
12  0751 1706  0723 1747  0638 1823  0543 1900  0459 1935  0439 2001  0451 2001  0522 1928  0556 1836  0631 1742  0710 1659  0744 1644
13  0751 1707  0721 1748  0636 1824  0541 1901  0458 1936  0439 2002  0452 2000  0523 1927  0557 1834  0632 1741  0711 1658  0745 1644
14  0751 1708  0720 1749  0634 1825  0540 1902  0457 1937  0439 2002  0452 2000  0524 1925  0558 1832  0633 1739  0712 1657  0745 1645
15  0750 1710  0719 1751  0633 1826  0538 1903  0456 1938  0439 2003  0453 1959  0525 1924  0600 1831  0634 1737  0714 1656  0746 1645
16  0750 1711  0717 1752  0631 1828  0536 1904  0455 1939  0439 2003  0454 1958  0526 1922  0601 1829  0635 1736  0715 1655  0747 1645
17  0749 1712  0716 1753  0629 1829  0535 1906  0454 1940  0439 2004  0455 1957  0527 1921  0602 1827  0637 1734  0716 1654  0747 1645
18  0749 1713  0714 1755  0627 1830  0533 1907  0453 1941  0439 2004  0456 1957  0528 1919  0603 1825  0638 1732  0718 1653  0748 1646
19  0748 1715  0713 1756  0626 1831  0532 1908  0452 1942  0439 2004  0457 1956  0530 1917  0604 1823  0639 1731  0719 1652  0749 1646
20  0747 1716  0711 1757  0624 1832  0530 1909  0451 1943  0439 2004  0458 1955  0531 1916  0605 1821  0640 1729  0720 1651  0749 1647
21  0747 1717  0710 1759  0622 1834  0528 1910  0450 1944  0440 2005  0459 1954  0532 1914  0606 1820  0642 1728  0721 1651  0750 1647
22  0746 1718  0708 1800  0620 1835  0527 1912  0449 1945  0440 2005  0500 1953  0533 1913  0607 1818  0643 1726  0723 1650  0750 1647
23  0745 1720  0707 1801  0618 1836  0525 1913  0448 1946  0440 2005  0501 1952  0534 1911  0609 1816  0644 1725  0724 1649  0751 1648
24  0744 1721  0705 1803  0617 1837  0524 1914  0448 1947  0440 2005  0502 1951  0535 1909  0610 1814  0645 1723  0725 1649  0751 1649
25  0743 1722  0703 1804  0615 1838  0522 1915  0447 1948  0441 2005  0503 1950  0536 1908  0611 1812  0647 1722  0726 1648  0752 1649
26  0742 1724  0702 1805  0613 1840  0521 1916  0446 1949  0441 2005  0504 1949  0537 1906  0612 1811  0648 1720  0727 1648  0752 1650
27  0742 1725  0700 1806  0611 1841  0519 1917  0445 1950  0441 2005  0505 1948  0539 1904  0613 1809  0649 1719  0729 1647  0752 1651
28  0741 1726  0659 1808  0609 1842  0518 1919  0445 1951  0442 2005  0506 1947  0540 1903  0614 1807  0650 1717  0730 1647  0753 1651
29  0740 1728             0608 1843  0516 1920  0444 1952  0442 2005  0507 1946  0541 1901  0615 1805  0652 1716  0731 1646  0753 1652
30  0739 1729             0606 1844  0515 1921  0444 1953  0443 2005  0508 1945  0542 1859  0616 1803  0653 1714  0732 1646  0753 1653
31  0738 1730             0604 1846             0443 1953             0509 1944  0543 1857             0654 1713             0753 1654

 

05.09.20xx MSK, Sunrise,Sunset, Sum of Daylight (Moscow standard time)

- Vergeev Mission #13: 05:49, 20:20, 14:31h daylight

- My own DCSBS observations at date #98:05:34, 20:27, 14:53h daylight

- USNavalObservationCenter: 05:49, 18:49, 13:00h dayligh

 

So there are some differences in the sum of daylights.

Edited April 7, 2010 by zdXu

[FGSchtuzer]

So, how is this project evolving? When we should expect the release?

 

Hi!

 

Thanks for your interest. We continued to work on the project after certain pause caused by car crash were author of the campaign was unfortunately involved. He was on the way to studio to supervise recording of last 20th mission...:(

 

Actually we are now preparing missions 1-10 for voice recording. We had to redo some text after advices by Eagle Dynamics and thus old records are not valid anymore. 11-19s are ready in full.

 

The plan is to release it by end of this month. :smilewink:

Whatever it takes. :gun_smilie:

[leroni]

Yes, distinctions are. Some resources in Internet offer figures of daylight without the account of global relief of planet, and without the account of local relief.

 

Also there is some difference in the data and in campaign "Group Vergeev". On maps in the inquiry it one, at the moment of game another. But this difference isn't so important. The data on sun time is necessary for general idea to the pilot about time of days. The error is insignificant. It was checked.

[Highwayman-Ed]

Hey guys,

 

I just wanted to add my support to your initiative. I like the idea of following a campaign in the day to day life of a pilot, and after having flown your demo, I can honestly say that it was quite refreshing to just fly for once, even though you don't really know what's coming ;)

 

I also like the simplicity that this gives you as mission designers allowing you to create quick and simple missions in amongst what can be an incredibly time consuming and intensive project.

 

I loved the voice overs, and the chatter too. Although I found them difficult to understand at times (I played the version without subtitles), overall I enjoyed what they added to the atmosphere of the mission, and livened up a mundane task.

 

Good work :)

[FGSchtuzer]

Highwayman-Ed

 

Thank you for providing your feedback. It's very pleasant and encouraging for developers to hear that.

As we noted 1/10th of campaign will be ready soon. We expect whole campaign to be as interesting as missions published before.

[FGSchtuzer]

Good news folks! :holiday:

 

We started pre-release testing of first part of Vergeev Group campaign (20 missions). :director:

[goldfinger35]

Good!

This campaign is very interesting. :thumbup:

[zangler]

going to give it a go!

[WindWpn]

Will release of 1.02 patch delay this project?

 

I was looking forward to this coming out to attempt a run though the campaign with Invulnerability off. Hope it remains on schedule with minimal change to support 1.02

[FGSchtuzer]

Will release of 1.02 patch delay this project?

 

I was looking forward to this coming out to attempt a run though the campaign with Invulnerability off. Hope it remains on schedule with minimal change to support 1.02

 

At the moment the schedule is not influenced by the patch. We randomly tested several complicated missions and no problems were found so far. Therefore we continue release testing.

 

Of course, some probs may appear but it does not seem likely at the moment.

[FGSchtuzer]

Small update for the community. :)

 

We're posting testing bulletin with the test progress.

 

 

 

As we informed before we had to remake first 10 missions so testing was thorough and lengthy. E.g. mission #002 takes up to 2 hours to complete so each tester had to spend minimum 3,5-4 hours to test both English and Russian versions of one mission. Test checklist accounts 27 points to verify.

 

5 testers involved, one of them being a professional - real military pilot (64 now) with combat and instructor experience.

Two other testers (39 and 29) are experienced "sharks".

One is aviation engineer (27) with average experience in Ka-50.

Last one (36) is just the beginner.

 

The team of testers was selected specially to see what type of difficulties users of different experience may face in Vergeev Group.

 

Most experienced tester (real Mi-24 Hind pilot, 3 000 hours flight time) completes missions within 1-2 trials, mostly at first run. Main mistake -huge desire to experiment. :joystick:

 

Two other experienced testers normally succeed from the very first try. Virtual flight time more than 1000 hours. Major mistakes caused by simple human tiredness. :yawn:

 

Third one with 300 hours flying time - at 3rd or 4th run. Main mistake is risky piloting, keeping not sharp enough to objectives and orders.

 

And 4th (70 hours flight time) needs 5-6 trials. Poor hardware knowledge and ignoring orders and instructions is his problem.

 

Hope that was interesting. :smilewink: