Do we go Up or Down

[Durham]

Each simulator has its strengths (these are my views after considerable time with each):

SteelBeasts has excellent modelling of AFV fire control and other systems - it has useless air assets, adequate helicopter assets (not player controllable), adequate artillery and deeply annoying pathfinding and other mindless ai stupidity.  The infantry is fairly hopeless;

DCS has excellent flight models and (depending on the platform) superb avionics and fire control modelling on the airborne platforms.  Compared with SteelBeasts the fire control system modelling inside the AFV's is hopeless, but the external views are nice.  The map interface is on a level with SteelBeasts although I believe the afv AI to be less capable.  The infantry consists of static sprites waiting to be turned into dead sprites.  More than hopeless!

Arma3 has infantry, armor and air (both rotary and fixed wing).  It excels as an infantry simulator, with afv systems on a level between SteelBeasts and DCS (ie usable but not what the SB user is used to) and airborne platforms way below DCS, but still serviceable.

Having just made a big SteelBeasts mission which was too much for the game, and where the limitations of the game engine impaired the enjoyment of the players, I am looking to you to vote as to whether you would think it better to (1) make smaller missions in SteelBeasts at a ratio of 1/1 player/vehicle (Option1) or (2) "go down" and focus on the soldier clearing the building (Option2) or (3) "go up" and focus on controlling the support assets (attack helos, CAS aircraft) to manage the battle at a higher level (Option3).

Please, through your vote, give me direction on how I should apply my mission development time.

Many thanks

Durham

[Lumituisku]

Voted for smaller missions in SB.

[Asid]

Just to be clear. The DOW Vu is not advocating abandoning any one sim for another. Durham just wants to know what the best use of his mission design time would be.

Steel Beasts has many problems in multiplayer. These problems are exasperated when a player is given control of more than 1 unit.  I have said for a long time that each player should have only 1 unit or a section at most if they feel up to the challenge.

Steel Beasts is limited. It is time to accept the limitations and move forward.

Regards

[Lumituisku]

thinking the future that if I would have new computer in future, what I would like to play. I still would prefer SB over other games.

[Beef]

Voted...to stick with our core competency.

[Cougar11]

I vote for smaller missions.

With that said it can be hard to make a mission for the specified day, and have the correct number of vehicle for the players that show up. It is very likely that missions will at times have more than desired, or less than desired when doing it this way. It is difficult to change missions the day of to keep overall mission design, and a balanced force ratio.

I do not think DCS is there in any fashion within the group to allow for the level of missions that we play in SB.

Same as above for ARMA within the group.

They all have the part within the group, and those that like to play them.

The idea that I will try to move on with is if I have a large mission idea, that I will try to pick parts of that mission to make smaller missions. This in turn should allow for multiple mission ideas from just one, and might just speed up the mission making.

I would really like to have a mission list again, and have missions planned out more than a week in advance. Unfortunately I am only one man, and cannot keep up the pace of making missions at two a week over time and one week in advance. For this to happen I would need others to work or learn their magic at mission making, pic a person or persons that you can test them with, and then send them to me 2 or more in advance to just check over before putting them on the list. I and we can only dream of this happening, but maybe one day.Those that do, and have or will thank you as always.

[Asid]

Cougar needs our help guys. Please step up.

[Lumituisku]

I will do what I can.

Smaller missions can be easy to make, thought at same time those are really different to make to be interesting, and not to be too.... easy or short.

[Renders]

small missions steel beasts, arma, and dcs, divided into days... so one can just choose... obviously this needs people to follow each branch...

[Cougar11]

I had an idea on mission making and the load on the group.
SB missions regularly done by myself, lumi, con, and Assassin (others could join in as well).
Arma by wilso, Durham, and cupcake.(others if they can)
Dcs by Assassin and beef (not sure if there are others that know how to and are not on the list already).

If this works for you and you want to step up, it's open for you to make a move. If I left you out, and you want to be part of the team, just let us know.

What do you all think?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Colebrook]

Voted!

[Lusik]

Voted