ONLINE CAMPAIGN SIMULATIONS

[Nemisis]

Agreed Grifter this thread has gone out of control, I'm seeing double!

As for the scenarios i would be glad to make up a couple of Lomac Missions for this task, so any situ assesments you might have that i could use to make a mission/missions for i'd be interested in getting ASAP so i can get working on them.

Also agreed we need to confirm exactly where we are heading with this, what the crisis is about and what action is being taken by whom? I also agree that Hammers layout is a good start as Korea and the Black sea area can be used ALA Falcon 4/Lomac.

So come on guys lets kick this pig and get a structure together that we can all agree on as i think we can all agree that this will be a fun venture and it will certainly give us all a bit of motivation to show up for the evening events.

[KODIAK]

Let me suggest one thing, well two actually. And if it goes well, we'll use it as a basic strategy:
1. When considering WHO will fly a mission or complete a task, it may be worth considering the time difference - might we experimentally split the groups to UK section / sabre team / flight, US section / sabre team / flight?
2. This could allow the US side to be reactive / proactive in light of the result gained by their UK couterparts - or the other way round with a longer planning time phase.

To make up numbers, some of the east coast guys could assist with the UK team effort. And conversely, those pf us from UK who CAN assist with the US effort, will.
Finally, what about training? I'm sure in the air those who have done it before, understand the requirements for flying missions in these campaigns. However, as far as our collective discipline is concerned - and I am the biggest offender IMHO - our ground-based effort is somewhat lacking. What I basically mean is, we all know how we should be operating, but we don't! We need to learn to be a disciplined team operating efficiently, which obviously includes comms - like we discussed earlier in the year about typing non-mission relevant commentary, leaving those who are still operating within the mission to hear what's going on around them better. Just my thoughts.

[Grifter]

I agree with Kodiak on most points. We could stand to tighten up comms, but more importantly, work as an effective teams on the ground and in the air. We tend to lone wolf a lot imho. I'm guilty too, though I do try and pick a person to follow when in game and stick with them. I think we could run some precampaign practice ops to prepare, just like real pre-ops where we would emphasize commmunication and team work. The rest we can refine as we go. As for Kodiak's UK/US suggestion, I think it deserves scrutiny. We could certainly gain a new dynamic in our gaming from it.

[Madrus]

Regarding the US flights, keep in mind that the most active WOF players are all in the PACIFIC time zone now - Steel, Softball, and myself. And we are also the most numerous as well, since no other time zone has three players who have every game we play.

And Softball has every game ever played, so there.

[Grifter]

Nevertheless, I still think Kodiak's suggestion has merit and may be "do-able" Anyway, we should start putting together mission briefings and assignments. I suppose we'll go with Hammer's theoretical scenario. I don't want to step on Hammer's toes, so I'm going to put together a mock prologue based on real events, nothing as laborious as last year mind you. Perhaps we can get some missions based off the prologue that lead up to Hammer's campaign (Operation Hammer). hehehe. People should start making missions based on his campaign scenario. I'll add back up story for the prologue the first chance I get so that we might have some prologue missions as well. I'll post my prologue scenario here or perhaps Raptor will post it on the website. Should have something by next week.

Who's creating missions? DA? GATOR? STEEL? MADRUS? RAPTOR?

[Grifter]

cool.

[Gator]

As to creating missions - I can do OFP, GR, F4, JO( ), and Lomac. Just give me a few days lead time (a week or so for some of these sims) and I'll do my best.

[KODIAK]

Woah! Gator, that's a lot of work mate, are you sure you can do all that? Well, best of luck to you there, wish I could be of more help myself. Probably the best assistance I can offer at the moment is provide field training expertise, and lead a ground assault team or better still play team 2i/c and advise someone else who's never done that sort of thing before so they can gain experience in that role.

[KODIAK]

Okay, bitch I've heard enough shit outta you for the day! :lol:

[Softball]

Ok, I would like to suggest that if we can get the Joint Ops editor to do what we want to, that we do NOT use OFP for this Campaign.

Let's narrow down our choices as much as possible. I am an OFP advocate, and I really have to say after playing JO last week, that JO really has some potential for our future endeavours. Don't get me wrong, I still like and want to play OFP, but I think JO has a much better graphics engine, absolutely no lag (that I noticed), you can join a game in progress (BIG PLUS), there are a variety of weapons and vehicles for us to use, and more. Of course this means everyone that wants to take part in the campaign will have to get a copy of Joint Ops.

Gator has sent me some info on the JO Editor, so I will be looking into this and seeing what we can do with it.

[Grifter]

Well the ongoing problem is that some of us don't have JO. But hey, run with it. Shrug.

[Madrus]

as posted before, I will write Jane's F/A-18 missions only. I have no clue how to write AS or JO missions, and those are the only ones i am interested in atm.

[KODIAK]

Well, I'd have to pipe up here and say we will always be limited in our success purely by the "lag" issue that exists on Athena Sword. Most of us have experienced it, I believe it's a graphics engine problem, right? That is an automatic disadvantage before we begin - so I would say, in light of that we would be going with JO as a general rule. But is there any interest in G-R2, as it will undoubtedly be rainsing it's ugly head in the next few months.

[Grifter]

On the contrary, I see no reason why JO would be the general rule. We have six games running right now. The lag I have experienced on AS is very limited, and often on maps that one might expect to be laggy based on there size and complexity. I do hope that AS will be the venue for missions that call for spec-ops or anti-terrorist units.

[daofcmacg]

I just ordered Joint Operations and I should have it in my hands on Friday so by the time I get it I will be in the shit house with my wife. 42 bucks is not her idea of cost effective spending, 32 bucks for the game and 9.99 for shipping. I got it from gogamer.com I wanted to wait for either the 48hour madness sale of it or it go down to 19.99 but when I looked at the game pics I had to get it.


DA

[KODIAK]

DA, nice one mate! I have a tendency to do the same kinda thing with golf clubs. And always end up grassing myself up! maybe I'll go and buy it anyway, if I get the money spare.
Grif, sorry, maybe I misrepresented myself there. Having re-read my post after your's I see what I have implied there, but it wasn't really the point I was trying to get across. I just see the "lag" when it does occur in AS to be of disadvantage to our potential mission success, and it is unnecessary IMHO to put ourselves at a disdvantage before getting the mission underway. When we could quite simply eliminate that, and give ourselves EVERY possible opportunity to win the mission. If you understand what I mean there. I love playing RvS, AS. And would not like to drop them from from the list. I was looking to see what others thought of that disadvantage and if they were willing to put up with it working against the mission success.

[Grifter]

I hear you.

[KODIAK]

Okay, where's gayboy? He hasn't showed up for at least 2 days now, to offer his services, I er . . mean slag me off . . maybe I should just say retaliate, eh? I'll give ya tea-boy! :roll: :lol:

[KODIAK]

Gay boy!