PDA

View Full Version : POLL: Would you like "compressed distances"-campaigns in PF?



Freycinet
11-21-2004, 03:20 AM

Freycinet
11-21-2004, 03:20 AM

Bartsimpson-
11-21-2004, 03:56 AM
i think ill start a poll on havin to sign in just to vote in a pole what a hassel

FAW-SPIT
11-21-2004, 04:17 AM
Hi .

By the past many of us think maps are too small to use long range planes..
Now we have decent size map but seem its too long to travel..
Is it a simulator or arcade game?
Think the first option is good..

georgeo76
11-21-2004, 09:54 AM
compressed distances should be an option, not standard. It's realistic to fly more than 200mi to target, and the purists should have that option.

Isn't there a time compression and time skip option?

but mostly I don't care. Never really fly offline.

WWMaxGunz
11-21-2004, 01:44 PM
Simply this:

PF is getting bad reviews over campaigns with too far to fly for many gamers.
Also serious sim players who simply don't have enough free time are posting same.

Having more choices with shorter range/mission time campaigns would help sales.
For that alone .... more choices clearly labelled! Yes!

Freycinet
11-21-2004, 04:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by georgeo76:
compressed distances should be an option, not standard. It's realistic to fly more than 200mi to target, and the purists should have that option.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"So, are you interested in a new DGEN with a "compressed distance"-option for all campaigns?"

Yes, I agree, it should just be an option, that's why I phrased my question like that.

SeaFireLIV
11-21-2004, 04:07 PM
I agree with georgeo76. Make it an option if you must have it. I prefer the long distances - it`s realistic. And the 10X option is fine for me.

Nimits
11-21-2004, 05:12 PM
As a secondary option (akin to turning off realistic gunnery or complex engine management), yeah sure, why not. Just as long as it does not take away from the realistic maps/campaigns.

Korolov
11-21-2004, 05:24 PM
The problem with some long distance flights is that we can't fly from, say, Iwo Jima all the way to Kyushu. On that basis alone we can't necessarily have a realistic flight time.

Something needs to be done about making DGen more compatible with the time skip feature, especially in Kyushu campaigns. It makes time skip almost useless in that we have 1 or 2 waypoints for maybe 30 klicks, and then a 140 klick trip to the target - but we can't use time skip since it's rigged not to work on the last waypoint before the target.

Luftwaffe_109
11-21-2004, 06:14 PM
Personally I dont have the time to sit for the better half of an hour going to a target so an option to drastically shorten campaign distances would be very nice.

Also I don't like time skip or compress time features as the airplane is very hard to control with compressed time on and also this kills immersion for me a lot (seeing a plane fly at 4x or 16x time).


Regards

Korolov
11-21-2004, 06:27 PM
Time skip puts the airplane into autopilot while accelerating time. It's a excellent feature - just needs to work better with the current DGen system.

Luftwaffe_109
11-21-2004, 06:46 PM
The problem with that, of course, is that you must still spend several minutes watching a black screen, which kills imersion greatly in my opinion. I still think drastically shortened distances should be an option.

Snoop_Baron
11-21-2004, 09:17 PM
Most definetly YES.

Short campaign flights should be on by default as I bet the majority who play this game either do not want to or don't have the time to fly for several hours to target. I think it should be the default to attract more people to PF. Those who do have the time or desire can simply switch it to more realistic distances. But making long distances the default will not help in attracting new customers.

s!
Snoop

TonyEH
11-22-2004, 02:08 AM
Most of the maps are "mickey mouse" now anyway. Whay make them smaller? That would be pants IMO. The Pacific air war was characterised by its long distances and that should be modelled in the "SIMULATOR" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The Guadancanal map is all but useless in a campaign context as it stands. Imagine how worse it would be if it was compressed even further???

Frankly I want to see BIGGER maps.......FAR BIGGER. The Guadalcanal map should have been made bigger to include the rest of the Solomon islands, especially Bougainville.

Tony

Tocca4
11-22-2004, 06:18 AM
I tend to agree with TonyEH, it's the pacific. It's HUGE!

What would be good is a better time skip function, one that works. Mig Alley had a great way of doing this, it went to a mapview and you saw an icon of your plane moving over the map during timeskip.

But, the way the sim is written i don't think it's possible.

So, i won't vote. There's no vote that right for me. Yes i want to be able to get to the fight faster sometime, but not by having smaller maps/mission distances.

S.taibanzai
11-22-2004, 09:23 AM
al you guys go home and play some FPS

i dont like the large distance

its a sim ,not a BF1942 game

its makes me sick

asking for unreal dots now unreal maps and distance

if mr Oleg wil keep listen to you al this sim wil go down the drain

the more noobs are coming more whining

dragonhart38
11-22-2004, 11:05 AM
From a person that perhaps get 1 or 2 hours max at a time to play this game. A time warp option based on waypoints would be nice. This way you can elect to fly the complete mission or warp to all the waypoints if the distance is quite long. In campaign missions in other sims where they would have a dynamic war environment you could fly to way point one and not see any enemy air activity, warp to waypoint 2 and see none then warp to waypoint 3 where your final target is and engage the enemy. Play the same mission again and warp to way point 1 then fly to waypoint 2 and perhaps see an incoming enemy air raid on your way to the target thereby electing to engage or not.

It may not be totally realistic but the playability would sure increase and frankly I think the main target market for this game are people like me that are married and have family obligations and responsibilites and don't necessarily have the time to start the game and fly a campaign mission that takes 2 or more hours to complete. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Gato__Loco
11-22-2004, 01:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Korolov:
Something needs to be done about making DGen more compatible with the time skip feature, especially in Kyushu campaigns. It makes time skip almost useless in that we have 1 or 2 waypoints for maybe 30 klicks, and then a 140 klick trip to the target - but we can't use time skip since it's rigged not to work on the last waypoint before the target. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed!!! And it should be very easy to fix. See my post

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=5351093142&r=5351093142#5351093142

Saburo_0
11-22-2004, 01:58 PM
What dragaon heart said !

WWSensei
11-23-2004, 07:37 AM
Putting the follwing line in your conf.ini in the [DGen] section:

MissionDistance=30

(where 30 is the average range of a mission in kilometers) will shorten the distances and already do much of what you are asking.

Freycinet
12-09-2004, 06:40 AM
nope sensei, that only works on the Eastern Front, not in the pacific.

Starshoy has now made some betas where missiondistance=00 (any number is valid) takes you to a short distance map. Only good for a few campaigns so far.

A.K.Davis
12-09-2004, 08:11 AM
Other than the carrier-based maps, which either already have shorter flights, or will have them with the MissionDistance=xx setting soon, which campaigns do y'all think need shorter distances and how do you think that should be accomplished?

ucanfly
12-09-2004, 09:14 AM
ALthough not historical, New Guinea would be nice to have that option.