Jump to content

Worst Camp ever.


milkojohns

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...

Just wanted to chime in that I really enjoyed the first mission. I only tried the second mission once because I didn't have much time and I hate sling loading in dcs. Not a complaint about the mission though. I look forwarrd to playing the rest though and look forward to seeing more from you. maybe in the future a campaign for some of the under served modules? F-5, gazelle, F-86, etc.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to chime in that I really enjoyed the first mission. I only tried the second mission once because I didn't have much time and I hate sling loading in dcs. Not a complaint about the mission though. I look forwarrd to playing the rest though and look forward to seeing more from you. maybe in the future a campaign for some of the under served modules? F-5, gazelle, F-86, etc.

 

Thanks!

 

Besides some improvements for the actual campaign Spring 2025, the second Campaign SUMMER 2025 is work in progress, and we are already in contact with Polyshop to ensure we get some assistance in case we decide to create a Gazelle campaign.

Talks are really productive and the information received concerning the Gazell's technical status and development is promising. So there is a chance for a Gazell campaign bevor "AUTUMN 2025" :thumbup: Depending on the demand out of the community.

 

So we open a Thread in the Polyshop /Gazelle channel for evaluation.


Edited by CHPL

Always happy landings ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being an Army veteran, the military life is - Hurry up and wait, as you get ready to BE ON TIME with your S*** together. Then there are hours of boring doing nothing and then, sudden bursts of intense pucker factor. So, if you want realism, there you go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

 I've just finished the campaign today and it's certainly not the worst campaign ever though it certainly has problems.

 

 It is fun. It has a good variety of tasks and situations and a nice attention to detail. I had no problem with the "hurry up and wait" approach, especially as there was plenty of dialogue or distractions.

 

 However it really needed to have been proofread by a native English speaker. Some of the dialogues were close to nonsense; arming wappos, looking for sings of the dammed rabbels before returning for a bear! That was all cosmetic though and didn't much impact on gameplay.

 

 The big problem was that for a campaign that relied so much on scripts I was often badly unsure what to do. The use of relative directions rather than absolute caused a lot of problems; "land at the pad on the right", well, I'd done an orbit and it was now on my left. The hill at two o'clock was infact at my 10 o'clock and the tree infront of me was actually one of three I could see.

 

 Too often I ended up flying in circles until another trigger gave me a clue as to what I should be doing. If there was one request for the followup campaign (which I'd be happy to go for) its better communication of my tasks.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@John C Flett  Many thanks for your feedback.
We are already working with native English speakers for the next campaign.
We also learned a lot from the community's feedback and now have different testers as well.  So we hope to be able to avoid some of the confusion.

  • Like 2

Always happy landings ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I think having downtimes, and travel time add to the immersion.  I enjoy DCS not simply for the action, which is great, but for the simulation.  I believe the criticism against these things are just people who either miss the point, or are not into that sort of thing.  As for the poor translations in this or other DCS campaigns, while they may indicate a lack of polish, it also shows the breadth of diversity in the community.  Im an American, and a veteran of the US Air Force, but I quite enjoy playing campaigns as a foreign military pilot, created by foreign developers.  In short I'm saying while not without it's flaws, I love this and other content in DCS and the platform in general.  Please keep up the good work! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. Played the campaign a few months ago and didn't review it then, but you've nailed most good and bad bits of it already here. I'm adding this just to note these are my thoughts, too.

 

1. Lots of love has been put in the campaign by CHPL and his people - and that's what counts most. I've played through all Huey campaigns, some twice, and "Worlds Apart" was (at its peaks) the most intense experience I've had in the Huey... at least as far as I can remember. Well, "Larkin Aviation" is intense, too, but it's a totally different creature, not a military campaign, very short missions etc. In terms of immersion, Worlds Apart is, IMHO, the best military campaign for Huey or at least one of the best.

(Can't remember Argo so clearly now, I think it was very good, too).

 

2. The parts where you just fly and fly (or sometimes just wait), and nothing happens are NOT AT ALL a nuisance for me. Just like others have already said - in RL missions you do fly a lot, on average at least, or you just "hurry up and wait". I treat such moments as a reward of sorts, a relaxation time in between action-packed moments where I have to work hard. Besides, AFAICR the beginning of the Mission 1 is by far the longest wait in the whole campaign... and there are few of them, IIRC.
You're gonna miss such nice leisure time later on in the campaign!

 

3. I may be alone in my opinion, but I don't even mind a "boring" mission thrown here and there in between intense missions. A mission of type "go from A to B, land, wait, return". It's okay for me, as long as there aren't too many of them. Have you noticed that "Oilfield Campaign" (for Mi-8) is highly acclaimed by people? This campaign is mostly A->B, land, B->C, land, C->A, land, shut her down, no shooting whatsoever... and people still like it a lot (I do, too)! How's that possible? I haven't a faintest idea, but it works. Perhaps it's about lively cockpit, crew talking, telling stories, telling jokes, the RL radio chatter in the background, the clear and coherent purpose behind the missions, where you know you do important things that people need, even though it's just A->B, B->C. I don't know how it works, but it does.

 

4. English. Proofreading. Oh, man... it is bad, but that's been said already, and you've said you've taken care of it for the next campaign already. Great!

 

5. Thanks a lot - John C Flett - for your comment. That's exactly what I think. Relative bearings just don't work, at least most of the times. In RARE situations where the author can be more or less certain about the player's heading, relative bearings WILL work, but these are rare. For example, the mission where you follow the flight lead on the way to the Navy group. If you don't follow the lead close enough, you are called to tighten formation. (Then he lands on the carrier, we land on the OHP and wait until he does his business on the carrier). Okay, so during such flight the mission author can be pretty sure my heading is exactly XYZ +-2 degrees perhaps, so saying "Look - 10 o'clock! What's going on there?" would be okay. In this mission it doesn't happen, but it's just an example.
However, when the player is allowed to just fly around more or less freely, saying "the tower to the left", "the whatever 10 o'clock" (etc.) is asking for trouble. 

 

Example: "take the boys to the bridge in front of us"... while I was "reversed" (turned around 180 degrees) and the bridge was exactly behind me 😉 Why was I reversed? Well, nobody told me I couldn't turn around to land. Nobody told me the next voiceover I was going to hear would assume I hadn't turned around. Why didn't the author expect a player to turn around to land? Because he knows one may plunge in between the trees and follow the road a few feet above the ground to get to the landing spot. If the player does exactly that, he/she WON'T turn around because that would be just silly. But I had never been to that place in Caucasus before and did NOT notice that I could follow that road in between the trees. I tried to stay far away from the bad guys on the first bridge, was looking at the trees at an angle, didn't notice the clearing, and besides there was a lot of smoke, low frame rate, so I was generally worried I could crash. So... I found the landing spot, it occurred to me that it was going to be easier if I turned around to land vertically... and I did just that. Obviously, if the voiceover was something like "take the boys to the next bridge North-East" (or whatever it was), there would be no problem. In this particular case it was actually obvious the bridge ahead could NOT be the one to go to, but it's just an example.

 

Another example I remember... "land by that lone tree on the hill", I think it's mission 5-1. Guess what happens if a specific player took no notice of that tree, previously (and judging from the forums there have been at least a few such people)? The player just gets stuck. For good. That's not a good design. If you somehow forced player to take notice of that tree beforehand, clearly, so that the player knows "this is an important tree, I must remember where it is", than reffering to it later on would be okay, I guess. But I can't remember you did that. It was like: "Remember this lone tree up the hill?", "No.", "So go exactly there!", "Okay, nice... another Youtube video to watch".

I can't rembemer it now, but I did fly there, looking for the tree, but I wasn't sure where it was, the "top of the hill" is not a single specific place there, there were a few scattered trees (I think) and all this was happening during serious combat, the bullets were flying, our boys were dying down there. Not a good time for sight-seeing trips 😧

 

Another example is that... hmm... this "where there's U-turn of the road" (can't remember the wording now). The mission where there's some shooting going on around, first you land on the top of the mountain, "licking" the clouds, then you... I think you need to throw down smoke flares. And there's a reference to the shape of the road. No one told me I should learn by heart how the road was weaving between the trees in the valley. Why would I care? Then - boom! - a reference for a specific turn in the road. And if you roam around like a tourist, looking for the spot, the bad guys WILL shoot at you. "Ok, another Youtube video to watch".

 

Other examples - see John C Flett's post.


You take a lot of assumptions on the player's knowledge, but it's you, not the player, who knows exactly what's going on in the mission, you see everything in ME, you set up triggers etc., while the player knows NOTHING except for spoken instructions, kneeboard and briefing.

 

I think it's very hard for mission creators to jump in the player's shoes. On the other hand, having played through the first half of "The Enemy Within" for A-10C, it seems doable - in this campaign I... at least I can't remember a single moment when I didn't know what I was expected to do. And there IS quite a lot of unexpected going on in The Enemy Within. First you think it's going to be a boring patrol, 15 minutes later all hell breaks loose. And somehow I know what to do. So it IS doable, but probably needs a lot of attention from the author to do right. I know it's easy to be a smart ass on the forum, but still... it's not a good way to "assume", it's better to "make sure". Player knows nothing. You are God, he's just a poor dude behind the controls. If you don't make sure he knows what you want him to do, he's likely to do something different at some point and get stuck.

 

Please, don't get me wrong, CHPL. Your campaign is otherwise excellent (at least that's what I think) - that's the very reason behind the criticism above! The campaign is just too awesome to be flawed with bad English and those "WTF" moments. I'm sure your next campaign will be smashing and I can't wait to get my hands on it! 🙂 Huey pilots need your campaigns!

 


Edited by scoobie

i7-8700K 32GB 2060(6GB) 27"@1080p TM Hawg HOTAS TPR TIR5 SD-XL 2xSD+ HC Bravo button/pot box

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@scoobie 

 Many thanks for taking the time for such detailed feedback. 
All feedback helps us to make the next campaign better. We already work with English and US testers and translators. We also committed to doing even more work on making klear what's next in the mission or catching the player and leading him back to the next trigger if he missed one.

We still will make it as inversive and exciting as possible, which also means we can't really shorten the mission length.
For those who like instant missions, we already plan a summary of such tasks without a story that keeps them in context with a mission dauration of arround 30 minutes.

We will see how it works out in 2021

Always happy landings ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really hope you make a Mi-24 campaign, but i will certainly buy for any helo. I am replaying right now, and it's the most immersive experience in DCS for me. You can just tell the CO Peter was voiced by a real pilot too, or at least someone with extensive knowledge of helicopter operations. the attention to detail of safe operation is a nice touch. Eg: off the top of my head he always mentions landing into wind, crossing powerlines at the poles not the wires, remarks on max grossweight takeoff technique and keeping engine within TOT limits.

 

Favorite mission probably mission 6 with the deteriorating weather where you start after being refueled by the convoy. It starts off with manageable weather and has you do an IMC landing on a hill to drop off soldiers, drop smoke on targets for arty at low level using the strong tailwind for fast ground speed. Bullets flying everywhere and then sudden calm while you resume your original mission before all the chaos, ending with the weather getting worse and worse as you are brought down to road level presented with a choice to make a precautionary landing or push on to Batumi. One of my most memorable sim experiences, flying this mission in VR. Thank you 
 

RTX 2070 8GB | 32GB DDR4 2666 RAM | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 4.2Ghz | Asrock X570 | CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle | TM MFDs | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Hi,

Just finnished the first mission and I found it really good. So much life at the airport, a lot of life and action at the boat and then the exciting car chase up the vally. Feels really authentic and a perfect match of realism and action. 
Struggeling a bit on mission 2, but sure I will manage. Had a look at you youtube video of mission 2 and got some good hints.

Keep up the good work! Looking forward to the upcoming campaign.

  • Thanks 2

HW: Intel i5 13600K, 64Gb DDR5, RTX 4090, Winwing Orion 2 HOTAS, TM TPR rudderpedals, Pico 4 VR+VirtualDesktop (VDXR), Win11
DCS: F-5, F-86, F-16, F-15E, FA-18, F-14, Harrier, Viggen, M-2000C, A-10C, AH-64, UH-1, Mi-8, Mi-24, Gazelle, Ka-50, Mig-21, P-47, P-51, Spitfire, Mosquito, Bf-109, Fw-190A, Fw-190D, Yak-52, C101, all maps & tech, SuperCarrier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...