No, the Falklands scenario looks pretty much the same as the CWC one. The OFP2 campaign has to be different. It would be cool if you are a terrorist/guerilla and you have to attack the Russians at all the possible ways: by sniping officers, blowing up convoys.
I'm sure if they made the logistics behind warfare more realistic (food, water, heating, healing, ammo, maintenance, fuel), we wouldn't have to bother scripting missions for protecting these targets because they'll actually have some importance for the defenders, for the AI and humans.
Do you notice we have barrels to represent fuel and water yet they have no use in the game? If we had to lug around a couple barrels each time we move camp, then it would make sense to keep the barrels together for protection and convenience and it would make sense for the enemy to want to destroy them.
Do you notice how when you get seriously injured, a field medic can heal you to 100% full health? If you are seriously injured, you should be air-lifted or transported to a field tent for surgery to get back to 100% health.
Do you notice how we have to either script people to stand around a campfire or make it an objective to approach a campfire? Do you notice how we can read maps in pitch dark in the middle of a forest without light? Soldiers should have to start a campfire every so often to warm up their joints and cook their food.
Do you notice how we never have to change or carry a spare tire? Or need extra parts to fix or salvage a boat?
If we make logistics more realistic, one simple mission can become very dynamic very fast.
Having a game mode which includes logistics may be a little more pleasant than having it forced upon everyone who plays the game. Maybe the dynamic campaign mode suggested above could use it.Originally Posted by (Coins @ April 17 2004,04:40)
Possibly being a background commander coordinating troop activities at certain points on the map. Maybe a turn based multiplayer system similar to the boardgame RISK or Rise of Nations where you choose to assault certain towns alternately and it zooms in for the combat using appropriate resources. Maybe you can choose to be personally involved but risk dying and losing the game entirely.
Possibly a little too far off track for BIS but when logistics are introduced in such detail anyway it takes your mind too far off the primary theme of the game.
By the time you hear the bullet I've already missed.
Yes, logistics should be optional. And the need for food, water, heating and maintenance shouldn't be too intense, and should have no effect on the performance of the soldier or vehicle unless at critically low levels. This way it's not worrying to a soldier unless it's quite obvious that he hasn't brought his canteen or a snack or he is on a cold mountaintop.
What it will do though, is give a soldier a reason to go to the local bar, start a campfire, do something in a base besides guarding it, get evacuated (if dehydrated, starved, hypothermic, critically injured), go hunting or foraging, build a shelter or return to base for replenishments.
With compartmental damage (if it's included), a pilot might want to look over his chopper to check if it's properly maintained, and if it's not, the helicopter might have to make an unexpected detour. Hangars might actually be used for something besides hiding.
Make a battle of WWII. I suggest the battle of Monte Casino. GREAT HISTORICAL POTENTIAL and GREAT ACTION POTENTIAL. Not to think about the Intro. All that happened during the battle can easily used in OFP2! Bu I guess happened too long ago
I heard it's set in Vietnam. I want to see these type of missions:
1)Bombing jungles with napalm.
2)LRRP
3)Helicopters.
4)River Patrol
It could be a great idea. I think that OFP2 should be a total soldier simulation.
It's taking place in multiple areas, and it's modern. So no Vietnam War missions.
Good idea, but that's a job for a mod. How many WWII mods are out there? I'm sure one could do a Monte Casino mission/mini-campaign.
If you have multiple campaigns, it would be cool if you have a full scale war campaign (a la CWC), a forgotten war campaign (like Resistance), and a peacekeeping campaign. The peacekeeping campaign would be cool: roadblocks, patrols, etc. But when you go on patrol in OFP1 you can bet your rolex on the fact that youre patrol is getting ambushed or sees anything suspicious. In a OFP2 peacekeeping mission, you patrol in the city, talk to some civi's etc.
I'm surprised noone has mentioned Falcon 4 - it has a wholly dynamic campaign engine, and models factors such as experience, fatigue, fuel, ammunition, electricity, transport networks, airfield status, C3 networks and so on. ***Not only does it model the war, but the tasking engine orchestrates both sides of the battle to the unit level so that they have macro/micro objectives and fight the war in an intelligent way. It is possible to give individual units orders or edit their tasking to achieve specific objectives. The 2D/simulated war is continued into the 3D gamespace so the units you see fighting on the 2D map are the ones you see fighting as you fly over in 3D.
IL2's dynamic engine is frankly a piece of shit. ***It is simplistic to the point where it essentially chooses a type of unit, a local spawn point, and makes you go after it, with progression occuring when you achieve a fixed number of kills or sorties. ***A less-than-dynamic mission generator, really.
To see a dynamic engine of the calibre of F4 in OFP would be amazing. ***It is much preferable to a linear campaign, in terms of realism and replayability.
Posting Permissions
HOME 
Reply With Quote
