mission makers, please, for the love of god!

[NoRailgunner 0]

Millenium7 go blame those server admins and those people who don't like to try & play other missions. BIS and mission makers are not responsible for hosting/playing the "same" mission all over again. :rolleyes:

Go kick some mp server admin's asses.

[sander 14]

There is nothing ridiculous about the suggestion. You actually do have a choice open to you that solves your perceived problem. It depends on your actions and does not involve decrying the work and effort of others. One does not need to begrudge the joy other people have in creating and playing certain types of missions that differ from one's own tastes. If you perceive a void, you can fill it by putting in some effort in creating and hosting the kind of scenario you like.

As I noticed the dearth of coop missions of the type I liked for Armed Assault the course of action open was to learn how to create missions and then host them myself. The fact that the majority of servers out there run missions that may not be my bag of tea does not bother me: after all there is only one that I can attend at a time and I can make sure that that server is running the kind of coop I like by hosting. What the rest of the servers is running is inconsequential.

Regards,

Sander

[Mr. Charles 22]

@burns:

Thx for the readup!

[jedra 11]

Even more so, players need to get some sense for quality!

Nowadays there´s far too many people praising stuff that either doesn´t work at all, produces huge rpt´s, or is simply rubbish.

What message does this kind of consumer mentality send out, "yay, gimme more of that crap"!?

One would hope that any feedback on community built missions from the community itself would be framed in a constructive manner!

There are all kinds of variables that cause a mission to have problems, and a lot of the time it is due to other mods which are loaded or the host's setup. Also it may be that the creator simply does not have the resources or time to test it fully - it's one of the reasons that feedback is good. Granted, they can just simply be not very good - but I wouldn't mind if someone told me this - sometimes you have an idea and it just doesn't work out.

People who build missions, like any other community content, do it for free and offer it out of a sense of community spirit. I am sure that this will continue with Arma3 also.

As an aside...

The title of the thread 'Mission Builders, for the love of god...' is somewhat offensive in that it makes the assumption that people who build missions have somehow a duty to make missions in a certain way. At the end of the day, as others have said here, if you don't like what is being produced then it's time to learn how to do it yourself.

[Militant1006 11]

Yeah, I prefer MSO, but I don't see that up much, it is getting a lot better though after private testing it.

I have very rarely played a game of Evo, if you don't like it so much, join a clan or find a server that likes to run more 'realistic' missions.

[Steakslim 1]

Downside of MSO i've seen in some cases is depending on a Clan's preference, it can get rather laggy for a server, and rather hard on some people's hardware after other addons and such.

I would like to say I do enjoy the mission itself though. Rather fun.

[mr burns 131]

One would hope that any feedback on community built missions from the community itself would be framed in a constructive manner!

There are all kinds of variables that cause a mission to have problems, and a lot of the time it is due to other mods which are loaded or the host's setup. Also it may be that the creator simply does not have the resources or time to test it fully - it's one of the reasons that feedback is good. Granted, they can just simply be not very good - but I wouldn't mind if someone told me this - sometimes you have an idea and it just doesn't work out.

People who build missions, like any other community content, do it for free and offer it out of a sense of community spirit. I am sure that this will continue with Arma3 also.

We´re pulling this offtopic i fear..

Yes, feedback is aklways a good thing.

Two downsides though, no, make it three:

1: most missions don´t get any feedback

2: some authors just can´t stand any form of negative yet constructive fb

3: another some authors don´t understand what fb´givers are talking about (this is the big one)

#1 is influenced by the sheer mass of soso missions that are being thrown out, after some of those ppl just don´t bother looking anymore at custom missions at all - me for example only downloads missions from "trusted" makers.

#2 .. well, the authors fault, he´ll never learn proper this way.

#3 has a slight chance of BI making few things easier to understand/achieve in A3, but there´ll always be a certain need of sophistication in ArmA modding. Nobody wants a magic make that button, at least i think so.

As for "the the creator simply does not have the resources or time to test it fully" part, simply don´t release until it´s done - take your time. Were following this game since 10 years and it´s never managed to run or hide away form us, so absolutely no need to rush rubbish releases out.

And we can be sure it´ll be the same in A3 one way or another, community spirit same as attention whoring.

[celery 8]

1: most missions don´t get any feedback

2: some authors just can´t stand any form of negative yet constructive fb

These two are at least imho related. Many people have adopted the "noble" principle of shutting up if they can't think of anything positive to say, or think that mission makers get upset if the flaws of their missions are pointed out, or even assume that any flaw they encounter must be common knowledge. Sure there are some delicate flowers among the content creators, but they ought to grow a skin anyway.

[weedkiller 10]

Even though I'm not working on Domina anymore I'll release an A3 version of the latest A2 Dom shortly after A3 release.

Xeno

Nice one, in the mean time cant we have ur final domi for those who tried to help and support you, stuff the ones who slate you cos it wasnt them putting in the work and effort, we appreciated you at least

[ArmAriffic 10]

Even though I'm not working on Domina anymore I'll release an A3 version of the latest A2 Dom shortly after A3 release.

Xeno

Thats good news, if people don't like it they can go fuck them selves for all I care

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I really need more coffee... misread that as "not working as a Domina anymore". :D

Hehe, well I called my Domination version "Dominatrix" - then I found out it actually meant something :D

Glad to hear about A3 version. I simply cannot imagine an A3 without a high quality, relatively bug free, all over the islands based mission with tons and tons of added features. And rpt entries are relatively rare. This is what we play on clan nights too, but we tend to go in infantry based (no vehicle or air support), and TWS use is illegal and seem to be respected even if I didn't bother removing them from the crates.

But private play on locked servers is the only thing I do. Public Domination is just mayhem and far too forgiving. Thank God for the variable respawn though, as it forces some to rethink their strategies somewhat.

Yes we've tried probably a hundred other missions, but are extremely buggy, spam the rpt, or doesn't have the features we're looking for. I've even seen missions that forces grass off. On I can understand, toggleable too in some cases (but I like being able to override it, which I can in Domination), but off? Doesn't make sense to me, and obviously we only played that mission for like 5 seconds...

[LJF 0]

I'd just like to see some more realistic game types. Maybe even one where it moves the playing area around the map slowly, alternating mission types, so in one part one team must attack a town and take it from the other team, then they win/lose/run out of time and perhaps the next part they need to move a convoy through a certain locations, then destroy a weapons cache, then defend a location, then destroy the opposing team.

You could even have separate objectives for each team like Combat Mission does it, one team might have to attack a location and hold it and the other team might only have to inflict casualties, or multiple objectives simultaneously (hold location, inflict casualties etc).

Most of the game types are laughably unrealistic and feel out of place in a "simulator", even Rush in Bad Company 2 is more realistic than most A2 game types.

I'd try making something like that but my scripting skill are dreadful :D

[Zipper5 74]

There are hundreds of those realistic missions you want, LJF. For example, a large portion of LDD Kyllikki's are. Didn't SimHQ also make a couple? If you want them to be played, you're going to have to convince a server admin to host them. ;)

[tsb247 0]

If you don't play Evo or domina there is...

Warfare

...

I don't see why warfare isn't more popular. I played some EXCELLENT vanilla warfare back in the days of ArmA, and I have had some good games with Arma 2 as well.

My main problem with Evolution is the, "Play, earn points, unlock stuff," aspect of it. It always seemed a little too much like a Battlefield game mechanic to me.

I'm hoping that Arma3 has a more in-depth warfare mode with more realistic modelling of the scenario as a whole.

[kylania 567]

Warfare is horrible. One of two things happens. A) you end up stranded out in the middle of nowhere or you end up spending the whole time running back to middle of nowhere. B) you're repeatedly spawn camped till you have to resort to A).

I also don't want to "buy" equipment. Soldiers don't buy their loadout during every mission and eventually you get so much money (assuming it doesn't bug out and you can't buy anything) that it all becomes an air vs air massacre.

Also it's a type of game play that ends up turning the game into single players wrangling AI instead of playing together. No thanks. A lot of my hatred towards it comes from simply not enjoying "game modes" and "pwn noobs" style pvp I'll admit. But when I see a server switch to Warfare, it's time to move onto another server. It's just actively un-fun for me.

[tsb247 0]

Warfare is horrible. One of two things happens. A) you end up stranded out in the middle of nowhere or you end up spending the whole time running back to middle of nowhere. B) you're repeatedly spawn camped till you have to resort to A).

I also don't want to "buy" equipment. Soldiers don't buy their loadout during every mission and eventually you get so much money (assuming it doesn't bug out and you can't buy anything) that it all becomes an air vs air massacre.

Also it's a type of game play that ends up turning the game into single players wrangling AI instead of playing together. No thanks. A lot of my hatred towards it comes from simply not enjoying "game modes" and "pwn noobs" style pvp I'll admit. But when I see a server switch to Warfare, it's time to move onto another server. It's just actively un-fun for me.

There are some features such as, "Buy equipment," that I am not in favor of either, but I have never had a warfare game turn out like you described. I would rather see BI revamp warfare (see my, "New ideas for warfare," thread), and add some more realistic features such as a better supply system, more precise and sophisticated command system, and more support for AI and different mission types within the scenario as a whole.

Some of my best MP experiences came from ArmA warfare. I've directed airstrikes with a laser designator, reconned possible base locations, and led tanks over a hill to assault an enemy held town, set ambushes, etc. In fact, I have never had a bad experience. The only real issue I have had was being kicked from a server for destroying the admin's base with artillery, but hey, it was a public server.

[Antigoon 10]

The other part of this is as fun as a little mission might be, any mission using bird respawn is an insta-neverplay. It's far too easy to die due to game bugs or something similar like a door hitting your foot then you just sit there for the whole game while others play. That's completely and totally not fun.

I tend to disagree with that, kylania. I can understand it, but in my experience having only one life in a mission promotes teamplay. Ofcourse you can have fantastic missions using respawns, but the minute your server goes public, you get these rambo one man "teams", trying to take or finish objectives all by themselves.

I admit...even I have been guilty of doing that. But once I found me a server with likeminded people, trying to play the game the way it's meant to be played (imo;))...I never looked back and enjoyed the game immensily.

And to be honest...people keep coming back to that server, specifically for those reasons, so I'm certainly not the only one who enjoys those "watch what you do, coz ya only have one life!!" missions:).

Btw, nice to see maio and dale bickering on the forum, tsk, tsk, hehe :)

Edited June 5, 2011 by Antigoon