What to do with a pilot that "dies".

[Pacman]

Well,

I would agree though that in an offline campaign the campaign is over.
Simple as that. I kinda liked the way longbow did it.

the thing is as well that things like G-force tolerance etc...should be in there.
But when your pilot dies.....so does that data and you can still use you same pilot. But you have to start things like G-force tolerance from scratch...

My 2 cents on the subject.

Sry for the absence...I spent 3 days in Jura (Lac de Chalain) and 3 days in Marseille...spent 2 hours in traffic and avoided the city itself after that mistake.

But heck...the southern french coast rocks!!!! Very nice coastline...with nice little ports....good snorkling in clear water...and loads of sun...which we weren't able to find on Jura, hence our move to the region of Marseille.

[Kerdougan]

During the reading of that topic I was thinking "Why not making of death a useful thing?". I'll take my own experience from my LockOn squadron, it's just for giving you an example.

While training or passing a few qualifications with my instructor it happened that I died. After the flight my instructor and I started the ACMI and he analysed the situation with me. Excellent method for learning from your mistakes and having a clear view of the situation. I recently started the learning of ATC/GCI, I'm a total noob at it but even with my little experience in that domain I learned a lot.

So here is my point:

Why not placing the pilot in an ACMI view of his mission and death and giving him the opportunity to change the events. At this time everything is offline and recorded in an ACMI file and every plane replay the mission. The pilot would be playing as ATC/GCI and give orders a few minutes before his death to avoid his own and the loose of other allied planes. The planes who receive orders would switch from "replay mode" to "AI mode". A kind of "close control" for learning from your mistakes. If he succeeds he will receive penalities anyway, I don't know which one but not death. If he refuses to do ATC/GCI or fails, his pilot dies.

Maybe an interesting way for learning and avoid frustration...maybe

[Buck-Danny]

Je ne pense pas que ce soit une bonne idée, si tu peux changer le cours des evenements en revenant en arriere, le realisme n'est plus la... (this would resemble to "Prince of Persia" )
I think that Jallie's idea is good (=> negative points in the logbook).
Cheers

[Pacman]

[quote="ViP3R"]Personnellement, je trouve vraiment tr&#232]

Know that this discussion is about career mode only. This is where the people will fly that even know when to push and when to abort a mission. Nothing fun about aborting...but even in real life it happens more often then one thinks. (example)
Just trying to make you understand that somebody that isn't afraid of dying will push into the most impossile situations and get himself and his teammates killed.
This is one of the things we try to avoid by discussing measures on "How can we make sure that nobody goes Chuck Norris, and uses common sense like a real pilot would do". A real pilot also has ONE life to use.
Not that we'll drive it that far but we are trying to find a "punishment" that will make a virtual pilot think twice before he'll risk his, and his buddy's lives.

If somebody wants to have fun-fun...then they can fly non-career mode where they can control all the goodies, realism settings etc... There a death will merely be an addition of a number to his previous "deathcount".

Dirk

[Splurk]

Having a rigid system "dead or alive" also needs a very important point: Good Artificial Intelligence.

For instance, if I loot at Lock On, 2 majors things appears:
AI never disengages, except when fuel short (I remember a SU27 tracking me on a distance of 200km until I was near the carrier that destroyed this stupid plane)
AI never hesitates to engage 1 against 100... it will launch all missiles etc etc...
With such a simulator, you can be sure that the AI will always try to kill you, as long as you are foe, even if you are flying on your area with SAM protections...

So if the player should know when to disengage the AI should also know.
AI must not be "all aware", I mean that they have to react according to the information they receive (AWACS or not...)
I say that because it's so easy to destroy a excellent game with stupid AI...

If the game asks the player to save his life, so the AI will have to!

[eutoposWildcat]

But heck...the southern french coast rocks!!!! Very nice coastline...with nice little ports....good snorkling in clear water...and loads of sun...which we weren't able to find on Jura, hence our move to the region of Marseille.

I would agree though that in an offline campaign the campaign is over.
Simple as that. I kinda liked the way longbow did it.

With no possibility to achieve the offline campaign with another logbook? I wonder if it would not be quite harsh for beginners. (I have never flown Longbow, so maybe I did not get your point.)


Sinon, pour Splurk: très juste, je crois .

[Pacman]

Having a rigid system "dead or alive" also needs a very important point: Good Artificial Intelligence.

For instance, if I loot at Lock On, 2 majors things appears:
AI never disengages, except when fuel short (I remember a SU27 tracking me on a distance of 200km until I was near the carrier that destroyed this stupid plane)
AI never hesitates to engage 1 against 100... it will launch all missiles etc etc...
With such a simulator, you can be sure that the AI will always try to kill you, as long as you are foe, even if you are flying on your area with SAM protections...

So if the player should know when to disengage the AI should also know.
AI must not be "all aware", I mean that they have to react according to the information they receive (AWACS or not...)
I say that because it's so easy to destroy a excellent game with stupid AI...

If the game asks the player to save his life, so the AI will have to!

Excellent remark and VERY true!!:yes:

[Tugais]

Hey there

It's been a while since my last post on the board. Very interesting thread, I love it !

Not that we'll drive it that far but we are trying to find a "punishment" that will make a virtual pilot think twice before he'll risk his, and his buddy's lives.

I don't know if someone already submitted this idea but here we go:
Why don't you lock some type of missions for Rambo's Pilot ? I explain myself (I'll try ...). If a pilot failed too many missions or if he drives his mates to death in impossible missions, we could imagine that this pilot has to proof himself and has to fly "boring missions" far from the line before returning in combat missions.

Those "boring" missions could be:
- escorting civilian planes out of the danger zone
- ferry planes from one airbase to another

The number of these missions will depend on how the failed missions were serious.

In the same way, we could imagine that a penalty will be applied for the carreer by reducing the "points" already earned in previous missions, or increasing the level to gain a promotion/medal ...

These two options combined will be effective for the pilots and will affect our way to fly our missions.


Thank you for this great project, I can't wait for it !


Cheers

[Buck-Danny]

Je trouve que ça peut etre une bonne idée
En esperant que le traffique aerien civile soit bel et bien introduit dans le simulateur.

Trad: I think that's will be a good idea
I hope that there will be civilian planes (AI) flights in this simulator.

[Sven]

Encore plus simple, en mode campagne, si on est "KIA", ben on peut plus continuer cette campagne. On est obligé d'en recommencer une nouvelle.( ou cotinuer avec un autre pilote)
Cependant, si par exemple, on vol en escadrille, ben créer une mission de sauvetage pour aller chercher le pilote éjecté.
Je pense que c'est le plus simple et le plus réaliste qu'on puisse trouver.
Oui je sais, c'est trop vache de devoir recommencer toute une campagne parcequ'on est mort. Mais au fond, c'est presque logique.
Si c'est vraiement trop sevère, ben alors que le pilote cope pour quelques jours de suspension ( jour de campagne)
Comme ca, on perd pas les points gagnés, tout en étant sanctionné.

je vais essayer de traduire. désolé si c'est littéralement.

I will try to translate for Pacman

More simple, in carrer mode, if we are KIA, we cant continue de campagne. We must began an other campagne. ( or continue with an other pilot)
However, if we fly with other human pilot, to creat a rescap mission to keep out the ejected pilot can be a good idea.
I think that it's the more simple and the more realistic way.
If its to hard as sanctions, the pilot must stop flying for some days of the campagne.
Like that, we don't loose our points, and we paid our mistakes.

( very sorry, for my very very bad english Pacman )

[MayDay-MayDay]

Hello,

Why not make it simple. If virtual pilot dies well the carrier is over for good. This will force ppl to plan their flights and to retreat when in tactical disadvantage.

On other hand if the pilot has been shot down because he did something stupid and he was rescued by SAR then based on flight records he should be court marsheled and grounded for x missions or even removed from flight personel if he was found guilty in taking unecessary risk to his flight and in detroying the gvt proprety.

Pretty hard to implement but the court marshal could be the first implementation in simulation games.

[eutoposWildcat]

Psss, c'est "court-martial". (Pas de "t" en français.) Sinon, on ne parle plus de la même chose.

Plus sérieusement, je vois mal comment on peut faire en sorte que le logiciel soit capable de faire la différence entre un acte maladroit et un acte délibéremment inconscient, qui éventuellement dans la réalité pourrait conduire à la tenue d'une cour martiale. Ca ne me paraît pas difficile, ça me paraît même impossible...
Même pour ce qui est du "friendly fire", c'est pas si évident. Dans Falcon, ça vous entraîne un passage en cour martiale avec jugement négatif direct, mais dans la réalité un "friendly fire" n'implique pas nécessairement de jugement négatif...

Bref, le concept est évidemment séduisant , mais je crains qu'il ne soit complètement inapplicable.

[Chupacabra]

Bordel j'ai jamais ete aussi content de retourner a l'ecole

[Tugais]

Ô que oui ! Si les dev' arrivent à tenir leurs engagements concernant ce simu, je ne vois pas ce qui pourrait endiguer la déferlante Fighter Ops sur le monde de la simulation militaire.

C'est bien simple, à la sortie du soft je change complètement de config machine et je refais l'acquisition d'une UC. Vivement !:Jumpy:

[Buck-Danny]

Same

j'attend de savoir sa date de sortie approximative pour refaire mon PC

[Mhm...mhm]

dites, les derniers screens datent de fevrier quand même. Le projet s'est
endormi ?

[Tugais]

Le projet est loin d'être "endormi", disons que pour les news, les dev' privilégient les membres de la Zone51.

[Eagle Eye]

comme le dis Defcon, l'equipe est loin d'etre endormi, au contraire, elle est dans une phase promordiale du projet.....

j'espere que l'on aura des infos bientot, mais ne vous inquietez pas l'equipe travail dur

[Electro]

c'est vrai que les devs travaillent mais il est vrai qu'il y a très peu d'infos. Et les membres de la zone 51 n'en ont pas vraiment plus.

Ce qui est promis c'est qu'il y aura dans pas trop longtemps des infos substantielles mais que la phase actuelle d'assemblage des différents modules est longue et se prête assez peu à des devs diary.

[Mhm...mhm]

Je le souhaite.

[III/JG52-Drach]

Ben il y a de nouveaux Screen shot dans l area51
737
757
et puis qlqs baraques

[Eagle Eye]

et puis qlqs baraques

qu'est ce que t'as contre mes vieilles baraques

[PiF]

PTDR !!!:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[III/JG52-Drach]

Rien de pejoratif pour moi sauf peut etre le fait de designer le dernier complexe comme une "baraque" , sinon ca continue a etre jolie ....

[Pacman]

ROFLMAO:hum: