Jump to content
Limey

Does anyone think there's a shortage of CO4 to CO18 missions?

Recommended Posts

As I do, I intend to produce some missions (as I learn) to compensate for this. Often, it's a playercount around this range to begin a random session from 0 and create momentum for further numbers, but I am worried there is a lack of choice which could (eventually) cause people to be less eager with initial sessions due to redundance, discouraging a productive cycle for activity. Mind you, if anyone doesn't think the same, or thinks this isn't a priority, that's completely fine, but I would like to highlight this as a possible issue! :)

Share this post


Link to post

Bring back #patrolops.

A dynamic, flexible mission is actually a brilliant idea as a solution: a few of these could easily make up for 10+ standard ones. 

Share this post


Link to post

Bring back #patrolops.

 

PO3 is outdated and not even supported by it's author. Once PO4 comes out I will start working on it (it was supposed to be released shortly after Apex...).

Share this post


Link to post

I think right now we have the most need for more missions in the 45-65 players range.

 

The more missions of course the better, but on a typical prime time evening we will need three or four of those and maybe one or two

in the 4-18 players region at the beginning and very end.

Edited by zumorc

Share this post


Link to post

truth is tho that outside that envelope a few players could drift in spontaneously and in fact that player count is more efficient to satisfy that sudden itch to play Arma even though it's not the day/time. 

 

Maybe more than CO4 id raise the lower player count to CO24 with 6 minimum players. Also the Apex campaign is not that bad, i like most of the missions.

Share this post


Link to post

Zumorc makes sense. During primetime there is not much need for smaller missions.   

 

No mission maker myself. But …

Having more (or lots) of missions that can be played with a Fireteam to a platoon minus would be helpful outside of primetime. Monday through Thursday. And early and late hours.  I've noticed that outside of primetime often people are not playing because no one is on the primary.  When we have started playing others join in.

The wait for a new seeder has been ongoing for quite some time. Perhaps rather than making a really cool new Patrolops you could just contribute simple missions that are scaleable. I’m not sure that a dynamic mission is really that much better than a bunch of very basic smaller sized missions. Dynamic missions often have way too many options and the friendly/enemy assets get out of balance fast.

Tin made a set of platoon sized missions that had a huge replay factor. I heard people complain “Not this mission again” only to give a thumbs up during the AAR. Leadership seemed to have a big influence on players enjoyment. Tin’s missions had simple objectives and were great training environments. They could be replayed in different ways. They would have benefited by more variation of the AI placement.

If you do make some smaller sized missions. Some basic suggestions are:

  • Keep them simple. The loadout is critically important for creating appropriate mindset.
     
  • Include a LR radio at the spawn point to contact the CO for orders.
     
  • Allow CO to end the mission rather than auto ending the mission. This would allow for a lot of flexibility in mission objectives. If only 2 players are available the mission could be a recce. With a fireteam the mission becomes a probe or raid. Or with a couple squads … an attack or assault.
     
  • Use the “Probability of Presence” to randomize the location and number of AI.
  • Consider scripting an increase of AI with a higher number players.
  • One you have a good solid working mission created then make another one by changing the location. Do it again a few times on various maps.
     
  • CO-TvT?

Final note. I’m not a mission maker. So please disregard if these ideas create conflict or grief.   More 65+ player missions may have  greater positive effect on UO ARMA.

Share this post


Link to post

@Jimbo i used to be a MM for my clan on that player range. Our style was wildly different from the missions i played here on UO (in term of complexity and thus lenght: a 20 player mission could easily last us for 2 hrs, we had all sort of triggers, DAC and whatnots), so i'd really like to have an official do and dont list like the one you posted to see if im able to make a few missions myself

Share this post


Link to post

There is only a very brief list of requirements that a mission must fullfill in our community: 

 

http://www.unitedoperations.net/wiki/Mission_Submission_SOP

 

But of course unwritten is the idea that it should be designed around our gameplay. We used to have many missions that lasted more than two hours,

I personally prefer 90 min as a good goal to aim for as a general maximum. Minor outliers excluded.

Share this post


Link to post

Thx zumorc

 

About patrolops: as per my experience, please dont. When i started playing I loved to play patrolops in SP, as a way to refine my game skills and observe how Ai reacted. But as time passed we tried to play Patrolops missions as a clan, and it was a disaster. The difference with handmade missions is too blatant, it is obvious that they are throwaway random missions, and they were consequently played half assedly. DAC missions were much better, as they kept the handmade quality with a randomic placement of patrols around the designated area. Of course aLive missions are another topic altogether

Edited by Maffa

Share this post


Link to post

We need more missions in general, regardless of playercount.

 

So it has been, so it is, so it will always be. Missions take longer to make than they can be made.

Share this post


Link to post

@Jimbo i used to be a MM for my clan on that player range. Our style was wildly different from the missions i played here on UO (in term of complexity and thus lenght: a 20 player mission could easily last us for 2 hrs, we had all sort of triggers, DAC and whatnots), so i'd really like to have an official do and dont list like the one you posted to see if im able to make a few missions myself

 

I'm NOT a mission maker.  My points above are just my own ideas on what I think would work.  I have no clue if the ideas are practical.  I used to play a unique two to three hour mission twice per week and it was great. UO prefers shorter missions and more of them.

 

Check out the link that Zumorc posted above.  Use this Link also for an idea of quality control.  Perfk is our go to guy for review.  Missions are a lot of work AFTER you have created them.

 

If you are looking for ideas for truly good missions remember this.  We would all prefer to play TvTs (Some players just don't know that yet).  So with that thought in mind review the following link and create CO-Ops with well designed objectives, or at least the potential for decent objectives.

 

HC66OXx.jpg

CO-Ops are really just training for TvTs.  If we were really awesome and had enough players (all of the time) I think we would always play TvTs.  But sometimes we just don't have enough players for a decent TvT or we need to practice together to build team cohesion.

It's great practice.

Share this post


Link to post

I know that the urban patrol script used to be good at randomly making patrols with specified unites. I don't know if the script is still supported though, seeing that it is a older script. I do believe (from what I can remember) that it was good for making randomized missions without having random units placed down. It could be interesting to see if it still works properly and if it would be suitable as a replacement for Patrol Ops. Here is a Link to the BiForum thread and a Link to kronzky's website (the author of the script). This could be completely irreverent considering I don't make missions so don't hate me if this is a stupid script that doesn't apply to anything lol.

Share this post


Link to post

I think we would always play TvTs.

I personnaly dislike playing more than 2 TvT's in a row.

They are mostly short engagement after a long briefing and a long walk. I'd rather play coops all the time because they mostly offer multiple engagement and "tell a story". But all tastes are different I guess.

 

I would love to see low count missions to seed the server or just play with 4 or 5 people for more than 5 minutes. Weekdays are dead :(

Share this post


Link to post

I personnaly dislike playing more than 2 TvT's in a row.

They are mostly short engagement after a long briefing and a long walk. I'd rather play coops all the time because they mostly offer multiple engagement and "tell a story". But all tastes are different I guess.

 

I would love to see low count missions to seed the server or just play with 4 or 5 people for more than 5 minutes. Weekdays are dead :sad:

 

Also, we are never going to get a TvT where people are willing to play battalion cook #472 for an hour just to get blown up when the other team's tanks finally arrive.

 

You have a lot more freedom in someways with co-ops, as you do not have to worry about 'fairness' or entertaining the other side.

Edited by IAJT

Share this post


Link to post

They are mostly short engagement after a long briefing and a long walk. I'd rather play coops all the time because they mostly offer multiple engagement and "tell a story". But all tastes are different I guess.

 

I think Jimbo's point is that we would rather play TVTs that offer multiple engagements and "tell a story," that play as a COOP would but with a live enemy.

 

You say that JT, but in Commandos 75% of the server would be on sentry while 8 guys had a great time, and we used to play that all the time.

Edited by Herbiie

Share this post


Link to post

I think Jimbo's point is that we would rather play TVTs that offer multiple engagements and "tell a story," that play as a COOP would but with a live enemy.

 

You say that JT, but in Commandos 75% of the server would be on sentry while 8 guys had a great time, and we used to play that all the time.

I suppose you are talkin about 40+ player TvT, below that threshold it's not as much Arma as GTA or America's Army...

 

The problem with TvT and multiple engagements is that you cant make believe the defending side that you are totally oblivious of the fact that you are to be pounded by a x3 force while you are scattered around the map. Maybe you should balance things down to x1,5 top, make objective to defend to all costs, provide a QRF and means for retreating and allow the possibility for the attacker to chose the starting point, or maybe enhancing the defenders with some oblivious AIs units patrolling around.

 

There was a mission i totally loved, where the defenders were tasked to be oblivious of the fact that they were to be attacked and didnt know what the attackers objectives were, as the attackers were SF infiltrating. I loved that mission, probably one of the best TvT i've ever played. 

Share this post


Link to post

I seem to have tendency to be an off-peak time player so I can only agree with OP. I wouldn't know if there's also a shortage of larger missions as I haven't played enough in the busiest hours. Mostly they're a bit too late at night for me.

 

I couldn't agree more with the concern regarding seeding the server. In these past few weeks I've seen too often the primary with ~2-4 people online getting dismayed at the prospect of playing one of the very few small missions yet again. And then others see those numbers and don't even bother to join because of the prospect of playing one of the very few small missions yet again. It seems to turn into a silly but understandable vicious circle, for when we did manage to stay on long enough and gather a few more brave souls we had pleasant enough weekday evenings with 12~20 players online -- numbers that seem to considerably broaden mission choices.

 

A couple of these evenings were with a few new players around though, and after a few sessions one can already sense the "oh, this mission again" feeling among them when numbers are low. Certainly a pattern. Just need to see how often "Try Bleeding Less" and "Goat Busters" are played, for example.

 

Anyway. It was in agreement with OP that I started fiddling with making missions again a couple of weeks ago. Funny that it was the exact same reason why I started making Arma 2 missions years back. 

 

I know I don't have the competence to make amazing missions, or large player count missions for that matter. I don't even think I have the time/stamina anyway. But I think Jimbo is on the money in that we shouldn't shy away from producing a few simple/straightforward missions to fill the gap. I know I'm guilty of always trying to over-complicate things and I see many others are too. Adding cool details to missions has diminishing returns in terms of gamplay/enjoyment. For example, copy-pasting simple missions to different locations on the map is certainly more than enough to keep low player counts entertained while the numbers pick up. Simple doesn't have to mean low-quality, and fiddling with details that often add very little can be very frustrating and time-consuming.

 

Lastly: If you're afraid to start playing with mission-making, don't be. Olsen's framework is great, as is the work I've seen Blackhawk and Perfk put towards help and documentation regarding its use. If you've never tried it, the learning curve for your very first mission will be somewhat steep (even if the wiki for Olsen's does a great job easing that), but once you have the basics set it's a breeze as long as you don't over-complicate things. If you want to get a first mission "just right", start making it as simple and straightforward as possible. No fancy, ground-braking novel ideas. Bread and butter. Once you have a working idea it's easy to get feedback through having more experienced people to test it, or submitting it for review, and then you'll know if there's anything missing. To get started, work from the ground up (adding details only as/if needed) and not the other way around.

 

And yes, I type too much.

 

TL;DR: Yes, it'd be great to have more small missions. Don't shy away from making very very simple ones, especially for starters. Simple doesn't have to mean low quality.

Share this post


Link to post

Small, dynamic missions are sweet. I'd love to see some on the server. The argument about the ~50players region is justified though, we really got some overplayed missions in that region.

@BlackHawk: PatrolOps? Jesus fucking christ no please do not. Like seriously, do not bring this halfassed shit back to this place, I beg you(And any other MM who reads this). Make a dynamic objective mission? cool! I tried that once but I am simply a too shit MM, so I stoped. I know you and Delta hang out a lot in TS (or at least did) maybe you guys can accomplish a squad/platoon size DOM for UO, that would be greatly appriciated.

Wasn't there a thread about this topic like a year ago? You guys might really want to look into that, quiet some people had some pretty good ideas there. Can not find it right now though.

Edited by Pax'Jarome Malues

Share this post


Link to post

Oh look its this topic again.....

 

If you think there is a shortage of missions why dont you try and make some?

 

Its quite easy ...... if I can do it (poorly) then anyone can... and then you get the bonus of playing your mission once and a while and listening to everyone complain about it!

 

 

In all seriousness though it is quite easy to make a mission, and we generally recommend to new mission makers to start with smaller (platoon minus) missions to start off with. Speak with anyone on the MMO staff or just hang out in the mission making channel and someone will be willing to help you!

Share this post


Link to post

@BlackHawk: PatrolOps? Jesus fucking christ no please do not. Like seriously, do not bring this halfassed shit back to this place, I beg you(And any other MM who reads this).

 

Easy there bud, you are fully entitled to not liking Patrol Ops but you are not allowed to take a dump one it. I'm not saying that for me, I'm saying it for that actual person who created it, it's pretty polished for a dynamic mission considering it's running on one of the most unreliable modding platform: ArmA. Most of the players who do not like Patrol Ops don't like it for a good reason which is that fact that it's not serious enough and again, I understand that. But I'd like to point out that the goal of Patrol Ops is not to be a traditional UO mission, it's to get the server going while allowing small to medium playercounts to pass time while getting used to assets that are rarely used without major consequences.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, please take any further debate on Patrol Ops to any of the past topics.  Search and you find them.  Please keep this to the topic on posted by the OP.

Share this post


Link to post

@jimbo great thread, I'll keep all suggestions in mind (as soon as I come back from vacation in Florida).

 

I was wondering: one thing that I think is hinted but not explicitly stated is the chance of creating a TvT with each sides having different not mutually exclusive goals. All TvT I played since now (except one, the one I liked best) is a zero sum game where the success of one side is the defeat of the other and vice versa. What if each side had goals that don't necessarily slam flatly against the goals of the enemy side. As an example: blufor's goal is to minimize casualties in keeping a key location as a minimum because home front is so sensible that a few deaths could cause the whole commitment to be recalled, while opfor goal would be taking control of the location blufor is keeping.

 

Maybe it's not the best example but bear it with me I'm slightly drunk and sunburnt I don't think I can do any better right now, but the point is: in anyone's experience, how are missions where the sides don't have antithetical missions, and/or where one or both sides don't know what the other true objective is?

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...