Author Topic: The Usual Controversy and RoF Editor  (Read 1048 times)

Offline AKA_Trapper

  • AKA_Wardogs
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
The Usual Controversy and RoF Editor
« on: September 03, 2013, 10:40:20 am »
There are the usual comments being made and I don't care.

What I can attest to, is the difficulty of the RoF Mission Editor.

The following is just FYI.


Possible a "controversial" statement by ATAG Bliss but an informative one. And since I feel it is 'important' to be informed, I post it here. Taken from this ATAG forum post ---> New update XXII .

The difference is there isn't much of a "wait to see what they bring to the table". We already know what they are bringing to the table. This is based off of the ROF engine. In saying that, the game will more than likely run very well. People will get good FPS on moderate machines and it will more than likely be fairly smooth. The flight model will probably feel exceptional and the overall look and graphics will probably be decent. But then it all goes wrong on the rest of the front. The ROF engine simply can not handle having many objects (static or AI) in a MP mission. The mission won't even load or, if you do get it to load, will feel like you are in a slow motion machine trying to fly it by yourself. That is simply unacceptable for a WWII flight sim. That alone makes MP nothing more than a sterile environment where nothing is going on besides planes fighting each other. I have several thousand objects, along with several hundred AI on one of my CloD missions for comparison. And even with that, because of the size of the map, it can feel sterile at times.

So I implore ANYONE to make a map that has anything close to that with ROF (just a stunt map) and watch what happens. This IL2 map probably has 60,000 objects in it. Everything from the mountains to the terrain, virtually everything in that mission is an object in the FMB. That's a good WWII sim engine. This same thing can be done in IL2CloD as well (considering they are both based off the same engine). This is beyond important.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg with what it "can't" do. You notice in all Maddox IL2 games there's a developer console. Using the "~" key or similar you can open up a command prompt and talk to the server, the server commander, or w/e 3rd party tool you use for your server. That "protocol" is there so people can create tools, commanders, moving dog fight servers, campaigns, or w/e a programmer can do to talk with and run your server. The only reason things like <obj<red, <timeleft, <help or w/e command you type to the server can bring back a response or action is because of that protocol in place. With ROF there is no protocol. There is no 3rd party server tools to create because the game does not allow it or have the "protocol" in place to do it. So any server tool you get within the game is what you are stuck with.

The same thing can be said for campaigns. IL2/CloD has a built in campaign and also the tools for users to create their own campaign as part of the game. That is why if you download one of the 3rd party SP campaigns available and install it, it actually shows up on it's own section in game. That is why, looking at the GUI, it looks like it's part of the game (a 3rd party campaign) to begin with. In ROF users can not create there own campaigns to be built into the game. So in a sense, all you can create is a series of missions that can be played one after the other, or in any order you want to. All the fancy scoring system, medals, briefs (depending on what you did etc.), all made by 3rd party are 100% incorporated into your game. In ROF none of that is possible and none of that exists other than what the developer sells you or gives you.

That again, is just the tip of the iceberg. ROF DM is based on hitboxes. An entire wing is a hit box. So for wing damage, the number of bullets hitting that wing determines when the wing fails. With even the old IL2, let alone CloD, the component you hit determines the wing damage or the part on the wing. That's why a couple short bursts into the right spot on a twin engine plane will send a stream of oil, a stream of coolant, a stream of fuel, or even produce a fire, all depending on what your bullets actually hit and not on how many bullets hit. That's also why, if you're not very accurate, you could chew through your entire salvo of ammo trying to shoot a bomber down. The rounds cause some minor structural damage, but without hitting an important component (control cables, fuel lines, fuel tanks, landing gear, oil lines, hydraulic lines [insert any part of a wing here/]) that it's not going to do anything major. That is why a ROF plane will never lose it's control cables. One good hit in the right spot in IL2/CloD takes your elevator out, takes your aileron out, etc.,etc., all only taking hits in the right spot, not the amount of ammo fired. Even the DM of the pilot in ROF is a hitbox. It takes 4 or 5 rounds (can't remember) to kill a pilot regardless of where that pilot is hit. In IL2/Clod, one round to the head = dead. I could simply go on about the DM aspects, and we could also point out some of the problems with Clod's as well. But not having component damage instead of hit box damage is like an arcade FPS game. It's the number of rounds you hit the other player instead of the precision of where the rounds hit. That is simply not acceptable in a modern flight sim. IL2FB of 10 years old had component DM.

And then there's the mission editor from ROF. This has got to be the worst piece of software ever made. In IL2's FMB if you want to do something, you select the object and properties you want to do and simply place them. You can put the object at any altitude, rotate them, essentially create w/e you want at will. A mission in ROF won't even run unless you start using special triggers that tell the mission to run. You should see the picture of a complex mission from the ROF editor and all the lines, timers, icons, and crap EVERYWHERE all over the screen while in the mission editor. And when I mean complex, I mean complex for the ME, not for the FMB that would take 1/10th of the time have 1000x more objects/AI and not all this dribble over the screen. Think about it this way, you can't even set the number of planes you want to use in ROF. Say you had a scenario where there was Me262's and you figured (as the mission builder) that only 4 should be in the air at all times (no more and no less) for balance or realism purposes, this isn't even possible in ROF. In Cliffs we can at least script this in so there's only so many of each type in the air. While it's a pain to do, it's still easily done. Kinda like anything else to script.

In IL2, 3rd party simply used this protocol available and made anything from SEOW, ADW, (full blown real time dynamic ever changing wars/campaigns for MP) and the server commanders. These server commanders also (because they can talk to the game) had elements put in them via 3rd party to help you complete your mission. You could set the loadouts, the objectives, the % of objective needed to be destroyed, the type of objective it was, the limits of planes etc.,etc.. Essentially the sky was the limit on what you wanted to have a server commander do. The same thing, of course, can be said for CloD. In ROF this is all impossible. This is just the major points of difference that are guaranteed differences between the 2 titles.

So when I say we are going backwards, this is the type of stuff I'm talking about. Irregardless, there's nothing I can do to change or convince them to use a different game engine or any of that jazz. But you gotta realize, this is just some of the stuff that WILL not be present. The sandbox of IL2/CloD is what keeps those 3rd party people making things for the game. The tools are part of the game to do it. So we are losing all of that. The 3rd party and content that kept people being able to play MP in a variety of modes, campaigns, moving dogfight servers., etc.,etc., is exactly why people used to have to wait to get into hyperlobby. With it's 1000 slot limitation, yes there was 1000 people online quite a bit in the old game, that's all that could be connected to HL at once. But those 1000 people were there because of all the things you had available to you in game in the forms of missions, 3rd party tools, and game types. That type of stuff can't be created in ROF.

So just realize when people are having some criticisms, especially mine, it's warranted. If this was a completely new engine, I would have some hope. But I, along with thousands of other ROF MP players, simply got tired of not having any sort of betterment to the basic core of the game. You can push out all the DLC in the form of scarves, compasses, fuel gauges, weapons, pistols, and planes all you want, but when the engine all this stuff flies in is severely limited, it gets very boring. If I was to try out all the 3rd party stuff made for IL2, I could probably spend 20 years playing it and never get to the last of it. Again, the reason for this community, and the 3rd party that's clung to it like glue over all these years, is because they had a sandbox to play in. You take the sandbox out, and you don't have much going on, let alone much of a community.

And I could go on and on and on about many other things. So if you're a MP guy, you most definitely should have some worry. It's not gonna be pretty.

Samples from RoF Mission Editor.

Offline AKA_MattE

  • AKA_Wardogs
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
    • View Profile
Re: The Usual Controversy and RoF Editor
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2013, 06:31:01 am »

I am going to take a wait and see approach as well, but my stance on the project is improving.  They certainly know how to communicate with their customers/potential customers and the more I watch them the more I feel they are seriously listening to what the WW2 online flight sim community is telling them.

this is something that was re-posted on the SoWC forums and I find really interesting.

Now this still might not work because of the ROF engine limitation, but at least someone is trying to make a ROF/BOS campaign engine, we will see if it works.

I have to say less than a year ago I was depressed about the state of the WW2 combat flight sim genre, I thought it was going to die a slow death, but now I really think it is going to be just fine or we might even see another golden age like the mid 2000's with what I see as some very healthy competition between COD, BOS and the DCS boys.  It could be very ironic that the abandonment of COD by 1C might have actually revived the genre and given it new life.


Certified DCS Aircraft