Advertisement

Author Topic: SP missions: intel info= too accurate  (Read 969 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

R.Y.A.N.

  • Guest
SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« on: 21 Jul 2003, 23:57:43 »
I have downloaded and played several good SP missions.

However, it seems that the intel is always pretty good, ie: your objective is really what they say it is, in the right place, etc.

A whole mission can revolve around bad intel. For example, I'm working on a mission now where an early morning raid by a Blackops team infiltrates through patrols leads the player's group through several stages where the intel is dead on, like supply stashes, suspected enemy positions, etc, but when they reach the town where the tanks are supposed to be, they are all hidden under camo netting and vegetation. When you get close enough to set a charge, you trip a trigger that tells you (if you hadn't already noticed), "these tanks are made of rubber and wood!" or "this tank is a decoy!"- they are all simply armored targets. Suddenly, the primary objective is God-knows-where, enemy patrols are still out there, and if you investigate further, the camp where the 'tanks' were supposed to be is really a secondary target: a well defended and hidden Shilka that has been shooting down NATO transport planes. Trouble is: blowing the Shilka up first causes problems- the mission still needs to be done in order of primary then secondary target, just so you survive- atract attention to yourself too soon and you've had it.

Another idea is to have an objective's intel right on, but- the location has moved several kilometers away, such as the Scuds you were after moved over the hill at the last moment- now you have no tactical plan- you planned the attack for the valley you're in now- which is deserted. Your team now has to alter it's plan quick to destroy the Scuds.

Even a straightforward 'clear the town' scenario is more tense if nobody's home....there's the trucks and transport, and the defenses...a couple guards-but were are the bulk of the enemy troops? Where'd they go, and- when will they be back, and from which direction?

It's that much more exciting when you find out that your neat little sabotage mission, or your routine attack on a presumed enemy held town is 100% out of your control after all your careful planning and recon. I like low-light condition, like dawn, so your eyesight is compromised, but enemies with IR goggles can still use them. I also like making the best approach to the objective the one that puts the sun in yours eyes, so even a simple advance into an 'unoccupied' town is flying blind. Two enemies behind a low wall can put a damper on your stealthy appraoch real quick if you never see them.

mikeb

  • Guest
Re:SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« Reply #1 on: 22 Jul 2003, 00:11:22 »
couldn't agree with you more!  there ARE missions where objectives change for some reason or another but what you are suggesting - totally wrong and requiring quick combat planning - is certainly something we don't see that much of.  however, would be boring if this happened right at the beginning of the mission perhaps....

hang on... ooohhh... seen another thread that describes randomising mission objectives at the beginning of the mission so each time you play it, the objectives totally change.  maybe this approach could be used here too.  i.e. you have the same intel but the mission changes.  for example the first objective of a mission could be to establish yourself in a reportedly empty forest and plan your attack into the nearby town.  however, using a random script the mission could instead change so that you are ambushed in the forest, forcing you to leave and regroup elsewhere to plan your attack.  or intel could be wrong about the amount/type of support in a town (and not just by a few soldiers using the probability of presence command but completely different type, e.g. armoured, air-support, or anti-air support)

of course this could mean that missions may be easily completed sometimes and near impossible other times.  plus would require lots of scripting, but would be incredibly cool, especially if you had two "random" scripts that jump between 3 scenarios which would give you 9 possible mission stories!!!!!

it would take you a while to get bored of oplaying a mission like that. nice!

Gooner861

  • Guest
Re:SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« Reply #2 on: 22 Jul 2003, 00:24:54 »
I agree with u, ur first idea sounds really interesting and wud get the player more involoved in the game.

Offline Messiah

  • Honourary OFPEC Patron & Drinking Buddy of Wolfsbane
  • Honoured Contributor
  • ***
  • OFPEC Veteran
    • Project UK Forces
Re:SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« Reply #3 on: 22 Jul 2003, 01:02:34 »
i do like the idea of armoured targets under cammo netting.... might use that in a new mission  ;)
Proud Member of the Volunteer Commando Battalion

asmodeus

  • Guest
Re:SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« Reply #4 on: 22 Jul 2003, 03:02:03 »
Good point!

I totally agree!  It's always different being told the path, then walking the path.   ;)

If you're looking for this kind of mission to play, check out my beta 'nam mission Killing Fields.  Lots of things go wrong, the intel is bad, and there's a couple more surprises!  (just like the war)   ::)

But yeah, I hope more people do this type of thing in their missions.  

Asmo

Phantom

  • Guest
Re:SP missions: intel info= too accurate
« Reply #5 on: 22 Jul 2003, 10:29:58 »
i agree.
seems that this is the first post in a while that everyone has given positive feedback on, nice work mate.