• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

All New Flight Simulator X Mission - Earthquake!

rightnumberone said:
"and then be judged on the quality of their decision making "

Scruffy,

You make a very good point. I had considered doing that also, and failing the user if they made the wrong decisions.
Click to expand...

This can be competence/performance oriented, rather than just decision based.

The user not exceeding predefined parameters,
e.g.
Penalising for use of full throttle throughout,
exceeding G-forces,
etc.


rightnumberone said:
This might not be the mission for that sort of non-linearity simply because of the length of this one (it will run 60-90 minutes minimum).
What concerned me was failing the user 70 minutes into the mission (for making a wrong choice) and frustrating them by requiring them to fly it all over again.
Click to expand...

You could work this a slightly different way.

By having only one goal,
something simple, effectively a participation goal & reward.

Then also have multiple additional, non-goal based, rewards,
for more complex achievements, (or again penalising them with penalty type rewards) ;-)

I'm using this implementation across a series of career type missions,
where unless the user has attained these additional rewards from a prior mission,
they will not be granted additional rewards in the current & subsequent missions.

Jon -
I'd been looking at scenarios for an Anneka Rice type 'Treasure Hunt'. ;-)

HTH
ATB
Paul
 
Jon -
I'd been looking at scenarios for an Anneka Rice type 'Treasure Hunt'. ;-)
Click to expand...

Sounds like fun - have you got a good model for the lady herself :D
 
This discussion really gets interesting. :)
That's an interesting point. What kind of strategy do you expect to see in missions?
Click to expand...
I worked as a bike messenger some years at university and I learned what it means to work with a non-linear schedule. The experience I got there I tried to put into the Kuala Air Taxi mission. An unexperienced pilot will get fired sooner than he can say "Where the heck is my schedule?!" :D But if you get yourself a strategy you may succed. But only after flying the mission several times you may find one (or another) perfect solution to get the extra reward. This sort of mission is something I want to see more often in fsx - and I'm planning a lot for further missions of that kind myself.

Negative 'rewards' is also a thing I came across, and I must say: it's quite mean. :D The user can't get rid of it once he "achieved" it. :p
I did that in my Madagascar Military Cargo mission and it works pretty well - giving the user some surprise moment when he realises that the reward is not really awarding... :D

I think a mission could absolutely include several rewards, maybe for each path the user took one reward.
Without wanting to sound proud :o I would give another example from my work: The Hooverdam Airrace. Airracing is something I really look foreward to have much more in fsx (think about the recent poll at avsim!). But the defauls races (how I like them!!:) ) are pretty much 'win or lose'. In the Hooverdam Airrace you get the trophy you deserve - depending how fast you were.

Oh boy, this rather looks like an advert for my missions than a discussion - sorry bout that! :o
 
OK Thorsten,

Since you brought it up ... :)

Is it possible to get the Gold in the Hoover Dam race?

I can't get much below 2:36?

Anyone got Gold yet? :confused:
 
After reflying my own mission I have to agree that it is harder to get gold in the normal race than brake the racerecord in the 'pro'-race. But I'm sure somewill will be able to do it. :)
 
OK, so, what is your best time in the normal race?

I've managed 2:35 and change ... and don't see how it would be possible to break 2:30 without cheating somehow.

(I do a loop over the dam as soon as I've passed through that hoop and then come right back down on top of it going back the other way. Can't think of a faster way.)
 
I'm not sure if this really is the fastest way. In the 'pro' race for example I found that it's much faster do do a very sharp 360-turn instead of a looping as I first thought.

But I have to admit I'm not totally sure I kept below 2:30 without, erm, streching the timer... :D
 
OK,

I will test it some more trying the fast 180 at the top of the dam. Still don't see how it is possible to get to 2:30 though.

(I even slowed down the simulation rate to 1/4. Very easy to fly it this way, and couldn't beat 2:35.x)
 
Just an idea: Why not use your "own" aircraft? Maybe you can get some more PS out of the engine. ;)
 
Well,

I considered that, but thought that might be like "cheating."

Just a thought if you're still working on this one: maybe put a dirt airstrip out there and give us a choice of planes to fly the mission in? Now THAT would be awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top