12-05-2014, 12:54 PM
First of all good topic.
You have a good point and I agree with you if there are many tasks where you risk turning in a confusion game.
I personally have only one objective in my missions.
Spoiler alert for those who didn't play my missions.
In ARMADA destroy tanks is a "non-task" cuz nature takes care of it
What seems to bother you is incertitude and lack of control which is something i'm looking for, for me is a feature as long the mission is not bugged
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: In Alias' mission, we had a section "Objectives" in the mission description that listed the two tasks, destroy tanks and take out general. This supposedly is less railroading than having the exact same text only in the task section. I don't follow.
Is not about logic is about a feeling, you are right in your argument, but the feeling is different, if it would be many tasks that feeling can turn for me into frustration maybe, but as you may know i only have one objective in my missions. This doesn't mean you'll not have surprises while playing
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: Order of tasks or order of Objective entries in the Briefing are equally irrelevant. In almost 99% of all cases, the order of objectives is more or less given by mere proximity, and that was also the case in this mission. We start near the tank base, so naturally the tank base is the first thing attempted. However, we might have attempted the second objective first, which would have been the exact same thing for tasks vs. briefing description.
We could've tried that, i don't impose a specific order for actions in my missions, however tornado is lethal for players too that could've ended in our death
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: [/size]Everyone can easily see if they are achieved or not. Sure, you can pop up a hint (which is easily overlooked since it is silent when you have music disabled), or do a sidechat (which is easily scrolled out by constant AI chatter)
That's why i disable AI chatter in my missions and i rely more on radio messages (txt+sound) than hints.
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: [/size]JIP players can check quickly what they have to do and what is still to be done. Sure, you can argue they can ask, but why burden the gameplay down with this? Task lists immediately show what has to be done still.
A stats report or basic info you have to give anyway for JIP players with tasks or not defined.
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: [/size]Tasks are very visible. They pop up in the middle of the screen. And even if you happen to miss that, it is easy to check.
I suppose is a matter of taste, i personally don't
(12-05-2014, 03:23 AM)Alwarren link Wrote: [/size]Tasks are easier to read. You do not need to search the briefing for information, the information is right there. The fact that you can easily recognize what remains to be done means you don't run into a situation where you suddenly are at the end of a three kilometer hike only to discover that you didn't blow up all the ammo crates at that depot forty five minutes ago.
You are right again, that's why i take extra-measures when i define objectives and related triggers.
At the end if i would make a mission with many or complex tasks i'll do it your way so we are pretty much at the same page Â
Otherwise, for one objective, i will always try to introduce a feeling of incertitude and lack of control in my missions so I will not use tasks ... like i said is a matter of taste... and surprises