Design Group ?
 

:) Where Fish and the Seawolves have led - will others follow? SW R&D has brought together experienced
designers to produce scenarios. We all benefit. :up:

Why is there no DWX type Design Group out in the general community ? No Reality Group ? No combos of leading
and experienced designers providing 'real' product ? Where is another combo. effectively achieving some
quality control and merging specialisations ?

Why are some big guys still submerged and not surfacing to invite others aboard ? :hmm:

I think mission designing is a one person operation. But thats not to discourage others from forming mission design groups, its just that I've found it better to work alone on things like this because I have total control over my mission- I can scrap or restart projects at will with out having to answer to anyone.

:sunny: I wonder if others feel this way too ? :hmm:

I wrote a response here but, as it evolved into my negative views on the DW system, thought it better to PM you. ;)

Well I think you are right TLAM, but the benefit of being part of a group is you can ask some one to look at your map when you get stuck or just to review.
And then test the map together before you give it to others to play.

Re: Design Group ?
 

I don't think a group is a good idea, either. I do think there's a lot more room for discussion. I wish people would post more good sources for DW missions. Sometimes just a good newspaper article can get one's juices flowing.

SQ - I guess that door shut well before ''the weekend''

:yep: A nods as good as a wink to a blind man. ;)

Well, group or no group the important thing is to make available to the community (perhaphs through www.subguru.com) the single and/or multi player missions.
There aren't a lot of missions published on his website, maybe players are just interested in keeping the missions for themselves ? :hmm:

If I get 'em, I'll publish 'em :up:

I have thought many times on a group or asking for help (more specific than "how can I make this"), but then I think that the ones who help me will know how the mission is. Maybe not all, but many thinks, and he will lost most of the fun.

Maybe a group is a good thing if the plan is make a big campaign, with various controlable platforms.
The missions I create are only for subs because I'm not used to manage surface or air platforms, so I don't know how will be an interesting missions for those.

A cooperation between various persons who makes, one the sub part, other the helo part, other the Perry part, and so... could be interesting, but for single missions, one person is enoght.
It's my point...

Hmmm... must be almost a hundred who are posted on Bill's site only from me. :hmm:

You are the exception that confirms the rule :sunny:

:) My passing thought was that its a tall order for one individual to combine all the talents required to
create exciting, challenging scenarios. It is truly remarkable that so many have achieved this. But that said
there are calls for more scenarios and with Gold this clamour will get louder. Is it enough to rely on the skills of the few ?

I dont think that there is any better way of describing the need for Group activity than my own situation.
I can create or source, adapt and scale workable scenarios and know enough of the game mechanics to assess
what can be achieved. But the neo-programming skills required to manipulate Dws triggers, scripts etc escape me -
not at a basic level, but in finnessing them to harmonise an orchestra.

So the clay model cannot, does not, receive all the skills necessary to create a refined product. It needs technical
development in close liason with 'Design.' A group of two or more such designers and implementers,
IMHO could achieve a very high standard of output.

It is highly doubtfull whether these two talents co-exist or are resident in many single individuals in the current
available pool of potential new designers.

I exclude of course the current impressive and very talented exceptional designers to whom we
are all greatly indebted for some first class missions.

The gap.
 

I used to create missions, but that ended after I player MP7 Mine Sweeping. Wow, I don´t remember who made that one, but he is way ahead of me. I looked at its design, well, it´s similar, even better sometimes than those of the Campaing or the Single Missions.

I think there´s 2 kind of missions: Those simple (like mine) and those great, memorable ones, but there´s a HUGE :o gab between them, and there´s nothing to show you the path....
Maybe a tutorial, guide, hints...?

The way to make so complex scenarios is to have a very CLEAR idea of what do you want, and how can it be made.

The first thing is for the chosen :sunny: I have started a lot of scenarios, specially campaigns because that's what I like much, but I allways fall onto my own improvisation. Sudently I say "why not placing a neutral ship here?", "hmmm a chinese Kilo at 2 knots would be interesting for next missions..." and that sort of things makes my original idea to sink. :dead:
Another thing that ruins my missions is to make various changes at a time when I discover a mistake when testing them.

The second thing is a matter of trying, and trying, and trying... and asking here to the ones who knows.

That's why I only have achieved to make one campaign... and had to make it very short because I run out of ideas... :damn:

Better wait now for patch 102,and eventualy the LWAMI mod thereafter, before you start with new maps to make. :|\