SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - A question of taste...

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- Dangerous Waters (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=181)

- - A question of taste... (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=97628)

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaQueen

You'd probably be bored to death by my missions, then, because I don't generally rely on a lot of scripting. I'm all about keeping it simple. I always include a more detailed set of scenario design notes, which explain some of the thinking and motivation behind a scenario, but I don't like to have too much scripting. A good scenario puts the player in the position of a decision maker. Too often scripting is a way of taking decisions out of the hands of the player. I'd much prefer to just pose the players with a tactical problem in the beginning, and let them figure out on their own how to solve it.

Thank you for your advice. I shall avoid your missions.

I find SQs approach to scenario design alluring as I too dont appreciate over scripting - If I want to run on rails I'll catch a train sim !
SQs 'realistic' approach may not be mainstream but it has my vote ! More please SQ.:|\\

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bellman

However SQs 'realistic' approach is not mainstream,

But it's really not... it's just old fashioned. It used to be, when you played table top miniatures, you'd pick a scenario out of a book, and it'd say something like, "Do this..." the other person's job was to stop you. The outcome of the scenario was due to a combination of luck and skill. Nobody led you around by the nose jumping through hoops. It wasn't necessary. Players could get themselves into enough trouble.

Every once in a while, someone would put together a "campaign system" which would take into account things like strategic movement, long term logistics, and what not, but the "plot" essentially just fell out. We just played it out.

Computer games are nice because they alleviate a lot of the book keeping that we used to have to do, and maybe they make some things a little less abstract (you can actually READ a sonar or radar display instead of just having a "cookie cutter" definite range law). That's cool, but I don't really like being told how to accomlish my mission. In fact, in military circles, that's considered the hallmark of poor orders writing. They want it short and simple. Tell me what you want me to do, tell me what you intend to accomplish, but DON'T tell me how to do it. That's precisely what scripting frequently does, though.

Quote:

Anyone who has hunted or fished knows that hours can be spent, often unproductively, but its the little signs and potential 'spots' which feed the interest and fire the adrenalin. More please SQ.:|\\

I totally agree, and I don't always make slow paced missions. It's just the nature of ASW. A surface warfare scenario or an AAW dominated mission is intrinsically faster paced.