[OKO]

Originally Posted by timmyg00

I disagree strongly with that assessment. Realism may suffer somewhat due to time constraints (it's hard to get people to sit in on a single MP session for more than a couple of hours), but it is still an important consideration for me when I create my MP missions.

TG

So Timmy, you will be VERY VERY restricted in the choice of your theatres.
I can say, as usual MP player, I never had people saying, during the mission, they don't like it because it's "geopolitically" unrealistic.
The goal is to make it interesting and to give a nice fight, well balanced, with action and the much work possible (nothing worth than to wait 1h30 before something happen ...)
If you look at my missions, you will see no one of them is more than 2 hours of games, usually, they are about 1H before one of the sides gets its objectives.
But during these 1H or 45mn, there is always 15 to 30 mn of positionning / data collection before engagment.

If you always try to have geopolitical realism, mission have DEEP chance to be bad balanced, just because if you do this, one side will be MUCH more strong than the other (US to name it)

I prefer interesting game instead to kill the interest in the name of 'realism'.
Because 'realistic' mission is way too long and way to unbalanced in real life ...

And that's why I said I concentrate on realism ONLY on solo mission, form reasons mentionned above.

Replayability is a probably one of the main factor to consider => dynamic group (to have something different each time) coupled to dynamic locations can make a mission replayable lots of time with different conditions.
It's very important for me as I often play my maps with friends.
And I still don't have lots of map made ...

talking about this, I'd like very much to have random wheater and sea states on editor ...

TimmyG00, I don't know how much often you play on MP match, but as regular player, I can tell you the more important is the quality of the engagment, and not the name of the boats ...