Some of the guys at Rowan
have been kind enough to talk to Ken "KC23" Cook about Mig Alley.
I have colour coded the interview to make it easier for you to follow
who says what. The codes are as follows. [ Rod Hyde
] Who started Rowan. [ Jim Taylor ] General
lead programmer. [ Mark Shaw ] Designer and
mission designer. All the rest is Ken "KC23" Cook.
Mig Alley Interview - Rowan Talks to KC23
Thank you for agreeing to
meet with us and congratulations on your release of MiG Alley. A lot of
people are anxious to hear your responses to some of the many questions
that have been popping up since MiG Alley hit the stores shelves in Europe.
But before we start how about you tell us a little bit about yourselves.
[ Rod Hyde ] Rowan Software Ltd was formed in 1987
to produce games and business software. Prior to 1987 we were engaged
in similar activities, trading as H&H Software which was formed in 1983.
Over the last 11 years, we have specialised in producing flight simulations
for the entertainment industry We are currently working on the following:
Soccer Management game
Battle of Britain flight sim
[ Jim Taylor ] Mark and I have been with Rowan since
Flight of the Intruder, back in 1990, although we both had a hand in Falcon
mission disk 2, and Falcon Gold CDTV
[ Mark Shaw ] When I first started at rowan I was
a 2d/3d artist. A couple of years later, I was given the chance to write
the missions for dawn patrol. By the time I started flying corps I was
involved with all aspects of design.
Being a Yank myself the question I hear most often is, when is MiG Alley
going to be available in the States and what differences if any will there
be between the US version and the UK/German version?
[ Rod Hyde ] Empire haven't finalised the marketing
and distribution details yet for the release of MiG Alley in the States.
So we don't have a date. The US version will contain some bug fixes. It
could include some mods suggested by users. It just depends on when Empire
call for a master.
Once the US version goes Gold will UK/German owners be able to download
the patch right after it is done or will they have to wait till it gets
packaged and hits the shelves in the US?
[ Rod Hyde ] I can't see why anybody should be made to wait. By the way
we have mastered the Italian and French versions already. The Spanish
is nearly there.
Rowan received high praise for the support of the hit title "Flying Corps
Gold"; will MiG Alley also see this kind of support in fixing any stubborn
bugs and/or multi-play issues?
[ Rod Hyde ] We like to spend time and money improving
our games and implement improvements suggested by users. The more successful
the game, the more we can spend. Flying Corps was very successful and
so we spend a lot. With MiG Alley we have started by issuing a bug fix
patch and first the game play patch will soon follow. How much we can
do depends on the success of the game.
There is a rumor that multi-play was originally going to include cooperative
play in the dynamic campaign is this something that is still possible
for a future patch or perhaps the US version?
[ Rod Hyde ] When we started to put together the
campaign multi-player option we realised that the basic design wasn't
going to work very well. A big fix was required and I had to decide to
use the available resource in other parts of the game. However we have
learnt some lessons and we are designing Battle of Britain with them in
mind. As far as MiG is concerned we could get multi-player campaign working
if the game generates enough income.
Judging by the response of the various flight sim newsgroups and forums
MiG Alley seems to be extremely popular. Were you surprised by the overwhelmingly
positive response and do you think that might have an impact on any decision
for an add-on for MiG Alley in the immediate future?
[ Mark Shaw ] I would certainly like to do an add-on.
If not a full add-on then maybe a few more quick missions. It's all boils
down to time and money. If the game is a success (worldwide) then it is
a possibility. The decision ultimately lies with Rod and Empire.
Hypothetically if the decision was made to go ahead with an add-on which
new aircraft(s) would you personably be most interested in seeing? What
other interesting things might we see in a possible add-on?
[ Mark Shaw ] Some of the navy aircraft would be
nice (panther, corsair), but adding a carrier and the ai to accompany
it would be like starting a new project! It would be interesting (not
to mention a great test of your pilot skill) to fly the meteor, the token
british aircraft.
[ Rod Hyde ] Adding the Navy's input would be interesting.
I would like to simulate 1950's carrier activity. That though, as Mark
says, is like a new project. I suppose It could be a mission disk. Anything
we do, needs to add a new angle and not be more of the same. So adding
some more quick missions that explore new areas is a good idea. Any ideas
are welcome!
As far as aircraft are concerned I would like to
fly the F82.
I have personally been a very big advocate for dynamic campaigns, however
the danger of repetitive boring mission types has scared off some of the
most experienced flight sim developers. What is it about your design that
made you feel confidant you could overcome this hurdle?
[ Rod Hyde ] When you are involved in games design,
it is difficult to be confident of anything. Some things turn out better
than expected, others things just don't work. To give you an example it
took us three attempts at the campaign map screen before we got an interface
that we liked. People have complemented us on the simplicity of the map
interface: micro-management is possible but you only have to delve as
far as you want and the game takes care of the rest. Well, it may appear
to be simple but it took us ages to sort it out.
On the other hand the dynamic campaign system works pretty much as originally
intended.
Overall, games design requires an iterative approach: design, implement,
test, redesign, reimplement retest, etc. The more experience you have
then the fewer the mistakes but then you get more ambitious. It is just
not possible to get everything right first time. When we play the game,
un-thought of improvements suddenly become obvious. This process continues
after publication…
[ Mark Shaw ] The campaign engine is making decisions
based on constantly changing information. It evolves as you do. If you
repeatedly hit a supply dump then the engine will try to find a way of
getting supplies around it. At the same time it will move more defences
into that area. If you fly the same mission twice in the spring campaign,
there's no guarantee that you will encounter the same sequence of events.
This generates a great feeling of suspense. For example, I flew lead for
a flight of mustangs on armed reconn. We went in and created merry hell
with a supply convoy. I was nailed by ground fire so i flew the mission
again. This time I was shocked to hear "MiGs, 10 o'clock high". The Migs
had managed to get past the sabre patrols and were bearing down on my
mustangs. It was a massacre! The game managed to take me by surprise and
I am the designer!
In some of your promotion material there is talk of "Gold Missions" in
the dynamic campaign. A hydroelectric dam was used as an example. About
how many of these "Gold Missions" are there in MiG Alley's dynamic campaign
and without giving too much away what generally triggers these events?
[ Rod Hyde ] Gold missions didn't fit the final
design and so they didn't make it into the master. This is good subject
matter for an add-on…
Sometimes when playing the dynamic campaign you are given a failure in
the debrief for missions with several hundred tons of supplies destroyed
while other missions you are given successes despite perhaps under a 100
tons of supplies destroyed. What is the over riding factor in your ground
troops doing well. Is it Successes Vs Failures or the overall elimination
of the enemy's supplies as measured in tons destroyed?
[ Jim Taylor ] The criteria used to flag a 'success'
are based on absolute values the %target destroyed only, although the
exact rules depend on the type of mission. [Capture a table from the FAQ
we have prepared]. However, in order to keep the supplies down it is often
necessary to attack a target that appears to be destroyed. The stores
you destroy, or the small level of damage you do effect, do get applied
to the state of the ground battle.
There have been very few game-play complaints about MiG Alley, however
one that seems to come up occasionally is navigation. Some of the suggestions
have been anywhere from improving the in-flight map mode to including
waypoint designation in the in-flight info bars. Has there been any thought
to improving this aspect of MiG Alley or do you feel that this is something
that is just part of that era in warfare.
[ Jim Taylor ] This is one of the issues we are
addressing in the gameplay patch we are working on currently. In addition
to tuning the detail level on the in-game map, Paul (our 3d lead programmer)
has also added more waypoint information in all the obvious places.
Many people are astonished at the number of aircraft that can be encountered
in any particular mission, how is it that you can keep the frame so high
where other developers with half the aircraft, weaker AI and no weather
struggle to keep the game playable?
[ Jim Taylor ] "Trade secret" :-) It is all to do
with making sure that what you don't see doesn't cost too much.
When fighting on the higher levels I've seen enemy AI aircraft go into
spins when near the edge of their flight envelop and generally behave
a lot like a human might in the same situation. Was this a particularly
difficult aspect of the AI to program because it seems so few other sims
come close to this kind of AI modeling?
[ Rod Hyde ] When the AI aircraft is on complex
mode, the aircraft is actually being flown. By this I mean that the AI
moves the aircraft's throttle, stick and rudder: it has the same interface
to the flight model as the player. In these situations it is possible
for the stick to be pulled too just much and a spin/start could be initiated.
A different part of the ai recognises this and overrides. In this way,
in complex mode, the AI pilot flies on the edge. The higher the skill
of the ai pilot the closer he will try to get to the edge. When on simple
mode, the AI aircraft is moved more directly and so spins etc are unlikely.
When flying 1 v 1 against the computer it is not hard to see the contrast
in the different levels of difficulty. My question is what kind of contrast
is demonstrated in the dynamic campaign with morale levels? In other words
to what degree does a "Veteran" level pilot become better or worse depending
on morale? Can he actually become a better than Veteran level pilot if
his morale is excellent or is it just a penalty of anything less then
excellent?
[ Jim Taylor ] Morale controls the tendency for
the aircraft to take certain risks. A high morale, but low skill pilot
will tend to attempt difficult manoeuvres and then screw up. Obviously
a low moral Veteran may well be capable of brilliant manoeuvres, but be
too timid to attempt them. Fear the happy hero pilot!
[ Mark Shaw ] There are other factors at work in the background that are
applied across entire mig squadrons. For example, squadron aggression
dictates which tactics a squadron will use. A very aggressive squadron
will go looking for trouble with sabre patrols. A less aggressive squadron
will generally avoid sabres and use safer hit and run tactics like dive
and zoom. Aggression is like morale - Migs will become increasingly aggressive
if you don't give them the occasional bloody nose.
There are several different attack patterns and flight formations to choose
from in the "Task" dialog screen. Are there particular mission types and
situations that each of these variables was designed for? If so can you
give a couple of examples?
[ Jim Taylor ] The high level is designed primarily
for the heavy bombers, although a flight of F80s carrying heavy bombs
will work equally well. The carpet bombing effect is pretty effective
against larger targets for very little risk. Low level bombing is designed
primarily for napalm strikes against smaller targets, and dive bombing
is required for rocket and gun runs. The idea with the patterns is to
use the loosest formation that you dare, given the opposition in the form
of AAA and MiGs. If you can only afford 1 quick pass, then a single file
attack will send everyone against one location and guarantee a hit, or
individual targets will split everyone up, but puts a lot less fire power
against any one element. The spaced selection modes give each aircraft
time to select a new target if the previous aircraft were successful.
In either case, the bombers will concentrate on a particular building
group in the target area until it is killed. To separate the bombers onto
different building groups you need to use the task dialog.
The manual is surprisingly small for such a feature rich and deep simulation.
Are there any plans for a strategy guide and/or FAQ?
[ Jim Taylor ] Dave should have told you about our
first draft of FAQ. Any contributions are gratefully received …
Thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedule answer some
of our questions. We'd like to invite you to visit our forum and perhaps
say a few words and answer a few questions from our readers.
random screenshot
random irc quote: <_Coyote1> i like this quote .... "People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it is easier to pick on rich old ladies than biker gangs"
