WOE:BC Postmortem

A couple of weeks ago I posted a request on combatace to get feedback on my WOE:BC campaign. Yet there were only few reactions. Not that I did not expect it. At this moment my campaign has been downloaded over 900 times, but i believe that most players just perform the download to see what's inside and discard it when it does not meet their expectations or wishes.

In this post I will do a detailled postmortem of my campaign. This is necessary if I want to reach the same download volume like Nato Fighters or other campaigns with my next campaign.

For comparison here are the number of downloads of some of the better known campaigns:
Operation Tainted Cigar: 3900+ downloads
Nato Fighters: 1200+ downloads (not counting the downloads at Column5)
Vietnam 1984: 2700+ downloads

So what went right, what went wrong and where should I focus on for my next campaign?


What went right

1/ download log

While gathering the different aircraft and mods i kept a detailled log of each download (its source, the edits I performed etc). This method proofed to be a lifesaver when early on in the project I screwed up bigtime and had to reinstall everything

2/ readme

Although I now have accepted the belief that most players will shun those campaigns that require manual install, I am conviced that the extensive readme with shortcuts to all downloads was a good alternative. Yet if the campaign would have had a one click installation, certainly more players would have downloaded and installed the campaign.

3/ Freeware Licensing Agreement

I can't take credit for this agreement, but it has certainly made life easier for me. I could encorporate mods and aircraft without the cumbersome permission hunt.


What Went Wrong

This was my first attempt at campaign building, so the mistakes I made were numerous (hence the longer what went wrong list). But each mistake is a valuable lesson learned.

1/ No Vision

When I started building this campaign, my goal was simple: modify a stock campaign by replacing older fighters with new models, using a historical Order of Battle (OOB) as source. I did not bother to write down my goals, the aircraft I wished to use. I just followed the OOB, placing squadrons and aircraft based on its entries.

2/ Too much aircraft of the same type

As I starting adding allied aircraft, I followed closely the OOB, which meant placing several squadrons of the same aircraft type in the campaign. Each of these squadrons were playable, yet most aircraft did not have a unique (squadron) skin. To much squadrons means the player has too much choice.

3/ Too realistic numbers

I followed the OOB to the heart, equipping each squadron with the right amount of aircraft and each air force with the right amount of squadrons. This resulted in a gigantic aircraft list (with 150 aircraft entries). As result some aircraft types appear too often (one feedback I got in return was that there were too much helicopters)

4/ Underdevelopped ground campaign

By the time I finished adding all the aircraft to the campaign, I had little envy to develop the ground campaign. I did have the intention to edit all target areas but in the end the sheer number of areas proofed too daunting

5/ Battlefield too big and too limited

The European battlefield was usefull since its the default WOE terrain, yet that already severly limited the potential group of players. On top of that the terrain is so big that editing and testing the impact of the different target areas is too much for a single person.

6/ Campaign is too long

I set the campaign at 30 days, since a real life conflict would not probably last for more then that (either resulting in a victory or a nuclear war). Yet 30 days of campaigns means 30 missions multiplied with the various aircraft, means a lot of test time. Time which I did not have.

7/ Not enough testing

As a result of the long campaign duration and the many aircraft I spent not enough time in testing the campaign.

8/Eager to publish

I did make the mistake to announce the campaign early on at combat ace. As a result, in the hunt for ego satisfaction, I probably published this campaign too early. It would have been better to either finish the campaign or either cut my losses and start on a new project.

9/ No one click install

As I said, I suspect most players avoid campaign where they need to download all the files. by not including an installation program I shut of another group of potential players.

10/ No USP (unique selling point)

With hindsight, its clear that my campaign does not offer much new to the already available stock and downloadable campaigns. There are already comparable campaigns available or players could construct one themselves quite easily.



Lessons learned

Based on what went right and wrong, how should my next campaign look like:

1/ 3rd party terrain: the terrain should be available at combat ace, so that all iterations of SF and WOx can play the campaign
2/ aircraft: same as the terrain, all aircraft should be part of the stocklist of all SF/WOx iterations or should be available at combat ace
3/ limited choice of aircraft: the player should only be able to choose out of a limited number of aircraft, with as few squadrons as possible, yet the number of aircraft types should be as wide as possible.
4/ small size enemy: the enemy too must have a limited number of aircraft (both in quantity and versions)
5/ short duration: the campaign should be short, both from a testing pov as to invite the player to replay the campaign with all the aircraft.
6/ Unique Aircraft: Aircraft have to be challenging. Each different iterations of the game comes with the run of the mill aircraft (F-15, F-4, F-16) for which most players have the "been there - done that" feeling. Aircraft should be special ie carrier operations with F-14, bomb runs with F-15E etc.
7/ Red Side possibility: The player should be able to fly also on the red side. The campaign might be developped for the blue side, but we should not deny the player the chance of being the bad guy.

Next week I'll post the design document for my current campaign which will explain how I want to encorporate the learned lessons.

Happy Flying

KingAlbert