Jump to content

ACG_Swinder

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About ACG_Swinder

  • Rank
    Founder
  1. Just wondering if there are any group out there at the moment doing PWCG co-op campaigns. I am getting back into IL-2 GB and I am really enjoying the much improved SP/PvE options the sim is offering these days through Career mode and PWCG stuff and the improved AI, as opposed to the usual old PvP air quake of the Dogfight servers. I live in Australia, but can do US timezones on US Friday and Saturday nights.
  2. Thanks for clearing that up, @PatrickAWlson Troubleshooting you provide is top notch as always
  3. I am having an issue with the PWCG skins. I just got back into PWCG. Dowloaded the PWCG Skin Pack and latest PWCG version, and extracted both into my root Il-2 folder. All of PWCG skins are selectable in the in-game loadout menu via the custom tab. Further, PWCG is generating missions just fine. However, the skins are not appearing in Skin Assignments and PWCG is not assigning the skins to any of the squadrons' aircraft when it generates missions. I also notice that in the PWCG Skins/Configured jsons for each aircraft no skins are listed as configured? Could this be causing it?
  4. I have read in other threads there are problems with AI attacking ground targets but not read anything in the PWCG context where you are not the flight leader. I began last night an Il-2 campaign with PWCG. I am starting at the lowest rank and want to experience going through the ranks. My first mission I am the 4th aeroplane in a flight of 4 tasked with destroying an enemy troop concentration. My flight takes off, we fly in formation to the target. We get to the target, we move towards it and like a good little wingman, I wait for the flight leader to begin the attack. The leader issues some order to the flight...BUT nothing happens. The flight leader and his other wingman just keep circling over the target, full of bombs and rockets, and don't attack it. And because I'm the lowest rank in the flight I cannot order the flight to attack. In the end I got bored and shot up the target independently. I did some good damage but could not destroy it all, and kept thinking 'well 4 Il-2s would make mince meat of this target...' It is all a damn shame. I was hoping to recreate my Il-2 1946 days, where I flew in an Il-2 for countless missions. In Il-2 1946 it did not matter if you were not the leader of the flight, because the AI leader would issue attack commands to the flight and the AI flight members would attack the target (not as well as the player, but at least they had a go). Anyone else run into this issue? P.S. I note this is in all likelihood an issue with game's AI programming and not anything that Pat has done. It is just so immersion breaking in the PWCG context.
  5. @Yogiflight You raise some goods points there. Reading some Soviet accounts, Soviet infantry definitely got very good at identifying Stukas from very far away. Perhaps in the briefing a little hint like "Enemy [insert 'fighters' and/or 'bombers'] have been spotted operating in the area recently"? As stated previously, this may be difficult to implement programing-wise and I wouldn't stress too much if it were not implemented.
  6. @Cybermat47 In relation to interception missions, let's look at this historically. 1. Enemy aircraft detection would primarily be done by ground observers (someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe either side had radar on the Eastern Front). These observers would have variable availability to optical devices i.e. powerful binoculars/scopes down to the eyeball. Hence, the ability to identify precise aircraft models would be some observers,but I do concede that most binocular-equipped observers would at the very least be able to distinguish aircraft types. Other observers may not have been able distinguish aircraft types but via colours of aircraft identify friend or foe. Further, the observer may spot aircraft heading for the lines but be unable to identify the aircraft, so the Air Force may scramble a flight as a precaution or cross-check which friendly flights were operating, ascertain the spotted flight is likely an enemy and then scramble a flight. 2. Next let's factor in the fog of war and communication issues. So the observer spots the precise aircraft model and number of aircraft but now needs to tell the Air Force who then needs to tell the fighter squadron who will do the intercept. What communication methods does the observer have available? Further, what about miscommunications or reductions of the message as it goes down the line? In short it is possible by the time a fighter unit got the message, all they would know is that aircraft were coming and they needed to be intercepted and nothing else. 3. Conceivably some of these 'intercepts' are actually a defensive patrol to protect an important location and/or asset. Hence, the Army may have requested a patrol because either a) they feel this important location may be attacked or b) it has been attacked or overflown by enemy aircraft in the past. Only in the latter instance would you have some Intel about the types if aircraft you may encounter, and even then one may encounter something different. Hence, there is a case that the limited nature of the briefing has some historical credience to it. Further, on the programing side there may be difficulties in putting such extra information in the briefings. Only Pat knowns if that's the case.
  7. Testing Results re Climbing WPs: - Hypotheses: increasing cruise speed of an aircraft in AircraftInfo file will result in a speed increase when the AI Flight Leader goes flies straight and level during a Climbing WP. Currently, AI flight leaders fly at rather slow speeds during this phase of the waypoint ("the slow down"). - Subject a/c: BF 109 F4 - Current Settings & Result: cruise speed = 390 kph. " Slow down" speed = 350 kph - Tweak: increased cruise speed of 109 F4 from "390" to "440" (50kph increase) - Results: "Slow down" Speed = 350 kph i.e. no change. Further, increase in cruise speed made it harder for me and the rest of the flight to keep up with the AI leader. - Conclusion: Hypotheses is incorrect. Tweaking the cruise speed is not a solution to Climbing WP problem and causes a problem for normal waypoints. So I think Bando maybe on to something when it comes to moving the climbing WPs closer together. On side note: I have discovered something rather useful re formations. I found If you leave the "Aircraft Spacing Horizontal" and "Aircraft Spacing Vertical" on there default settings, 200m and 100m, respectively, the AI wingmen in a formation place themselves a long way behind the flight leader whether the leader is human or AI. However, if you set these two options both at 20m then the AI does a nice close formation off the flight leader.
  8. Thanks for the info, Pat. I do some tweaking and testing for the next few days, and report my results.
  9. While we are the topic of climbing WPs, I have agree say they are excellent but for issue of the Flight leader slowing down when he does straight and level between climbing points. I note that every time the AI fligt leader does slowdown, it slows down to just above stall speed As suggested, if Pat can find a way to set the straight and level speed to the average standard cruise of all the aircraft, then the climbing WPs will be a complete success.
  10. Sorry to double post. It won't let me edit my previous post. Higher air density should not effect the chance of encounter too adversely. The other day I did a patrol, and though I heard from a flight of LaGGs on the radio saying they were engaging some fighters and bombers, my flight of two Yaks did not encounter a single aircraft. Hence,higher air densities coupled with lower flight opposition and generation settings means you get realistic low chances of encountering the enemy whilst having 'ambient' engagements going on. This makes you feel like you are a small part of a much bigger war effort.
  11. I have air density on 'high' but then increase the aircraft numbers further to put more planes in.IIRC I have 18 German aircraft to 24 Soviet ones. That said, your air density setting should be determined with regards to your PC's performance. I have a gaming desktop which is barely a year old, so I can afford to have large numbers of aircraft in my missions.
  12. Wow, I can't believe someone dug that old post of mine up... For record the Flight Generation and Flight Opposition options do work. In RoF (and now BoS) I done many uneventful patrols where the enemy hasn't graced my flights presence (just like it was in real life). It makes it quite a suprise when you do encounter an enemy flight. In fact on one occassion in RoF, I had gone three patrols without a contact and was getting a bit complacent. Half an hour into the fourth patrol an enemy flight snuck up behind us and shot up me and my wingmen! I managed to escape and limp home, but my flight had several KIA and I was wounded and out of the fight for a few weeks. My settings for these options are: Flight Opposition Odds - 25 Flight Generation Odds - 50 Flight Generation Odds Modifier - 20
  13. I think I should clarify this. Here is the US WWII organisation (as a reference) with the Russian and German equivalents: Wing - IAD - Geschwader (e.g JG 53) Group - IAP - Gruppen (e.g. III/JG53) Squadron - Eskradilla - Staffel Flight - Zveno - Schwarm Element - ? - Rotte I hope it helps. I have always loved your work, Pat.
×
×
  • Create New...