Jump to content
Jason_Williams

PWCG for BOS Beta 3 Available for Testing

Recommended Posts

I have tried campaigns in Yak, IL2, 109G2 and F4 and Stuka. All do the same: just after T/O they dive for the deck, then they make a low level turn and mostly (not always) continue to follow the climbing WP's.

The throttling back is (IMHO) too much. A yak flying at 270? You're right in that they need to throttle back a bit to let the rest catch up, but, well....

I use default values (air density low).

 

It's not such a big deal, but I just wanted Patrick to know about what I noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By clear skies I mean the lack of clouds :)

 

But no ground attacks. A few escorts and intercepts, but 90% patrols.

Roger Reflected....sorry for the misunderstanding.  I've had a serious low ground cover on most of my missions......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger Reflected....sorry for the misunderstanding.  I've had a serious low ground cover on most of my missions......

 

Configure the chances for the various coverages through the advanced settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@4./JG52_Neun

...plus you can scramble missions until you get something that pleases.

 

 

I have tried campaigns in Yak, IL2, 109G2 and F4 and Stuka. All do the same: just after T/O they dive for the deck, then they make a low level turn and mostly (not always) continue to follow the climbing WP's.

The throttling back is (IMHO) too much. A yak flying at 270? You're right in that they need to throttle back a bit to let the rest catch up, but, well....

I use default values (air density low).

 

It's not such a big deal, but I just wanted Patrick to know about what I noticed.

You know that you don't have to use the climb WPs? There's an option in the advanced config. You can also try and move the climb WPs in a straight line or change the altitudes if you don't like the AI back throttleing at the climb WPs, maybe that helps?

 

I have no solution for the low diving though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to edit that first WP to see if the dive lessens.

Another observation:

 

post-675-0-65354900-1447098714_thumb.jpg

 

I'm not on the airfield that the mission states. 

 

Hope it all helps....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to edit that first WP to see if the dive lessens.

Another observation:

 

attachicon.gifAirport wrong.jpg

 

I'm not on the airfield that the mission states. 

 

Hope it all helps....

Based on this picture I tried a few missions from this airfield with Il-2. There are obstacles just after an airfield, a dense forest. I think the main problems are:

1. The first WP is set too low at 200 meters, that is causing the severe nose dipping. After the latest patch AI is climbing pretty steep. I changed it to 500 meters for testing and no dipping.

2. There is a too tight turn on the first WP after take off. Which is above own airfield. Wingmen are getting too low and turning immediately when following the leader after dipping the nose and resulting crash to the tree.

Edited by Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on this picture I tried a few missions from this airfield with Il-2. There are obstacles just after an airfield, a dense forest. I think the main problems are:

1. The first WP is set too low at 200 meters, that is causing the severe nose dipping. After the latest patch AI is climbing pretty steep. I changed it to 500 meters for testing and no dipping.

2. There is a too tight turn on the first WP after take off. Which is above own airfield. Wingmen are getting too low and turning immediately when following the leader after dipping the nose and resulting crash to the tree.

 If you know in which direction the planes take off you can try and set the first waypoint in a better to approach direction. I'm experimenting right now what to do best.

 

Best results I have either when they can fly directly ahead or bank right/left (with some space from the airfield). With some automatic first WP the AI Leader first dips low, banks left, then right and so on and all flying very low. Nothing ever happened, but it isn't very elegant to say the least.

Edited by 74_jim_nihilist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If you know in which direction the planes take off you can try and set the first waypoint in a better to approach direction. I'm experimenting right now what to do best.

 

Best results I have either when they can fly directly ahead or bank right/left (with some space from the airfield). With some automatic first WP the AI Leader first dips low, banks left, then right and so on and all flying very low. Nothing ever happened, but it isn't very elegant to say the least.

Just adding the altitude for the first waypoint seems to work just fine in most cases. For me at least :) . 

 

How often the do these AI take off crashes happen to you? If they are regular you could post a mission here.

Edited by Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Configure the chances for the various coverages through the advanced settings.

Roger...will do...Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Any particular plane?

 

It would be best to be as specific as possible  :)

Edited by Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I don't think I have ever seen the AI fly within 30 KPH of the requested WP speed.  I did set cruise speed to historical speeds - or at least I think I did.  

 

Cruise speed is in the AircraftInfo file and that is what is used for WP speed.  If you want to experiment please do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As suggested above, I changed the initial WP after TO from 200 to 5oo meters altitude.

That did the trick. No more diving there.

I also changed and moved some climb WP a bit closer together, so it looks like the flight is climbing above their field and that got rid of the slowing down.

So far so good. Is there a way to set the initial WP at 500 as default? Been looking, did not find it.

 

Another thing: As soon as I move a WP, the briefing text disappears. I hope this can be corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cannot edit above post.

 

I just looked into the text files and found the "initial waypoint altitude" in Boscampaigm.config to be 1500 mtrs. I guess the climb WP default to something else, just could not find them.

Never knew these files were there (never explored them) and this is nice to set all things up to once preferences so to not having to do this for each campaign individually.

 

In "Squadroninfo.boscampaign" (in the Stalingrad subfolder) I was able to find the Il2 squadron with the wrong airfield attached and changed this.

Getting the hang of it now   ;)

Edited by Bando
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How often the do these AI take off crashes happen to you?

 

@zami

Only once in close to 65 missions now. It's no issue for me.

 

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.   

Oh that's cool. Will try this and Bandos closer waypoints.

 

@Bando

Do you mean "BoSCampaignSpecific.config"? Just copy this file to your new campaign. No need to edit it every time.

 

Also - you can have for every campaign different advanced config rules, which I find rather cool. If you liked your configuration in one campaign, just copy the "BoSCampaignSpecific.config" into the folder with the new campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some more questions - I have installed the campaign generator at the right space in the directory and it creates a campaign. The first mission was also to be found under "Missions" in the game.

Apart from the fact, that my group was attacked right after takeoff and I had to bail out due to too much damage on the plane, I could not see a mission description at the beginning, that field was empty. I went back in order to see if I could write a briefing or something in the campaign generator but I could not find an option where that would be possible ? Neither could I find an option to write anything after the failed flight. The first mission remained though in the Missions section. Any idea what I did wrong or where I should look ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original Mission Description is in PCGW under "Mission".

 

You have to got to "Combat Report", claim your victories there (if you have shot down anyone), then click "Finished"...there you go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Geralt: This may help you:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/19184-pwcg-quick-start-guide/

 

@ Jim:

Learning every day  :)

 

About those crashes: I had them every third flight. Since the initial WP is set to 500Mtrs (must be done by hand every time) I had no more crashes.

Getting the Climb WP closer together works great for me. But I keep losing the briefing text on the right side of the window every time I move a WP.

Anyone else have that too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Geralt: This may help you:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/19184-pwcg-quick-start-guide/

 

@ Jim:

Learning every day  :)

 

About those crashes: I had them every third flight. Since the initial WP is set to 500Mtrs (must be done by hand every time) I had no more crashes.

Getting the Climb WP closer together works great for me. But I keep losing the briefing text on the right side of the window every time I move a WP.

Anyone else have that too?

thanks Bando for the hint :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@ Jim:

Learning every day  :)

 

About those crashes: I had them every third flight. Since the initial WP is set to 500Mtrs (must be done by hand every time) I had no more crashes.

Getting the Climb WP closer together works great for me. But I keep losing the briefing text on the right side of the window every time I move a WP.

Anyone else have that too?

Me too, haha.

 

The climb WPs were originally integratet because the AI never reached the altitude given in the mission briefing. Bunching the climb WPs together and -at least for me- the old problem occurs again: The AI Leader never climbs to the mission critical altitude. What's it like for you?

 

And yup, when I edit the WPs the mission description vanishes for me as well.

 

OTOH

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. 

 

That worked really well.

 

My biggest problem right now is striking the right balance in the advanced config: Either I get attacked shortly after take off (which mean : RTB after the foghting), or there are no or only 1 or 2 enemy a/c there. Will have to test more.

 

Here's a question:

 

Situation:

The flight is still climbing or finds at the first real WP an enemy flight. Fighting begins and then most often the next chosen waypoint is the homebase. Is this because the AI Wing leader got wounded and because of that the whole flight has to RTB? BECAUSE sometimes there are only one or two enemy a/c which then get shot down quickly and the Wing leader resumes the mission (meaning flies to the other waypoints and no RTB).

 

I can faintly remember that I have read something similar in the ROF forums, where Pat said that he lets the flight leader fight to the death, because of a similar problem. But that was a very old post.

 

In some scramble missions therefore it can easily happen, that there is a little bit of fighting and then the flight has to RTB, which means it circles above the airfield. The surviving enemy a/c circle as well some 3 or 4 kilometres away. No more fighting occurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question about Stuka bombing missions.This utility has real possibilities making Stuka canpaigns more available,but I am having a problem with the 2 or 3 already flown:I cannot find the targets I am told to destroy. I do a complete look at the mission maps & in mission description they might say "destroy a troop concentration near_________town .When I fly to that given town there is no evidence of a breakthrough or troop concentration.If I use HUD there are no little red squares that might give a hint as to targets.In one mission the town mentioned wasn't even on the mission route. Maybe I've missed someting ( clearly the target...) But maybe I'm supposed to look around more or something? Alas no troops on the ground with German flags or arrows to point out the target of the day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I eliminated the RTB for the flight leader some time back because of that concern.  The flight leader will now always fight to the death as a shining example to his men.  There are complexities in the AI that I do not completely understand.  For instance, if the flight leader is shot down then control seems to be passed to #2 in formation.  #2 still has the RTB logic enabled, so what happens when he gets damaged?  What happens when #2 is already damaged and returning to base and then the flight leader is destroyed?  

 

The goal behind all of the RTB logic was as follows:

1. If wounded try to save yourself.

2. If damaged try to save yourself.

3. If too many losses try to disengage.

 

The goal was to eliminate every fight being to the death and introduce a more realistic set of behaviors.  Instead it seems to be producing target drones.  

 

About the circling - that I absolutely do not understand.  In the scenario above the rest of the flight would go passive and try to RTB with the leader.  Not good but understandable.  Circling?  It only does that when it has no commands.  That should never be the case, so I don't get it.  Also the behavior where the AI follows an enemy but doesn't do anything.  Just don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I changed the percentages so that they add up to 100%. Still not a single cloud on the skies, and still no ground attack mission with JG52.

 

I noticed that the mission briefing doesn't say "clear skies", though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I've noticed some problems.

 

- Bombing missions are given the PATROL name in the in-game missions menu.

- He-111s of II./KG 51 can't take off from Oblivskaya; they crash into the village. Would it be possible to make them take off in the opposite direction, which is clear of obstruction?

- Intercept missions have little intel. I was told to intercept Russian aircraft near 'Kuz mici' (shouldn't this be Kuzmichi?). I assumed that they were either Sturmoviks or Pe-2s, and loaded up with 20mm gunpods. Turns out that they were La-5s. As I've mentioned before, if possible, it would be nice for the briefing to tell us if the e/a were fighters, bombers, or attack aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only speak for german side, but there were enough ways of communication by radio and fieldphones. Each company, if not even each platoon had fieldphone and of course radio connection, this was one of the biggest advantage of the german Wehrmacht.

Then almost every little boy in germany was able to recognice the own and the enemy aircrafts, so of course the soldiers were. And by the way, it is not necessary to know which type of aircraft is comming, it is enough to know what kind. It is a large difference, whether there are bombers coming, Sturmos or fighters. And when you know it is Sturmos, you know they will not fly in 4000m. And of course it was also important for them to know were have they when been sighted and to which direction did they fly, you know this was the big advantage of the british in the battle of England.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only speak for german side, but there were enough ways of communication by radio and fieldphones. Each company, if not even each platoon had fieldphone and of course radio connection, this was one of the biggest advantage of the german Wehrmacht.

Then almost every little boy in germany was able to recognice the own and the enemy aircrafts, so of course the soldiers were. And by the way, it is not necessary to know which type of aircraft is comming, it is enough to know what kind. It is a large difference, whether there are bombers coming, Sturmos or fighters. And when you know it is Sturmos, you know they will not fly in 4000m. And of course it was also important for them to know were have they when been sighted and to which direction did they fly, you know this was the big advantage of the british in the battle of England.

@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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original Mission Description is in PCGW under "Mission".

 

You have to got to "Combat Report", claim your victories there (if you have shot down anyone), then click "Finished"...there you go.

aha, ....ok ... thanks for your answer nihilist :salute:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will verify that weather parameters are being properly used.

 

You will not get ground attack missions with Me109s.

sorry but why no ground attacks with the BF-109 ? It has the capacity to carry bombs and could attack bridges, artillery guns, vehicle columns etc. ...is that limitation set due to the ability of the campaign generator ? By the way, great that someone takes care of a campaign generator for IL2 BoS, good work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- I hope this can be a stepping stone to make PWCG better and that others share their findings and ideas. -

 

Okay, the last days I really tested the advanced config settings. I was playing with a pilot of I JG 53 flying a Bf109 G2, from Grachi (mostly, as there are transfers inbetween) and "flew" close to 70 missions. Tried a few things and tried to understand what happens. I stopped the missions when it was clear to me how they play out. At one point I gave up on climb WPs or tried to configure them differently, with no success. They are cool as they are, but they can create their own problems.

This is my advanced config on which I settled after some time:
 

AircraftSpacingHorizontal = 20;
AircraftSpacingVertical = 20;
BaseAltPeriod3 = 4000;
InitialWaypointDistance = 2000;
RandomAdditionalAltitude = 1500;
TakeoffTime = 20;
FighterAINoviceOdds = 50;
FighterAIVeteranOdds = 10;
ReconAINormalOdds = 20;
ReconAINoviceOdds = 70;
ReconAIVeteranOdds = 10;
AirfieldInclusionRadius = 350000;
MaxGroundTargetDistance = 120000;
RandomTrains = 4;
InitialSquadronSearchRadius = 300000;
JunkFlightDistance = 80000;
MGSpacing = 2000;
MaxEnemyPlanes = 24;
MaxFriendlyPlanes = 12;
MaxOpposingFlights = 0;
MaxSquadronSearchRadius = 500000;
OddsOfAceFlying = 20;
OppositionOdds = 10;
PlaneDeleteEnemyDistance = 18000;
PlaneDeletePlayerDistance = 20000;
SquadronGeneratesMissionModifier = 90;
SquadronGeneratesMissionOdds = 35;
UseAirfieldMGs = 1;
UseMGs = 1;
UsePlaneDelete = 0;
AxisEscortMission = 20;
AxisGroundAttackMission = 0;
AxisInterceptMission = 15;
AxisOffensiveMission = 60;
BombingAdditional = 4;
BombingMinimum = 4;
GroundAttackAdditional = 4;
GroundAttackAltitude = 500;
GroundAttackIngressDistance = 2000;
GroundAttackMinimum = 4;
InterceptAdditional = 6;
OffensivePatrolAdditional = 4;
PatrolDistanceBase = 70;
PatrolDistanceRandom = 100;
ReconMinimum = 2;
ScrambleAdditional = 6;
ScrambleMinimum = 2;
PilotInjury = 4;
SimpleConfigAir = Med;
SimpleConfigGround = Med;

You can put this list into your "BoSCampaignSpecific.config" which you will find under (or create a new textfile with this name, when there is nothing) "IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Stalingrad\BoSCampaign\campaigns\Name of your pilot". In the simple config I had ground and air density on medium. Some options are very critical performance wise - adjust as you see fit.

"Flight Generation Odds" is for me the main tool with this config to control what happens in the air. The sweet spot is imo at around 30-40%.
20% You will mostly fly alone, with occascional enemy a/c
30-40% You probably will have every mission something to shoot at, but most of the time in a nice balanced way.
100% you will see a living sprawling airspace, but since everything is so crammed, you will get very often into dogfights right after takeoff. But I find they are better balanced as with the standard settings.

I wasn't really able to get the generator to reliably mix missions with much action or no action. Either you fly mostly "alone" (without enemy a/c in the near distance) or not.

Here's what I saw:

Intercept Missions:
Don't expect to fly the waypoints when the intercept WP is very near your airbase, since the enemy a/c are so very nearby, that it means there is action right after take off.

 

Mission report: (with "Flight Generation Odds" at 100%).

In the air: some Fw190, another flight of Bf109, Stukas, some Il2 and (their escort?) some Lag5. Suffice to say, that my AI Wing leader headed immediately to the IL2. Some Fw190 also joined the fight and it became a big furball of Fw190, Bf109, Lag5 and IL2. The action was very short and all parties disengaged after 2-3 minutes.

With "Flight Generation Odds" at 30-40% and an intercept WP farther away you will actually, have to lookout after enemy a/c and will find something. Very cool!

Offensive and Patrol missions:
I think those rock, particularly the longer ones. Even if you don't see anything, be aware that there are flights generated around. There is enemy a/c you can find, but they also will find you!

 

Patrol mission (long distance)
I saw via CTRL-F2 Pe2 and Il2, but too far to the ground. Nevertheless it made me happy, that there would be something if I would only look.Then something incredible cool happened. Our flight was at 5000 m (15000 feet) and a flight of LaGG3 saw us...barely. They immediately took pursuit, but they were too low, had to climb and build pace. Meanwhile my flight flew 4-5 WPs and crossed the frontline to friendly territory. A long flight home was before us - nothing else.. well after a third of the distance the LaGGs attacked us. Just great!
 

Patrol mission (short distance)
While climbing an enemy flight spotted us and attacked. While fighting another enemy squadron came along from a different direction and joined the fight. Some Stukas were also in the area, but I didn't watch long enough to see if they got in harms way.

Escort missions:
I even tried the -right now- broken escort missions several times to see why they don't work:
- with my settings there is always the odd IL2 which attrackts my AI wing leader
- if the IL2 gets shot down without hurting my flight too much, everything is okay
- but even then the whole flight will RTB and try to climb - which takes time. In this time your bombers get torn to pieces if there are enemy fighters near them.
- if you are unlucky, the IL2 puts up a good fight and the AI will RTB and land because, it decides flying any longer is too dangerous. Live long and prosper, friendly bomber crews...or not. ;)

Escort missions played out twofold: Either there was no enemy a/c around and the missions got accomplished (I only got these missions when I had configurations which very seldom produced enemy a/c) or my flight got immediately attracted from enemy a/c and then all bets are off. I've only seen it once that the Rendezvous was reached with enemy a/c around in the airspace.

I don't know if putting the rendezvous 15 km behind the frontline will be enough. These missions fail because A) the bombers circle too close to the frontline and B) my flight needs time to climb and sees all the time juicy targets (because the airbase is also close to the frontline). So even if we put the Rendezvous say 50 km behind the frontline, there will still be the problem that the fighter escort will get "attracted away" easily. I think the rendezvous will haveto happen in a "safe way" and the time flying together has to be longer, then there is the hight possibilty you have to actually defend your bombers.

My main problem is this: "Junk Flight Distance" is, as I guess, just the distance flewn between waypoints or on other words, a straight line. Here I can manipulate that no enemy a/c occurs. Using the climb WPs, these are something of a look out and it is a circle. Which means, if there are 2 or 3 enemy a/c near your base the chance is high your mission will get abandoned immediately after take off. And if this happens, the AI logic is as follows:
1. If wounded try to save yourself.
2. If damaged try to save yourself.
3. If too many losses try to disengage.
..which makes the AI very sensitive to preserve their AI lives - which I like and I think it should stay like this.

@Patrick
I'm only brainstorming here: Would it be possible to change "junk flight distance" in "junk flight radius"? Then we could control if our take off would be quiet or with more action. With "junk flight radius" there could possibly also be a chance option, like "junk flight radius attack". A percentage that makes it possible that we get attacked nevertheless, so that there is still an uncertainty when taking off. Otherwise it would be possible to render intercept missions, which happen near the airbase, pretty useless when the radius is too big.
 

Or what do you think would be a nice and easy solution to this?

 

And thanks for your input regarding the AI priorities, I finally understood what I saw. In my automated missions I never saw circling, but I didn't play out many scramble missions.

 

And again thank you for your hard work. I've had a little bit too much BOS the last days, but it was great fun to try and test the settings. It really transformed the whole game for me and I had much joy seeing the different flights doing their things. Your Generator is wonderful!

Edited by 74_jim_nihilist
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice report Nihilist, good work  :salute:

 

About the escort missions, I think that moving the rendezvous point 15km to the friendly territory will solve most of the problems. This is with default settings. If you change those, it might be different. Of course there is always a possibility that AI will do something stupid before rendezvous waypoint but that`s the way it is. It is acceptable IMO. 

 

But it requires testing to find out once we get a new version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Zami. As long as it works out I am happy - no matter what will be done. Oh and I can't wait till Beta 4 comes out. I really want that these missions work as intended. I like escort flying, spices things up nicely.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- I hope this can be a stepping stone to make PWCG better and that others share their findings and ideas. -

 

-snip-

 

Jim, you're doing awesome work. Thanks for your contributions in the beta stage.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jim, I will copy your settings and see where it leads to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jim, I will copy your settings and see where it leads to.

Very cool. I'm very curious how you like them or what you think is wrong.

 

In the end I was too tired to try 1-2 other approaches with the settings. What I want to create are missions were you never can be certain what happens next. Are there 1-3 flights aganst me, does nothing happen at all? I had also a setting where you could fly 5 missions and nothing much happened - found them too boring in the end, but every mission a big furball, without chance to complete the objectives was the other extreme. I want the middle, haha.

Edited by 74_jim_nihilist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far so good.

I had a scramble mission where the EA were on top as soon as I got my wheels up. That was a furball.

I will adjust the route length, for in the LA5 I do not have enough fuel to complete this mission (beside the fact that I cannot scroll down):

 

post-675-0-94154300-1447271949_thumb.jpg

 

But I like the settings so far. The diving for the deck after take off is still there, although I set the initial WP at 500 (instead of 200).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...