Jump to content
PatrickAWlson

PWCG 10.2.0 Razorback

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

After you created the campaign was the date 1942 and Stalingrad?  

 

April 1st, 1942. Home field is Kalach (east of the Don River). The front lines showing on the briefing map are just west of the Don River.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sevenless said:

Small glitch I guess. I can´t select No. 66 Sqn as a Sqn Leader. I can select No. 66 Sqn as a Fg Lt.

According to a post of Pat in the 'New Issues Thread', I would guess, the squadron leader of the 66 Sqn is a historical ace, whom you can't replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

According to a post of Pat in the 'New Issues Thread', I would guess, the squadron leader of the 66 Sqn is a historical ace, whom you can't replace.

 

Hahaha, ah that indeed explains it. I will be flying with Johnnie Johnson. Look:

 

 

Unbenannt2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, Pat, I just realized, are those Max & Moritz in your avatar?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, blue_max said:

Haha, Pat, I just realized, are those Max & Moritz in your avatar?!

 

Yes.  Use them on everything, including my personal AC skins - both WWI and WWII.  Interesting thing is since Busch wrote the books in the 1800s and I read them in the 1960s you know they were around during those time periods.  Almost surprised a real pilot didn't use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! My mom would read that to me as a kid, together with Der Suppenkaspar. Really funny to run into this on the IL2 forum :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I should try a different flight-or plane group. I really want to stick with the Allied side though and sure do like the Spit.

Just 8 missions into my new Spit MK IX Bodenplatte Campaign and the enemy is dwindling down.

They are down to just 6 fighter groups and 2 attack groups. We vastly outnumber them on the Allied side. Missions are getting barren again and just running mainly into other friendlies the last couple, so this seems to be headed same as my last campaign attempt.

Or perhaps start a new campaign in Kuban and see how things go.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dburne said:

Perhaps I should try a different flight-or plane group. I really want to stick with the Allied side though and sure do like the Spit.

Just 8 missions into my new Spit MK IX Bodenplatte Campaign and the enemy is dwindling down.

They are down to just 6 fighter groups and 2 attack groups. We vastly outnumber them on the Allied side. Missions are getting barren again and just running mainly into other friendlies the last couple, so this seems to be headed same as my last campaign attempt.

Or perhaps start a new campaign in Kuban and see how things go.

 

 

 

Hmmm while this might be historically accurate, it also sounds a bit boring. Maybe an option where you can choose the strength of each side between 'historical', 'evenly matched', 'outnumbered' and such? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will give a few more days and see how it progresses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Almenas said:

Had a ground attack mission and instead of flying to the target, the first single target was attacked.

Barbarossa202005311605525.zip 948.78 kB · 0 downloads

 

Did the attack icon appear?  Were you still flying through Nav icons?  My first thought is I don't see the problem but I also concede I might not be understanding what you feel is an issue.

 

Attacking something should happen once the AttackArea MCU is triggered.  That trigger is based only on range to target area.  Once it appears the AI will attack whatever it will. 

 

I would find it odd for the AI to attack if a Navigation WP was active.  There again: AI decision, but that would be one that I have never seen before.

 

Attack or don't is an AI decision.  It is influenced by mission design but with PWCG mission design definitely not scripted to the last detail (very much on purpose).  As a result sometimes the AI will make unusual decisions.

 

PWCG is coded to intentionally put a lot of different situations on a map. Unusual things hopefully will happen, otherwise it's just fly to target, shoot something, rinse wash repeat.  

 

@dburne @blue_max My own campaign has progressed through Moscow and into May of 1942 in western Stalingrad.  I have seen no activity maybe once or twice.  If you have slaughtered half the opposition then take a break (leave) for a month.  By now you probably have a victory count in triple digits so a rest is deserved :) 

 

So that was part tongue in cheek but also part serious.  Down to details: I can look at loss vs replacement rate.  Temporary inactivity due to heavy losses i by design and I have no desire to change that.  Long term inactivity is not by design and may require some tweaking of out of mission losses/replacement to resolve.

 

@dburne Zip up your campaign and I can run some analysis on it.  I might even add a detailed intel page that would let you see the state of all of the squadrons so you can check the situation for yourself.

 

I had suggested turning on the view that allows you so see enemy flights.  Have you tried that to see if enemy flights are being generated and where they are going?  

 

I am trying to figure out why you are not seeing activity but others don't seem to be experiencing the same thing.  It could be that there is enemy activity being generated but something about the map and squadron placement is limiting encounters.  Need feedback or your campaign to get a better idea of why you are seeing what you are seeing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear: I flew the mission once again with the same result. The AI started attacking a single target shortly after takeoff and still very far away from the actual target. Find it a bit of a waste to spend 5 bombs on it. For clarification I made the screenshot. If this is so, then you don't need to specify a target after all.

1.jpg

Edited by Almenas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Almenas said:

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear: I flew the mission once again with the same result. The AI started attacking a single target shortly after takeoff and still very far away from the actual target. Find it a bit of a waste to spend 5 bombs on it. For clarification I made the screenshot. If this is so, then you don't need to specify a target after all.

 

 

I've seen this happen before - I suspect the waypoints on the way to the target might be low priority rather than medium, but I've not had a chance to investigate 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Murleen said:

 

I've seen this happen before - I suspect the waypoints on the way to the target might be low priority rather than medium, but I've not had a chance to investigate 

 

Should be medium, but even on low I have not seen airplanes randomly attack ground targets without an active attack MCU.  The attack area check zone will trigger regardless of path, so if the flight goes close enough that will just happen.  At that point the AI will attack whatever it feels like.  If this was an attack with nav still active it would be the first time I have seen such behavior.

 

 

5 hours ago, Almenas said:

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear: I flew the mission once again with the same result. The AI started attacking a single target shortly after takeoff and still very far away from the actual target. Find it a bit of a waste to spend 5 bombs on it. For clarification I made the screenshot. If this is so, then you don't need to specify a target after all.

1.jpg

 

Can you post the mission?  Seems too far away to have triggered the attack area check zone but hard to tell just by looking at it.

Edited by PatrickAWlson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

 

 

@dburne @blue_max My own campaign has progressed through Moscow and into May of 1942 in western Stalingrad.  I have seen no activity maybe once or twice.  If you have slaughtered half the opposition then take a break (leave) for a month.  By now you probably have a victory count in triple digits so a rest is deserved :) 

 

So that was part tongue in cheek but also part serious.  Down to details: I can look at loss vs replacement rate.  Temporary inactivity due to heavy losses i by design and I have no desire to change that.  Long term inactivity is not by design and may require some tweaking of out of mission losses/replacement to resolve.

 

 

Pat,

I am not going to worry with it and take up your valuable time as it would seem I am the only one seeing this.

I can tell you this if it helps any:

I am 11 missions (11 days) into the new Spit Mk IX Bodenplatte Campaign, flying for 66 Squadron. Oct 4th 1944  was my last flight to date.

 

As of this moment, according to the Intel Report, we have:

Allied - 14 Fighter squadrons, and 3 Bomber Squadrons.

Axis -  1 Fighter Squadron, 1 Attack Squadron, 1 Bomber Squadron, and 1 Transport Squadron.

This would seem to me to be why perhaps I get missions with no enemy air AI action at times.

My total air victories to date are 23.

 

 

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was also my impression that it was still a bit far away. Difficult to get to the finish line. Thanks for the hard work.

 

For some reason I can't upload a txt file right now.

Barbarossa 1942-08-31.rar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Pat,

I am not going to worry with it and take up your valuable time as it would seem I am the only one seeing this.

I can tell you this if it helps any:

I am 11 missions (11 days) into the new Spit Mk IX Bodenplatte Campaign, flying for 66 Squadron. Oct 4th 1944  was my last flight to date.

 

As of this moment, according to the Intel Report, we have:

Allied - 14 Fighter squadrons, and 3 Bomber Squadrons.

Axis -  1 Fighter Squadron, 1 Attack Squadron, 1 Bomber Squadron, and 1 Transport Squadron.

This would seem to me to be why perhaps I get missions with no enemy air AI action at times.

My total air victories to date are 23.

 

 

 

So I started requesting some leave in hopes the enemy AI pilots would build up some.

I did 7 days at a time, for a total of 3 times or 21 days.

 

Enemy is down to only 1 Transport Squadron now, and that is it.

Friendlies we have 14 fighter squadrons, and 3 bomber squadrons.

I guess I will consider this Campaign done after 11 missions. Just not in the cards for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I will look into loss/replacement rates.

 

Much thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I will look into loss/replacement rates.

 

Hi Pat - I have a few question as you look into this regarding the # missions flow in the Advanced Config menu.  Watching my squadrons, it appears that this setting modifier applies to all pilots in the squadron, not just the human pilot.  Meaning if I set it to "3" (attempting to recreate no contact missions for my pilot), AI pilots will also reflect 3 missions for the one flown.  So here are the questions:

 

1. Is my assumption above correct (if not, please ignore everything below)?

 

2. If so, is that desirable since the a/i pilots will also be flying "out of mission" in your algorithm (which I assume will already impact their flight numbers separate from the human pilot)?

 

3.  If so, does that "multiple missions" setting factor into risk of loss to those a/i pilots "out of mission"?

 

4.  If so, does that setting apply across all squadrons in the campaign (beyond the active squadron)?

 

Personally, I really like this setting - especially since your "Ground Up" version has produced a lot of action in each mission flown (so far have been focusing in Kuban).  Therefore, being able to add extra flights for the human pilot keeps the ratio of flights to kills looking more historical and makes a lot of sense to reflect that IRL there were plenty of "no contact" flights that would be really boring gameplay here.  However, I keep having this nagging feeling that when I increase it, I am also increasing the overall organic attrition in campaign.

 

Please know, I am having a great time in PWCG with all the changes you have made - these questions imply zero criticism from me.  I know you have applied real historical data into the attrition algorithm, so this is just me figuring out how to apply this "mission flow" setting and being sure I understand what is happening if I crank it up.  Thank you!!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

# missions flown is just a multiplier.  It applies to AI as well as human. 

 

It is desirable because the AI only fly as many out of band missions as humans fly actual missions.  Further Ai included in a mission are not included in out of band missions.  Therefore every Ai pilot, whether in a mission or out of a mission should be credited with the same number of missions flown.

 

Number of missions flown is just an ambient data item used to reflect no contact.  Its purpose is to avoid 200 kills in 75 missions flown.  Its only effect is on skill level, medals, and  promotions.  It is not incorporated into real or simulated missions in any way and therefore does not impact the odds of survival.

 

OK ... really getting into the weeds here - since it affects skill and skill level affects odds of survival it does play some role, but not a direct one.  The AI only has to survive one mission for every one you fly.  Setting missions flown higher will ever so slightly improve the odds of a pilot surviving, and, more important, will generally make the pilots a little bit better a little faster from a campaign perspective.  Really sinking into details: missions flown for fighter pilots gets them from novice top average.  You don't need kills to make that leap.  To get to veteran and certainly ace you need kills. 

 

Non fighter pilots are always novice.  This is done to tamp down on gunner accuracy.  The pilots in PWCG will still have a higher rating, but in the game their AI will be novice.  Let's face it, an "ace" bomber pilot wasn't about what ace Ai is about.  As for accuracy in ground attack, I don't see where AI impacts that.  Novice AI seems to hit ground targets just fine.

 

Some planes like the 110 (fighter planes with gunners) may get a break in that they are considered fighters but have a gunner - so the gunner will be better.  I think the 110 is the only plane in this category.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Its only effect is on skill level, medals, and  promotions.  It is not incorporated into real or simulated missions in any way and therefore does not impact the odds of survival.

 

Thank you Pat for this VERY detailed answer - especially the part above takes away my paranoia that I was somehow handicapping myself in my multiple pilot/squadron SP campaigns where I have been pushing this setting to try to reflect missions while I was "away" piloting in other squadrons.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I have a pretty good idea as to why German units are being depleted around Bodenplatte.  With the addition of East Front 1944 and 1945 the Germans have twice the opportunity to lose men and equipment but their replacement rate has not changed.  Going to have to fiddle with the algorithm to account for that fact.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I think I have a pretty good idea as to why German units are being depleted around Bodenplatte.  With the addition of East Front 1944 and 1945 the Germans have twice the opportunity to lose men and equipment but their replacement rate has not changed.  Going to have to fiddle with the algorithm to account for that fact.  

 

:good:

 

Thank you!

I will certainly be looking forward to it.

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

:good:

 

Thank you!

I will certainly be looking forward to it.

 

Have it coded.  Need to write some tests around it.  Instead of a fixed replacement quota per armed service I have a multiplier per armed service that I multiply by squadrons in PWCG.  This way each service resupplies at different rates (Americans highest, Germans lower) but the number of units represented n PWCG is taken into configuration.  A bit of quick math says that Allied resupply rates should not change too much, nor should German until there is war on both fronts. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Have it coded.  Need to write some tests around it.  Instead of a fixed replacement quota per armed service I have a multiplier per armed service that I multiply by squadrons in PWCG.  This way each service resupplies at different rates (Americans highest, Germans lower) but the number of units represented n PWCG is taken into configuration.  A bit of quick math says that Allied resupply rates should not change too much, nor should German until there is war on both fronts. 

 

Awesome thanks so much! Take your time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really enjoying 9.0 in single player, just wanted to thank Pat for the great work!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started a Spit Kuban Campaign yesterday.

So far I am 10 missions into it, all have been great with plenty of enemy air AI, and according to Intelligence still several groups left.

Having a blast with this one. Only issue I see , which obviously is an issue with the game, is in Kuban some 190's tend to like to lawn dart into the Kuban terrain.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found samething playing early Moscow-Map. Seems that Ruza Airport for 132nd Bomber Air Regiment is empty.

Ruza.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dburne said:

Only issue I see , which obviously is an issue with the game, is in Kuban some 190's tend to like to lawn dart into the Kuban terrain.

 

Yes it is really odd with the 190. Sometimes AI shoots everything down with them and another time they fly like complete idiots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, dburne said:

I started a Spit Kuban Campaign yesterday.

So far I am 10 missions into it, all have been great with plenty of enemy air AI, and according to Intelligence still several groups left.

Having a blast with this one. Only issue I see , which obviously is an issue with the game, is in Kuban some 190's tend to like to lawn dart into the Kuban terrain.

 

 

 

I am doing some work that should make unit starvation more noticeable.  On the intel report screen I am outlining resource starved units in red.  At the moment resource starved units are excluded.  In my case the issue was Russian units and not German.  Plenty of planes and not enough pilots.  Resource starvation on a larger scale is the doing of the out of mission calculations, and not intentional.  With the new system it should happen less frequently.

 

One thing that I noticed was an inaccurate usage of active units (they are on the map) and viable units (they are on the map and have resources). I am changing some code to make more accurate use of the distinction but it has to be done carefully.

 

 

Edited by PatrickAWlson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

I am doing some work that should make unit starvation more noticeable.  On the intel report screen I am outlining resource starved units in red.  At the moment resource starved units are excluded.  In my case the issue was Russian units and not German.  Plenty of planes and not enough pilots.  Resource starvation on a larger scale is the doing of the out of mission calculations, and not intentional.  With the new system it should happen less frequently.

 

One thing that I noticed was an inaccurate usage of active units (they are on the map) and viable units (they are on the map and have resources). I am changing some code to make more accurate use of the distinction but it has to be done carefully.

 

 

 

Great thanks much, looking forward to starting a Bodenplatte campaign again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks. In the meantime are there any ways to improve the supply situation while we wait for Pat? (No pressure of course, Pat; stuff you make are absolutely wonderful). 

 

Currently at about a dozen or so sorties with 37 kills in a Tempest campaign. Wondering what the maximum leave time would be that would improve things a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MarderIV said:

Wondering what the maximum leave time would be that would improve things a bit. 

May, 8th 1945:biggrin:

 

Sorry mate, I simply couldn't resist;)

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need more Spit Mk IX's in Kuban campaign.

Our group is down to only 2, rest are Mk V's. I do not let others in my flight have one, I only have one and keep the other in reserve

in case something happens to mine. I know that is bad of me, but hey it's my game.  Any idea how very hard it is going back to flying the Mk V once you

have had your hands on the Mk IX??

LOL.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dburne said:

I think we need more Spit Mk IX's in Kuban campaign.

Our group is down to only 2, rest are Mk V's. I do not let others in my flight have one, I only have one and keep the other in reserve

in case something happens to mine. I know that is bad of me, but hey it's my game.  Any idea how very hard it is going back to flying the Mk V once you

have had your hands on the Mk IX??

LOL.


Yes, you don’t want any of those AI upstart squadron colleagues getting a taste of MkIX or they’ll all want one. You have to do what you have to do dBurne. War is hell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I like this new Alternate Visibility option we now have in the game.

Mission #12 on my Spit Kuban Campaign. High altitude patrol - 25k ft.

We got to the patrol area and as I was looking around, spotted something off in the distance. Not close enough to even show

up on the large map, but could tell something was there and it appeared to maybe be several aircraft, so I am thinking

possibly an enemy bomber squadron?  

 

Put the pedal to the medal, and as we got closer yes indeed it was two flight of four enemy bombers. What's that? 

Oh wow, two flights of four HE-111's. And they appear to be unescorted! 

What luck - it was a turkey shoot for us. No telling how many lives we saved from those 8 bombers who obviously were on their

way to do some nefarious stuff. 

I have a feeling we never would have spotted these guys without the alternate visibility  as they were not close enough to even show up on the large map.

 

We returned to base afterwards, and sadly find out we lost one of our fellow pilots. Not sure how that happened as we did not encounter any

enemy fighters, he probably did something stupid. So we had a few beers in his honor.

Great fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep in all I think the alternative option is the best choice overall. 
 

Sounds like dburne had some fun! Bombers can be pretty nasty with their gunnery. Glad you and most

of your mates made it back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest change here is to resupply.  I ran tests for each service to see how well supply kept up with demand.  I managed to get things to a point where depleted units were not that common but they could happen with just the out of mission stuff.  Now add what you do in a mission and it will be closer to the goal of short term depletion but not long term.

 

9.1.0
Significant improvements to resupply to produce long term results int he campaign
- Fixes excessive depletion in campaigns
Adjusted font sizes
- Fixes font size too large causing buttons no to display
Bugs
Fixed odd case where missions do not generate because a squadron is too close to the front
Fixed bad pilot picture that caused issues with American campaigns
Fixed incorrect place name
Fixed issue that could start American and British AI pilots with no victories in Sept 1944.
Fixed issue that would cause low altitude CAP missions to have a zero altitude waypoint.
Fixed issue where "Unknown was killed in action" was displayed for out of mission victories
Fixed issue where generic target description was displayed

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:good:

Much thanks Pat!

I will try out a new Bodenplatte Campaign in the Spit MK IX again, will be nice to be able to progress and still have someone to fight along the way!

Thanks for the font corrections as well.

 

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...