Jump to content

PWCG 13.2.0 Trimming trees is fun


PatrickAWlson
 Share

Recommended Posts

From my observations (both escorting and flying bombing missions), AI wingmen will drop when the leader does; so assuming that is the default state, a 10-second delay between the bingo bombs and next waypoint should theoretically work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bgreman

Hi Pat.  I found the Campaign Generator on GitHub and was perusing the code to try to figure out how squadrons upgrade to new plane types.  I think I've figured it out, but in the process, I may have found a bug.  Should I post about it here, file an issue on GitHub, or is there some other mechanism you'd prefer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse
8 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

We're going to have to play with this a bit to get it right.

 

Being honest, I am not really up on the process.  Discussed this with Murleen a few days back and will have to review his code to see what needs doing.  The issue is that the decal markings must only be used on "blank" skins, must not be used on other skins, must not stop the use of other skins, but should be used in preference to a otherwise generic skin.   So it comes down to: did the generic blank skin actually get used?  Is the generic blank skin marked as using decals?  

 

I am unaware of this blank skin.  Can you provide some more information?  My guess is that it is not configured in PWCG as a blank skin and therefore the markings do not make it to the mission file.

 

It's this one here I believe (I've had it for quite a while so it is a little hazy on exact origin) 

 

I tried creating another entry with tactical codes in the skins.json after your reply gave me the clue to go looking but it didn't work. Obviously I have stuffed up something or there is more too adding a new generic skin with codes than just bunging in a new entry. I used a mix of the first entry and one of the later ones not defined in the game (which I assume indicates a stock skin or not) to come up with the below.

 

My entry attempt:

        "P51D15NA_BlueNose": {
            "skinName": "P51D15NA_BlueNose",
            "planeType": "p51d15",
            "startDate": "19400801",
            "endDate": "19450601",
            "squadId": -1,
            "country": "USA",
            "category": "Configured",
            "definedInGame": false,
            "winter": false,
            "useTacticalCodes": true,
            "tacticalCodeColor": "BLACK"
        }

 

Also to mention that I have assigned the skin to each pilot in my squadron via skins management and the loose skins set..........maybe that is the problem looking at "category": "Configured" .........perhaps now I have added the entry the skin is no longer a loose skin?

Edited by No457_Stonehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GarrettJMorgan

Do updates to the campaign generator require a restart on campaigns or can preexisting ones continue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Varibraun
2 minutes ago, GarrettJMorgan said:

Do updates to the campaign generator require a restart on campaigns or can preexisting ones continue?

 

No, you can continue your existing campaigns.  Always be sure to backup though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GarrettJMorgan
Just now, Varibraun said:

 

No, you can continue your existing campaigns.  Always be sure to backup though.

Sweet thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cybermat47

@PatrickAWlson just so you know, it's historically inaccurate that I./JG 27 is flying the Fw-190. Everything I've found indicates that they flew the Bf-109 for the entire war.

 

Here is the Bf-109 G-6 of Major Ludwig Franzisket, commander of I./JG 27, in early 1944: 

 

Spoiler

Messerschmitt-Bf-109G6R3R6-Stab-I.JG27-L

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109G6R3R6-Stab-I.JG27-L

 

Then there is this Bf-109 K-4, which was apparently found in the Czech city of Hradec Králové in 1945. It was apparently from 3./JG 27 (Marseille's staffel). The green fuselage band shows that it belonged to JG 27.

 

Spoiler

Messerschmitt-Bf-109K4-3.JG27-Yellow-2-H

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109K4-3.JG27-Yellow-2-H

 

According to both Wikipedia and this Luftwaffe website (which cites these sources), not a single unit of JG 27 was ever assigned the Fw-190.

 

Sorry if this is a bit TMI, but I'm studying history at uni at the moment, so crossreferencing has become second nature :biggrin:

 

Hope this helps you, PWCG is great and getting better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
11 minutes ago, Cybermat47 said:

@PatrickAWlson just so you know, it's historically inaccurate that I./JG 27 is flying the Fw-190. Everything I've found indicates that they flew the Bf-109 for the entire war.

 

Here is the Bf-109 G-6 of Major Ludwig Franzisket, commander of I./JG 27, in early 1944: 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Messerschmitt-Bf-109G6R3R6-Stab-I.JG27-L

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109G6R3R6-Stab-I.JG27-L

 

Then there is this Bf-109 K-4, which was apparently found in the Czech city of Hradec Králové in 1945. It was apparently from 3./JG 27 (Marseille's staffel). The green fuselage band shows that it belonged to JG 27.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Messerschmitt-Bf-109K4-3.JG27-Yellow-2-H

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109K4-3.JG27-Yellow-2-H

 

According to both Wikipedia and this Luftwaffe website (which cites these sources), not a single unit of JG 27 was ever assigned the Fw-190.

 

Sorry if this is a bit TMI, but I'm studying history at uni at the moment, so crossreferencing has become second nature :biggrin:

 

Hope this helps you, PWCG is great and getting better!

 

Thanks for the information.  I will make the change.  Besides historical accuracy, swapping a 190 unit for 109s will actually increase variety in the west.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

busdriver

Just in case it matters, the latest build is displaying this. I updated from 11.1.1 to 12.1.1

 

1046842361_PWCG12.1.1.thumb.jpg.4946edb1f683aa6bd0f0e932aea40de0.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse
On 4/29/2021 at 9:02 AM, No457_Stonehouse said:

 

It's this one here I believe (I've had it for quite a while so it is a little hazy on exact origin) 

 

I tried creating another entry with tactical codes in the skins.json after your reply gave me the clue to go looking but it didn't work. Obviously I have stuffed up something or there is more too adding a new generic skin with codes than just bunging in a new entry. I used a mix of the first entry and one of the later ones not defined in the game (which I assume indicates a stock skin or not) to come up with the below.

 

My entry attempt:

        "P51D15NA_BlueNose": {
            "skinName": "P51D15NA_BlueNose",
            "planeType": "p51d15",
            "startDate": "19400801",
            "endDate": "19450601",
            "squadId": -1,
            "country": "USA",
            "category": "Configured",
            "definedInGame": false,
            "winter": false,
            "useTacticalCodes": true,
            "tacticalCodeColor": "BLACK"
        }

 

Also to mention that I have assigned the skin to each pilot in my squadron via skins management and the loose skins set..........maybe that is the problem looking at "category": "Configured" .........perhaps now I have added the entry the skin is no longer a loose skin?

 

Been fiddling around some more with this but not getting anywhere. Any tips or thoughts Pat?

 

Thanks

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murleen
4 minutes ago, No457_Stonehouse said:

 

Been fiddling around some more with this but not getting anywhere. Any tips or thoughts Pat?

 

Thanks

 

 

Adding those lines to the skin definition should work - have you unassigned and reassigned the skin to pilots after changing the JSON?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse

Sort of - I changed the json entry in my earlier post by setting the squadron id to the correct value for the 352 FG and also changed the 352 FG json to point at the generic blue nose skin then ticked none on loose skins for each pilot so it goes back to the default skin in the squadron json. I then generated a new mission and all the pilots in the mission looked to have the correct skin and I could see the tactical codes in the pilot selection screen during mission generation but could not see the tactical codes in game.

 

<edit> opened a mission just now in the editor and the codes are not set.

 

<edit2> for whatever it is worth I just noticed that when I try to either save the mission or exit the editor I get an error "Frame heap overflow" in a little popup box.

 

Mission in question attached. To give you the error report.zip I'd have to upload it somewhere else and pass you a link via PM as it is too large.

PWCG.7zip

 

<edit3> Actually I stand corrected. This morning I opened the mission in the editor to recheck the skin on each 352 FG aircraft and actually the Frame heap overflow error pops up behind the editor screen when the mission opens. Could this be the reason the tac codes don't get set? ie the mission is not getting correctly built for some reason from the game's viewpoint? I might try creating a smaller test campaign........I tend to use pretty much maxed out PWCG settings for single player campaigns. Maybe it is too many objects or something

Edited by No457_Stonehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse

Ok doing a search here found this thread about frame heap overflows.

 

Frame heap overflow - Mission Making and Mission Editor - IL-2 Sturmovik Forum (il2sturmovik.com)

 

and doing a reseteditorsettings cleared the error on opening the mission (and suddenly made the editor load 1000 times faster than before by the way)

 

I don't know very much at all about building missions for IL2 but now there was no error I was able to check the thing I was interested in. Double clicking on any of the 352 FG aircraft to see how it has been setup I notice no skin name in the skin entry box and the tac codes are all just black squares which I believe means they are blank and black selected. I was surprised to see there wasn't the skin name p51d15na_bluenose showing as the aircraft definitely show the correct skin in the mission in game. Does IL2 allow some sort of mission start trigger that allows a skin substitution to take place? ie aircraft has no skin in the editor setup so would get the default and there is a mission start trigger to override the skin to be what was selected in PWCG?

 

Could that be connected to the tac codes not being set?

 

 

I tried the low settings test campaign idea. Once the frame overflow error was dealt with so easily I didn't really expect the settings to make any difference and sure enough it still didn't work. I was able to set the tac codes in the plane setup just prior to entering the 3D so I can confirm that the skin works fine with tac codes. Still seeing a 21mb error report zip so can't upload it here. Mission attached however for whatever it is worth.

 

 

531335526_Il-22021-05-0109-50-29.thumb.jpg.9c1de301a4298547860668c1bb5127d6.jpg

PWCG (2).7zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
Posted (edited)

PWCG 12.1.2
Got plane markings working for 354th
- Will work for other units too but they need blank skins
Fixed null pointer scenario in markings manager
Fixed error that would cause AI squadrons not to upgrade to better planes (thanks for the code review bgreman).
Fixed error: glass head rest on the 109 should not be a stock modification as doing so prevents other head rest options.
 

Edited by PatrickAWlson
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PatrickAWlson changed the title to PWCG 12.1.2 Plane markings for the 354th
Stonehouse

I noticed you said there was no suitable 352 FG skin in the other thread - not sure if you missed my earlier post linking to another thread in the skins forum where a generic 352 FG skin was available or whether you looked at it and it was not good?

 

Anyway putting the link here again for perhaps better visibility, skin by Legioneod posted 2019. I have confirmed that the dropbox link still works.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/54579-p-51d-mustang-4k-skins/?do=findComment&comment=829893

 

Big thank you as always for your continued efforts in making this almost mandatory tool better ! 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
9 hours ago, No457_Stonehouse said:

I noticed you said there was no suitable 352 FG skin in the other thread - not sure if you missed my earlier post linking to another thread in the skins forum where a generic 352 FG skin was available or whether you looked at it and it was not good?

 

Anyway putting the link here again for perhaps better visibility, skin by Legioneod posted 2019. I have confirmed that the dropbox link still works.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/54579-p-51d-mustang-4k-skins/?do=findComment&comment=829893

 

Big thank you as always for your continued efforts in making this almost mandatory tool better ! 👍

 

I was thinking of skins immediately usable.  At the moment that skin is not packaged for download or properly configured for PWCG.  It's just work to be done. 

 

If all goes well, eventually, there will be a skin pack with a blank skin for every squadron, every plane type in PWCG.  Probably a couple hundred skins.  P51 is a small start because there is only one P51 and only two squadrons that fly it.  Life gets much more fun when Me 109s can use decals.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse

Understand completely, it did occur to me later that the skin not being part of the native skin set was the issue. As an fyi for the future I can confirm it works ok now when I make the same changes you made for the 354th but with defined in game set to false for the 352nd skin. It really does look good with them all lined up for take off with codes matching those given in the briefing. I think in the long run it will actually make life easier and make the PWCG skin pack much smaller since a single skin will cover a lot of aircraft. Particularly RAF aircraft were quite standardised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oskar_GD

Pat, thanks for your great work. One question: is it possible to display losses of each regiment in the intelligence? To know how many planes and pilots lost every regiment. It would be very immersive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
8 hours ago, Oskar_GD said:

Pat, thanks for your great work. One question: is it possible to display losses of each regiment in the intelligence? To know how many planes and pilots lost every regiment. It would be very immersive. 

 

That is a good idea.  PWCG has all of the information.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oskar_GD
14 минут назад, PatrickAWlson сказал:

 

That is a good idea.  PWCG has all of the information.

 

It would be great to display victories too. Because now you dont even know how many  planes and pilots lost your squadron and how many shot down in total during for all time. You have to calculated and make notes yourself.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

justin_z3r0

Just a question - I'm doing a campaign with 403 sqn (RCAF) in Bodenplatte. When I run skin analysis it says I am missing No403 skin - I'm not sure where to find that one though. I have downloaded and installed all of the skin packs from the website.

Can anyone help?

 

Thanks in advance
image.thumb.png.60bcc3013c25b1f59c2ce9b9a01cc24e.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
On 4/22/2021 at 11:54 AM, 22.Gr.CT.Ludovisi said:

I really think tha Strategic Intercept missions in Bodenplatte/JV44 Me 262 are bugged. Two main problems/bugs:

 

- I play tens of missions without enemy planes (no bombers, but even no fighters): conversely, in every mission of different kind I encounters tens of US aircraft.

- In these mission, at about 50% of route, AI exit from path and begin ground strifing.

 

Thanks for you effort in improving PWCG.

 

Working on it.  When I ran this myself I could not recreate the bug, but I did feel like the missions were not what I wanted.  I am reviewing the whole thing to improve the intercepts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PatrickAWlson changed the title to PWCG 12.2.0 Let's get out of here
PatrickAWlson

PWCG 12.2.0
Make planes exit attacks more quickly
- When one or two planes goes bingo bombs the rest will jettison remaining ordnance and exit after 30 seconds.
Rewrite of strategic intercept
- Use more realistic targets.
- Multiple enemy flights based on air density config
- Enemy flights are escorted
- Improved spotter position
Included more airfield and city blocks as targets to make airfield and city attacks more likely to trigger.
Expanded structure inclusion box to encompass the flight path of all human players.
Allowed possibility to escort bombers or ground attack
Added enemy scrambles to escort missions when the escorted flight is attacking an airfield
Fixed incorrect (low) altitude of ingress waypoint on strategic intercept and transport missions
Fixed spelling of opportunity in mission briefing
FIxed missing plane codes.
Fixed Me262s could not take off from airfield (moved to different field)
 

  • Thanks 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheSNAFU

Wow you have been busy Pat. Really nice enhancements. Can’t wait to give the new version a go!! Thanks so much for all you do to make this game great. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PatrickAWlson changed the title to PWCG 12.2.0 Better Performance???
PatrickAWlson

12.2.1
Limited assignment of entities to structures in target zones (performance). 
Fixed error that could cause missions to fail to generate

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highwayman
Posted (edited)

Hey Pat, I'm not sure if you ever intended for your campaign generator to be used as such, but I thought I'd give you some feedback on the way we've tried using it for our latest campaign.

 

Usually our squad consists of 4 regular members and we fly a coop campaign for a certain airframe, mostly in Bodneplatte, but with a couple of older members coming back into the fold, we looked like we were going to double that number. As a result we ran an 'experiment' with the current 4 members in a 2 vs 2 scenario in a proof of concept with 2 members flying for the 352nd Fighter Group in P-51's and the other 2 members flying for I./JG27 in the Fw-190D9.

 

The primary chalkboard interface is solely for the 352nd, but every other screen (briefing, waypoints, roster) all allow me to switch between the 2 main squadrons and tweak the waypoints, change the loadouts, etc without any issues. The missions are generated perfectly (as always) and we've been having a completely different experience with the generator this way, and it's been absolutely fantastic! Having a limited and controlled PvP environment, but with our own campaign sorties and objectives to fly has really added to our experience. Sometimes the missions take us to separate areas of the map, other times one side is tasked with a ground attack and the other side is on CAP in the same area, you never know what you're going to get and it's brought a thrilling edge to what was already a great system!

 

Thanks again for your work :)

 

Edited by Highwayman
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Highwayman said:

Hey Pat, I'm not sure if you ever intended for your campaign generator to be used as such, but I thought I'd give you some feedback on the way we've tried using it for our latest campaign.

 

Usually our squad consists of 4 regular members and we fly a coop campaign for a certain airframe, mostly in Bodneplatte, but with a couple of older members coming back into the fold, we looked like we were going to double that number. As a result we ran an 'experiment' with the current 4 members in a 2 vs 2 scenario in a proof of concept with 2 members flying for the 352nd Fighter Group in P-51's and the other 2 members flying for I./JG27 in the Fw-190D9.

 

The primary chalkboard interface is solely for the 352nd, but every other screen (briefing, waypoints, roster) all allow me to switch between the 2 main squadrons and tweak the waypoints, change the loadouts, etc without any issues. The missions are generated perfectly (as always) and we've been having a completely different experience with the generator this way, and it's been absolutely fantastic! Having a limited and controlled PvP environment, but with our own campaign sorties and objectives to fly has really added to our experience. Sometimes the missions take us to separate areas of the map, other times one side is tasked with a ground attack and the other side is on CAP in the same area, you never know what you're going to get and it's brought a thrilling edge to what was already a great system!

 

Thanks again for your work :)

 

 

I'm glad somebody is finally using it that way.  I put a lot of work into making not so cooperative coop work and I thought it would be heavily used.  You're the first person that I know of that is actually doing it.  Very much appreciate the feedback.

 

I think this mode works best with dead is dead.  Players can be in the campaign, score, get medals and promotions, etc.  If they are killed then they create a new pilot and start again.  Their old pilot's history is still there in the campaign. 

 

I played a Red Baron 3D multiplayer session like that and I think it was the most fun I had online.  In the RB3D campaign everything was done manually.  I was so proud of actually making ace and then so ticked when I was killed in a collision

 

And thanks for the phrase PVP.  That is the proper description and I don't know why I have not thought to use it until you just did.

Edited by PatrickAWlson
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Varibraun
9 hours ago, Highwayman said:

Having a limited and controlled PvP environment, but with our own campaign sorties and objectives to fly has really added to our experience. Sometimes the missions take us to separate areas of the map, other times one side is tasked with a ground attack and the other side is on CAP in the same area, you never know what you're going to get and it's brought a thrilling edge to what was already a great system!

 

4 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I think this mode works best with dead is dead.  Players can be in the campaign, score, get medals and promotions, etc.  If they are killed then they create a new pilot and start again.  Their old pilot's history is still there in the campaign. 

 

I have always thought this would be a really exciting way to play PWCG since Pat brought in this capability.  If any of @Highwayman's squad has the inclination, it would be great to hear about some of these missions in Pat's "Interesting Missions" thread when you guys run into each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highwayman
11 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I put a lot of work into making not so cooperative coop work and I thought it would be heavily used.


That's great! I had no idea it had the capability and just thought I'd give it a go, maybe it's worth a mention in the next patch to highlight it, I just don't think many people are aware that it's there :)

 

Now I know I'm not forcing it to work in an unintended manner, I'll provide some feedback on it.

 

I mentioned that the only screen that doesn't give you the option of switching between the two sides is the main Chalkboard. That would be a really nice to have if there is a way of doing so, as I often post up a screenshot of the chalkboard to our discord after a sortie with the mission debrief.

 

image.thumb.png.26aab01e7a337f045cadf5b705576373.png


The other screen that doesn't have the ability to switch teams in it is the Waypoint Editor screen. You can of course get to the other team by changing teams on the map, or pilot roster and stepping back or next to the Waypoints screen, and we've noticed that the secondary team, in this case the Germans, always have a 100% fuel load regardless of the mission length.


image.png.8fe27ae7f184010b3e8206e3f0138aad.png

 

image.thumb.png.6537ff9b07f61fb3b0a77b9612de4347.png

 

The final one is that on the debrief when making the claims, is that only aircraft from the secondary team can be selected in the claims interface. The actual debrief works however as long as you pick something of a similar type. For example, in the last mission I shot down a P-47 and a P-51, but in the claims screen could only claim a 190D9 or an Me110. I selected 2 x 190D9's and the debrief credited me with the kills for the correct aircraft:
 

On 20/10/1944 near Diest. A P-47D-22 of 50th Fighter Group was brought down by OFw Highway of I./JG27. Lt Stepven Rogers was not injured OFw Highway was flying a Fw 190 D-9.

On 20/10/1944 near Diest. A P-51D-15 of 352nd Fighter Group was brought down by OFw Highway of I./JG27. Flt O Live was lightly wounded OFw Highway was flying a Fw 190 D-9.

 

Thank you once again for all your efforts. This has made what was already a fantastic tool even better!
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CaptainFlemme

Pat, 

 

Your performance enhancement seems to work !

 

My two last mission with v12.2.0 (medium air & ground activity), over Rhineland map) where stuttering like hell. Strangely I still got 80 to 90FPS, but very slow time & lots of hiccups - it looked like CPU related problems. My last mission however, with v12.2.1, was very fluid. More tests might be necessary but it goes in the right direction :) ! Many thanks.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson

@Highwayman You can change the reference pilot (personnel of the campaign screen).  That will cause everything (main board, journal, squadron logs, etc.) to be viewed from the point of view of the selected pilot.

3 hours ago, CaptainFlemme said:

Pat, 

 

Your performance enhancement seems to work !

 

My two last mission with v12.2.0 (medium air & ground activity), over Rhineland map) where stuttering like hell. Strangely I still got 80 to 90FPS, but very slow time & lots of hiccups - it looked like CPU related problems. My last mission however, with v12.2.1, was very fluid. More tests might be necessary but it goes in the right direction :) ! Many thanks.

 

That would seem to confirm what @jollyjack brought up: excessive numbers of linked entities on structures degrades performance.  12.0,0.0 through 12.2.0 declared certain building types to be targetable and added entities to those buildings.  In 12.2.1 I changed that to only add entities to buildings in target areas, which generally should be much fewer.  I could further reduce it to only the player's target area. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheSNAFU

Seems like all the intercept missions I’m getting are at 500 ft altitude. Is that normal now? So far only patrol missions are at high altitude. Flying US with 352 p51’s.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TheSNAFU said:

Seems like all the intercept missions I’m getting are at 500 ft altitude. Is that normal now? So far only patrol missions are at high altitude. Flying US with 352 p51’s.  

 

Bad weather will push altitudes down.  500 feet is unreasonable though.  Usually it will be around 1000 - 1500 meters.

 

Recreated the problem.  Thanks for the report

Edited by PatrickAWlson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheSNAFU

Oh ok so there was something there. Glad to help Pat. Thanks!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PatrickAWlson changed the title to PWCG 12.2.2 Better UI Performance
PatrickAWlson

12.2.2
Improved performance of the waypoint editor screen
Improved (slightly) performance of the map screens
- Press new button edit waypoint details to edit 
Fixed error that cause incorrect intercept waypoint altitudes
 

Something that has been annoying me for along time is the delay when using the waypoint details editor during the briefing.  Often over 10 seconds.  I dug in and discovered that java Swing cannot handle lots of small text windows.  I replaced them with labels and performance improved dramatically.  But you can't edit a label ... so I added the "edit waypoint details" button that restores the editable UI.  On that one I reduced the number of text boxes by 60% by using labels for text fields that were never editable anyway.  

 

SO - if you want to edit altitude and cruise speed you will have to press  "edit waypoint details".  The edit screen will be faster than before.  if you don't want to edit then the screen will be very fast.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41Sqn_Riksen

@PatrickAWlson

 

Do the iconic events allows the use of customized object placement for those missions? For example, would a Iconic event for D-Day allow placement of ships, ballons and all that at the beaches on that exclusive day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
Just now, 41Sqn_Riksen said:

@PatrickAWlson

 

Do the iconic events allows the use of customized object placement for those missions? For example, would a Iconic event for D-Day allow placement of ships, ballons and all that at the beaches on that exclusive day?

 

Not customized, but coded to support that placement.  I did the Russian amphibious assaults around Kerch and also for Operation Varsity on the Rhine.  To do that i had to configure the fact that an amphibious landing was happening on that date and the landing spots.  Then I coded PWCG to put  landing craft on the map at that point and drive them to the shore.  Once the reach the shore another event is triggered that causes a few tanks and machine guns to be disgorged.  The tanks then start  to make their way inland.

 

As of the iconic events release I have that.  Normandy should be pretty much the same thing.  I would say "except bigger" but that will not be possible without the game itself allowing more.  If it does at that time then Normandy will be bigger.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stonehouse

Noticing an issue with AAA batteries near my airfield - seems like maybe 70% of the large caliber guns get two guns spawn in the same spot?2021_5_19__13_17_55.thumb.jpg.3455c82873cc51b3604ebbff12011459.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
11 hours ago, No457_Stonehouse said:

Noticing an issue with AAA batteries near my airfield - seems like maybe 70% of the large caliber guns get two guns spawn in the same spot?2021_5_19__13_17_55.thumb.jpg.3455c82873cc51b3604ebbff12011459.jpg

 

It's the new, top secret, MBIAAAA (Multi Barrel Independently Aimable AAA) - pronounced Mbeeahhh.  Not sure, but you could get in trouble for posting highly classified pics online.  Either that or I was inspired by Dr. Zebra and his penchant for combining airframes in mid air.

 

Seriously - seen the same.  No idea why it's happening but I'll do something about it.  First I have to figure out if PWCG is accidentally producing extra AAA guns or if it is producing the right amount and dropping them in the same location.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • PatrickAWlson changed the title to PWCG 13.2.0 Trimming trees is fun

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...