PWCG 17.1.1 Oh, your squadron needs a plane.

[Falcon41]

Pat,

     I'm having some serious problems with installing your latest release.  Everytime I attempt to install it I receive a message that says This application requires a Java Runtime Environment 1.08.0 (64 bit)  Any idea what I'm doing wrong? I've downloaded Java several times but have yet to be able to install your CG.

[Stolle]

1 hour ago, Falcon41 said:

Pat,

     I'm having some serious problems with installing your latest release.  Everytime I attempt to install it I receive a message that says This application requires a Java Runtime Environment 1.08.0 (64 bit)  Any idea what I'm doing wrong? I've downloaded Java several times but have yet to be able to install your CG.

Falcon, You might have the wrong version installed. You need the 64 bit version. I have both 32 and 64 bit installed. See here:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/58751-pwcg-800-beta-3-available-for-test/?tab=comments#comment-896482

[Chief_Mouser]

Hi Pat, I've just generated a new Luftwaffe campaign for IV(Pz)./Sch.G.2 with the Hs129B-2 on 01/03/43, flying from Holmskaya on the Kuban map. The first mission has generated aok - haven't flown it yet - but the briefing has allocated my flight of Ducks an escort flight of Macchis. Historically out of context?

Cheers.

[Cathaoir]

Go get them Cat....might be an interesting mission.....or not.....?

[NN_Elanion]

Thanks Pat for thinking of the little guys in Normandy.

[PatrickAWlson]

3 hours ago, 216th_Cat said:

Hi Pat, I've just generated a new Luftwaffe campaign for IV(Pz)./Sch.G.2 with the Hs129B-2 on 01/03/43, flying from Holmskaya on the Kuban map. The first mission has generated aok - haven't flown it yet - but the briefing has allocated my flight of Ducks an escort flight of Macchis. Historically out of context?

Cheers.

 

Probably.  okay ... definitely.  I keep the Italians in place to allow Italian pilots to continue careers.  Poor guys are stuck with the Macchis for the whole war.

A low priority to do is to eliminate historical anomalies from missions unless the player is actually part of that squadron.

 

[Retnek]

Hi Patrick,

 

started a P-39-campaign just for fun, execpt "music off" anything is default. Mission was fun, made logs, but analysis is refused:

 

PWCGErrorLog.txt

 

RetnekVVSfighter202004022004407.zip

 

Let me know if you need further information - thx for all the work!

 

PS: I re-started the mission and provoked an accident 2 min after start - then everything was fine, accident was registered and pilot is out of order for a long time.

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by Retnek
add-on

[jlan5031jlan5031]

I've just downloaded 8.2. PWCGFC works, but PWCGBoS  won't recognize that.that I have Java 1.8.0(64 Bit). I've downloaded PWGC several times, reinstalled, restarted my computer. What to do?

[rieper_420]

Hello Pat,

 

I love your PWCG, it is extremely impressive and the generated missions are great!

 

I have no issues with broken missions or waypoints outside of the map so far after flying >10 missions generated with 8.2

Had some great patrol missions with the P-39 over Kuban shooting down Ju-88s & Ju-87s =>  Thanks!

 

Yesterday I was supporting an attack on Kuban with my HS-129 and saw Tiger Tanks for the first time in game ?

 

However, after flying 5 "attack enemy troops" missions with the HS-129 on Kuban I did not yet find any soviet tanks to bust with my HS-129 with PWCG 8.20.

Whenever I should attack enemy troops I only find 3-5 mostly already destroyed artillery / AAA emplacements.

 

Time: March 1943 - High Ground Density - Medium Air Density activated.

 

It would be awesome to have dedicated tank busting missions depending on airplane? IL-2 / HS-129 / Ju-87G

 

Please tell me if I can support you in any way creating the mission type / unit spawning scrips  - I have some programming knowledge, but I am no Java specialist...

 

 

Cheers

Tobias Rieper

[Columbar]

Hi Pat,

one question: Does PWCG generate "squadron life" aside of player mission?

What happen to me ( P40/IAP126/9_10_1941 campaign): in last two debriefs there were killed pilots and lost aircrafts which were not flying with me on missions.

[PatrickAWlson]

3 hours ago, Columbar said:

Hi Pat,

one question: Does PWCG generate "squadron life" aside of player mission?

What happen to me ( P40/IAP126/9_10_1941 campaign): in last two debriefs there were killed pilots and lost aircrafts which were not flying with me on missions.

 

Yes.  That is a very large chunk of the combat report process. 

 

First PWCG evaluates everything that happened in the mission.  All of that information is recorded.

 

Then, for every pilot in the PWCG universe that did not participate in the mission it emulates a day in the life.  Maybe he scored a victory (which means that somebody else got shot down).  Maybe he was the one that got shot down.  If he was shot down then maybe he survived and maybe he did not.  He probably flew a mission so the number of missions goes up.  Whatever happened is also recorded.

 

Then evaluations occur for medals and promotions.  Lightly wounded pilots may heal.  Those events are recorded.

 

When all is done the events are split into different groups to provide you with information about the mission and then more information about the days events, in mission and out of mission.  Those are the tabs in the combat report.

 

If you take a leave the first step is skipped (obvious since you didn't fly a mission) but the subsequent steps still happen, so stuff happens while you are away.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, rieper_420 said:

Hello Pat,

 

...

However, after flying 5 "attack enemy troops" missions with the HS-129 on Kuban I did not yet find any soviet tanks to bust with my HS-129 with PWCG 8.20.

Whenever I should attack enemy troops I only find 3-5 mostly already destroyed artillery / AAA emplacements.

 

 

 

Battles in PWCG have attackers and defenders.  The defenders don't have tanks.  What you got was a bunch of German assaults in a row.  The Russians do attack so you will see tanks.  

 

A couple of to dos for me:

1. Replace some AT gun units with stationary defending tanks.

2. Model meeting engagements with both sides attacking.

[Yogiflight]

Hi Patrick, I am starting a Bf 110 campaign in june 42 on Kuban map and have as first mission 'Attack the shipping near Gelenjik-3', but we don't have bombs, just standard weaponing. Is there something I am missing, so did you do this on purpose or did you forget the bombs for this kind of mission? I have to add, I had this kind of mission three or four times before, but always forgot to ask.

I will take some bombs with me, in the case I will need them

Edited April 3, 2020 by Yogiflight

[Yogiflight]

Bodenangriffs Kampagne202004032304844.zip

Hi Patrick, there was something odd going on in the debriefing, with too many destroyed targets credited for my squadmates. On a sidenote, was there really a torpedoboat? Because I didn't see one, only the freighters and the destroyer.

But it was a nice little convoy. If only AI wouldn't attack all the the same target at the first attack and one of them wouldn't take one bomb back to our airfield, however there were still targets. I can only hope AI will improve in ground attacking over time.

[Columbar]

Hi Pat,

10+ missions flown in 126IAP camaign, autumn Moscow map and I have to report no problems. Everything is working fine. Flak shoots, bombers shoot back, ground targets are well placed. Thank you very much for your hard work!

 

I found only two minor issue:

1) please, please more flak around airfields ? Now there are mostly only few AA machineguns - at least on russian side.

2) missions are too long - two randomly generated mission:

  

I have this setup:

Edited April 5, 2020 by Columbar

[Yogiflight]

On 3/30/2020 at 3:32 AM, PatrickAWlson said:

Added spotters for intercept and scramble missions (BoX only)

Hopefully not too stupid question, are these the reasons for the black,blue and red aircrafts on the map?

Second question, as I am not sure there, too. What are drifters? Targets like trucks or tanks, moving on roads or through the terrain?

[Nocke]

Ligthning202004052304922.zip

 

Hi Pat,

 

We ran into trouble with our coop campaign after the host retired from the squadron because he had enough of being immortal,  he had died several times but soldiered on in the roster.

A new character played by the host (myself) was created, after flying then one more mission the after action report failed completely.

 

Which was a real shame because it had been a wonderful missions. Generally since 8.2 the missions are really nice. Interesting ground battles going on, varied enemy flights, AAA shooting ...?

[Retnek]

54 minutes ago, 216th_Nocke said:

We ran into trouble with our coop campaign after the host retired from the squadron because he had enough of being immortal,  he had died several times but soldiered on in the roster.

A new character played by the host (myself) was created, after flying then one more mission the after action report failed completely.

 

Can underline there's something strange with that "host"-character. Any time I tried to change that  "reference pilot", the follow-up missions got errors all over. Only way to stop it was to re-start the mission with the same settings and NOT to fiddle around with that host-reference-role.

Some more notes to the report by Nocke c.a - I think we did > 20 missions in a series:

- It's frustrating not to get a kill just because you did not choose correctly between an 190-A5 or -A8, a 109-G6 or -G14.

- Quite a lot of kills and pilots death were not registered by the report-analysis

- Sometimes there have been "ghost kill reports" - usually to several human pilots at once. Looks like the mission spawned some objects, those were immediately destroyed and it counted as success for the pilots.

- Mission reports often showed lot of strange kills like "MG-34 destroyed Tiger" or so - maybe object spawning in one place and blowing up.

- Still lot of mission objects were placed in the middle of large forests and rivers occasionally, too. It was wise to take an AI-guy with us, they usually were able to find hidden enemy positions.

- Sometime Blue and Red objects spawned just a few dozen meters away, so we had friendly-fire incidents.

- NDB are placed on the airfields, but don't send a signal.

- Looks like P-39 supply was difficult for the allied forces (maybe one just wasn't able to scroll down the re-supply-report). The squadron soon was short on planes and after 15 missions or so we didn't got any (poor) greenhorn pilots, too. All the higher ranking pilots finally were lost, too - except one trusty captain!

 

Anyhow - all in all it the campaign went on nicely until we changed that reference pilot. And the missions usually had one surprise attack by German fighters, sometimes twice. Mostly near the frontline and from below. But we were jumped on near the base, too, or even chased back to the base. So the most important factor "gripping sorties" is here already!

Edited April 5, 2020 by Retnek

[PatrickAWlson]

8 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Hopefully not too stupid question, are these the reasons for the black,blue and red aircrafts on the map?

Second question, as I am not sure there, too. What are drifters? Targets like trucks or tanks, moving on roads or through the terrain?

 

Black blue and red are decided by the game. Black is you.  Blue is friendly.  Red is enemy.

[Chief_Mouser]

10 hours ago, Retnek said:

 

- Quite a lot of kills and pilots death were not registered by the report-analysis

 

 

Just to add a note - I think that some of the kill claims, and maybe pilot deaths as well, are being denied because the stricken aircraft disappear before they hit the ground. The event is given on the in-game chat but doesn't register for the AAR. The disappearing aircraft need fixing by the devs IMO. It hasn't added anything to the game.

[Lusekofte]

In the same mission I got hits in the radiators of a BF 109. It was steaming and I saw it fought with other P 38 after my hit. 
A minute later I got a notice that I had shot it down. After the mission I was asked if it was a G 14 or G 6 and I guessed G 14

I did not get the kill, witch is realistic, and not important. But was it a wrong guess that made me not get it? Or was it wrong message in game that caused this information. 
I jettisoned bombs and got target destroyed after jettisoning. So I figure it might be a overeager raport system

[PatrickAWlson]

2 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

In the same mission I got hits in the radiators of a BF 109. It was steaming and I saw it fought with other P 38 after my hit. 
A minute later I got a notice that I had shot it down. After the mission I was asked if it was a G 14 or G 6 and I guessed G 14

I did not get the kill, witch is realistic, and not important. But was it a wrong guess that made me not get it? Or was it wrong message in game that caused this information. 
I jettisoned bombs and got target destroyed after jettisoning. So I figure it might be a overeager raport system

 

PWCG only cares if you get it approximately right.  For instance, you need to be able to tell the difference between a balloon, a bomber, and a fighter.  PWCG does not care about the difference between a G6 or G14 or even a G6 or FW190 or Me262.

 

There is a report error button on the campaign that creates a zip file.  If you are being denied kills zip it up and post it and I can take a look.  PWCG is coded to be quite forgiving.  It really should only deny a claim if it can be demonstrated that you did not score.

 

 

 

 

A note on PWCG development: I have been working on strategic bombing mission intercepts, such as the game allows.  As usual, it's harder than one might initially think.  Still, things proceed.

 

Once that is done I do not plan any new significant features for awhile.  It has been 18 months of nonstop development and a bit of a break is in order.  However, I will focus on dealing with bugs and anomalies at the pace of a weekly point release.  That includes disparities in claims, coop issues reported above, and whatever else comes up.  

 

Appreciate the feedback.  Give it about another month and most of these issues will be dealt with,

[dburne]

46 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

PWCG only cares if you get it approximately right.  For instance, you need to be able to tell the difference between a balloon, a bomber, and a fighter.  PWCG does not care about the difference between a G6 or G14 or even a G6 or FW190 or Me262.

 

There is a report error button on the campaign that creates a zip file.  If you are being denied kills zip it up and post it and I can take a look.  PWCG is coded to be quite forgiving.  It really should only deny a claim if it can be demonstrated that you did not score.

 

 

 

 

A note on PWCG development: I have been working on strategic bombing mission intercepts, such as the game allows.  As usual, it's harder than one might initially think.  Still, things proceed.

 

Once that is done I do not plan any new significant features for awhile.  It has been 18 months of nonstop development and a bit of a break is in order.  However, I will focus on dealing with bugs and anomalies at the pace of a weekly point release.  That includes disparities in claims, coop issues reported above, and whatever else comes up.  

 

Appreciate the feedback.  Give it about another month and most of these issues will be dealt with,

 

Please enjoy your well deserved break!

[Varibraun]

^^^^^^ Agreed - and maybe even take some time to actually fly and enjoy what you have created! 

[PatrickAWlson]

On 4/1/2020 at 2:52 AM, jeanpit-frenchy said:

no more BF 109.E7 in 8.2 version !, attacker only BF110  ?

 

 i have a solo campagne with E7 ( more than 25 missions ) and it's the end for my avatar "report error"

 

I looked into this and I have a fix.  It will be available in 8.3.0.  Hang on to the campaign.  You should be able to pick up where you left off.

On 4/2/2020 at 2:21 PM, Retnek said:

Hi Patrick,

 

started a P-39-campaign just for fun, execpt "music off" anything is default. Mission was fun, made logs, but analysis is refused:

 

PWCGErrorLog.txt 27.87 kB · 3 downloads

 

RetnekVVSfighter202004022004407.zip 165.76 kB · 1 download

 

Let me know if you need further information - thx for all the work!

 

PS: I re-started the mission and provoked an accident 2 min after start - then everything was fine, accident was registered and pilot is out of order for a long time.

 

 

I looked into this.  Based on the logs PWCG is doing the correct thing - sort of.  TBH it is a use case that I never counted on. 

 

The logs show a mission that was started and almost immediately stopped.  Look at the file set missionReport(2020-04-02_18-43-05)... There are only 11 files and there is nothing in there, not even a plane spawn event.  When you tried to submit a combat report PWCG said that it couldn't find any planes in the logs, which is true.  Not really sure what happened there but that's what the logs say.

[Yogiflight]

Focke Wulf Kampagne202004072104558.zip

We taxied to start position, the flightleader called out we will start, but nothing happened. Plus, again no bombs for anti shipping mission.

It might be, that it has to do with the starting direction 120°, as a second mission didn't work, too, with the same direction, but the next mission with direction 90° worked fine.

One thing however, Olt Paul Drach was awarded the Iron Cross 2nd class after he had two air victories, one Yak and one FW 190. Both kills are credited in his pilot log as airkills.

Focke Wulf Kampagne202004072104558.zip

Edited April 7, 2020 by Yogiflight

[PatrickAWlson]

On 3/31/2020 at 4:30 PM, Columbar said:

AAR error.

USAAF202003312203368.zip 430.6 kB · 3 downloads

 

Got that one fixed.  After releasing the update with the free French there is a problem in existing campaigns in that no depot is created for the service.  Added something in to fix that for campaigns made before the free French additions.  It will be in 8.3.0 - end of week at latest.

On 4/5/2020 at 6:06 PM, 216th_Nocke said:

Ligthning202004052304922.zip 352.95 kB · 1 download

 

Hi Pat,

 

We ran into trouble with our coop campaign after the host retired from the squadron because he had enough of being immortal,  he had died several times but soldiered on in the roster.

A new character played by the host (myself) was created, after flying then one more mission the after action report failed completely.

 

Which was a real shame because it had been a wonderful missions. Generally since 8.2 the missions are really nice. Interesting ground battles going on, varied enemy flights, AAA shooting ...?

 

Same problem that Columbar had.  Wasn't related to Host.  The error was related to replacing Free French squadron members.

[Retnek]

Sorry Patrick, but please allow to insist on this topic "reference pilot". Since that pilot seems to be an important part of the generators logic.

 

I cannot set a pilot as a "reference pilot" permanently. Whenever I open that menu that Coop-pilot with the name first in alphabet is shown. But per default active seems to that "host: user" generated during the first campaign-generation. One can choose another reference pilot and *immediatly* after that has to generate the new mission with that chosen pilot as part of the mission. That's confusing.

 

Is there any way to get rid of these confusing objects "user: host" and "reference pilot"? Can't you generate it per default and hide from user interaction? For the mission place that reference "user: host" in an invulnerable tank far away from any enemy. Blind, silent and uncomplaining waiting for the mission to end.

 

Edited April 8, 2020 by Retnek

[PatrickAWlson]

@Retnek 

I'm sure that the host pilot can be thought through.  There should be a way to decouple that from the mission.  Going to take some work though.  There are aspects of the campaign that depend on knowing the answer to "who am I?".

 

Host: the person who created the campaign and is hosting the missions.

Reference Pilot: The central persona in the mission build process.  The persona from who's perspective the UI is being viewed.  

 

Open to suggestions for naming improvements.

 

At a minimum there is a need to allow the reference pilot to be changed and to persist that such that the next time you enter PWCG it picks up where you left off.  Further, the reference pilot needs to be decoupled from the campaign host such that any pilot can be the reference pilot.

 

I had never thought of the use case where the campaign host would effectively quit.  Nor did it occur to me that the host might create a mission, start a server, but choose not to fly.  However, these are use cases.  These can be long campaigns so I will take that as an oversight on my part.   

[Utopioneer]

9 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Nor did it occur to me that the host might create a mission, start a server, but choose not to fly.

FWIW, I've also found the reference pilot setting to be cumbersome, and this is a use case I come across regularly. The PWCG software and Dserver run on my computer, if I can't fly but my squadron mates can, it wouldn't take me very long to generate a mission and fire it up for them.

 

I don't know what the code looks like behind the scenes, but it is possible to have a reference squadron? Then store combat report information in a squadron folder rather than a pilot folder?

[PatrickAWlson]

32 minutes ago, Utopioneer said:

FWIW, I've also found the reference pilot setting to be cumbersome, and this is a use case I come across regularly. The PWCG software and Dserver run on my computer, if I can't fly but my squadron mates can, it wouldn't take me very long to generate a mission and fire it up for them.

 

I don't know what the code looks like behind the scenes, but it is possible to have a reference squadron? Then store combat report information in a squadron folder rather than a pilot folder?

 

Now that I have a better understanding of some of the use cases I'll see what I can do with it.  This will not make 8.3.0 but I can probably do something by end of month.

[Retnek]

3 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Now that I have a better understanding of some of the use cases I'll see what I can do with it.  This will not make 8.3.0 but I can probably do something by end of month.

 

Thank you very much - just to be sure (and because it was written already  ) please allow to present our "use case" in some detail.

 

A group of friends would like to enjoy a continuous coop-campaign. It's fine if  50% find the time, so constantly we need to change the participants. Except the special case "user:host" and "reference-pilot" for our "standard-participants" there's no problem! Smoothly done via the "Pilot Selection" menu - all fine.

The missions are generated on the fly before the flight. This is done using your generator via shared desktop (Discord) on the PC of the guy who later is serving the mission. Here again it's already fine as it is.

 

  All of us have one identity at a time with the rule "dead is dead" or "captured is captured". That's the main factor of immersion, trying to survive. If my first pilot "Retnek" is lost during a mission, then before the next we generate a "Retnek_II" via the "Administer Coop"-option - and so on. Loss rates are high, so this is a day-by-day procedure, too. Once understanding the concept it's no problem to leave the campaign, add some new or extra-pilots and go into that campaign again.

 

  Usually the new mission then is served immediately via a dedserver.exe running on the super-PC of one guy. He's flying from that PC, too. But sooner or later there will be the need to use another guys PC as a mission-generator and server. Running the dedserver.exe on a dedicated server hardware is on the wish-list, too.

 

Sorry for the wall of text! If you're able to de-couple all the different roles and processes it would make things easy for us.

[Utopioneer]

I have almost the exact same use case as @Retnek, right down to the "Utopioneer II" to replace dead-is-dead and captured-is-lost pilots (I think I'm up to VI now though...)

Edited April 8, 2020 by Utopioneer

[PatrickAWlson]

Persona: The persona in the campaign that a user is playing as

Reference Persona: The persona from who's point of view you are viewing the UI.

 

This is where I am going with this. 

1. I am eliminating the concept of the host.

2, The reference persona concept has to stay

3. Reference persona will be hidden from single player campaigns

4. Reference persona starts as the player created during campaign creation

5. Changing the reference persona will be saved with the campaign and remembered when PWCG is restarted

6. If the reference persona dies then missions are disabled until a new reference persona is selected

- Can be existing persona or new persona created with Add New Pilot

7. Adding a persona while the reference persona is dead will cause the new persona to become the reference persona .

8.  reference persona need not be included in a mission

- May cause parts of mission briefing not to display ... not sure how that will work yet

 

[Nadelbaum]

Ju52 (Transport) campaign is working very well now, thank you for the fixes done in 8.1.0/8.2.0!

 

I've also started a Bomber campaign, flying the He111. The first mission is funny in a sad way as the flight leader doesn't manage to takeoff without hitting the trees at the end of the runway. I've restarted the mission 3 times just to make sure it isn't a glitch. 

 

I don't know if there's anything you can do about it, but I can attach the mission file if you want to analyze (later as I'm currently not by the PC)? The length of the runway is not enough for the heavy bomber in this case. I can barely avoid the trees myself when following the flight leader.

 

Then another question: If this kind of missions get created then is there a way to scrub the mission afterwards in PWCG without losing the day? In such situation I would rather generate another mission for the same day than to fly alone and have one of the pilots killed in an accident that has little to do with realism and immersion.

[Columbar]

Hi Pat,

I want to ask you: new mission type recon - how often it happens? In setup I found nothing related with recon mission frequency. And is recon mission aviable in older campaigns started in older versions of PWCG?

 

Why I am asking: I have 20+ missions in campaign 126IAP autumn 1941, Moscow map and I´ve never generated recon mission.

[PatrickAWlson]

1 hour ago, Columbar said:

Hi Pat,

I want to ask you: new mission type recon - how often it happens? In setup I found nothing related with recon mission frequency. And is recon mission aviable in older campaigns started in older versions of PWCG?

 

Why I am asking: I have 20+ missions in campaign 126IAP autumn 1941, Moscow map and I´ve never generated recon mission.

 

There are roles and mission types within roles.  The advanced config allows you to weight mission types within roles.  Recon role has only one mission type: also called recon.  Probability of a unit acting within a role is defined in squadron configs.  I will have to look into 126 IAP to see if it is configured for recon.

@Nadelbaum If a field is entirely inadequate for the plane type then the unit can be moved to a new field.  Sometimes limiting takeoff to one direction is also an option.

 

If the results of a mission areeats:  unsatisfactory you can

1. Refly it in the game

2. Go to PWCG and generate a new mission without submitting an AAR

Caveats:

You must have binary mission file generation turned on.  If you are using text mission the game (I think) uses an auto created binary file from the old mission.

Stop the game, generate the new mission, restart the game to make sure you don't get a cached version.

3 hours ago, Retnek said:

 

Thank you very much - just to be sure (and because it was written already  ) please allow to present our "use case" in some detail.

 

A group of friends would like to enjoy a continuous coop-campaign. It's fine if  50% find the time, so constantly we need to change the participants. Except the special case "user:host" and "reference-pilot" for our "standard-participants" there's no problem! Smoothly done via the "Pilot Selection" menu - all fine.

The missions are generated on the fly before the flight. This is done using your generator via shared desktop (Discord) on the PC of the guy who later is serving the mission. Here again it's already fine as it is.

 

  All of us have one identity at a time with the rule "dead is dead" or "captured is captured". That's the main factor of immersion, trying to survive. If my first pilot "Retnek" is lost during a mission, then before the next we generate a "Retnek_II" via the "Administer Coop"-option - and so on. Loss rates are high, so this is a day-by-day procedure, too. Once understanding the concept it's no problem to leave the campaign, add some new or extra-pilots and go into that campaign again.

 

  Usually the new mission then is served immediately via a dedserver.exe running on the super-PC of one guy. He's flying from that PC, too. But sooner or later there will be the need to use another guys PC as a mission-generator and server. Running the dedserver.exe on a dedicated server hardware is on the wish-list, too.

 

Sorry for the wall of text! If you're able to de-couple all the different roles and processes it would make things easy for us.

 

Out of curiosity: do different people generate the mission?  You could do that but you would have to redistribute the campaign after every mission.

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

You must have binary mission file generation turned on.  If you are using text mission the game (I think) uses an auto created binary file from the old mission.

I don't know for Coop, but in SP missions you can, without using binary files, simply go back to PWCG and scrub the mission and create a new one. PWCG then overwrites the files of the old mission.

 

Patrick, can you please change the waypoint priority for Bf 110s on the RTB after ground attack missions to low. It really is a pitty, when you, after you did your job, encounter Pe-2s or IL-2s and simply let them pass, instead of giving them a very bad day.

[Retnek]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Out of curiosity: do different people generate the mission?  You could do that but you would have to redistribute the campaign after every mission.

Not yet - but that's a plan for the future, too. If the usual mission host is out-of-action (an old man already), we need to do that. The transfer via zip-file will be ca. 100 MB, no problem.

 

@Yogiflight: there's no blessing in becoming greedy. Full-fill your mission objective in dignity and turn home bareheaded and modest.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Retnek

[Varibraun]

AAR Error Report following 4.005 - Single Player Campaign

 

Edited March 24, 2021 by Varibraun

[Nadelbaum]

9 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

@Nadelbaum If a field is entirely inadequate for the plane type then the unit can be moved to a new field.  Sometimes limiting takeoff to one direction is also an option.

 

If the results of a mission areeats:  unsatisfactory you can

1. Refly it in the game

2. Go to PWCG and generate a new mission without submitting an AAR

Caveats:

You must have binary mission file generation turned on.  If you are using text mission the game (I think) uses an auto created binary file from the old mission.

Stop the game, generate the new mission, restart the game to make sure you don't get a cached version.

 

@PatrickAWlson How stupid of me, yes of course you can scrub the mission even after creation. That's clear now, thanks!

 

But how on earth do I choose the takeoff direction? In the mission map (during creation) I can move the ingress/egress points, but takeoff and others are greyed out. I can't move the points on the map and I can't type different heading number either. I'm not the squadron leader if that matters...