Get PWCG Here ...

[czech693]

Since this thread is about PWCG, I'll be talking about PWCG and not the sim's career.  I fly PWCG exclusively.  What is nice about PWCG is that you can modify things.  For instance, if you think the missions are too long you can go into Configuration/Advanced Configuration and change "Max dist in km mission center from base".  Default in PWCGFC was 35 km.  I changed it to 20 km because I was spending a long time just traveling to the start of the patrol area.  Don't like escorts, you can also changed the number for chance of escort (presumably a %).  I really like that I can change the skins (the Nieuport17gbr restricted tactical codes situation is a bummer though).

 

The Advanced Configuration gives you a lot of options to modify your career.  I have my default "config" folder saved and apply it to every new campaign I start so I using the same criteria.

 

Time acceleration in the sim goes up to x8.

[KodiakJac]

On 3/29/2025 at 10:40 AM, Aurosa said:

1.Too long flights, if I wanted to sleep, waste time and do nothing, I would be flying bomber escorts*. Why I am always being sent far away to the edge of the map**?

2.Too many waypoints that serve no point, other than prolong time-wasting. Get to the point, no worthless waypoints and circling around, just the bare minimum, to get back and from, as soon as possible.

 

 

I enjoy the longer, more realistic missions.  I have my "Max dist in km mission center from base" in PWCG set to 75 km (plus a few other parameters that make for longer missions).  Sounds like you are looking more for an arcade experience, so you might try War Thunder instead of IL-2 Great Battles.

 

[Nickkyboy99]

Is the Stug and Churchill added?

[PatrickAWlson]

6 hours ago, Nickkyboy99 said:

Is the Stug and Churchill added?

 

I have stopped development of PWCG for TC.  Just can't make it what I want it to be.

[FodderMonkey]

On 3/30/2025 at 1:46 PM, czech693 said:

Time acceleration in the sim goes up to x8.

Time acceleration goes as high as your system will allow, which for most people (myself included) is somewhere between x2 and x4.  It depends on how many resources the game is requesting, and it can even force you to stay at x1 or slower if too many sim elements are generated.  The game never stops simulating objects during compression, so most rigs can't handle it.  It was a critical misstep leaving out the option to "skip to contact" that had been available in IL2:1946.  I've heard they're bringing it back for Korea, though, and I hope they do.  Us folks with full time jobs don't quite have the time for a fully-immersive experience, unfortunately; gotta skip to the action and be done with it!

[PatrickAWlson]

On 4/11/2025 at 5:42 AM, FodderMonkey said:

Time acceleration goes as high as your system will allow, which for most people (myself included) is somewhere between x2 and x4.  It depends on how many resources the game is requesting, and it can even force you to stay at x1 or slower if too many sim elements are generated.  The game never stops simulating objects during compression, so most rigs can't handle it.  It was a critical misstep leaving out the option to "skip to contact" that had been available in IL2:1946.  I've heard they're bringing it back for Korea, though, and I hope they do.  Us folks with full time jobs don't quite have the time for a fully-immersive experience, unfortunately; gotta skip to the action and be done with it!

 

I very recently got a brand new, top of the line gaming computer.  I thought "this is going to make IL2 run so much better".  This computer makes every game except IL2 run smooth as can be.  IL2 time compression is barely any better than my old computer.

 

If IL2 optimization was improved such that my computer could actually achieve 8x then jump to action would be unnecessary.

Edited April 12 by PatrickAWlson

[zsolo007]

On 4/11/2025 at 3:58 AM, PatrickAWlson said:

 

I have stopped development of PWCG for TC.  Just can't make it what I want it to be.

Hi!

 

Is it possible to access the source code for it? Since there is no dynamic campaign, your approach would be real nice. I'd like to try it if there is a way.

 

Thanks!

[Aapje]

@zsolo007

 

https://github.com/PWCGDeveloper/PWCGCampaignTC

[Raynebow]

Just want to report that the site is being considered 'unsafe' and my browsers are giving me a real hard time of trying to download PWCG again. Certificates expired?

 

Edit: Yeah, cert expired on May 17th

Edited June 3 by Raynebow

[[806th]_RipGZW]

What is thef ix for this issue? i downloaded Java

[AndreiTomescu]

On 3/30/2025 at 8:08 PM, Aurosa said:

I read many comments, and reviews about the AI, but If I really knew it was that bad, I would have never gotten the game, never! I found out too late about it, with no chances to get a refund, unfortunately. 4 careers, 2 planes, that's it. Scrap Korea, scrap everything else, focus on the AI, and career, then this game would be enjoyable and playable, otherwise, adding more of anything, while the overall feeling of the game is that you just fly the same generic, repetitive missions in a world that is totally empty, and nothing you do matters, since the campaign is set in fixed timeframe... 

I hear you, mate. But sometimes the AI does really impressive things, in a good way. imho.

the campaign is a reenactment of the past, so, yeah, everything it's somehow fixed, and your actions won't change anything, it's not Back to the Future movie :))))

I am a great fan of this historic simulator, and i think that, despite it clearly has lot of rooms for improvment concerning AI behavior, it does the job done in immersing us into those times and happenings.

You could try some scripted campaigns, most of them are really awesome , with huge effort put into them to be accurate and thrilling even sometimes.

Just my 2 cents, sorry to bother.

[Gobnik20]

On 9/7/2025 at 9:25 PM, AndreiTomescu said:

I hear you, mate. But sometimes the AI does really impressive things, in a good way. imho.

the campaign is a reenactment of the past, so, yeah, everything it's somehow fixed, and your actions won't change anything, it's not Back to the Future movie :))))

I am a great fan of this historic simulator, and i think that, despite it clearly has lot of rooms for improvment concerning AI behavior, it does the job done in immersing us into those times and happenings.

You could try some scripted campaigns, most of them are really awesome , with huge effort put into them to be accurate and thrilling even sometimes.

Just my 2 cents, sorry to bother.

I would disagree. It does a terrible job at immersing you. At most it feels like a technical simulation rather than trying to immerse you in WW2.

 

The world is barren, there is no dynamic campaign. The career mode is just an eyecandy UI with no depth to it whatsoever. Just a generic mission generator. The single missions are cool and in fact immersive but that's about it. Just a linear set of missions with a few objects and planes placed for you to mess around with. 

 

There is no depth at all. The AI is horrendeus. The performance is the worst in the series, for some odd reason 1C decided to give the AI same flight model as the player with no real benefit as stated above the AI has no behavioural trees at all. Its all just weird and strange designs and a destroyed potential.

 

In my opinion (You may disagree) IL2 - 1946 is one of the most immersive and well designed aeroplane combat games ever made. The AI is astonishingly in depth. There is a vanilla dynamic campaign, but it shines with a mod developed by Lowengrin called DCG. Which is the closest thing to Falcon 4.0 campaign.

 

1000s of planes thanks to modpacks. 

 

Sure Il-2 has great visuals and nice looking models. But I don't really understand the psychology here. We're paying full price for planes that have detailed interiors but no ability to interact with? It's all very strange and if you asked me shady. 

 

The only reason why I even played this game is probably thanks top Patrick and his great mod. Even that can't really save this title for me as the AI and the limitation of the engine are just too much.

[AndreiTomescu]

2 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

You may disagree) IL2 - 1946 is one of the most immersive and well designed aeroplane combat games ever made

I DO agree.

But things have to move on. I've played 1946 since before my 15 yrs older was born. It had consistent romanian faction. But age is showing. that's the problem. 

The new one I find very good, however. Sometimes surprisingly good. sometimes not. You know when it's gonna be awesome? after the newest one will come out, and the old one will be left on the hands of modders. Modders like Patrick, and others guy who did awesome things. then, like the old 1946, it's gonna reach its full potential, because a passionate comunity of many guys can do more than a limited number of programmers limited also by numerous constrains: management, financial and so on. 

Look how incredibily good are many of the scripted campaigns.

Just my opinion.

2 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

behavioural trees at all.

what does this mean? like choises? like Detroit became human game ?

2 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

AI same flight model as the player

i thought that is a good thing. why not? 

Edited September 9 by AndreiTomescu

[Gobnik20]

 

  

2 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

I DO agree.

But things have to move on. I've played 1946 since before my 15 yrs older was born. It had consistent romanian faction. But age is showing. that's the problem. 

The new one I find very good, however. Sometimes surprisingly good. sometimes not. You know when it's gonna be awesome? after the newest one will come out, and the old one will be left on the hands of modders. Modders like Patrick, and others guy who did awesome things. then, like the old 1946, it's gonna reach its full potential, because a passionate comunity of many guys can do more than a limited number of programmers limited also by numerous constrains: management, financial and so on. 

Look how incredibily good are many of the scripted campaigns.

Just my opinion.

 

Well truth is that the game is very hardcoded and hardlocked. The business model used here is inherently against modding. This game will NEVER be moddable to the extent IL2 - 1946 was. We can't even program basic AI functions, the best mod for AI we have is the "AI gunnery mod" which in itself isn't really doing much.  What Patrick has done is incredible but it uses a a 3rd party program, it's essentially just stats and algorithms.

 

That's what annoys me about this product. It's a combination of greed and ignorance. Devs gotta earn of course. But this is not a sustainable model longer term wise. There's a reason why a lot of players including me go back to IL2 1946 or even Cliffs of dover. Because they have depth and replay value, this game doesn't and it could if the devs weren't this greedy. "we can't find an AI dev". Well then let us as a communtity fix what you cannot? Well I guess not, money matters.

 

2 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

what does this mean? like choises? like Detroit became human game ?

Its basically a modular series of tasks AI dynamically adopts in certain situations. It's not finite state or linear but adaptive. For example:

 

Selector:
  - Condition: EnemyAbove?
    - Sequence:
        - Condition: EnemyIsFast?
        - Action: DiveDownAndBreakLeft

 

It gives AI a brain and makes it reactive. 

 

Not sure if you noticed but a LOT of the times AI just either flies straight, or just keeps doing turning fights until it dies. It doesn't take into account what plane you fly, how fast you are, how slow etc. Its just baffles me  how bad it is,  It's just linear and stupid. For a flight game not to have complex behavioural trees in 2025 is INSANE. IL - 1946 had all of these basic and advanced functions and its 7 years older than IL 2 GB. IL - 2 GB is still updated till this day. How is this not sorted yet? I can't explain this differently than just ignorance and incompetence.

 

2 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

AI same flight model as the player

i thought that is a good thing. why not? 

 

It's not good because the AI is fully simulated wether its 500000000KM away from you or 1km away . It takes A HUGE toll on performance, placing more than 4 bombers will bootleneck your game. It will run in slow motion but your frame rate stays high. It's because there's WAY too much unnecessary calculation going on . It's just a dumb decision choice with 0 benefit. Sure its nice knowing the AI doesn't "cheat" but at the same time it limits the scale of battle where you can only have like max 10 planes in a flight.

 

I'll use IL 2 1946 as a comparison again. You can have more than 50 planes and the game runs fine. The AI doesnt fly the "Same" flight model but it's cleaverly programmed where it it isn't cheating but it also isn't performance heavy. The AI there stalls, it isn't faster than you, it doesn't turn faster than you, It's all smart programming. This game here is lackluster.

Sorry if I sound negative and I don't mean to destroy your enjoyment. Just wanted to highlight vital points why this game is not all that good.

 

To be fair the IL2 GB has some incredible flight and damage physics, it's very satysfying to shoot and fly. It's also very cinematic and graphically really good. What overshadows all of that is what I described above. Without depth, there's no longevity. 

 

Look at it this way: IL2 GB is a shallow but very pretty girl. Treat IL2 1946 as an unattractive yet incredibly intriguing girl.

Edited September 9 by Gobnik20

[giftgruen]

So true. Since I like pretty girls I still somehow like IL2 GB. Visuals and good VR somehow make a match.

Nevertheless - yes - user experience is overshadowed by the things you mentioned.

 

34 minutes ago, Gobnik20 said:

It's a combination of greed and ignorance. Devs gotta earn of course. But this is not a sustainable model longer term wise

 

Second that.

The day there is another 'Retro' FlightSim which offers VR - I will be up and away.

Will maybe never be the case however, since this pre1945 sim community maybe rather dies.

 

[AndreiTomescu]

1 hour ago, Gobnik20 said:

basically a modular series of tasks AI dynamically adopts in certain situations

thank you for explaining. now i understand. i thought it does that.....

1 hour ago, Gobnik20 said:

It will run in slow motion but your frame rate stays high.

yes , saw that quite often. now i understand. what it's not in contact with you doesn't have to behave like the real deal, and you still get a good experience

1 hour ago, Gobnik20 said:

The AI there stalls, it isn't faster than you, it doesn't turn faster than you, It's all smart programming. This game here is lackluster.

that is why a Fw-190 turns better then a spitfire, maybe? and I get blackout and the AI pilot is fine.....

 

1 hour ago, Gobnik20 said:

IL2 GB is a shallow but very pretty girl. Treat IL2 1946 as an unattractive yet incredibly intriguing girl.

now you've really got me thinking. I wish we could have both in the same game/body.....

2 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

Well then let us as a communtity fix what you cannot?

that's what i hoped for. For ex, i did a romanian radio chatter, as good as i could, because it's quite weird to hear those guys speak german. kills immersion. Maybe it will be done "officially", sometimes.....i hope...... 

and i also don't understand why letting the game be modded is bad for business. You still have to buy the core game.

1 hour ago, giftgruen said:

since this pre1945 sim community maybe rather dies

not so soon i hope. there is still interest.

 

well thank you guys for all the detailed explanations. they really helped.

[Gobnik20]

2 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

now you've really got me thinking. I wish we could have both in the same game/body.....

Wouldn't that be a treat

2 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

that's what i hoped for. For ex, i did a romanian radio chatter, as good as i could, because it's quite weird to hear those guys speak german. kills immersion. Maybe it will be done "officially", sometimes.....i hope...... 

and i also don't understand why letting the game be modded is bad for business. You still have to buy the core game.

Well that's puzzle here. I don't want to be insulting but it does seem like greed to me. Their perspective is Full control = Max profit.

 

Whilst the way I see it is: Let the community have the creative leverage, let the community fix issues you can't which also helps the studio focus on things of higher priority, which can later be implemented upon review. Sure it can somewhat impact their revenue short term. But there's so much benefit from this in the long term, which should be pretty obvious. People are still going to buy officially released DLCs...

 

Let the game be a platform for people to play and cater to their liking  Most of the issues in the game are actually quite easy fixes. But we don't have access..

 

I'm quite skeptical of IL2 Korea. I mean IL - 2 GB is not a good representation of what's to come. Especially in the AI department. 

 

 

 

Edited September 9 by Gobnik20

[AndreiTomescu]

Well i hope for Korea to be next gen, greatly improved. I mean, we have cars that drive all by themselves, even in old, old games like gta5. So I guess it's doable. The only problem is that all this AI issues are disturbing only if you want a sim. For an arcade-ish experience, is fine. And the money are coming from large groups of people, and that's arcade focus.

We'll see. And hope for the best. Or at least better.

[AndreiTomescu]

@Gobnik20 because i see you really know this stuff and you explain so well, i take the liberty to ask you one more thing: is the AI different depending on the aircraft model? like different behaivour for the Spit and for the Fw-190 ? or they do the same things and they have similar capabilities despite being sooo different? I'm asking because during my aborted Spitfire Normandy career those Fw did astonishing turns, pulled incredible G-s, and I was panting and blacking out constantly, getting shot down eventually.

Thx in advance.

Also, does Patrick's software influence this problems, somehow? Because in the scripted campaigns i noticed this problem being less often.  

[Panzerlang]

1 hour ago, AndreiTomescu said:

@Gobnik20 because i see you really know this stuff and you explain so well, i take the liberty to ask you one more thing: is the AI different depending on the aircraft model? like different behaivour for the Spit and for the Fw-190 ? or they do the same things and they have similar capabilities despite being sooo different? I'm asking because during my aborted Spitfire Normandy career those Fw did astonishing turns, pulled incredible G-s, and I was panting and blacking out constantly, getting shot down eventually.

Thx in advance.

Also, does Patrick's software influence this problems, somehow? Because in the scripted campaigns i noticed this problem being less often.  

PWCG AI pilots have a mixture of ability, in the stock campaigns I believe all pilots get the same level.

[Aapje]

16 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

It's not good because the AI is fully simulated whether its 500000000KM away from you or 1km away . It takes A HUGE toll on performance, placing more than 4 bombers will bottleneck your game. It will run in slow motion but your frame rate stays high. It's because there's WAY too much unnecessary calculation going on . It's just a dumb decision choice with 0 benefit. Sure its nice knowing the AI doesn't "cheat" but at the same time it limits the scale of battle where you can only have like max 10 planes in a flight.

 

Of course there is a benefit, because it means that the developers don't have to implement two separate AI simulations, a simplified one that is use when the plane is far away, and a close up one. And a simplified remote AI would have all kinds of limitations.

 

I do think that they should have made one, but there are disadvantages to it as well.

[Gobnik20]

On 9/10/2025 at 1:55 PM, Aapje said:

 

Of course there is a benefit, because it means that the developers don't have to implement two separate AI simulations, a simplified one that is use when the plane is far away, and a close up one. And a simplified remote AI would have all kinds of limitations.

 

I do think that they should have made one, but there are disadvantages to it as well.

 

Well. It doesn't need to be a complex algorithm, it can be as simple as just an LOD simulation.

[Aapje]

6 hours ago, Gobnik20 said:

Well. It doesn't need to be a complex algorithm, it can be as simple as just an LOD simulation.

 

It still needs at least a tactical AI, so the flight keep following a plan.

[Gobnik20]

I've started development on a dynamic war system for PWCG. I think I should have some playable results in about 2 - 3 months.

I only just discovered the source code and looking through it I think I can implement a few things:

 

Ground:
- Simulated front line simulating up to 1km of gains and losses.

- Simulating production of ground vehicles

- Simulating encirclements

- logic for reinforcements.

- Logic for retreats and counter attacks.

- Production logic simulating the economical aspect of the war like (Tank production, Air production, etc)

 

Strategic:

- Axis and Allies Oil and war effort simulation (by 1943 Germany will be weaker thus making further advances much harder, less tanks, less planes etc)

- Conditions for changing maps when 1 side beats the other.

 

Things I cannot fix.

- Horrible performance

- Laughable AI

- 1C.

 

Thanks!

 

 

Edited September 12 by Gobnik20

[Aapje]

Cool, let's see what you come up with!