PWCG Wishlist

[=SqSq=switch201]

With the release of PWCG 3.0, I wanted to create a thread where we can compile all of our desired features for this beautiful application. Some of these feature request might not be feasible, but I wanted to just put them out there just in case.

 

I will order my list from easiest to hardest to implement (if I had to guess as to what is easiest/hardest)

 

1. The later into the war a player starts, the more victories squad members will have upon campaign creation.
2. when an AI pilot dies he should be replaced with a pilot of the lowest rank.
3. Give AI pilots a damage % at which they will attempt to escape a fight.
4. A more dynamic campaign map where actions from a previous mission carry over to the missions to come. 
5. (this ties in with 4) number of pilots and airplanes is tracked. maybe x number of planes are produced each day x number of pilots are trained each day

In regards to points 4/5 although I think this would be very time consuming to implement, I think it would add a lot to the campaign. Technically speaking, there is really no incentive to accomplish missions or to bring your plane back in one piece. I could theoretically play through the whole campaign by bailing out after take off, and I think it would be cool to tie some consequences to the player actions. 

 

As I think of more features I think would be cool I will try and add to this list.

Edited November 13, 2017 by =SqSq=switch201

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

• Tracking of aircraft/repairs (similar to ROF career system or WoFF)

Accurate/believable stats for squadmates (ie. why does my Hauptmann have 20 less missions than my Oberleutnant? Why does my Major have a two thirds less missions than a historical ace who ranks Leutnant? Why is one pilot a Leutnant with 0 missions and another is a Feldwebel with 13?)

[Yogiflight]

 

 

when an AI pilot dies he should be replaced with a pilot of the lowest rank.

You can do this yourself in the 'Confguration', following the path BOS/PWCGCampaign/BOSData/Input/Configuration

 

But I tried this eartlier, with the result, that there were a lot of Feldwebel, who were no help at all, because of their lack of experience.

[=SqSq=switch201]

A way to set default advanced config options across all campaigns (from within the UI) 

Edited November 23, 2017 by =SqSq=switch201

[PatrickAWlson]

I did a couple of features for 3.0.2

Music:

- Music will be part of the download.  No need for a separate install.

- Music control panel added to main page.

- Music fades in and out to prevent abrupt cut overs.

- Volume control improved

 

Map Icons (not working yet)

- Front lines on map

- Airfield icons on map for friendly airfields.

[dburne]

I did a couple of features for 3.0.2

Music:

- Music will be part of the download.  No need for a separate install.

- Music control panel added to main page.

- Music fades in and out to prevent abrupt cut overs.

- Volume control improved

 

Map Icons (not working yet)

- Front lines on map

- Airfield icons on map for friendly airfields.

 

 

 

Nice additions!

Especially looking forward to the new Map Icons.

[Cybermat47]

Why is one pilot a Leutnant with 0 missions and another is a Feldwebel with 13?

While I think Luftwaffe pilots could be made NCOs on the completion of their flight training, it’s still perfectly believable for an NCO pilot to have more experience than a recently comissioned officer only just assigned to their first squadron.

Edited November 24, 2017 by FFS_Cybermat47

[Picchio]

Optional cold startups from the parking area would be a nice addition, I think!

[PatrickAWlson]

Optional cold startups from the parking area would be a nice addition, I think!

I admit that I am daunted by the idea of getting the AI to get  out of the parking area, to the runway, and taking off.  If I make it player only the AI will be in the air long before the player gets there.  If the player is the lead or not last then you will have AI sitting on the runway ... or not ... not sure.

 

I'm not against it but I really don't have a handle on how to do it.

[Picchio]

Me neither, sadly... I wonder if the settings used in the QMB could give us some hint on the parameters to set. There must be an automated way to place aircraft in the parking area...

[Yogiflight]

Where in QMB can you have AI aircrafts starting a mission in the parking area? As far as I know they begin the missions either in the air or on the runway. Only the player aircraft can begin missions in the parking area, or am I wrong?

[Picchio]

Yep, you're right, my bad. Cold starts only work for Free flight missions, with the player flying alone.

Sim did manage to have AI start from the parking area in his own generator. Perhaps he could help, somehow?

Edited November 26, 2017 by Picchio

[Yogiflight]

IIRC, Sims workaround is, that the aircrafts are not positioned in the parking area, but somewhere in the green, and don't taxi on the taxiways, but also in the green. Seems to me to be a quite good idea, as, from what I read about this, it is not too easy to make AI taxi from parking position to the runway.

[Picchio]

I just ran a mission from Sim's generator and AI are placed in the parking area, and they do use the taxiway.

I remember making some tests months ago on edited PWCG missions and it seemed like AI just ran for the runway without following the taxiway. I also remember that it used to run into objects that were placed around the airfield (a camouflaged caponier, in that case). I'll test again to see if somehow that improved. But what you suggested might be a good solution.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Picchio

[Picchio]

Back to the wishlist: to have TOF and heading degrees for the flight route on the map would be cool, I think.

[MacLeod]

I admit that I am daunted by the idea of getting the AI to get out of the parking area, to the runway, and taking off. If I make it player only the AI will be in the air long before the player gets there. If the player is the lead or not last then you will have AI sitting on the runway ... or not ... not sure.

 

I'm not against it but I really don't have a handle on how to do it.

There’s a scripted campaign, cold winter if I’m not wrong, that get this cold start with AI going good. It might help to take a look on how he scripted that

[TheSNAFU]

This was brought up at one point but as a reminder, smoke rising over Stalingrad and maybe elsewhere would enhance immersion nicely. 

[oho]

An Option for Minimum wind and turbulence would be nice.

[Yogiflight]

 

 

An Option for Minimum wind and turbulence would be nice.

What about the weather setting in the advanced config? Reduce 'Turbulence Factor'  and 'Maximum Windspeed' and you should be fine.

[PatrickAWlson]

What about the weather setting in the advanced config? Reduce 'Turbulence Factor'  and 'Maximum Windspeed' and you should be fine.

I think Oho's looking for a minimum.  The mission file allows me to define atmospheric layers with changes in wind and turbulence.  I set wind and turbulence fairly low on the deck because of both AI issues and user complaints.  Once you are off the deck there is more wind and turbulence.

[MarcoPegase44]

Hello,

in reality, during the summer season, the turbulence is sensitive up to 5000 to 6000 feet approximately.

They originate on the one hand convection due to the effect of the sun on the different surfaces of the soil and often give rise to cumulus clouds. Moreover the wind on the relief gives rise to gusts in the very low layers up to 600 feet approximately.

So above 6000 feet the feeling of turbulence is less.

Edited November 27, 2017 by MarcoPegase44

[oho]

Thanks Patrick, yes I meant Minimum wind-parameters.

It would be fine if there is always a light (sometimes medium) wind on the ground with some light gusts. That makes landing more interesting. The AI is worked on with the new FM so I hope they should not have a Problem with that in the future.

[an_Axolotl]

Hej.

 

I also have some ideas: It could be cool to have a list for the lost squad-members, beside to Pilots and Aces list. Maybe a "counter" for victories and loses for the hole Squadron. Its surely hard to make. Pilot loses could be not refuild with new recruts instandly. Even Planes could be more valuable. For examble If you crashes a lot of Bf-109F4's - you have to use F2's or E7's for a time. Maybe it's impossible - but it's just an idea. Anyway PWCG is a great tool.

 

greetings from Sweden

micha

[=SqSq=switch201]

Hey Pat,

 

I am not sure if you have seen it or not, but I was reading up on the MIssion Making Manual for Il2 and apparently you can set damage thresholds for AI pilots.

 

check out page 210 and 211 of the manual for more info. I can't figure out how to attach it here, but the manual exists on the mission making thread of these forums so it shouldn't be hard to find

[PatrickAWlson]

Hey Pat,

 

I am not sure if you have seen it or not, but I was reading up on the MIssion Making Manual for Il2 and apparently you can set damage thresholds for AI pilots.

 

check out page 210 and 211 of the manual for more info. I can't figure out how to attach it here, but the manual exists on the mission making thread of these forums so it shouldn't be hard to find

Thanks for the info.  That has been in place in PWCG since RoF.  I also set up "fake airfields" to try and get the AI home.  I have the manual downloaded.  I will check it to make sure that I am doing it right.

[Tomsk]

My main things on the wishlist are for AI improvements, most of which Pat probably can't fix ... some of which maybe he can:

- AI pilots never disengage and RTB, even when they are severely damaged, are massively outnumbered, don't stand a hope of catching their target ... or are deep into enemy territory. This is my biggest complaint as it means you can never escape if you pick up a gaggle of enemies ... they will quite happily chase you all across the map.

- AI has extreme target fixation. If he has set its sights on someone he will ignore everything else around him, including being torn to sherds by another plane on his six.

- AI has daft target selection. It's common to see 10 AI planes all chasing after the same contact, totally ignoring the other enemies around them.

- AI doesn't use planes advantages sensibly and will happy try and engage a yak in slow speed turn fight in a FW 190 (it doesn't work well for them).

- AI flights currently cruise at what seems to be 100% sustained, this causes big issues keeping formation ... for both the player and other AI wingman. Running at a bit less would greatly help formation keeping.

- AI doesn't ground attack well ... it mostly just mills about around the target area for ages, being shot at by flak before either being shot down or eventually deciding to make the bombing run.

- AI never acknowledge orders, or call out what they're doing .. or if they do they spam something pointless.

- AI has perfect vision and seems to know the location of all planes at all times, even if there is no way they could possibly see them.

Edited December 15, 2017 by Tomsk

[sniperton]

Tomsk, I believe you should post your wishes in a dedicated AI thread instead, Pat is as much a victim of weird AI behaviour as all of us SP guys, and he can only try to find workarounds, but cannot provide real solutions.

[Tomsk]

Tomsk, I believe you should post your wishes in a dedicated AI thread instead, Pat is as much a victim of weird AI behaviour as all of us SP guys, and he can only try to find workarounds, but cannot provide real solutions.

 

As I said, I know Pat can't fix most of these things, so I definitely don't blame him at all. One or two the issues other people have said are fixable by Pat (such as AI's not disengaging, apparently it's a plane setting in the mission file), perhaps some of the others are as well? I honestly couldn't say.

 

But also I'm posting them here because I think Pat probably has a lot more sway with the development team than a post in a forum thread, which the dev team will probably never read. PWCG is well regarded, and has enough official blessing to get its own sub-forum. As well it should, it's by far the best SP experience currently available for BoX. Maybe Pat will get an opportunity to feed back to the dev team about what things would most improve a single player campaign, maybe Pat will agree that AI is an important issue and raise it with them .. especially if lots of his users request improvements in that area. That's my thinking anyhow, but I certainly don't blame Pat at all ... what he's produced is great, and as you say he's as limited as the rest of us

Edited December 15, 2017 by Tomsk

[sniperton]

I think devs do read posts, and I think we SP guys should be more loud to be heard. You made valid points, so don't hesitate to sound them openly. You're a customer, after all, aren't you?

[Belgicos]

Hi.

 

I'm french and new on this forum.

 

I'd like to know if a PWCG version would be possible on Cliffs of Dover.

I only play solo and once the campaigns are done, there is not a lot of things to do anymore. It would be a good idea for playing much more time.

[Cybermat47]

Hi.

 

I'm french and new on this forum.

 

I'd like to know if a PWCG version would be possible on Cliffs of Dover.

I only play solo and once the campaigns are done, there is not a lot of things to do anymore. It would be a good idea for playing much more time.

Sadly, this would be far too difficult and time consuming, perhaps even impossible, to do, due to the difference between the IL-2 and CloD game engines.

 

There are other campaigns and single missions available on the ATAG forum, though: https://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/Downloads.php?categoryid=8

[PatrickAWlson]

As Cybermat said, it can't done.  At least not easily.  So much of PWCG code is centered around the generation of the mission files which are BoX/RoF specific.  

[Belgicos]

Not a problem. Thanks for the answers and for the link. I'll have a look.

[busdriver]

Would it be possible to include a page(s) in the Pilot Journal that lists a simplified chronology of his kills? Something like...

 

Aerial Victories

 

2/10/1941    Ju 88 near Zenino 

20/10/1941  Bf 109 near Novoye Selo 

4/11/1941    Ju 52 near Tyurmino

[PatrickAWlson]

Would it be possible to include a page(s) in the Pilot Journal that lists a simplified chronology of his kills? Something like...

 

Aerial Victories

 

2/10/1941    Ju 88 near Zenino 

20/10/1941  Bf 109 near Novoye Selo 

4/11/1941    Ju 52 near Tyurmino

lol - that's what it used to be .  It's doable.  Working on anti shipping and context sensitive events right now so I'm not sure when.

[busdriver]

lol - that's what it used to be .  It's doable.  Working on anti shipping and context sensitive events right now so I'm not sure when.

 

My bad...I meant in addition to journal's individual mission page that includes your kills and kills by other squadron mates.  PWCG is the greatest thing since sliced bread for SP 1G Comfy Chair Fighter Pilots. Thank you kindly for your efforts.

[Tomsk]

So something I've noticed is that quite often you are sent on an intercept mission, or a patrol mission and there seems to be an enemy flight designed to meet yours. This is fine, however, I've noticed they always seem to be co-E with you. I end up having a lot of co-E fights against the VVS at more than 5 km of altitude, which is probably not so realistic. It would be nice to have more variety, and in particular if I chose for our flight to climb higher it should be much less likely that I meet a co-E enemy.

Edited January 11, 2018 by Tomsk

[PatrickAWlson]

They really are not designed that way at all.  It turns out that way because two fighter patrols cruising the front are pretty much going to collide.  Since both sides routinely cruised the front lines it just so happens that you meet a lot of other planes that way.  You should also meet other types of flights but the chances of crossing paths are less because they are penetrating the lines not flying parallel to them. 

 

About the co-alt thing ... there is definitely variation in flight altitude but maybe not as much as there should be.  It is random placement.  Two improvements:

1. A larger scale of "random".  Maybe 2K to 6K.

2. Altitude preferences by aircraft. 

[Tomsk]

They really are not designed that way at all.  It turns out that way because two fighter patrols cruising the front are pretty much going to collide.  Since both sides routinely cruised the front lines it just so happens that you meet a lot of other planes that way.  You should also meet other types of flights but the chances of crossing paths are less because they are penetrating the lines not flying parallel to them. 

 

Okay that's interesting, you're essentially saying it's all random and any pattern I think I see is all in my head It's surprising because most of the time I seem to meet an enemy flight that's co-E, so I assumed it was done deliberately. 

 

I asked because I mostly fly the 190 and found myself pushing the climb out altitude higher and higher. The 190 doesn't like fighting co-E, so it makes sense to climb to an altitude where you're likely to have an energy advantage ... or just high enough that the Russian planes suck at that altitude. As I say, I kept meeting co-E flights, and very few below me, so that altitude just got higher and higher. I had many flights where I'd climb out to 6k, and go on patrol ... only to find a russian patrol also at 6k. Which I thought really odd, as why would the Russians even climb that high?

Edited January 11, 2018 by Tomsk

[PatrickAWlson]

It's not completely random either.  Every mission, yours or AI, is set up to have a legitimate, realistic purpose.  That means that while the missions are randomly generated, their path is not really random.  It is what it would take to accomplish the mission.  The ones that you are meeting are enemy fighter units also on patrol.  

 

About the altitude thing - once the mission is written it is locked in.  At no point do I alter AI missions to somehow counter modifications that you have made to your mission.  I do not have a good explanation of the co-alt thing but I can offer two possibilities.  The aircraft spawn something like 20km away from you and the AI sees much better than a human.  Once the AI spots you it is no longer flying the flight plan.  It is possible that they have been climbing to meet you by the time you see them.

 

The other possibility is random luck.  Per my earlier post, I do not set altitude by aircraft type or side.  That is an improvement that I would like to make.  So the fact that Russians tended to fly lower is not currently reflected in PWCG.

 

If you are interested you can open the mission in the ME and look at waypoint altitudes.  That will tell you whether PWCG actually set the altitude or whether the AI decided on its own to go to that altitude.