New PWCG Issues Thread

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

7th Mission seems to have logic issues:

 

The Lead JU87 is to far forward when the flight spawns in; he ask ATC, to Taxi to run way. he proceeds to goes all away around get behind last aircraft, to only damage his prop against the last JU87, then despawns. Flight then hands off to the next wingman to take lead and no way point show up, I turn around go to the other runway take off, while the other flight takes off then proceeds to circle around the airfield until I arrive at the target arear where then the target waypoint appears and the flight then heads to it.

 

mission logic:

PWCGm7.rar

_gen7.zip

 

spawn to far forward.

Karpovka af.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

this error when no value.

 

aaa in river water

 

 

convoy under bridges

 

 

 

 

 

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

Mission #8 same issue mission aborted by the lead AI.

 

Vultures Ju87Ds 1942-10-15.zip

 

data8.zip

 

 

 

The latest update changed something?

 

 

[co199]

Thanks for the hard work on the new version, Pat. Seems to be an error with the FC version where missions with the new bomber are erroring out. Error message, log, and campaign attached.

 

PWCG Error
Thu Oct 28 09:47:03 EDT 2021
pwcg.core.exception.PWCGException: No payload for plane breguet14
	at pwcg.product.fc.plane.payload.FCPayloadFactory.createPlanePayload(FCPayloadFactory.java:98)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.plane.PlaneMcu.buildPlanePayload(PlaneMcu.java:193)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightPayloadBuilder.setFlightPayloadHomogeneous(FlightPayloadBuilder.java:41)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightPayloadBuilder.setFlightPayload(FlightPayloadBuilder.java:20)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.Flight.setFlightPayload(Flight.java:54)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.recon.ReconFlight.createFlight(ReconFlight.java:35)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.recon.ReconPackage.createPackage(ReconPackage.java:28)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightFactory.buildFlight(FlightFactory.java:171)
	at pwcg.mission.AiFlightBuilder.buildFlight(AiFlightBuilder.java:71)
	at pwcg.mission.AiFlightBuilder.createAiFlights(AiFlightBuilder.java:50)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionFlightBuilder.createAiFlights(MissionFlightBuilder.java:67)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionFlights.generateFlights(MissionFlights.java:41)
	at pwcg.mission.Mission.generateFlights(Mission.java:169)
	at pwcg.mission.Mission.generate(Mission.java:121)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionGenerator.buildMission(MissionGenerator.java:144)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionGenerator.makeMission(MissionGenerator.java:48)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.home.GuiMissionInitiator.makeMission(GuiMissionInitiator.java:38)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.MissionGeneratorHelper.showBriefingMap(MissionGeneratorHelper.java:32)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.generateMission(CampaignMissionScreen.java:179)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.createSinglePlayerMission(CampaignMissionScreen.java:154)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.actionPerformed(CampaignMissionScreen.java:126)
	at javax.swing.AbstractButton.fireActionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.AbstractButton$Handler.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.DefaultButtonModel.fireActionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.DefaultButtonModel.setPressed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicButtonListener.mouseReleased(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.AWTEventMulticaster.mouseReleased(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.JComponent.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.processEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.processEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.retargetMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Window.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.access$500(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpOneEventForFilters(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForFilter(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForHierarchy(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.run(Unknown Source)
Invalid medal: Order of Military Merit

 

Germany.zipPWCGErrorLog.txt

[Slo-Mo]

6 hours ago, co199 said:

Thanks for the hard work on the new version, Pat. Seems to be an error with the FC version where missions with the new bomber are erroring out. Error message, log, and campaign attached.

 

PWCG Error
Thu Oct 28 09:47:03 EDT 2021
pwcg.core.exception.PWCGException: No payload for plane breguet14
	at pwcg.product.fc.plane.payload.FCPayloadFactory.createPlanePayload(FCPayloadFactory.java:98)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.plane.PlaneMcu.buildPlanePayload(PlaneMcu.java:193)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightPayloadBuilder.setFlightPayloadHomogeneous(FlightPayloadBuilder.java:41)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightPayloadBuilder.setFlightPayload(FlightPayloadBuilder.java:20)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.Flight.setFlightPayload(Flight.java:54)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.recon.ReconFlight.createFlight(ReconFlight.java:35)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.recon.ReconPackage.createPackage(ReconPackage.java:28)
	at pwcg.mission.flight.FlightFactory.buildFlight(FlightFactory.java:171)
	at pwcg.mission.AiFlightBuilder.buildFlight(AiFlightBuilder.java:71)
	at pwcg.mission.AiFlightBuilder.createAiFlights(AiFlightBuilder.java:50)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionFlightBuilder.createAiFlights(MissionFlightBuilder.java:67)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionFlights.generateFlights(MissionFlights.java:41)
	at pwcg.mission.Mission.generateFlights(Mission.java:169)
	at pwcg.mission.Mission.generate(Mission.java:121)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionGenerator.buildMission(MissionGenerator.java:144)
	at pwcg.mission.MissionGenerator.makeMission(MissionGenerator.java:48)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.home.GuiMissionInitiator.makeMission(GuiMissionInitiator.java:38)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.MissionGeneratorHelper.showBriefingMap(MissionGeneratorHelper.java:32)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.generateMission(CampaignMissionScreen.java:179)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.createSinglePlayerMission(CampaignMissionScreen.java:154)
	at pwcg.gui.campaign.mission.CampaignMissionScreen.actionPerformed(CampaignMissionScreen.java:126)
	at javax.swing.AbstractButton.fireActionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.AbstractButton$Handler.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.DefaultButtonModel.fireActionPerformed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.DefaultButtonModel.setPressed(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicButtonListener.mouseReleased(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.AWTEventMulticaster.mouseReleased(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at javax.swing.JComponent.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.processEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.processEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.retargetMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.processMouseEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Window.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEventImpl(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.access$500(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$3.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
	at java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEvent(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpOneEventForFilters(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForFilter(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForHierarchy(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(Unknown Source)
	at java.awt.EventDispatchThread.run(Unknown Source)
Invalid medal: Order of Military Merit

 

Germany.zip 169.87 kB · 0 downloads PWCGErrorLog.txt 4.14 kB · 0 downloads

 

Yes, thank you for all your work on this Pat - highly appreciated!

 

I have the same problem in FC vol 1 & 2, but getting it no matter if i start a new campaign regardless of country. Error is either the "no payload for" or just "null"

 

Cheers

 

Edited October 28, 2021 by Slo-Mo

[rozera]

2 hours ago, Slo-Mo said:

 

Yes, thank you for all your work on this Pat - highly appreciated!

 

I have the same problem in FC vol 1 & 2, but getting it no matter if i start a new campaign regardless of country. Error is either the "no payload for" or just "null"

 

Cheers

 

 

Have exactly same issue. 

[[TWB]Rich8]

The A-20B has no payload option for x4 250kg with x8 100kg bombs.

[PatrickAWlson]

Fix coming for FC Breguet payload issue.

[Swing]

Hi Pat......For Flying Circus 20 squadron RAF (F2B) can't be selected (error message)

Edited October 30, 2021 by Swing

[PatrickAWlson]

6 hours ago, Swing said:

Hi Pat......For Flying Circus 20 squadron RAF (F2B) can't be selected (error message)

 

Thanks.  Squeezed a fix into 13.4.2

[Cathaoir]

Hi Pat,

The Depot report for the Russians is not working.....when checking the report get PWCG error msg...click ok and I am able to get into the report, but there are no entries for the Russians....others have entries.....error file provided...thanks

PWCGErrorLog.txt

 

Disregard.......I had modified some planes and squads and the newer versions did not like that.....went with a clean install with no changes and everything now works....sorry about that.?

Edited November 1, 2021 by Cathaoir

[Drim]

I shot down a Russian spitfire in a Kuban campaign, and it even confirmed my name to kill text in-game.  However, when I go to list my kill claims there is no spitfire option available in the dropdown list.  I wasn't the only one who shot at it but it definitely listed my name for the kill.  Am I doing something wrong?

Edited November 2, 2021 by Drim

[ataribaby]

Little oversight in text fields content. Latest FC version.

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by ataribaby

[Highwayman]

Having issues with the Combat reporting with a new campaign created in this latest version of the generator.

 

Basically it throws the error when submitting the kills at the claims screen.

 

Lightning202111052111979.zip

[actionjoe]

Hi, also a problem with claim submitting on one mission (coop mode). I did three mission the same night, and only got a problem with this one.

(BTW many thanks for the work)

KubanCoop202111042211784.zip

[raizde2]

In the administer pilots in a coop campaign, now I only have add pilot button, the activate pilot and transfer are gone. Also, had to resize the fonts, since the buttons to choose the pilot were cut out from the screen no matter other options.

 

Also, I deleted the older version from PWCG, where can I download it again?

Edited November 7, 2021 by raizde2

[PatrickAWlson]

On 11/6/2021 at 10:52 AM, actionjoe said:

Hi, also a problem with claim submitting on one mission (coop mode). I did three mission the same night, and only got a problem with this one.

(BTW many thanks for the work)

KubanCoop202111042211784.zip 2.42 MB · 1 download

 

Ran the AAR and it went as expected.  You don't really say what the problem is.  Program error or just not the outcome that you expected?

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

I have redone this mission and itr will not read it after the 13th mission the new mission 14th is not reporting now.

 

Vultures Ju87Ds.zip

 

1000001.zip

 

I don't understand why its not saving the finished last mission. 

 

missionReport(2021-11-07_13-21-12).zip

My last mission date was 11-01-2021 I completed one today and nothing there. in the folder.

 

 

 

Neverminded I fixed it. I didn't notice I had to take Wounded leave for 7 days.

Edited November 10, 2021 by 71st_AH_Mastiff

[actionjoe]

On 11/7/2021 at 8:11 PM, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Ran the AAR and it went as expected.  You don't really say what the problem is.  Program error or just not the outcome that you expected?

I had a pop-up message saying there was an error submitting the claims. About the outcome of claims, it has maybe already pointed out, but we had numerous cases where a pilot claim a type of plane and got credit for another completly different type (a 109 for a He111, a Ju87 for a Hs129, etc...)

[PatrickAWlson]

4 hours ago, actionjoe said:

I had a pop-up message saying there was an error submitting the claims. About the outcome of claims, it has maybe already pointed out, but we had numerous cases where a pilot claim a type of plane and got credit for another completly different type (a 109 for a He111, a Ju87 for a Hs129, etc...)

 

That's going to happen.  The logs frequently do not tell me who shot down who.  Players frequently claim the wrong plane.   You might be surprised at how very different the info in the logs is from the info on your screen after the mission.  Would love for the logs to match better, but they do not.  PWCG does a matching effort that tries to make sense of it all.  109 for He111 would be very weird.  If you can submit an error report when you see something like that I can have a look.

[Chief_Mouser]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

That's going to happen.  The logs frequently do not tell me who shot down who.  Players frequently claim the wrong plane.   You might be surprised at how very different the info in the logs is from the info on your screen after the mission.  Would love for the logs to match better, but they do not.  PWCG does a matching effort that tries to make sense of it all.  109 for He111 would be very weird.  If you can submit an error report when you see something like that I can have a look.

 

We've had this too. Given kills for planes we never encountered instead of those we did. A while back we got one of the guys to submit a claim even though he'd never fired a shot - he was duly awarded a kill!

What we have also noticed is that the player that is last on the claims list quite often loses legitimate kills, especially if someone else has overclaimed before him.

Edited November 9, 2021 by 216th_Cat

[PatrickAWlson]

5 minutes ago, 216th_Cat said:

 

We've had this too. Given kills for planes we never encountered instead of those we did. A while back we got one of the guys to submit a claim even though he'd never fired a shot - he was duly awarded a kill!

What we have also noticed is that the player that is last on the claims list quite often loses legitimate kills, especially if someone else has overclaimed before him.

 

Back to what I have and do not have in the logs.  I do not have an accurate assessment of who shot down who.  About half of the victories will not have a record of who shot them down.  Therefore, if you claim a victory and I see crashes with no victor then PWCG assumes you shot one down and tries to do a best match. 

 

Simple solution is don't make false claims.  Why do that unless you really want the victory?   If you do, know that high command will tend to believe you since you're such a charming fellow.

 

[Chief_Mouser]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Simple solution is don't make false claims.  Why do that unless you really want the victory?   If you do, know that high command will tend to believe you since you're such a charming fellow.

 

 

We don't deliberately - apart from that one instance - but as in real life, two or more pilots shooting at the same plane can result in them both/all claiming it. No beef with that, as long as someone gets the credit, it's just that the poor guy last on the list is nearly always the one to miss out. One of our chaps got given my Il-2 kill instead of the one he was firing at, because someone else also shooting at it got 'his' so he was given mine. Even though he was 5 miles away and had never fired a shot at it. The after action report even had me damaging it seconds before he 'shot' it down.

[PatrickAWlson]

5 minutes ago, 216th_Cat said:

 

We don't deliberately - apart from that one instance - but as in real life, two or more pilots shooting at the same plane can result in them both/all claiming it. No beef with that, as long as someone gets the credit, it's just that the poor guy last on the list is nearly always the one to miss out. One of our chaps got given my Il-2 kill instead of the one he was firing at, because someone else also shooting at it got 'his' so he was given mine. Even though he was 5 miles away and had never fired a shot at it. The after action report even had me damaging it seconds before he 'shot' it down.

 

Plane locations are not well tracked in the logs, so there is a limit as to what I know about a plane's location at a point in time.  Plane locations used to be tracked in RoF but that was removed in GB for reasons I do not understand.  Performance maybe? 

 

I do get damage events, but for player planes only.  So if the player and the AI are shooting at the same plane I will only know about the player.  At one point those did not exist in GB but now they are there.  I had them in RoF and I did use them, but I think that I had them for all participants and not just players.  I might be able to do something with that to more accurately assign victories.

 

I need you to trust me when I say this is not easy.  If every plane that went down was assigned a victor and no victor truly meant crashed undamaged then my life would be a hell of a lot easier.  That's just not the way it is.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

ok I found the issue with the lead plane AI not wanting to take off and instead goes around back to the taxi area. 

 

When I add more than 4 AI JU87's in the to go with the mission it causes the Lead plane to abort.

[PatrickAWlson]

13 hours ago, 71st_AH_Mastiff said:

ok I found the issue with the lead plane AI not wanting to take off and instead goes around back to the taxi area. 

 

When I add more than 4 AI JU87's in the to go with the mission it causes the Lead plane to abort.

 

Starting from taxi position is, at this point, no longer actively supported.  The AI is just too wonky and there are no rules to make it work anywhere near 100%.  Everything that was done remains in.  It tends to work under some conditions.  Players are free to try it out, but if it doesn't work the answer is going to be "use runway start".

 

If taxi Ai is improved and becomes reliable I can revisit actively supporting it in PWCG.

[Duce_de_Zoop]

I'll upload if this is actually an issue, but I've had two airfield attack missions now where the airfields had nothing on them but trucks and oil stations. On the second one I enabled target icons to check, and the trucks don't show up as targets but can be killed (though I get a friendly fire message?) Unfortunately this means the AI (we had almost 30 Il-2s attacking this airfield!) did not actually attack the trucks on the airfield but instead diverted to strike a bridge crossing a few kilometers away.

 

Is this intentional? I know in some memoirs I read pilots would sometimes show up to strike an airfield and it would be empty. If it's not intentional I'll upload the mission so you can take a gander at it. 

[PatrickAWlson]

Depends on the airfield.  if the airfield is occupied then there should be parked static planes.  Otherwise it might just be trucks.  I do not specifically check to verify that a target airbase has anything stationed there.

 

The friendly fire thing is odd.  Maybe they are the wrong country or maybe neutral, which would be on PWCG.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

19 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Starting from taxi position is, at this point, no longer actively supported.  The AI is just too wonky and there are no rules to make it work anywhere near 100%.  Everything that was done remains in.  It tends to work under some conditions.  Players are free to try it out, but if it doesn't work the answer is going to be "use runway start".

 

If taxi Ai is improved and becomes reliable I can revisit actively supporting it in PWCG.

I'm not starting from taxi-way, I'm starting from runway; the lead AI cancels his take off, turns to the taxi way and then taxis all the back around again, runs into the last plane, and then gets sever damage and despawns; the mission is then handed to the AI leads wing man and no waypoint information is handed to him. its not until, I take off, conduct the mission and approach the target area, then all of a sudden the new Lead AI gets the waypoints.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by 71st_AH_Mastiff

[No105_Swoose]

4 hours ago, 71st_AH_Mastiff said:

I'm not starting from taxi-way, I'm starting from runway; the lead AI cancels his take off, turns to the taxi way and then taxis all the back around again, runs into the last plane, and then gets sever damage and despawns; the mission is then handed to the AI leads wing man and no waypoint information is handed to him. its not until, I take off, conduct the mission and approach the target area, then all of a sudden the new Lead AI gets the waypoints.

 

 

 

 

That happens to me.  Ilarnovsky on the Stalingrad map comes to mind when flying PWCG Soviet Air Force careers.  Some airfields are "porked" causing that to take place.  My workaround is to reduce the number of aircraft in my flight, usually no more than four.  That seems to help and the first radio message I hear is "Cleared for takeoff" instead of "Taxi to runway".

[PatrickAWlson]

On 11/2/2021 at 11:45 AM, Drim said:

I shot down a Russian spitfire in a Kuban campaign, and it even confirmed my name to kill text in-game.  However, when I go to list my kill claims there is no spitfire option available in the dropdown list.  I wasn't the only one who shot at it but it definitely listed my name for the kill.  Am I doing something wrong?

 

If something like that happens again, press "Report Error" and post the zip.  That will allow me to recreate the problem on my machine.

On 11/9/2021 at 10:44 AM, 216th_Cat said:

 

We don't deliberately - apart from that one instance - but as in real life, two or more pilots shooting at the same plane can result in them both/all claiming it. No beef with that, as long as someone gets the credit, it's just that the poor guy last on the list is nearly always the one to miss out. One of our chaps got given my Il-2 kill instead of the one he was firing at, because someone else also shooting at it got 'his' so he was given mine. Even though he was 5 miles away and had never fired a shot at it. The after action report even had me damaging it seconds before he 'shot' it down.

 

I'm working on something.  First let me lay out the history, what was, what is now, and what I can and cannot do.

 

RoF tracked damage reports for every plane.  When GB came out the damage records were taken away.  Now the damage records are back but only for player planes.  it has always been, and remains, the case that many crashed planes are not assigned a victor in the logs.  About half the time I have no idea who shot down who.  So I can tell that a player damaged a plane, but I cannot tell if he really brought it down or not.  Could be that an AI entity (enemy plane or AAA or the willingness of the AI to lawn dart) caused the destruction.

 

The code in PWCG was pretty old.  I removed damage tracking as a criteria for player victories because that info no longer existed.

 

PWCG first resolves player claims.  This got more complicated when PWCG went from one player to many.

The claim resolution cycle goes like this:

1. Award a victory for all planes definitely shot down by the player (logs clearly indicate player kill) with a proper identification. 

2. Award a victory for all planes definitely shot down by the player with an incorrect identification. 

3. Award a victory for all planes without a clear victor that are properly identified by the player.

4. Award a victory, based on best matching, for all planes without a clear victor that are not properly identified by the player.

 

Current state:

Victory awards stop when all player claims have been resolved.  So if you shoot down four and claim 2, PWCG will give you two and reallocate the others to squadron members.  If you shoot down 2 and claim 4, as long as there are downed planes with unknown victors PWCG will give you what you claim.

 

Once a plane is downed it is marked as allocated and will not be given to another pilot.  if the victor is clearly identified I will not give it to another pilot - exception being victories that you scored but did not claim.  Those go to AI members of your flight.

 

You can see how easy it is to to overclaim, and I have always been forthright that overclaiming was a possibility for PWCG and simply asked players not to do it ... unless they really wanted to.  If you want to be Hartmann in a month who am I to spoil your fun.

 

Future State:

So now I have a way to mitigate this somewhat.  In cases 3 and 4 I can check to see if you damaged the aircraft.  This will prevent players from receiving a victory for a plane that they didn't even hit, which should be a 90% solution.  

 

Victory allocation in PWCG is pretty complex.  I am juggling the desire to maintain a claims system with incomplete information in the logs.  I don't want players to be cheated of victories because the logs lack information.  This should be a good solution.  I am pretty sure that damage records are always logged.  

Edited November 13, 2021 by PatrickAWlson

[Chief_Mouser]

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

PWCG first resolves player claims.  This got more complicated when PWCG went from one player to many.

The claim resolution cycle goes like this:

1. Award a victory for all planes definitely shot down by the player (logs clearly indicate player kill) with a proper identification.  Doesn't work. I shot down four according to game; claimed three; PWCG gave me two. Three were definite kills by me alone.

2. Award a victory for all planes definitely shot down by the player with an incorrect identification. Probably works. Although getting awarded kills for types of planes that we've never seen is still a problem.

 

 

So now I have a way to mitigate this somewhat.  In cases 3 and 4 I can check to see if you damaged the aircraft.  This will prevent players from receiving a victory for a plane that they didn't even hit, which should be a 90% solution.  

 

Yes. Please do this if you can. ?

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by 216th_Cat

[PatrickAWlson]

@216th_Cat Need to make clear: what you do or do not see in the game is meaningless from PWCG's point of view.  PWCG has no access to the internals of the game.

 

You state that it doesn't work.  Yes, it does.  Guarantee 100% that if the logs show you shooting down a plane and you claim it, you will be awarded precisely that claim. 

 

Why are you not seeing the same results in PWCG that you see in game?  Because PWCG works off of the post mission logs.  The information in these logs is not the same as the information displayed in the game.  Wish it was, but it's not.

 

I have been fighting the battle of in game vs. PWCG for 12 years now.  Until the logs are updated to reflect the I same results as the post mission summary PWCG will never correlate 100% to the game.  I have asked for this umpteen times, in the form of a post mission summary written to the logs,  since 2009.  For either of us to hold our breath would be unwise  

 

Anyhow, the ability to check for damage should help quite a bit.  However, if two people hit the same plane and both claim it, somebody is going to walk away disappointed, and it might be the person the in game summary credited.  Fortunes of war.

[[NOSIG]_Salsam]

@PatrickAWlson mind taking a look at this?

Seem that every time we try to run a Coop campaign, on BoBP, as RAF (1/09/1944) AAR stops working after 2nd mission (1st missions it works fine)

Even if we try different dates, squadrons or even Luftwaffe side, we still get same error on 2nd mission;

"PWCG Could not perform AAR. Could not find any vehicle spawns in log set..." and "missionReport (Dates&numbers)(0).txt)"

 

Any Ideas? Ive tried reinstalling PWCG, recreating pilots and campaign... ??‍♂️

 

I imagine that hard work and hours you put down in PWCG and just wanna add - We´re been using PWCG in our squad, on weekly basis now for almost 2 years doing Coop campaigns, and for our 8- 12 pilots, it's the highlight of the week! We all love it and really brought back life to BoS among us!!

 

Thank you for your hard work and for continuing support and updates!

 

(Attached Error report)

fyra202111121311876.zip

[Seamus]

Hey pat, trying to setup a ju-87 and ju-88 campaign on the moscow map. However, no matter how i configure the target odds in the advance configuration section, it keeps giving me the same transportation attack mission. My understanding of the war, this would be more of an interdiction mission fit for BF-110 and 109E-7. Not the tactical or strategic use of these bombers like i expected. Please let me know what i can do to remedy this.

[PatrickAWlson]

@Seamus

Press report error to zip up your campaign and then post it here.  Also, please provide detail on the kings of missions that you expect.  When you change advanced configs, what are you looking for (I can probably figure that out myself by looking at your campaign configs, but better to hear it directly from you).

 

For the Ju87 you are not going to get strategic missions.  It was the Luftwaffe's mobile artillery.  Airfields, frontline troops, etc. were its most common targets.  They were not often used to bomb things like factories.  The Ju88 was also used as a tactical bomber, but it is more likely to get strategic targets.  

 

PWCG builds the mission world first and then assigns the target type.  Without alterations there should be a pretty wide variety of target types, but for the Ju 87 at least they will all be tactical.  Still, it shouldn't be trucks all the time.

 

Last thought: are you scrubbing the mission in between generation attempts?  If you do not PWCG will display the current mission and not generate a new one.

[Seamus]

it wont allow me to add the folder because of the size to the forum. I did some testing. I stated multiple campaigns all configured the same. I created and scrubbed 10 missions. For ju-87 all the missions were attack road and transportation faciality at Mjavtlavo. For Ju-88, eight of them were attack road and transportation faciallity at Mjavtlavo. For BF-110 Half of the them was attacking roads Mjavtlavo. And Finally i created a HE-111 campaign and 9 of the missions were attack Mjavtlavo. Sorry I couldn't get the error file to load. Hope my test information helps.

 

[PatrickAWlson]

@Seamus

Unfortunately, it doesn't.  I have never seen PWCG produce the same mission over and over.  Can you give me a date and a unit?  Also tell me what changes you made to the configurations.

 

[TheSNAFU]

Pat, If the same mission means the same mission type at the same place over and over again I can say without question that pwcg does it with regularity. The weather, pilots or other variants may be different but I often see the same mission over and over. For example, a CAP to Eindhoven comes up mission after

mission. I scrub it but the same mission is generated. Sometimes a different target area does come up such as Nijmegen. I believe this is due to the feature you added emphasizing a particular event such as Market Garden or the Bulge. The only way I know to get out of the loop is to go on leave for a week or more. 
 

Perhaps this is what the post was referring to? 

[Seamus]

Configuration as follows:

Air density: medium

Ground density: high

AA density: medium

CPU allowance: low

Structure: low

 

Mission details:

Squadron: I./st.G.77

Date: 1/10/1941

Yes what sanfu describe.  I have never noticed it in pure fighter squadrons but bomber, attackers and hybrids of both experience it to varying degrees.

[PatrickAWlson]

6 hours ago, TheSNAFU said:

Pat, If the same mission means the same mission type at the same place over and over again I can say without question that pwcg does it with regularity. The weather, pilots or other variants may be different but I often see the same mission over and over. For example, a CAP to Eindhoven comes up mission after

mission. I scrub it but the same mission is generated. Sometimes a different target area does come up such as Nijmegen. I believe this is due to the feature you added emphasizing a particular event such as Market Garden or the Bulge. The only way I know to get out of the loop is to go on leave for a week or more. 
 

Perhaps this is what the post was referring to? 

 

What you are describing is PWCG issuing iconic missions, in your case, Market Garden.  Those will force specific missions at specific locations.  Once the period of the event is over then mission generation returns to normal.  @Seamus I will take a look at 1/StG77 to see what's up.  BTW: early war Stukas will always get the same mission type: dive bomb.   Target should vary.