Updated Dynamic Campaign by theOden: DynMis EXE

[PB0_Roll]

Thanks for callsign, are you thinking of implementing a less calm air in the desert too some day ?

 

[theOden]

First post updated.

Yes, some work done for turbulence but I didn't see any big impact.

El alamein error was just my sloppy work in the template - shame on me

 

[jollyjack]

On 9/30/2020 at 10:32 PM, theOden said:

Dynamic Singleplayer Mission

 

 

Update 18 feb 2021

El Alamein Pursuit Blue side fixed.

Squadrons now have a pre-assigned callsigns.

(note that some scenarios have more than 36 units a side so these will use a random available each mission - player squadron will always have a unique callsign)

Work done on weather/turbulence but I didn't see any big difference.

 

Thanks to theOden for all his work on this!  Buzzsaw  

 

 Yep, Chapeau  !!

[PB0_Roll]

Thank you very much ?

 

[inbeat777]

On 2/15/2021 at 2:38 PM, theOden said:

What scenario and squadron/staffel?

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by inbeat777

[PB0_Roll]

Indeed, despite having cumulus I plowed into joyfully, I didn't experience any turbulence.

 

Is turbulence even modelled in game ? I can't remember playing any missions that had any, but then I didn't play this much.

[Buzzsaw]

11 hours ago, PB0_Roll said:

Indeed, despite having cumulus I plowed into joyfully, I didn't experience any turbulence.

 

Is turbulence even modelled in game ? I can't remember playing any missions that had any, but then I didn't play this much.

We are in the process of implementing the trueSKY weather system into the game.

 

There will be a number of changes when that happens.

 

Until then the only way you get turbulence is from wind layers... see the mission builder.

[PB0_Roll]

Looking forward to play windy dynmis ?

[theOden]

On 2/18/2021 at 2:23 PM, inbeat777 said:

 

 

Had a go at 1./JG54 over France for a few missions and they generally behave well besides every now and then flight lead announce "going back to base" usually dragging one wingman with him - no idea if they have engine trouble or whatnot but the rest of us usually reach combat.

 

Later down the line I did notice individual planes going down low and speeding along tree top level pulling nose-up every 3-5 seconds - thats a new one for me.

 

I also tried removing the mission C# file to see if there was something from my script that could interfere but that test had the whole staffel fly in a wide circle not really reaching the CAP area over Amiens.

 

Not sure what to make out of it but without the C# script I also had a takeoff mayhem with numerous 109's crashing/exploding on the runway positioning.

 

As it stands I don't really see anything I can change to make this better.

 

 

 

 

In other news I think I have to stand corrected on the previously stated ai flying behaviour.

 

Slapped together a small Hurricane Rotol 100 taking off from Rochford heading for Dover and while they do climb like madmen at some 120 mph they actually ease off when at altitude and really follow flightplan speed.

 

As seen in attached pictures there is a full 3000 rpm climb (pic with map), which must be considered ok by all means, but best climb speed should be some 160-180 mph?

The other picture (without map) shows them trucking along at 180mph at altitude which match the flightplan 300kmh pretty well actually - good to see.

Still, diving on target at full monty with repeated nose-up-roll-dive-again is something I've seen plenty of while "ai flying" during dynmis development even for Tobruk.

 

 

[Sokol1]

On 2/18/2021 at 12:15 PM, PB0_Roll said:

Is turbulence even modelled in game ? I can't remember playing any missions that had any, but then I didn't play this much.

 

Only weather layers, and require that mission maker set manually.

[PB0_Roll]

let's hope for truskies then ?

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by PB0_Roll

[jollyjack]

Thanks Oden for all your work ...... Slowly all them 3rd party efforts make Cliffs even more worthwhile ...

 

[inbeat777]

Are there any other additions or changes planned?

[max303]

I just want to chip in and say a Big Thank You for this.  Wow!

[Pinguim]

Thanks! This is the main reason I play CloD SP over other flight sims (coupled with interesting AI). 

 

I wonder how feasible is it to edit the player crew gunner level... What I miss the most in flight sims is any kind of crew stats for multicrew aircraft. I guess an abstract way to implement crew progression would be gunner KDR (or only kills if death ratio cannot be computed) + number of missions flown in order to increase overall gunner efficiency (Pat implemented something like that for fighter pilots - not for bomber crews - in the Great Battles dynamic campaign app).

[theOden]

One could control every single airman in each scenario and have them gain profession in a range of qualitites but I'm not sure if that would be noticed in the overall gameplay - actually I'm not sure the current arrangment of pilot/crew skill is noticable

 

As of now skill is only tracked on squadron level based on plane type, default looks like this:

Quote

                string fSingle = "1 0.26 0.26 0.35 0.89 0.99 0.47 0.47";
                string fCrew = "1 0.26 0.52 0.30 0.89 0.99 0.57 0.57";
                string sCrew = "1 0.26 0.52 0.40 0.89 0.99 0.57 0.89";
                string bCrew = "1 0.26 0.75 0.25 0.89 0.99 0.57 0.89";

 

So Hurricane, Spit, 109 etc gets the fSingle, 110 gets fCrew, Stuka the sCrew and bombers bCrew for a starter then it's adjusted based on squadron skill (playersquadron always "ace" to not annoy the player too much over weak ai performance).

 

So, "basic flying skills" for instance could be increased per mission and gunnery skills per successful hit/kill but as said, I doubt anyone would notice the change from 0.5 to 0.6.

 

I'm not sure the current skill details makes a noticable difference to be honest, but I'm a pretty useless pilot to begin with.

On 3/4/2021 at 9:02 AM, inbeat777 said:

Are there any other additions or changes planned?

Nope, not currently.

 

[WoweeHowee]

After finding this topic upon countless others the dyna exe is unavailable to download, is there an eta on when its going to be back up?

[Pinguim]

4 hours ago, WoweeHowee said:

After finding this topic upon countless others the dyna exe is unavailable to download, is there an eta on when its going to be back up?

Tested right now, it's available

[WoweeHowee]

Ye just realised all good

[kraut1]

Hi theOden,

Many thanks for the template files!

I have just made some adjustments for plane types for the Circus Offensive. Works very well.

Best Regards

[DaddyCat]

I'm probably doing something wrong, but the generated files aren't appearing in my game at all. The example mission is appearing though so I know it seems to be vaguely in the correct file. Does anyone have any advice at all?

[kraut1]

Hi TheOden,

Once again thanks very much for your work!

In general it works well and it is really good.

Today one small issue, that is common in many other campaign missons too ( eg. BoX, il2 1946 il2dcg):

The defined cruise speeds are very often a bit to fast.

The result is that you have to use for cruise flight, especially while climbing or when carrying extra bomb loads, combat power or even emegency power. The result is, that the engine tempertures are near the upper limts and you don 't have sufficient reserves for combat.

In my current Ooeration Sonnenblume BF109-E7N trop. missions I reduce the speeds of my flight from 426 km/h to ca. 390 km/h.

Maybe it would be helpful if you reduce the cruise speeds 

by 5% or you provide us with a config text file that contains the speeds.

Best Regards

[greybeard_52]

Just one question: what position does the player occupy in the formation? Is he always the leader or can he choose to be a wingman? Thank you.

[Thundercracker]

17 hours ago, greybeard_52 said:

Just one question: what position does the player occupy in the formation? Is he always the leader or can he choose to be a wingman? Thank you.

From most of the unfinished campaigns I've started I tend to be number 3, either way ai ignores me.

[greybeard_52]

11 hours ago, Thundercracker said:

I tend to be number 3

Thanks for your reply - same here after a few missions played. I hope this will remain along all campaign duration, since I hate leading the flight.

 

11 hours ago, Thundercracker said:

either way ai ignores me.

If you mean that AI ignores your commands, I seemingly experienced the same: there's always a number four following me (LW career), but when I order him "return to base", he remain stuck to me in formation.

[Thundercracker]

21 minutes ago, greybeard_52 said:

If you mean that AI ignores your commands, I seemingly experienced the same: there's always a number four following me (LW career), but when I order him "return to base", he remain stuck to me in formation.

Same experience with RAF campaigns so far. Constantly following, never listening. Like my missus.

[greybeard_52]

9 hours ago, Thundercracker said:

Like my missus.

[greybeard_52]

I have a problem with the "Circus" missions: the cruising speed of my plane (a Hurricane Mk.IIa - but I don't think it changes for the others) is so low (around 130 mph) that, before our flight arrives at destination ... the war is over!

[Pinguim]

On 6/10/2021 at 7:50 PM, greybeard_52 said:

there's always a number four following me (LW career), but when I order him "return to base", he remain stuck to me in formation.

 

Using the 'abort mission' command seems to work for me after trying 'return to base'.

[Wolf_Hound]

Stupid friendly AI that go too fast so you can't form up with them, I thought after 20 years of this issue mission creators would learn? 

[greybeard_52]

16 minutes ago, Wolf_Hound said:

Stupid friendly AI that go too fast so you can't form up with them

After 10 years playing IL-2 1946 with "realism" settings on, I came to the conclusion that was much better turning them off, including CEM (complex engine management). I set the same in IL-2 desert wings - Tobruk from the very beginning.

[Wolf_Hound]

1 hour ago, greybeard_52 said:

After 10 years playing IL-2 1946 with "realism" settings on, I came to the conclusion that was much better turning them off, including CEM (complex engine management). I set the same in IL-2 desert wings - Tobruk from the very beginning.

Doesn't change anything, the AI just go unreasonably fast and it's not a game problem, its' bad mission making because other missions created by other people work fine in this aspect.

[greybeard_52]

On 6/26/2021 at 2:10 PM, Wolf_Hound said:

Doesn't change anything, ... its' bad mission making

Uhm... Yes and not: I think question is a bit more complex. Undoubtedly, those missions you refer to are arguably planned about AI cruising speed, and can't have been tested by player not in autopilot and with "engine overheating" set on, otherwise he would have noticed the bug. On the other hand, I experienced that a proper trimming can make you gaining up to 20 km/h and, of course, disabling "engine overheating" helps a lot coeteris paribus.

[greybeard_52]

On 6/18/2021 at 4:41 AM, Pinguim said:

Using the 'abort mission' command seems to work for me after trying 'return to base'.

True! I realized now that it works only if hit from main command menu (that got right after hitting TAB). Thank you!

[PB0_Roll]

My AI fellow spitfire pilots could indeed use a bit of speed limit during climb/cruise.

 

To keep up I need 95% throttle (with boost on).

 

Quite oddly they seem to go a tad slower when in combat.

 

Ennemy bombers also seem quite fast at times.

[FTC_Karaya]

Boost only kicks in with the RAF birds when you exceed 100% throttle.

But yes, the AI is a bit crazy in the whole energy retention and build up department.

[PB0_Roll]

I don't have the % on screen, just describing my physical throttle position.

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by PB0_Roll

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

2 hours ago, PB0_Roll said:

I don't have the % on screen, just describing my physical throttle position.

 

Just in case: 

You can edit the Info Window to have percentages instead of sliders showing.

 

Alt+Click the space the sliders are at to select it, then right click and select Edit from the context menu.

There will be a lot of options there.

 

This should still be up to date:

https://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3273

Edited July 2, 2021 by 9./JG52_J-HAT

[kraut1]

On 6/26/2021 at 12:33 PM, greybeard_52 said:

After 10 years playing IL-2 1946 with "realism" settings on, I came to the conclusion that was much better turning them off, including CEM (complex engine management). I set the same in IL-2 desert wings - Tobruk from the very beginning.

Hi, in 1946 I am flying most il2dcg careers / missions. In these missions there is by default the same problem with the high AI cruise speeds, especially when climbing. But it is possible to change the default cruise speeds in the settings files. If you reduce the cruise speed by ca. 10%... 15% it's much more easier to keep formation.

In CLOD Blitz / Tobruk / TheOden Dyn Mission  I am testing to reduce the speed for the first 2 or 3 waypoints by editing before starting the game (takes only 1 or 2 minutes). It seems to have some positive effect at the very beginning of the missions. But I think when some time later the waypoints are created automaticly by the script the high default speeds are there again. But you are some kilometers closer to the formation even with realistic settings.

In some Tobruk missions in the hot desert a simply replaced all high BF109 speeds from 426km/h to ca.400km/h and for Jabo missions I used xa. 390km/h as far I can remember. It worked.

From my point of view it would be helpful if the players could get acces to a settings file with the speeds.

Or the default speeds are reduced a bit.

I think an way to define a more suitable cruise speed could be for a fighter / fighter bomber: cruise speed = speed at max. continous power with cooler full open, 100% fuel and max. bombing load.

Best Regards

 

Updated 08.July:

Example for Battle of France / BF109_e3

[BoB_LW_JG54_I.33_Way]
  TAKEOFF 285109.90 139909.10 0.00 0.00  
  NORMFLY 287695.08 147529.01 758.50 320.00  (reduced)
  NORMFLY 291766.54 153810.66 1517.00 320.00    (reduced)
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 320912.19 192043.70 1517.00 320.00    (reduced)
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 305057.03 194554.92 1517.00 426.00  
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 306917.47 187361.14 1517.00 426.00  
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 307618.16 198817.35 1517.00 426.00  
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 312616.01 200786.06 1517.00 426.00  
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 305124.97 194827.42 1517.00 426.00  
  AATTACK_FIGHTERS 309882.73 185284.84 1517.00 426.00  
  NORMFLY 303270.15 179848.76 1517.00 426.00  
  NORMFLY 291766.54 153810.66 1517.00 426.00  
  LANDING 285109.90 139909.10 0.00 426.00 

Edited July 8, 2021 by kraut1
Updated after test missions

[greybeard_52]

I think Cliffs of Dover, with the developments of Team Fusion, is a great combat flight simulator, but, from my personal point of view, it suffers from not having a career system conceived from the beginning, and not even a Pat Wilson who look after an acceptable surrogate. The Oden did an exceptional job, but it seems to have abandoned it, and it seems to me that it is still too compromised by unresolved anomalies.
Personally, I can't complete many missions without my flight's AI spinning inexplicably in circles and never reaching the target, flee instead of fighting when it meets the enemy, or all of my companions return to base, one after the other, leaving me alone with my wingman to face the enemy. And more negative.
I recently set realism to "normal", instead of customizing it by simplifying it, as I usually do, and I must say that, unlike many other simulators, here this more realistic setting is not a cause of frustration for me, but fun and challenge; this game has huge potential. I really appreciate certain subtleties such as the detail of the serial number on the individual aircraft. But there are still many bugs to fix.
All things considered, I don't think I will continue to be interested in this game given this situation. I thank anyone who has had the time and patience to read these considerations so far, written in the hope that someone will know how to help me.

On 7/7/2021 at 11:54 PM, kraut1 said:

From my point of view it would be helpful if the players could get acces to a settings file with the speeds.

I completely agree. Otherwise this is where giving up the realism of CEM, as I said before, can help.
But the real problem is another: there is no development on this issue. Developers are focused on VR, demanded by a "noisy minority" (I don't think many can afford it)?, while no one makes a statistic on how many single-players would like a well-made career system.