Changes and tweaks to career mode

[Rodwonder]

On 10/31/2023 at 12:33 PM, LukeFF said:

 

I'd have to look and see how that unit is set up in the career files. I'll let the career guys know as well. Thanks!

 

EDIT: what might be happening is the needed airfields for Jasta 6 are currently not on the map, but in any case I've asked about this internally.

 

EDIT2: Okay, yes, it is what I thought: the airfields Jasta 6 used in the summer of 1918 are not yet on the map. 

 

This happened to me also with Jasta 6... So it's just not a one off. 

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

@LukeFF so not really something for the Hs 129?

 

Yes, I think it was added by mistake.

[Pict]

Looking through Erik Pilawskii's book, Soviet Air Force Fighter Colours 1941-1945 (page 87), I spotted a couple of photos of MiG-3's of 7 IAP, captioned as being at the Kuban in 1943

 

There are a couple of what appear to be P-40M's (long tail still with E greenhouse)? at the end of the line up

 

Anyone have any more on possible MiG-3 placement at the Kuban?

 

 

Btw, I love your work on the career, it's like an encyclopedia and I can spend a lot of time just browsing the map and the squadrons / aircraft types

Edited December 24, 2023 by Pict
Spelling

[Tony_Kito]

Is there a way to make the Regiment/Squadron/Pilot's randomly generated stats upon beginning a career/joining a campaign reflect the real nature of their squadron?

 

I say this because when I first joined my Li-2 squadron in Moscow it was a bit eye-rolling to see my Regiment commander had sunk 2 U-Boats and shot down 7 fighters with his Li-2. I don't think even the wildest of Stalinist era propaganda would dream up such stats lmao

 

My question is: is there a way to generate such stats more appropriately to different squadrons? Ground attack in Moscow having no boat kills but tons of transport/gun kills and so on.

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Tony_Kito said:

Is there a way to make the Regiment/Squadron/Pilot's randomly generated stats upon beginning a career/joining a campaign reflect the real nature of their squadron?

 

I say this because when I first joined my Li-2 squadron in Moscow it was a bit eye-rolling to see my Regiment commander had sunk 2 U-Boats and shot down 7 fighters with his Li-2. I don't think even the wildest of Stalinist era propaganda would dream up such stats lmao

 

My question is: is there a way to generate such stats more appropriately to different squadrons? Ground attack in Moscow having no boat kills but tons of transport/gun kills and so on.

 

The only way you could do that is to swap out a certain config file as a mod, based on the sort of regiment you are joining. Right now there are what's called "initial experience by rank" files for each phase of career mode, and these files control the initial stats of a pilot joining your squadron. As the name suggests, it's based on rank, not squadron type, so yes, you end up with C-47 and Ju 52 pilots who are aces. ? 

[Tony_Kito]

Ah I see. Hope this can be remedied at some point but, of course, it's far from a debilitating or serious issue - more of a funny oddity.

One more thing: I was reading up on this topic how at one point the Soviet flight composition was changed from multiples of 3 (based on their usage of Vic formations) to multiples of 4 later on during the war. I was surprised this was implemented and I appreciate the authenticty, however the formations used in the missions themselves leave much to be desired. The fact that no matter what fighter or attacker I fly the formation chosen is always "right edge" I must admit is a bit off-putting, especially seeing the Germans do it when they were big proponents of fluid-four or finger-four.

 

Is there any chance for the different mission presets to have different formation types depending on side and timeframe? IE, early Soviets do flights of 3x Vics of 3x, and later Soviets do flights of 2x pairs of 4x aircraft, etc..

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Tony_Kito said:

Is there any chance for the different mission presets to have different formation types depending on side and timeframe? IE, early Soviets do flights of 3x Vics of 3x, and later Soviets do flights of 2x pairs of 4x aircraft, etc..

 

It's been brought up but I don't know if anything with that will be changed any time soon. 

[tattywelshie]

I know this has been brought up many, many times, or maybe it was just me bringing it up...but @LukeFF what's the score with anti-shipping strike missions in career mode? Are there any plans on implementing these types of missions in the career mode? Or...excuse the pun...but has that ship sailed? ?

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, tattywelshie said:

I know this has been brought up many, many times, or maybe it was just me bringing it up...but @LukeFF what's the score with anti-shipping strike missions in career mode? Are there any plans on implementing these types of missions in the career mode? Or...excuse the pun...but has that ship sailed? ?

 

Still in the queue, along with a lot of other things. ?

[Yogiflight]

After two missions in a Normandy career with the Bf 109

 

When you fly ground attack missions with the Bf 109 E7 or FW 190 A5 at the East Front, the AI drop their bombs and RTB.

In the Normandy with much more AA guns and a huge Allied air superiority, the AI attack the ground targets again and again, until they are all killed.

They should drop their bombs and get their a...s out of there as fast as possible. They were all killed and one wounded by AAA.

The same for FW 190s, which attack without bombs. They should do one or two strafing runs and RTB.

 

 

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

After two missions in a Normandy career with the Bf 109

 

When you fly ground attack missions with the Bf 109 E7 or FW 190 A5 at the East Front, the AI drop their bombs and RTB.

In the Normandy with much more AA guns and a huge Allied air superiority, the AI attack the ground targets again and again, until they are all killed.

They should drop their bombs and get their a...s out of there as fast as possible. They were all killed and one wounded by AAA.

The same for FW 190s, which attack without bombs. They should do one or two strafing runs and RTB.

 

It's a complex issue - paraphrasing one of our mission designers, returning to base is triggered by the "out of bombs" event. If they have one bomb they will drop it and return to base, but when they have multiple bombs they will continue to circle around until they have dropped all of them. There is a timer that can be tuned for the ability of planes to strafe targets, but then there will likely be reports about why planes with cannon ammo don't state targets. 🙂

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

It's a complex issue - paraphrasing one of our mission designers, returning to base is triggered by the "out of bombs" event. If they have one bomb they will drop it and return to base, but when they have multiple bombs they will continue to circle around until they have dropped all of them.

We only had one SC 250. But they were going in to strafe again and again.

 

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

There is a timer that can be tuned for the ability of planes to strafe targets, but then there will likely be reports about why planes with cannon ammo don't state targets. 🙂

I several times experienced, that we had to jettison our bombs on the way to the target. What happened after the enemy fighters were eliminated was, we did one strafing run at the target and then RTBed. Maybe this behaviour could be something to get into making the AI do one strafing run when flying without bomb.

I was just flying the third mission of that day.

First, flying an artillery bombing mission with just two aircrafts?

Second, While I was flying with bomb, my flightleader was flying without bomb

 

 

Third, we didn't get a fighter escort, either.

Artillery bombing at Normandy.zip

[LukeFF]

18 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

First, flying an artillery bombing mission with just two aircrafts?

Second, While I was flying with bomb, my flightleader was flying without bomb

 

Did he take off that way? If it's the same Bf 109 variant, then there should be no reason why he took off without bombs.

 

EDIT: I see it's two different Bf 109 variants. Will check the file to ensure both have the correct loadouts for that mission type. Thanks!

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

EDIT: I see it's two different Bf 109 variants. Will check the file to ensure both have the correct loadouts for that mission type. Thanks!

Yes, he was flying the early G6 and I was in the late one. He must have started without bomb, because he doesn't have the bomb rack under the belly of his 109.

Any idea, why the fighter escort was missing, too? Same issue, because it was counted as fighter mission, maybe?

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Yes, he was flying the early G6 and I was in the late one. He must have started without bomb, because he doesn't have the bomb rack under the belly of his 109.

Any idea, why the fighter escort was missing, too? Same issue, because it was counted as fighter mission, maybe?

 

The armament issue is likely due to a config file problem, but that's an easy fix. 

 

Missing fighter escort I have no idea. @=FB=VikS?

[Yogiflight]

In Battle of Normandy the JG 2 is flying the FW 190 A6 and A8. But according to the unit cronicle both units were equipped with the A8 after they were retreated from the Normandy and sent back to Germany mid July.

 

Another point, it seems quite strange to fly Airfield Defense Missions for Calais, 209 km to the north, when you have the I./JG 26 based 30 km southeast of Calais and the II./JG 26 100 km south. IRL when you would arrive at Calais, the British pilots would already be sitting in their Officer's Club, drinking a cup of tea.

 

 

 

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

In Battle of Normandy the JG 2 is flying the FW 190 A6 and A8. But according to the unit cronicle both units were equipped with the A8 after they were retreated from the Normandy and sent back to Germany mid July.

 

The aircraft strength returns for I./JG 2 show they had 7 A-6s on hand at the beginning of April 1944 and 12 at the beginning of May. That drops to 2 at the beginning of June and then back to 4 at the start of July. I don't remember how I set it up, but I think they have A-6s through at least the end of May. My general rule for mixed 190 formations is that I include a give subtype only if there were at least enough to form a Schwarm for the given time period. 

 

6 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Another point, it seems quite strange to fly Airfield Defense Missions for Calais, 209 km to the north, when you have the I./JG 26 based 30 km southeast of Calais and the II./JG 26 100 km south. IRL when you would arrive at Calais, the British pilots would already be sitting in their Officer's Club, drinking a cup of tea.

 

Yes, that's just the way the mission generator produces missions - it's looking anywhere on the map to place enemy aircraft. 

[Yogiflight]

53 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

The aircraft strength returns for I./JG 2 show they had 7 A-6s on hand at the beginning of April 1944 and 12 at the beginning of May. That drops to 2 at the beginning of June and then back to 4 at the start of July. I don't remember how I set it up, but I think they have A-6s through at least the end of May. My general rule for mixed 190 formations is that I include a give subtype only if there were at least enough to form a Schwarm for the given time period. 

Luke, you misunderstood me. What my question was about is, shouldn't they be equipped only with A6s in Battle of Normandy and only in Battle of Rhineland fly the A8?

That is the way I understand the cronicle at the point I put my cursor on in the screenshot I posted.

[LukeFF]

Ah okay, I see it now. I didn't write that unit history, so there might have been some misunderstanding on the part of the author about what planes they were equipped with at that given time. 

[sevenless]

I/JG2 received their first A8s 4/44, so a mix of A6/A8 looks quite right for april 44 to august 44.

 

Here: Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen, I./JG2 (ww2.dk)

[Yogiflight]

20 hours ago, sevenless said:

I/JG2 received their first A8s 4/44, so a mix of A6/A8 looks quite right for april 44 to august 44.

I was just reffering to the unit cronicle in the career mode.

Apart from that, were there really no A6s anymore after D-Day, apart from the ground attack unit? In career mode, as far as I found so far, all units are only flying A8s after D-Day.

[sevenless]

14 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

I was just reffering to the unit cronicle in the career mode.

Apart from that, were there really no A6s anymore after D-Day, apart from the ground attack unit? In career mode, as far as I found so far, all units are only flying A8s after D-Day.

 

Yep, I got that. The text in the IL-2 unit cronicle is unspecific. I would not say misleading, but could be worded more precisely.

 

Yes, remember the A6 is a 8/43 introduced plane. The frontline units at the channel and in the reich got supplied with A7s in 01/44 and A8s in 4/44 and the likelihood of one such unit to still have A6 crates in service after big week 02/44, push for Berlin 03/44 and pre-invasion activities 04/44 was slim, nevertheless it happened.

 

Furthermore I guess IL2 looks at the A8 more or less as a standin for the A7 also. Thats why we basically have both A6 and A8 over the whole career timeline.

 

You can easily look up plane status of the units at ww2.dk for JG 2 and JG 26. Those are official strength numbers.

 

The Luftwaffe, 1933-45 (ww2.dk)

[LukeFF]

The A-6 comes and goes as a day fighter through the end of chapter 1 of Rhineland. After that it's solely as a night attack plane. 

[gemanuel1]

Hello!

 

Playing through the career mode in Normandy and loving it. I really enjoyed intercepting bombers and a lot has been done with the different types of missions since i last played a couple of years ago. Intercepting recon planes is one of my favourites.

 

Not sure if this exactly is the place for this but one thing that i have thought of a great bit is how we always fly in to the enemy territory on free hunt at 2000-3000 m. Surely FWs and 109s would "free hunt" from atleast 4000 (-6000) meters altitude. That breaks a bit of the immersion for me. We fly in and enemy airfield patrols are at 3000-4000 meters. So a lot of the free hunt missions have looked like this: we fly in over enemy territory, spitfires are 1-2000 meters higher up and often around their airfields. My AI friendlies climb straight up draining all their energy and attacking from low. They usually win over the spitfires thouh.

 

I am sure others have asked it and once again: might not be the correct place but wouldnt a lot of the missions be placed higher up? 4000-5000 m.

 

Oh! and one more thing: would be amazing if the battle for normandy would be longer. So start from 1942-43: the intermediate years. Would almost only be intercept bombers but still. 

 

Cheers!

 

Edited June 9, 2024 by gemanuel1

[LukeFF]

Yes, those free hunt altitudes should be higher. I'll ask about it. 

[Yogiflight]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Yes, those free hunt altitudes should be higher. I'll ask about it. 

And the intercept altitudes as well. You don't fly to intercept bombers at the same altitude as the bombers, well knowing, that the escort fighters will attack you from higher altitude.

But really absurd is it in ground attack intercept missions. You coming to the artillery position you have to defend at an altitude of 500m and then have to climb up to the ground attack aircrafts, coming in at 1500m.

9 hours ago, gemanuel1 said:

Oh! and one more thing: would be amazing if the battle for normandy would be longer. So start from 1942-43: the intermediate years.

This wouldn't be the Battle of Normandy, but something like Channel Battle. BON was the preparation of the Allied landing, the landing itself and the advance of the Allied troops through the Normandy. Some interesting aircrafts for the timespan you mentioned, this would be a nice little Addon.

[Yogiflight]

The result of a Supply Dump Bombing mission. I was the only on who bombed the warehouses, while my three squadmates bombed the AA defense.

In a Supply Dump Bombing mission. This is nonsense.

If the Wehrmacht had acted that stupidly, the war had ended 1939, with the Polish boy-scouts conquering Germany.

 

If the developers and/or the Russian community (I never read, that someone of the international community wanted that AAA attacking by the AI) wants to attack AA guns, then they should create an 'Attack/Bomb enemy AA defense Mission' as preparation of the bombing/attack by a bomber/stuka/ground attack aircraft squadron. But having in a four aircraft bombing/attack mission not all of the aircrafts attacking the target doesn't make any sense. Especially when the pilots, who attack the AA guns, do that at the same time, when the other pilot(s) attack the target. Attacking the AA defense has to be done before the target attack.

 

 

 

[WarSlothdsbeckett]

Hello,

 

A couple ideas/recommendations for the career mode.

 

A realistic tail number added especially to US aircraft seem like it'd be a simple addition that would add to the realism. Obviously I'm not suggesting historically accurate aircraft/SN numbers, but maybe allow custom or at least randomly generated tail numbers as seen in the photo attached.

 

Also I know this has been brought up before, but the idea of escape from captivity during the career mode would be a great improvement!

 

Thanks as always!

[Yogiflight]

In the first phase of BON, do the two Gruppen of the JG26 only fly Bomber intercept missions? No ground attack aircraft intercept or Airfield defense missions?

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

In the first phase of BON, do the two Gruppen of the JG26 only fly Bomber intercept missions? No ground attack aircraft intercept or Airfield defense missions?

 

I think so but I would have to check my sources. For JG 26 their missions are based strictly on what is in Vol. 2 of Caldwell's book.

[migmadmarine]

On 11/11/2024 at 8:38 AM, WarSlothdsbeckett said:

Hello,

 

A couple ideas/recommendations for the career mode.

 

A realistic tail number added especially to US aircraft seem like it'd be a simple addition that would add to the realism. Obviously I'm not suggesting historically accurate aircraft/SN numbers, but maybe allow custom or at least randomly generated tail numbers as seen in the photo attached.

 

Also I know this has been brought up before, but the idea of escape from captivity during the career mode would be a great improvement!

 

Thanks as always!

I doubt this will come officially at this point, but there are mods by me and Skycat 1969 that will give you at least unit colors. I have stand in S/N on the US aircraft but as there is no way to randomly apply them they are a generic numberbending in 0s. I figure since you usually can't read more than one at any given moment, it fills the space well enough. 

[Yogiflight]

On june 6 the I./JG 26 should move to Chaumont-en-Vexin and maybe I am completely wrong but from what I remember it did so. But I am currently in a career and the I./JG 26 is based at Cormeilles-en-Vexin instead.

And then a question to the cruising speed of the 190s. In the Kuban career the A5 has a cruising speed of 445km/h, with bomb, in the Normandy career the A6 and A8 have a cruising speed of only 420km/h (both speeds according to the map). Why so?

And additionally, when the flightleader is waiting for pilots of his flight (after takeoff, air fights and ground attacks), he is flying in an altitude of 500m at a speed of 270km/h, even if deep in enemy territory and the aircrafts catching up, flying with just 300km/h. You would never do this. I wasn't a pilot in German army, but platoon leader and tank commander of an IFV SPz Marder. When we moved to another location, there were two speeds ordered, the cruising speed, and for vehicles, which had to stop for some reason, a catching up speed. This would make much more sense for aircrafts as well. The flightleader flying cruising speed an aircrafts catching up, flying with maximum continuos power, if not maximum combat power.

[LukeFF]

Cormeilles is correct for the first few days of Chapter 2. By the end of the chapter they are at Chaumont. 

 

The other stuff is unfortunately just limitations with the AI. 

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

By the end of the chapter they are at Chaumont. 

Yes, you are right. They move to Chaumont-en-Vexin at june 8.

[Tripper]

On 6/9/2024 at 8:07 PM, LukeFF said:

Yes, those free hunt altitudes should be higher. I'll ask about it. 

 

This is still happening.  I fly 5k ft above my squadron and  swoop down to save their sorry arses like a hero when there's contact, but they really shouldn't be down there.

 

The enemy AI doesn't wander around at 7k asking to be vulched.

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, Tripper said:

 

This is still happening.  I fly 5k ft above my squadron and  swoop down to save their sorry arses like a hero when there's contact, but they really shouldn't be down there.

 

The enemy AI doesn't wander around at 7k asking to be vulched.

 

I need the relevant mission files and dates to forward this to our mission builders. 

[Tripper]

On 2/22/2025 at 7:00 PM, LukeFF said:

 

I need the relevant mission files and dates to forward this to our mission builders. 

 

OK, I have no idea what that means. I'm new to IL2, but I am a professional programmer. I will be able to follow instructions as to how to get you what you need. By all means point me to instructions you've issued in the past.

[Aapje]

11 hours ago, Tripper said:

 

OK, I have no idea what that means. I'm new to IL2, but I am a professional programmer. I will be able to follow instructions as to how to get you what you need. By all means point me to instructions you've issued in the past.

 

Upload a zip of the _gen.mission file from /data/missions. Do this directly after flying the mission, since if you fly a new one, the file is overwritten. Also, write down the date of the flight.

 

@LukeFF Can you make a locked thread describing how to report an issue with a mission, and pin it to the 'Technical Issues and Bug Reports' subforum? Then we can just point people to that.

 

 

[Tripper]

2 hours ago, Aapje said:

 

Upload a zip of the _gen.mission file from /data/missions. Do this directly after flying the mission, since if you fly a new one, the file is overwritten. Also, write down the date of the flight.

 

Thank you.

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, Aapje said:

Can you make a locked thread describing how to report an issue with a mission, and pin it to the 'Technical Issues and Bug Reports' subforum? Then we can just point people to that.

 

Good idea, will do.