Dynamic Campaign Engine

[PB0_CEF]

I really would like to make a Persian Gulf campaign but options seems to be too limited :

 

- only one usable airbase in Iran (with taxiways)

- no F-14 nor F-4 on Iran side

 

- no Oman or UAE dedicated planes

 

 

 

Maybe a limited war could be possible ...

[QuiGon]

I really would like to make a Persian Gulf campaign but options seems to be too limited :

 

- only one usable airbase in Iran (with taxiways)

- no F-14 nor F-4 on Iran side

 

- no Oman or UAE dedicated planes

 

 

 

Maybe a limited war could be possible ...

That's exactly what I'm currently working on. The missing F-14 and F-4 for the iranian side is indeed a huge issue, but I've worked around it by adding them as USAF Agressors to the red side for now.

[PB0_CEF]

That's exactly what I'm currently working on. The missing F-14 and F-4 for the iranian side is indeed a huge issue, but I've worked around it by adding them as USAF Agressors to the red side for now.

 

 

Really good idea :thumbup:

[MBot]

I feel a little bad for neglecting DCE for such a long time. For a couple of months I was away from DCS due to hardware issues and for the past weeks I simply enjoyed playing it again. There is a bunch of stuff that requires attention I think. First I should give DCE a good review on how it tolerated the 2.5 transition. I saw some mentions of problems with AI not attacking their targets. Then there are some areas for which it is now time for improvements:

 

-DCE needs to become a single entity as a base for the ever growing number of different campaigns (right now each campaign has "its own DCE". This should make updates on the base less of a hassle.

-Obviously support for carrier operations got relevant now. We still have to wait and see though how carrier operations will ultimately be handled in DCS (static objects, spawning, AI, uncontrolled aircraft).

-Moving ships. This has been long planned. Now is the time that this finally should be implemented.

-Support for multiple radios.

-Various small improvements.

 

Then of course there is the Persian Gulf map, which offers a lot of exciting new opportunities for campaigns. I have several planned in my head, but the theater needs to consolidate first. The object lists for Iran/UAE/Oman needs to be put together and filled out with relevant new units. Some we have already seen are in development (Rapier, SA-2), others I hope will be added too (various AAA, EWR for all sides, Silkworm ASM etc.).

 

Things for the summer though, for the moment I just want to enjoy the Hornet :)

[Falcaw]

 

Things for the summer though, for the moment I just want to enjoy the Hornet :)

 

Enjoy the Hornet Mbot =)

[falcon_120]

Great news! Looking forward to your improvements MBOT :)

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[QuiGon]

I feel a little bad for neglecting DCE for such a long time. For a couple of months I was away from DCS due to hardware issues and for the past weeks I simply enjoyed playing it again. There is a bunch of stuff that requires attention I think. First I should give DCE a good review on how it tolerated the 2.5 transition. I saw some mentions of problems with AI not attacking their targets. Then there are some areas for which it is now time for improvements:

 

-DCE needs to become a single entity as a base for the ever growing number of different campaigns (right now each campaign has "its own DCE". This should make updates on the base less of a hassle.

-Obviously support for carrier operations got relevant now. We still have to wait and see though how carrier operations will ultimately be handled in DCS (static objects, spawning, AI, uncontrolled aircraft).

-Moving ships. This has been long planned. Now is the time that this finally should be implemented.

-Support for multiple radios.

-Various small improvements.

 

Then of course there is the Persian Gulf map, which offers a lot of exciting new opportunities for campaigns. I have several planned in my head, but the theater needs to consolidate first. The object lists for Iran/UAE/Oman needs to be put together and filled out with relevant new units. Some we have already seen are in development (Rapier, SA-2), others I hope will be added too (various AAA, EWR for all sides, Silkworm ASM etc.).

 

Things for the summer though, for the moment I just want to enjoy the Hornet :)

That's great to hear! :thumbup:

 

I was actually just about to ask how carriers could be defined as bases as they have no airdromeID. Instead they have a helipadID and are referenced as "linkUnit" in landing waypoints for aircraft.

It seems this requires a lot of tweaking in the DCE code to adjust for that?

 

 

Edit: Disregard, I made it work by myself. It wasn't as difficult as I first thought.

Edited June 5, 2018 by QuiGon

[PB0_CEF]

Really good news Mbot :thumbup:

[gorzasty]

Gr8 to hear Mbot!

[QuiGon]

Disregard my question. I managed to modify the engine to support carrier ops :)

[71st_AH Rob]

Care to share the details?

[QuiGon]

Care to share the details?

I'm not really eager share them tbh, because it's a quick and dirty implementation, that is not very safe, although quick tests seemed to work fine. This is only an interim solution for my needs untill Mbot implements proper carrier ops.

 

But if you really want to try it, you can find my ATO_FlightPlan.lua attached, which I took from Mbots Desert Tiger campaign and modified it to accept carriers as airbases. Just replace it with the original ATO_FlightPlan.lua. You can then define carriers as airbases in db_airbases.lua, just like all other airbases. Because carriers don't have an airdromeId, you need to use the helipadId instead. It can be found in a mission file of a mission that has a carrier and an aircraft that has a landing waypoint assigned to the carrier (just like the airdromeId on land airbases).

Here is an example from my db_airbases.lua:

['Stennis'] = {
 x = -151730.15085715,
 y = -285835.33628571,
 elevation = 0,
 airdromeId = 100, --This is actually the helipadId!!!
 ATC_frequency = "0",  
},

The only condition your mission needs to fulfill to make this work is, that you have placed at least 20 other units before placing the carrier in the mission editor. :music_whistling:

 

Let me know if it works for you as well, if you dare to try it :D

ATO_FlightPlan.lua

Edited June 5, 2018 by QuiGon

[71st_AH Rob]

Nice. I tried this and failed using the Vinson with different variations on the name and random ID that appear after the active aerodromes for the theatre but never tried 100. I even tried the unit name since in the selection screen in multiplayer you see the unit name given in the editor as the airfield name.

 

Only thing I would question is how does the elevation work if you set it to 40'?

 

I will try to set up a mission this evening using this, thanks

[QuiGon]

Nice. I tried this and failed using the Vinson with different variations on the name and random ID that appear after the active aerodromes for the theatre but never tried 100. I even tried the unit name since in the selection screen in multiplayer you see the unit name given in the editor as the airfield name.

Did you try this by yourself or did you try this by using my implementation?

Only thing I would question is how does the elevation work if you set it to 40'?

I did set it to 0 and it works just fine, so I never bothered to try different elevations. IIRC 0 was actually the elevation that is used by DCS for landing waypoints on carriers, which is why i have set it to 0 as well.

[PB0_CEF]

Nice job ! It works both for AI and human I suppose ? How many planes can a carrier manage ?

 

One completly different question : did you find iranian skins for F-14 and F-4 ?

I found a skin for F-14 in VSN mod but I was not able to make it work :(

[PB0_CEF]

I'm not really eager share them tbh, because it's a quick and dirty implementation, that is not very safe, although quick tests seemed to work fine. This is only an interim solution for my needs untill Mbot implements proper carrier ops.

 

But if you really want to try it, you can find my ATO_FlightPlan.lua attached, which I took from Mbots Desert Tiger campaign and modified it to accept carriers as airbases. Just replace it with the original ATO_FlightPlan.lua. You can then define carriers as airbases in db_airbases.lua, just like all other airbases. Because carriers don't have an airdromeId, you need to use the helipadId instead. It can be found in a mission file of a mission that has a carrier and an aircraft that has a landing waypoint assigned to the carrier (just like the airdromeId on land airbases).

Here is an example from my db_airbases.lua:

['Stennis'] = {
 x = -151730.15085715,
 y = -285835.33628571,
 elevation = 0,
 airdromeId = 100, --This is actually the helipadId!!!
 ATC_frequency = "0",  
},

The only condition your mission needs to fulfill to make this work is, that you have placed at least 20 other units before placing the carrier in the mission editor. :music_whistling:

 

Let me know if it works for you as well, if you dare to try it :D

 

 

I suppose I need to use my Base_mission template to find the helipadId because it depends on how many units I placed before my CVN ?

[QuiGon]

Nice job ! It works both for AI and human I suppose ? How many planes can a carrier manage ?

 

One completly different question : did you find iranian skins for F-14 and F-4 ?

I found a skin for F-14 in VSN mod but I was not able to make it work :(

I did not have had the time to test this thoroughly, but it seems to work fine for AI and himan players so far. I did only test it with a unit size of no more than 4 aircraft. I didn't bother to test it with bigger unit sizes, because AFAIK the carrier can't take more than 4 so far. I created a reserve unit that has more aircraft and will reeinforce the active unit if necessary. I just pretend the reserve unit are the aircraft in the ships hangar :D

 

I did not even search for iranian skins. For me the major problem is, that the F-4 and F-14 are not even available for Iran. I would be happy if they would just be available for Iran without skins, just like the Su-24M.

For my campaign I used USAF Agressor F-4s and F-14s on red side instead.

 

I suppose I need to use my Base_mission template to find the helipadId because it depends on how many units I placed before my CVN ?

Yes, the helipadId depends on how many units you placed before the CV. That's why you should place 20 units at least before placing the CV to avoid conflicts with the actual airdromeIds.

[PB0_CEF]

I did not even search for iranian skins. For me the major problem is, that the F-4 and F-14 are not even available for Iran. I would be happy if they would just be available for Iran without skins, just like the Su-24M.

For my campaign I used USAF Agressor F-4s and F-14s on red side instead.

It's a smart solution :thumbup:

 

I created a small OvGME file to allow F-14 and F-4 on Iranian side but I'm not sure players will be ready to use this kind of program even if you can put other files like the modified missionscripting.lua or skins for aircrafts :huh:

[71st_AH Rob]

Did you try this by yourself or did you try this by using my implementation?

 

I did set it to 0 and it works just fine, so I never bothered to try different elevations. IIRC 0 was actually the elevation that is used by DCS for landing waypoints on carriers, which is why i have set it to 0 as well.

 

I tried this back in 2.2 with AI aircraft only, I did consider trying the SU-33 but gave up after not getting the AI to work.

 

I thought I read that for the new carrier the alt was 40' ASL for landing. If 0 works no problem. I am working on a mission now but did not get around to the carrier operations last night. Will test tonight I hope.

 

Can this work for multiple carriers?

[QuiGon]

I thought I read that for the new carrier the alt was 40' ASL for landing. If 0 works no problem. I am working on a mission now but did not get around to the carrier operations last night. Will test tonight I hope.

Yes, it is 40 ASL when flying, but for some reason the editor just uses 0 ASL.

 

Can this work for multiple carriers?

Haven't tested it, but it should. At least I can't think of any reason why it shouldn't work. Let me know if it works for you :)

Edited June 6, 2018 by QuiGon

[PB0_CEF]

It seems that every DCE campaign made on Caucasus map doesn't work anymore (since last update ?) : the mission start normally but when you are in the cockpit the game stay with 1-2 FPS even after many minutes waiting :(

I tryed Cristofer's campaigns and it bugs too...

All campaigns made on Nevada map seem to work...

Any idea ?

[Tomsk]

It seems that every DCE campaign made on Caucasus map doesn't work anymore (since last update ?) : the mission start normally but when you are in the cockpit the game stay with 1-2 FPS even after many minutes waiting :(

I tryed Cristofer's campaigns and it bugs too...

All campaigns made on Nevada map seem to work...

Any idea ?

 

It's the weirdest thing .. the framerate is totally unplayable as you say ... until you hit "pause" at which point it immediately jumps (for me) to 90 FPS. You can then look round paused, and everything is totally fine. Until you unpause at which point it's unplayable again.

 

TBH it seems to be the same sort of problem that's been affecting MBot campaigns in DCS generally: big framerate problems when unpaused. It seems the update has just made it much worse for the caucasus that it used to be.

[Tomsk]

Okay so as an update I thought I'd investigate what's going on so here's what I found:

 

- Just removing all the "Static" aircraft made a *HUGE* difference in frame rate. It's still not good (like 20 FPS for me), but it is at least vaguely playable.

- Then removing all of the other aircraft (besides the player's flight) also made a significant difference (goes up to 30 FPS).

- Removing the ground units seemed to matter a lot less, although pruning them down a bit did gain some framerate.

- If you remove *ALL* the ground units, but leave all the aircraft it still runs absolutely terribly (1 FPS).

- If you remove *ALL* the units except the player unit, everything runs just great.

 

I've been working on a script to automatically prune MBot missions down to just the units that are likely to actually participate, which also helps very significantly. The limiting factor does just seem to be number of units, DCS doesn't like missions with more than 100 units in them. It seems it especially hates missions with lots of aircraft in them. I think the reason this issue is limited to the caucasus missions is just that those missions tend to have more units in them. The Nevada ones are sparser, and so have less problems.

 

As a side note the caucasus campaign seems thoroughly bugged in other ways: 9 times out of 10 my plane just explodes on mission start.

Edited June 9, 2018 by Tomsk

[Cristofer]

Working on a F5 campaign on the Gulf map. It´s a small campaign with few units, and it works fine. It has to be something with the newer updates, since I am also working on a campaign in Caucasus and I know it has worked in 2.5 before. Haven´t played for a couple of weeks, and now it´s not working.

[Tomsk]

Working on a F5 campaign on the Gulf map. It´s a small campaign with few units, and it works fine. It has to be something with the newer updates, since I am also working on a campaign in Caucasus and I know it has worked in 2.5 before. Haven´t played for a couple of weeks, and now it´s not working.

 

Oh yeah it has definitely got *much* worse, but I think it's the same sort of problem the Caucasus campaigns always had ... just worse :)