Great campaing, only one issue worth mentioning so far.

[vilson.farias]

Reflected,

I'm playing the JG26 campaing and I noticed that durign the second B17 raid (I think it's mission 4), the bombers dissapear after some time. My group missed the front attack, for some reason we were not high enough, so I had to turn around the B17s and get some more altitude before I could try the frontal pass. It took me a while and when I was just about to start my attack, then suddenly the first formation disappeared, few seconds later the second and then all the bomber were gone. I suppose there's an area trigger for that, maybe you can move it farther. I will retry this mission again during the weekend (I can save a track if you like). 

Although it's not cheap, since WWII scenarios require new planes, maps and even the WWII assets before we can try one of your campaings, playing the JG26 campaing makes me feel the investiment worths every penny. It is simply beautiful, rich in details and pleasant to fly. Thanks for such great work.

I hope you get inspired to create new historical/non-historical campaings for the warbirds. As people like you add more great content to WWII period, the ecosystem gets richer and therefore more people try it. For example, my friends and I only buy new planes if there is at least one good scripted campaing available. DCS has two great WWII European maps, several warbirds but still very few campaings. Most of the planes have campaings for only one of the maps, some planes like the Fw190 D9, which has been available for ages, still don't have any.

Best, Vilson

 

[Reflected]

Hi @vilson.farias, thanks so much for the feedback!

You're right, the B-17s were deactivated by a trigger. I do need to do this, deactivate units that are no longer relevant/ out of sight, because even if they're far away, they cost a lot of FPS. My campaigns are full of optimization tricks like this.

I checked the mission, the bombers get deactivated halfway across the Channel, or if you are outside of 25 miles of the lead bomber. This gives you 45 miles to harass the bombers, and I think you were the first one so persistent as to cross the Channel half way

I could move the zone, but that would mean worse performance for those who break off earlier  I have to find a compromise. In real life in 1944 you made 1 or maximum 2 passes and then high tailed it home to avoid the escort fighters - which are there in the mission too, albeit not very keen to fight despite having the task to protect the bombers, but that's a different question that belongs to the table of the DCS AI team.

BTW what do you mean your group wasn't high enough? You should have been co-alt with the bombers by the time you turned back to face them. What was your altitude at that point and where on the map were you when they started their climb after takeoff?

There used to be an AI bug that prevented them from climbing properly - are you using the latest open beta?

[Reflected]

Yepp, just checked, it's the same AI bug that ruins the mission. They fly level over the water instead of climbing, no wonder they end up too low to intercept. Sent a track to @[ED]Ben

[vilson.farias]

Hi @Reflected

"I think you were the first one so persistent as to cross the Channel halfway"

Probably hahaha . As we reached the formation, the BF109 squadron decided to turn and start a back attack. They got all the escorts on their tails, which gave me time to climb more and align with the bomber formation. I was almost there when the B17s disappeared.  

I usually create simple missions to play with my friends online, so I completely understand there must be some triggers like that in order to keep good performance.

Regarding the bug you mentioned, I remember I noticed the squadron wasn't gaining altitude even after we had the information on the radio telling the formation was at 7.000m. I didn't know it would be caused by a bug tough.

Besides the low-level flight bug, I also noticed the Bf109 squadron is using 1.42ATA for climbing (that's how much I'm using in order to not get behind). I would expect 1.3-1.35, but I'm not sure if the K series engine would be more robust to the point we could keep higher manifold pressure without methanol injection (MW50) for longer periods. That's one of the reasons it took me so long to finish my climbing and prepare my frontal attack: once I realized the whole squadron was turning and the escorts were intercepting them, I reduced to 1.3 in order to avoid any engine failure during my remaining climbing/aligning.

I do use Open-Beta. Do you suggest the official version instead? Well, maybe it would be a good idea besides disabling as many mods as possible. In the current campaign, the only mod that I use is one that replaces the Bf109 interior.

Best, 

Vilson

[Reflected]

4 hours ago, vilson.farias said:

 

Besides the low-level flight bug, I also noticed the Bf109 squadron is using 1.42ATA for climbing (that's how much I'm using in order to not get behind). I would expect 1.3-1.35, but I'm not sure if the K series engine would be more robust to the point we could keep higher manifold pressure without methanol injection (MW50) for longer periods. That's one of the reasons it took me so long to finish my climbing and prepare my frontal attack: once I realized the whole squadron was turning and the escorts were intercepting them, I reduced to 1.3 in order to avoid any engine failure during my remaining climbing/aligning.

Yeah, the way the AI climbs is hard coded, you can't edit that in the mission editor. I reported it to ED that the AI 109 climbs at 1.45 ATA even if they are not given any MW50. This was about 2 years ago...