Clients in same flight..

[WildFire]

I know this has been addressed before, couldn't find it with search, but why cant we have multiple clients in the same flight? The problems off the top of my head are-

 

Jtac would have to send data to all the possible ID's in the flight leads group.

Tower comms would have to be redone to take into account multiple ID's in group. Tower comms need improvement anyhow, but for now a tower could just clear a whole flight I would think. I believe that's how it works in real life, doesn't flight lead usually call to tower/approach and declare wing info so the tower can direct and clear the entire flight?

 

Refueling-

Here is why I am asking. To be able to have a flight lead contact the tanker, the tanker count the group/unit ID numbers and then only apply the appropriate comms to each client. Each client would have a selection for pre-contact, and abort. If the connected aircraft is not the aircraft that requested pre-contact the tanker would abort. Only the flight lead, or the first ID in the group would have the option for flight abort refueling. If the current aircraft takes on a full load then the tanker automatically clears the next ID for precontact. And they may abort and the tanker will begin its script for the next aircraft/ID in line.

 

This must be a lot to implement in code, but I think its still worth ED's time to look at, cause right now, I believe, in this realistic simulator the most unrealistic thing is the comms. Everything else seems like it has been given a good looking at, or update.

 

Is there another issue out of scope that Im not even hitting on? Seems like the whole system should be based off the SADL codes.

[Kaiza]

Concur. The fact that the capability to fly in the same flight as your buddy has not been implemented earlier blows my mind.

[harleyblue]

+1

[Eddie]

Until we have a full AI ATC system and drastically improved comms with AI such as tankers and AWACS, being able to choose the client option for unit in the same group wouldn't really add anything.

 

Hopefully further down the line this will arrive.

 

EDIT:

 

Basing the system on SADL codes wouldn't work as seperate flight wouldn't necessarily be in a seperate SADL group. There might be one group for one Package, Sqn or aircraft Type. There is a reason there are 99 IDs per group.

 

The only way to do it would be by callsign, as in RL.

Edited November 24, 2011 by Eddie

[WildFire]

Basing the system on SADL codes wouldn't work as seperate flight wouldn't necessarily be in a seperate SADL group. There might be one group for one Package, Sqn or aircraft Type. There is a reason there are 99 IDs per group.

 

The only way to do it would be by callsign, as in RL.

 

Here's my thoughts on this. So you have a different callsign, as IRL that would not change in flight. However if you were ordered to join another package, your callsign would stay the same however you would change the SADL to match the current package your joining. Which is why this is ok. So even if you had different callsigns you could still join a flight and perform actions such as landing and refueling. This is completely ok.

 

As for memory addressing the solution is simple, at mission start have this trigger~

Hawg1-1 joins game= true , then,

reference hawg1-1 SADL code

Store variable name (SADL code) = Hawg1-1

 

(To talk to the tower for startup we would need the SADL to be preset, which is why we need ME privileges).

 

Now everytime the AI calls a command on SADL code blah blah it equals Hawg1-1 and that gets filled into the AI comms script.

Create another trigger that is defined by each client changing their SADL at anytime so that variables can be overwritten or destroyed any time SADL codes are changed.

 

What we dont want is the client(s) to join an AI flight. And for this a solution is relatively simple. Limit the given SADL codes for clients. If in the ME a skill is selected then a SADL code is auto-generated like it is now. For each AI in that flight have the same SADL group. However modify the A-10C cockpit so that clients cannot select this set of locked AI groups. It is completely ok to take away some of the group numbers since we should never have 99 groups in one mission anyhow, I would rather have functionality rather than complaining about not being able to create a hundred AI groups. I'm not speaking for everyone but I wouldn't doubt that more mission editors would agree with this rather than less. Feel free to chime in, anyone.

 

I for one also believe that we should be able to set our SADL codes in the editor. Seems as this kind of system would base all AI comms off SADL codes we need to be able to manipulate them and modify them to suit our mission as mission editors. Honestly I cant Imagine why players would ever need more than 20 groups. People want to play together, they want to be in groups, so we don't need that many.

 

Even limited at 20 and running 2-ship flights you have room for 10 flights, which is more than enough. Most mission editors use flights of four so that's even less needed groups.

 

Thanks for all the +1's. I hope we can build enough steam here. Keep posting pilots, bring some major attention to this thread.

[Eddie]

Here's my thoughts on this. So you have a different callsign, as IRL that would not change in flight. However if you were ordered to join another package, your callsign would stay the same however you would change the SADL to match the current package your joining.

 

The thing is, your package is not relevant to ATC/AWACS/JTAC etc. A package can consist of any number of aircraft of many different types, operating for different airfields flying totally seperate flight paths and attacking different targets at different times, some using SADL and some not. All that matters for radio comms is your flight callsign.

 

Your method of using SADL wouldn't work because not all aircraft have SADL in the first place (Ka-50 for example, as well as many NATO aircraft). Also, SADL IDs could always change in flight. And what if your aircraft has a SADL failure? How would that work out?

 

Callsign is the method by which radio comms are carried out IRL and that is how it should be in the sim. While your solution could work in theory, it's just making the situation unnecessarily complicated.

 

The only thing having clients in the same flight would give is the ability for the ME to give each aircraft it's correct -1, -2, -3, -4 callsign. And even then it isn't always correct as in many cases flights will not have callsigns -1, -2, -3, -4. You may have a 2 ship flight who's callsigns are Ugly 56 and Ugly 57 for example.

 

The only thing we really need is the ability to edit the 2nd digit of the callsign in the ME. At the moment this can be done, but as I already alluded to, you have to unzip the .miz file and edit the mission file manually using Notepad++.

[WildFire]

Wait a second.... You got my attention. If you do this change, which I will have to try anyhow, will it work to refuel? Will the tanker see both aircraft and allow you to refuel with it, or does it still recognize each client as a separate flight? Hmm...

 

Ok I see your thinking with SADL, understandable. So we base it off callsigns. So in essence you could not join flights mid-air, unfortunate. But if we could just get it to work with one flight, forget all the joining strike packages and stuff, if we could have a full flight of four working, that would be enough at least.

[Eddie]

The tanker will still communicate to each aircraft seperately. This is nothing to do with callsigns or anything else, it's how the sim is designed. Until or unless ED redesign the system it's how it will always be.

 

At the moment DCS is still very much singleplayer-centric. Although there are continuous improvements being made to the multiplayer side of things, it still has a way to go.

 

Everything regarding comms would very likely need to be redesigned from the ground up (ATC/AWACS/Tanker/AI Flights) much the same as JTAC in order to achive what you are talking about.

 

Rest assured you're not alone, hopefully at some point in the future ED will be able to develop these features, but if they do it'll be part of a new module rather than a patch for an existing module.

[WildFire]

I think its about time we enlist the help of some F4 mod programmers. Or any programmer for that matter. I wish I was educated enough to figure it out.

 

If some highly gifted individual were to work on this and perhaps pass it to ED for integration or just release it as a mod, I would be more than willing to donate to the cause. Of course sound files will have to be completely redone and added but its not impossible.

 

Heck, MSFSX and ED so far have shown me that pretty much anything is possible. All I want for christmas........ do da do:music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

ED programmers are quite gifted. Get over the 'hire sim x programmers' BS.

 

Eddie, I think a small, in-game interface to change C/S and number would work out just fine IMHO. Just a little box that comes up with a drop down list, and you make the changes there - and then the sim knows.

 

As a bonus, the AI could also take advantage of this and automatically (or by trigger/other game logic) join/split flights.

[WildFire]

How dare you assume I was taking away anything from ED programmers by saying we should enlist extra help. Especially since I said they have taught me that the impossible is possible. And I wasnt talking about hiring anyone, I was talking about donating to a valid cause.

 

A call to the mod community takes nothing from ED.

 

Your a moderator, not an enforcer, take it easy home-slice.

 

And I like how you addressed Eddie as if I wasn't part of the conversation anymore, respect.