Jump to content


Photo

DCG 3.49 Open Beta Test


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#1 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 24 March 2016 - 04:29 AM

The first beta for 3.49 has been posted.

 

 

Additions to Version 3.49

Updated links to online website and support.  Improved logic for long distance missions.  However, for best results, users should use the Aircraft Class Settings Panel to update the ranges of all active plans to their historical stats.

Note: After installing, remember to reset your basic options and, if using DGen or NGen Replacement modes, make sure these options are re-checked before running IL-2 Forgotten Battles, Pacific Fighters or 1946.  Mods which have made changes to the event log may not work with IL2DCG.



#2 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 25 March 2016 - 12:44 PM

Thank you so much! It will be a short day at work so I will get to testing!



#3 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 28 March 2016 - 12:32 AM

Paul I have been testing 3.49 at it seems that even setting mission radius of 700KM, my patrol radius remains the same. Not to mention this is the only mission I get when I select a fighter "Protect Base". It seems both sides are circling there air bases in a defensive posture.

 

My map is BQx33 not sure sq.km that is.

 

I am going to go back to 3.48 to see if there is a difference.

 

Thank you!



#4 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 28 March 2016 - 05:15 AM

If you open BQx33 in the full mission builder and then add any flyable plane and make it the player's.  Then put the first waypoint of the plane over your base and the second over one of the enemy bases.

 

If you save it and start the mission, it should show you the distance between the two points on the map.  Maybe it's less than 700KMs.



#5 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 06 April 2016 - 05:53 AM

I've uploaded the 2nd beta.

 

It has some tweaks to Combat Air Patrol missions.



#6 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 06 April 2016 - 04:15 PM

Rodger that!



#7 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 15 April 2016 - 05:10 PM

Hi Paul - Just wondering if you made any changes to how DCG assigns runways with this latest version?



#8 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 19 April 2016 - 01:56 AM

No changes there.



#9 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 30 April 2016 - 03:01 PM

Paul - Can you please re-post 3.49 beta 1 please? I had more success with that version.

 

Thanks!



#10 Riksen

Riksen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 30 April 2016 - 07:25 PM

Amazing job with the new version of dcg Lo. The customization option for the columns is a great addition. One question, if u dont mind, is there anyway to have wind in the missions? It keeps generating missions with random weather (as it should) but it never has any wind speed

#11 JG7_X_Man

JG7_X_Man

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 01 May 2016 - 06:53 PM

Hi Paul - Just wondering if you made any changes to how DCG assigns runways with this latest version?

 

Nevermid - User error.



#12 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 03:29 AM

:lol:



#13 Riksen

Riksen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 06:03 PM

Regarding the wind?

#14 sniperton

sniperton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 03 May 2016 - 09:05 PM

Hi Lo, first, and again, I honestly thank you for maintaining DCG. Bad news for you that currently DCG is the only campaign generator which is regularly updated and maintained.

 

Even worse news is that Moezilla and me are close to release a DCG compatibility mod for CUP WAW, and I'm fairly close to release a data integrity tool which will half-automate importing game data to DCG. No more hassle with hyphens and underscores, with uppercase/lowercase, and with incompatible loadouts resulting in CTDs and pink planes (feature only available for modded games).

 

I have two questions regarding this. First, if DCG still checks aircraft availabilty on the availability of the corresponding skin folder, is this check case sensitive or insensitive? If case sensitive, I modestly ask you to turn it to case insensitive.

 

Second, how does DCG deal with "none" loadouts? Specifying "none" as ground attack loadout, for instance, does prevent DCG from assigning a ground attack mission for that plane, or means that that plane will fly an unarmed mission in the next turn?

 

Thanks



#15 Riksen

Riksen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 04 May 2016 - 01:34 PM

Great news sniperton! Hope u can share ur work with us as well :)



#16 sniperton

sniperton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:05 PM

Sure, it will be up as soon as all the internal problems in WAW are fixed.



#17 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 03:56 AM


I have two questions regarding this. First, if DCG still checks aircraft availabilty on the availability of the corresponding skin folder, is this check case sensitive or insensitive? If case sensitive, I modestly ask you to turn it to case insensitive.

 

Second, how does DCG deal with "none" loadouts? Specifying "none" as ground attack loadout, for instance, does prevent DCG from assigning a ground attack mission for that plane, or means that that plane will fly an unarmed mission in the next turn?

 

1. I'm pretty sure it's case sensitive, but I can certainly make it insensitive in the next beta.

 

2. There is no "none" loadout allowed for ground attack.  Even if a plane has no bombs/rockets, DCG may give it a ground attack mission with "default" weapons.  The chances of a mission are based on the aircraft class that's been assigned to the type.  "None" is allowed for specialized anti-air and for anti-shipping.  For anti-air, it just means the default will be used, but for anti-shipping, it means the plane will never be assigned anti-shipping strikes.



#18 sniperton

sniperton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 09:08 AM

1. I'm pretty sure it's case sensitive, but I can certainly make it insensitive in the next beta.

 

2. There is no "none" loadout allowed for ground attack.  Even if a plane has no bombs/rockets, DCG may give it a ground attack mission with "default" weapons.  The chances of a mission are based on the aircraft class that's been assigned to the type.  "None" is allowed for specialized anti-air and for anti-shipping.  For anti-air, it just means the default will be used, but for anti-shipping, it means the plane will never be assigned anti-shipping strikes.

 

#1 Thank you. Il2 seems to check those folders in a case insensitive way, and present-day DCG doesn't find several (in fact, hundreds of) folders which are still there. 

 

#2 I ask it because I had to make an alternate interface where the imported data can be adjusted, and it is one thing what the interface allows/enforces, and another what exactly DCG does with the data entered. (Think of the transit altitude setting, where DCG accepts and processes any numeric value, while the interface only allows them in large increments.) I try to restrict the use of the loadout slots as DCG does in the following way (is this correct?)

 

default:                  default + A

ground attack        default + B

level attack            default + B

anti-shipping         default + none [= prevents from ship attack] + B + T 

anti-air                  default + none [= default] + A

long range            none [= ?] + D,

 

where "default" as a choice means the base configuration of the plane with no bombs or extra guns, and choosing "default" doesn't keep the plane from that type of mission (correct?).     

 

As to long range: Does "none" suppress long range (bomber escort) missions, or does it only imply that the plane will fly with its "default" loadout?

Furthermore, we already have plenty of fighter bombers with a mixed payload of bombs and droptanks. Shall the user stay away from those loadouts as "D" (unless he wants them to be sent on escort missions with bombs and droptanks)? 

 

Finally, for all slots, is the default loadout nominal, or inherited from the default slot? Let me explain. If I specify an "A" as default loadout, and "default" as a ground attack payload, will then the ground attack be performed with an "A" loadout?

 

I hear you cry "where's my gun?"  :wacko:  :)



#19 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 05:53 PM

You have the options correct.  Long range set to "none" will mean that fighters will not escort beyond their range (if droptanks are selected, they will be given missions beyond their range).  If no range for that aircraft type has been set, the default is 300kms (I think).

 

The default loadout (as per the DCG option) is only for non-combat missions (base transfers or supply runs).  It will never be used for a combat mission.  A ground attack payload will always be determined from the ground attack loadout.

 

There's no option for bomb + droptank combos...a designer could set the range of a ground attack plane to beyond it's operational range and then give it bombs + droptanks as it's ground attack loadout.  But that's up to the designer.

 

Did I get them all???

 

Oh, yeah, I just checked the code and it looks like it isn't case sensitive.  I'll have to test if that is really true.



#20 Lowengrin

Lowengrin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 660 posts

Posted 06 May 2016 - 05:56 PM

On closer inspection, it isn't case sensitive. 

 

The problem may be that the ID for Dogfight missions doesn't match the paintscheme skin name...?

 

I need a specific example for further testing...if there are any in the non-modded version I'm using.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1)