Jump to content


Some DCG Requests & Suggestions (rather long...)

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Slink



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 31 January 2012 - 03:13 PM

Greetings Paul, you may have already seen some of this at SAS, but I’m finally putting it updated here “officially”. Rather long, sorry, and intended as suggestions not demands, but maybe some catch your interest while looking at the 4.11 update, which probably means you already have your hands full, but if you don’t ask...

First is the column width in the DCG payloads file, apparently currently still at 20 characters as I can’t get it to accept anything else, which cuts out a whole series of payloads for many planes in SAS DBW. The longest of these is currently 48 characters, which is rather extreme, but extending the width to 35 to match the other columns would help a lot.

Another thought here is that the strings used for these loadouts are often impossibly cryptic, but players have to try and work out what xyz3 could be, when there are in fact legible text strings available in the weapons.properties files, so could these not also be referenced to provide meaningful descriptions for weapons selections? Would require a GUI change, or the display box still has some space? Same could be done for the plane names, use the planes.properties entries instead of the air.ini entries (so we don’t have to suffer the sons of bitches syndrome etc.)

Updating Stock Campaigns
The original DCG campaigns are stock only, and getting a little dated in respect to new content. As DBW represents the new offline modded standard is there a case and/or permission to rework/update the standard campaign set to use the new content available in DBW? Everyone could do this for themselves of course, but it seems the logical expansion/addition to providing the compatibility files in the first place. This wouldn’t change basic DCG itself; just provide an alternate set of mission template/timetable files in much the same way as the basic compatibility files.

Display missions flown in addition to kills, just as or even more relevant for assessing their skills.

Total results in the debrief, can be extremely long and very hard to get an overview, maybe the details follow the overview?

Show the unit for the aces display in addition to base. Separate bomber/ground kill aces from air kill fighter/aces. Sort by #kills. Reduce/remove kills assignment for new /replacement pilots, some come in as mega aces, should be rare.

Split displayed pilots into groups of four, colour the text red, green etc; flights can be moved up and down the list by player as part of squad management, (rotated automatically for AI), flights change position in list so all pilots get to fly and progress, and also get to rest.
Increase possible squad pilots to realistic numbers, squad rotation allowing the extras (in white) to simply be off duty but eventually get their turn.

Remap GUI mask to fill the full window allowing vastly more space for display/functions, and a bigger font. This is a great problem for me, and I’m sure for many other players also getting on a bit, a considerable percentage of us not being teenagers anymore, and 640/800 is really a legacy these days, but currently the GUI only uses the centre section of the limited available space and I have to lean in close to read anything. This should be a once-only job, and would also allow some extended campaign/squad management functions; increasing the GUI size would provide space for all these options and also bring DCG up to date visually; I use 2560 resolution, so you can imagine how small the DCG screen is, and if you knew how thick my glasses are…

Extend squad list from a single display drop-down to a multiple-entry scrolling list down the left side for a better overview, and move all editing functions onto the right panel for each squad. Selecting a squad on the left then opens the extended squad-editing panel on the right for each squad, the larger GUI allowing incorporation of squad specific functions.

Ranks, Names & Aces
Always having the highest possible rank as leader of each squad produces some odd results, every RAF squadron being led by a group captain for example. I changed the ranks to have squadron leader as highest rank, but larger formations do need a higher rank, but Stabs cannot be coordinated with Gruppen for example. A max rank for squadron level units and reserve the top for Stab/Wing? (See SetGroup on this issue).

This also becomes a problem when I assign a list of aces and historical squadron leaders in the aces.dcg file, although they have the correct rank there is generally already a max rank pilot created to lead the squad, defeating the object of assigning the historical personnel.

General name assignment also interferes with this, as everybody comes out with the same names as the actual aces themselves, and the number of “name changed” reports can be extensive. Any way to change or switch this off?

Could we have a namesgb.dcg (etc.) file where everything can be listed, changed, added to or customised, and integrate the aces here or let them override the general function?

This could also be extended to nationalities in general, separate lists of squads with red/blue assignment allowing the use of additional nationalities and blue “alternative” squad lists for various scenarios like post-war or Vichy France. (Already out , I know)

Also useful for historical recreations would be having the squadrons and pilots.dcg lists also function in campaign generation, so these can be preset for all units in the campaign, along with specific skins, skills, kills etc, allowing all unit personnel to be set up for the campaign start, also good for carrier groups and historical/famous units.

Replacements currently always take the place of a lost pilot, could replacements be generally of low rank (currently one rank lower, but where do these pilots come from?) Lost commanders would be replaced by the existing next highest rank, making promotions and experienced officers far more relevant.


Attack Rendezvous
Can’t find an explanation of how this works precisely, is it a pre-target or over-target rendezvous point?

Squad Balance
Always seems to give an allied majority whatever the setting, broken?

Loadout based mission type exclusion
Giving a plane none for a loadout type should exclude it from that mission type, but if I do this for the Ju87s, putting none for the ground attack/level loadouts to make them concentrate on anti-shipping, I get squads flying search and destroy ground target missions but with no bombs, so they fly in, even escorted, and just fly out again. Seems to work for some but not others?

An incidental point here concerning sea/floatplanes, which seem to always run out of fuel and make forced landings before getting back to base. I don’t really see how this could be DCG related, maybe more AI throttle control, but has this come up before?

Time checking
Sometimes after a long mission there is a time warp where the next mission begins before the last one ended. Record the end time of the previous mission and allow an hour for rearming/refuelling, with always the chance of a surprise raid catching you scrambling on the ground with only half fuel?

Seems to be difficult, I have squads flying past/over convoys, but never actually finding it and attacking. I know they have to fly to the next waypoint and then turn back, and ship waypoints should therefore not be too widely separated, but this means my convoys tend to stop in the middle of the mission. Any ideas, could they be slowed down, they are currently really rather fast for merchant convoys. Also find that if a ship does get hit and go down, any realistic sinking times (modded) mean the following ship will ram the wreck and also go down. Could the convoy offset be adjusted so the ships are not actually in line and cannot run into each other? Targeting is a problem too, with entire units attacking a single ship in a convoy to the exclusion of any others. At least a max of one flight per ship, starting from the largest or centre ship.

Automatic ZigZag waypoint generation for ships/convoys
Instead of a straight line the path zigs/zags in/out a km or so every x km. Tricky with station keeping and collisions though.

If I use naval ships they seem to generate front markers along their waypoints, dramatically changing the front line, even extending over land and removing coastal units, and giving away their positions. Is this a game function or can it be suppressed? Maybe only capital ships should get front markers?

Intercepts = 0, particularly if there is no radar, otherwise players are forced to accept interceptions whether they like it or not, even if it's completely unrealistic, and brings up more problems as here;

Interceptions glitch in game
Using a large map becomes problematic as the game intercept system makes no consideration of the actual distance to the intercept, there is only set target and the green lines. This ignores the actual flight path of a squad and simply sends them off to wherever with no consideration of range and fuel, so I get 109s from Leeuwarden flying across the North Sea to intercept at Filton, if they ever make it that is never mind getting back. The whole concept in game is inherently flawed, as without radar there can only be scrambles following visual detection, and weather dependent, apart from instances such as a single Intel intercept in the Pacific, and even if there is radar, interceptions would still have to be limited to a specific range at least.

Equally, there is no feasibility checking in DCG, the Leeuwarden flight should clearly not receive an intercept on the opposite side of the map, and particularly when other squads are much closer anyway. This also appears to be part of a problem with squad selection and mission assignment, see more on this below. Could DCG not however plan intercepts all the way to the interception point, calculating range, and then set the actual intercept from a specific waypoint set close enough to simulate visual contact? This would avoid flights magically changing course at 100km away if the target somehow gets involved in something else, although they would still set off as if by magic toward the new position...

Squad selection routine
Currently DCG seems to select squads from the list according to their position, but only semi-randomly as there seem to be particular positions which almost always repeat, especially at low density settings, and then looks for possible missions for these squads according to their type. If there are none available however, a squad can end up being given a recce assignment as there is nothing else to do. Would it not be better to check for possible missions first and then select squads according to role and distance from target, also then avoiding the intercepts problem above? Would also make the list order less crucial and dominating, and remove the need to constantly juggle them around in the timetable/mission files, especially as combat reduced or weary squads should be rested, unless you’re flying Axis of course… but is the list priority selection actually valid anyway, wouldn’t squads in hot areas near the front with more targets get more missions, so it would depend more on their distance from the front, and their selection priority would change as they get transferred to and from the main action.

An extended timetable can get rather large and unmanageable, in my BoB campaign it’s currently around 20,000 lines condensed, but repeats eight times, once for each campaign section, and will extend in future, so perhaps the timetable could be referenced using separate sections in separate files for each campaign section in the grand campaign. Smaller, easier to edit, giving an overview of branching structures, and easier to read, edit and compare, allowing unlimited expansion without producing a vast text file, they would simply become another standard file in the set for each mission along with mis, rds etc.

Could DCG also read and apply timetable events when Time Passage is high or even when the date is advanced? Things seem to currently get skipped, which kind of defeats the object. This would allow campaigns to transfer over purely through the timetable, which currently only works if the transfer date doesn't get skipped over, which would also allow all squad creations to be made in the timetable instead of the mission template file, much easier and more practical, especially for editing!

SetTime in Timetable
This currently allows starting the first mission at a specific time, but cannot be applied to other events like AttackRendevouz (or weather…) which seem to be valid for all missions during that day, so once set the same action gets repeated again each time. Could this be appended to other functions allowing them to only be valid for perhaps even a specific from-to period?

AlwaysActive in Timetable
Is again always valid, meaning it has to be switched on and off constantly as any squad flying permanently will eventually lose too many planes, and a timetable entry is valid for the entire day, so if there are four missions they could end up being decimated in a single day with the characteristic IL2 aerial slaughter. Could this be instead valid in the GUI as is for simplicity, but flexible in the timetable with an appended time (from-to?) to allow specific events to be “recreated” but also allowing the squads involved to stand down again afterwards and recover with reverse transfers of below strength squads to the rear?

Final waypoints
Should always be set severally some distance behind the home airbase, just before landing sequence, to prevent dummy behaviour all the way home as soon as a flight reaches the penultimate waypoint and gets the return to base order. This can’t be helped if the order comes mid-mission for some reason, like running out of ammo, particularly annoying for patrols intercepting raids, running out of ammo and then becoming sitting ducks for the still present raiders to pick off, an AI issue that would have to be changed in game, but could at least be reduced. These final waypoints could also reduce the altitude so there is no endless circling down from altitude before entering the landing circuit, and if there are several incoming flights close together then one could be sent low and the other high to provide some separation, assuming they aren't all shot down before in typical IL2 aerial slaughter fashion.

Bomber Delay
I very often find formations taking off and making wide detours or even flying back into home territory before setting off toward the target, some then arriving up to one hour after mission start (!) Maybe on the small stock maps they need to gain some altitude but on bigger maps it makes the controller wonder the hell his flights are actually going. Could there be a calculation of transit path distance to altitude gain so formations can fly directly to target (or ingress points)?


Interlinked weather

SetWeather – weather parameters in game set historically by date/time in timetable, allowing recreation of historical conditions or deliberate conditions as part of the campaign.

SetCloudHeight – full extended range, inc. ground level for fog.

SetWind – speed, direction, gust

Bad weather should also generally come with lower cloud and higher winds/gusts, but could be overridden in the timetable to produce specific conditions if required. It would also be possible to extend the available weather settings in the game, allowing gales (high winds but no clouds), fog (ground level clouds but no wind) and violent storms (thunderstorms with very high winds/gusts).

If stationary objects could be placed/removed on the timetable it would be possible to set storm front objects to reproduce inclement conditions on a day to day basis, and even have them move from day to day (or mission if there was a linked time of day function). Have been experimenting with getting these to pop in and out according to red/blue status along a fluctuating but relatively static frontline (in the channel) for unpredictable effects, but this wouldn’t work for advancing front lines on most maps.

This also requires linking squad assignments/density/time progression to the prevailing weather, as there were no all-weather aircraft during this period, and apart from specific deliberate exceptions like Bodenplatte, air operations should generally be reduced during bad weather to mostly recce and limited interceptions and patrols, so these are automatically reduced in inclement weather, helping frame rates too and avoiding flying too many missions with little activity in inclement conditions; override in timetable for specific scenarios.

Could also be selectable separately for both sides, allowing an attacking force to already be approaching the target as the mission begins, and the defenders having to take off to meet them, possibly extended to aircraft role types, where bombers will airstart but not fighters, and even a squad level set function in the timetable for specific instances?

Calculated prioritised airstarts would prioritise slower aircraft/bombers so long flight times are minimised, start positions being calculated back from when the first bomber or recce reaches the ingress or a reasonable detection point, the rest following in chronological sequence. Fighter CAPs and patrols should still be in place, but intercepts should only take off when there is a fair chance their target would be detected, (start delay) which could also be weather dependent, and would of course require a Radar Present switch to allow/exclude long range/inclement detection/interception, excluding intercepts completely and requiring standing patrols as was the historical case.


SetDelay - Axis/Allied/SQN/ROLE/TYPE allows delay to be set specifically to avoid runway spawn traffic problems or produce waves, or delay most fighter take offs so they are not all ready to return to base as the enemy raids come in, player has to be excepted of course.

Set Squad Balance – allows changes mid-campaign, max effort or conserve resources.

Set Max Flights Axis/Allied/SQN/ROLE/TYPE – allows changes mid-game for either entire air force, such as for fuel restrictions, or particular aircraft types or even squads due to low serviceability for example, which could be another linked variable, if planes are in constant max effort then available planes are reduced, remaining become stationary and can be destroyed in airfield attacks. Primary function is however the split between sides, allowing the attackers to use larger formations, particularly for bombers, and defenders to conserve resources.

Set Resupply – Axis/Allied/SQN/ROLE/TYPE – change to two variables for increased granularity, plane number times day number, i.e. 1/2/3 planes every 5/6/7 days etc; allows total differentiation and flexibility of squad resupply, currently for the entire air force, but could be set for individual squads, giving preferred units or some which are cut off, and for aircraft classes or even specific types, allowing some types to be in plentiful supply, and others to be or become fairly rare with fewer replacements as time progresses, or land units to have resupply but carrier units to be limited.

Set Skill Progression – historical progression/balanced/slow/med/fast
Axis advantage turning to allied advantage historically, or custom progression, good for what-if or minor conflicts, or timetable controlled only.

Set Ingress/Egress Altitude Axis/Allied/n/Squad, where n is the type code, hi/med/lo/random or specific for squads. For general use allows high flying fighters with med or low bombers, all types can have different ingress/egress heights, giving much greater variation, and allowing this to be changed in mid-campaign without having to edit it manually on the GUI, much like setting loadouts, so tactics can be changed giving much greater flexibility.

Another variation would be an above/below cloud extension, so bombers or recce would have to fly below the cloud height to see anything (if conditions are relatively bad), obviously with a minimum so they don’t try and fly below the fog… transit heights being for economic cruise should pretty much stay the same.

Add/Remove Stationary function in timetable; currently a new mission file is required to add or remove objects, meaning that if there is to be any change in a long campaign there has to be an entire new campaign section as well, which can only realistically be done so often. My campaign has eight currently, about every two weeks, which really only allows me to change the AA density and static ships arrangements so it doesn’t always look the same at Dover. Being able to add/remove objects in the timetable would allow new campaign sections to only come at appropriate player entry points, and new targets to pop up, possibly temporarily, at any time in the campaign not just at the transition points. Some very useful new objects would also become more practical, Stormfronts (CY6) could even appear at a specific time on a specific day, and be made to appear to move across a map over several days for example. This also links in with the next request below.

In combination with weather settings this would allow changing the map to alter the conditions without changing to a new campaign section, allowing the map used to be changed directly through the timetable at any point in the campaign. This is not intended to swap from one theatre to another, rather allow variations in conditions on the same map on a daily basis if required, such as date, pressure, temperature, using different file references in the separate load.ini files). All that is required is a set of load.ini files, one for each day/required change. Airfield friction values or even textures could be swapped here for wet weather, snowy days, etc; allowing fairly realistic conditions on a day to day basis, theoretically could even have a time of day or SetTime link to allow things to change from fog and waterlogged airfields in the morning to bright sunshine and smooth take offs in the afternoon. A lot of work for designers, but some of us are that crazy, and once a set of historical conditions/load.ini files are put together for a map area for a certain period there is no need to repeat the work. This would also allow the actors file to be adjusted, again on a daily basis if required, so map objects can be changed around, statics can appear to move, airfields, bridges and fortifications can appear to be constructed or destroyed. Even the tides could be modelled if someone wanted to go that far, but would be highly relevant for Sealion...

Set Stance – extension or replacement for squad balance, each side can be on the offensive, defensive, or neutral. Similar to “attacker” in allcampaigns but can change mid-campaign, controls squad and mission type selection, escorted attack/bombers for offensive, CAPs and intercepts for defensive, lots of recce for neutral, and squad balance in favour of the attackers. Allows a defensive side to mount a counter attack operation in the middle of the campaign, back to Bodenplatte.

Set Operational Range – currently a frontline squad can be assigned to defend say an airbase on the other side of the map, or even behind the lines, although there are other squads much closer and second line squads should be defending frontline airbases, not frontline squads defending second line airbases, so this would restrict them to defending their own base/area/carrier with much greater time on station and no long trips from A to B. Could also restrict attack planes from deep penetration missions unless specifically set to do so. This is not the same as setting the range, which can currently only be done on the GUI, and gives squads missions which are in total no longer than that range, which also sends CAPs/patrols home early instead of remaining on station.

SetGroup – links a group of squads in DCG to make a larger formation operating together which is then selected as a whole unit in DCG. This would allow bombers to be grouped into larger formations for bigger raids, with attached escorts included, and fighter wings for mass intercepts, allowing anything from RAF big wings to coordinated Luftwaffe attacks on US bomber groups.
Waypoint planning could be tricky here, as speed variations would be required for turns, and enough spacing to avoid collisions especially with escorts, making US combat boxes still problematic, but assigning a lead formation as target and letting the rest follow doesn’t work as the followers will always indeed follow, all the way down to the ground…
A way around this could be to use flights in close column formation so one follows the other, but without actually being linked, either at the same height or with some vertical separation for safety, escorts always being a problem, and allowing an approximation of a combat box. Groups cannot be assigned in game, but individual squads in an escorting group could each be set to escort individual squads in the bomber group.

Set Escort – allows specific escorts (squads or groups) to be defined for another flight or group, see above, could be both timetable and GUI like currently with SetEnemy.

Set Escort Rendezvous – allow escorts to join bombers at specific points, before or after target, as organised for long range bombers, otherwise once the original escorts are engaged or out of ammo the bombers are alone on the way back.

Set Form Up Rendezvous – bomber flights assemble over friendly territory (airstarts?) to move into enemy airspace as a group. May be similar or linked to current AttackRendezvous, (but there is no description of this function available, is it the actual attack point or a form up point, and valid for all four possible missions in a day? Equally, can there be multiple points?)

Set Target Zone – Axis/Allied/SQN/ROLE/TYPE – Units can be directed to attack targets in a specific area according to types/roles, so attack planes may go to one area at the front while bomber types are set to target an area further back.

Set Mission type
In the same way as currently for the player squad simply extended to all squads, so they can each be given a specific function if required even if using the same plane type (loadout selections/restrictions won’t work for fighters with default loadouts) so it would be possible to have bomber squads and anti shipping squads both using Ju88s for example, or set my Coastal Command Blenheim IVFs to patrol convoys, see below.


Additional Ingress/Egress Altitude in class.dcg would allow HI-LO-HI missions etc; planes fly economically to target but can change both speed and altitude when entering enemy airspace, currently there are two cruise speed settings, but always the same altitude, so 109s for example have to fly either low for fuel economy or high for historical tactics, but it’s a case of either or. See set function above.

Night/Maritime/Long-Range Fighter Squad Settings
Using Extremely Slow time progression, missions are mostly during daylight but sometimes at night, whereby some types should be excluded from operations and others specifically included, with the player always representing the obvious exception. To allow a primarily day campaign to have both night and day action, without having night fighters/bombers also flying during daylight, could there be an additional squad switch which would exclude/allow squads to also operate at night? This could exclude dive bombers during darkness, and night fighters/bombers/intruders/night witches during daylight, to provide an extra element of variety to the campaign experience and make searchlights/balloons practical assets. This would extend campaign design, allowing dedicated units to fly night operations without plane type limitations, and even change their role mid-campaign, and also allow the same campaign to be used for both day and night missions, extending their range of application and reducing the need for multiple versions of the same campaigns.

The same could be done for maritime squads, the squad level again avoiding plane type limitations (so two squads can use the same plane but in different roles, like Do17s or Ju88s in both bombing and anti-shipping squads, and also allows target type concentration and role changing, from a ground-attack Stuka unit to an anti-shipping Stuka unit. These would then only receive missions over water as suiting their role, and should not really fly inland. (Needs land/water/coastline recognition below).

Dedicated long-range fighters could also be dedicated to long-range missions, leaving local defence/interceptions to the fighters; mixed-role planes like Zeroes would still need to maintain the existing flexibility.

Advanced Recce
This was being looked at, and would certainly add to campaign development, mobile targets and ships otherwise being subject to all-seeing satellite vision, and recce planes currently being just targets, shooting them down would then become crucial as in reality. Perhaps recce flights could just be set to primarily fly missions early in the day or in poor weather while the other squads are mostly grounded waiting for the results? This would allow a kind of routine to develop where the usual early morning recce flights precede the day’s major actions, maybe no attacks on ship convoys unless these have been previously spotted? (Requires a record of a successful recce mission). Ground units might on the frontline be spotted in other ways, but those in rear areas could also be excluded unless there is a successful recce mission (or simply along the flight path (radio at intersection point, check distance along flight path if recce is shot down). Could also be a variable for cloud conditions, no spotting in thunderstorms for example.

Frontline & Coastline recognition
Since frontline markers are used in missions, could these also not be used to avoid squads flying along the front line through all the Flak concentrations? Transport waypoints could be set to only fly behind the front, unless carrying paratroopers, and air forces on the defensive could also only patrol along or behind. Same for coastlines, could these not be mapped out on the mission map (or as locations) so there is some recognition of the difference between land/water, so seaplanes can be given only overwater targets/waypoints for example, or anti shipping units could be set to only attack targets on water (needs a switch, see above).

So if you got this far, thanks for your time and interest. I know this is all extra on top of 4.11 but perhaps something strikes a chord?

#2 Lowengrin


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 615 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 07:19 AM

Hi Slink,

I'm estimating that you spent more time compiling your requests and suggestions than I have programming DCG since I looked at the 4.11 update.

And the one thing I immediately noticed was that some of the weapon strings were longer than I'd ever seen them before.

I don't often look at the SAS site unless someone steers me to something specific. I'm no longer that interested in playing IL-2 (online or off) and haven't been for some time. In fact, it's been about 5 years or so since I have played it beyond testing DCG generated missions and for the past couple years, it's been more about maintaining DCG than it has about expanding it's functions and features.

Note that I said "more about" because occasionally something does catch my interest and I do modify/add to the code. Some of your suggestions did catch my interest. Some are simply too complex and would require major rewrites of the code - code that is now over ten years old and horribly convoluted...not to mention terribly written in the first place.

I don't have time right now to go through your post point by point, but I did read it all. Some of your suggestions may find there way into DCG (particularly if they are quick wins), but most probably will not. But I appreciate your putting them all down.

#3 Riksen


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 10 May 2014 - 04:50 AM

Hi Lowengrin...


I have a few questions about the above suggestions if u dont mind. I see that some of them ended up being introduced in the newer versions of DCG but i would like to know if this one here actually work via timetable:


Set Mission type: To allow you to set a specific type of mission as well as location of attack/defense to each individual squad, not only the player one, so they can each be given a specific objective at a particular date.


I;m building a campaign that would benefit tremendously from such a feature ...


Thanks for ur time and continuous support to DCG anyways!





#4 Lowengrin


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 615 posts

Posted 10 May 2014 - 05:30 AM

Hi Riksen,


I would have to look at the code...it's been years since I touched the mission generation functions.  My initial thoughts are it could be possible without too much effort as there is already code in there for the player squadron to have mission preferences (see the Custom Mission Panel). 


For example, you could set the player squadron to do a shipping strike at XXX_Harbor.  However, the current code allows DCG to ignore a player's preferences if it's not possible to carry out the orders.  For example, if there were no shipping in XXX_Harbor, DCG would ignore the order.


But while I say "without too much effort", there'd still be a lot of coding involved (most of it fairly mindless) to get DCG to recognize the new commands.  So it's unlikely I'd get around to it.

#5 Riksen


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 10 May 2014 - 05:38 AM

I see ... 


Thank u for the repply Lowengrin but what i meant  is to have the same function for the player squad but for AI squad as well via timetable. That way u could set a specific location of attack as well as type of mission to the AI squadrons as well as the players via timetable. That would be a huge improvement for us campaign designers and it would definitely give us some more control over the events that we want to take place in a particular campaign. I know u dont want to look at the code right now or even ever (lol) but if u could please just give some consideration on this one for me ... Pretty pleaseeeeeeee lol


Well thanks for listening anyway,





#6 Lowengrin


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 615 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 07:09 PM

I got that you meant for the AI squads.  :)


I'm saying I might be able to expand on the player squad code so that AI squads could use it too.  But I'm quite a few more years from retiring from my real job.  ;)

#7 Riksen


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 11 May 2014 - 09:44 PM

"I'm saying I might be able to expand on the player squad code so that AI squads could use it too.  But I'm quite a few more years from retiring from my real job" ... Lol


No problem Lo, maybe by then?... Lol


Just dont take me the wrong way ok.. I do love DCG!



#8 Lowengrin


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 615 posts

Posted 18 May 2014 - 03:16 AM


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users