Squadron Management Potential Feature Request if Possible

[bweiss]

I put this question/idea, into the discussion arena since I'm uncertain if anyone else would have an interest or if it is even possible to do.

Long ago there was a flight sim, perhaps EAW, or something that contained an aspect of Squadron Management which allowed for the Squadron CO to assign a flight to carry out a mission while the CO stayed safely behind. In essence then, turning the sim into a movie for which you could then watch and see the action from the safety of home if one so desired. In my view, it gave an added value to the sim immersion of being the Squadron CO. The reality of which is that the Squad CO is not always the flight leader as IL2 designed it. That, or in all these years I somehow missed that one..?

Furthermore, the immersion factor is then additionally increased as it becomes more paramount for the Squad CO to ensure that all the squadron pilots get increased experience and therefore increased efficiency, while still trying to accomplish the given mission(s). Thus making the sim a bit more realistic when you lose that pilot you worked so hard to train and nurtured through experience, or appreciate the good job done when the boys you worked so hard to train, go out and trounce a group of lesser experienced bandits. If you see what I mean. Turns the Squadron Management option into more of a realistic venture than just picking the best pilots to fly with, and adds a dimension of strategy to the overall aspects of squadron management for a campaign. Some of this currently exists I know, but having to always be the flight leader sort of kills the realism aspect and keeps the CO from potentially training another pilot while you the CO stay behind and do paperwork or enjoy some cognac.

So I'm wondering if anyone besides myself would have such an interest. And if so then the second question becomes; is it even possible to have DCG's Squadron Management make IL2 allow for this if Lowengrin could work the magic? The best implementation in my view, if it is possible to do, would be to limit the ability to only the Squadron CO, if chosen as rank, and not just based on just picking squadron management in the options. Otherwise it kind of messes up the immersion factor somewhat for Corporal Klink to be managing the entire squadron to that extent. But whatever it takes to make it work would be priority one I suppose. At least even with that circumstance, one would still have what I'm aiming at if one is the Squadron CO.

Since IL2 "does" allow for the continuation of the mission(s), after death or if one simply pulls off the runway and sits allowing everyone else to take off as normal (if instant success is chosen). The sim progresses w/o the flight leader just fine. So I'm thinking perhaps it could be done, but I really have no idea if it is possible to create this as a working feature.

If this type of thing is possible, then perhaps it could go even deeper to have DCG do it's own AI routine for squadron management of all squadrons based on whatever factors are decided as applicable to a priority algorithm of sorts based on pilot experience/efficiency/rank factors which are mathematical and reside inside of IL2/DCG. So it at least has a base line from which to operate using math as derived from the mission log file(s). That is, the numbers used by DCG to ascertain those factors like experience/efficiency/and rank, if not more factors that I'm forgetting about or don't even know about.

It has always bugged me that IL2 puts the Squadron CO as the flight leader for each of the squadrons in a campaign mission. Not just the player squadron, but all of them.  And my perspective here is just as applies to campaigns. I do not know the internal routine that IL2/DCG goes through to assign the pilots to a mission. That is, is it totally random? Or based on what if not?

Regardless, the Squad CO always ends up as the flight leader. Is there anyway to apply any logic to that process? For example, for the assignments to take some other aspect other than random into account? Like number of flights flown, levels of experience, rank, etc,. and then assigning pilots based on those determining factors rather than random with Squad CO being factored in somehow (perhaps a priority factor added in), rather than always assigned as flight leader? Maybe it is already doing that to some extent and I don't even know it, but it seems more random than not to me.

I apologize for digressing and this is lengthy, but I'm trying to fully explain what I'm aiming at here, which is an expansion of the Squadron Management option into a much larger aspect of strategic application in the sim campaign, and especially one in which the player is the Squadron CO. Perhaps think in terms of Rowan's "Battle of Britain", (Commanders Perspective), rather than pilot, where there is emphasis on strategic management of the squadron(s), and not just flying it anymore but retaining it's current emphasis on piloting also. Better than Rowan's. With Rowan you could jump into a mission, I'm trying to address a micro-management of the squadron(s) along side of that idea. Adding an entirely new aspect. One could if one desired, manage an entire campaign that way and not even fly if that is what is desired. My own desire is to do both.

Again, I know this is already possible to some extent, however it is unworkable in that it is entirely unlikely one can alt-tab out of the game and spend a few hours thinking about strategic design of all the squadrons including your own, change all that manually in DCG, and then go back into the game and click the mission "apply" button. That is easy enough done just to change your next three squad pilots for the next mission. But after that overall strategic management of all the squadrons gets problematic. Sorry for writing a book, and suspecting my answer will be short and simple; "Can't be done."

Any interest?

Can it be done?

Thanks ~

 

[bweiss]

Well after 60 views and no comment I would surmise there is scant interest in the concept. I figure the first idea of making IL2 conduct a mission w/o the player being in the flight is not possible due to hard coding of IL2 or otherwise someone would have done it by now. Or perhaps requires some creative java scripting and a lot of work at that for something not many seem to want.

Second idea of having DCG conduct something of an AI routine in assigning all squad pilots in a strategic manner based on some algorithm of desired categories might be possible with DCG, but again at the cost of a lot of work for something no one seems to want.

Alas, I seem to be alone in being really into strategic campaign squad pilot management.

So I'll let go of all this by ending it with well deserved praise for Lowengrin and the fantastic work he has done and keeps doing. While I'm no expert at IL2 or DCG, I have used it for years and have always used DCG married with it. Wouldn't be the same without DCG. Thanks again Lowe for all you've done to increase the enjoyment of this flight sim.

Salute ~

[Fhechene]

1 hour ago, bweiss said:

Well after 60 views and no comment I would surmise there is scant interest in the concept.

Dude, that's not how this works.

[bweiss]

Okay Dude, so how does it work then?

[Fhechene]

6 hours ago, bweiss said:

Okay Dude, so how does it work then?

I find the concept interesting. However, I don't think that something like that would be a priority. So, maybe DCG 1.51 or 1.52? I don't know.
And while DCG is used by plenty of people , this forum is not very active, so  saying that your concept doesn't have interest after the post doesn't have answers after less than a day of being created it's not necessarily correct.
PEACE!

[bweiss]

14 hours ago, Fhechene said:

I find the concept interesting. However, I don't think that something like that would be a priority. So, maybe DCG 1.51 or 1.52? I don't know.
And while DCG is used by plenty of people , this forum is not very active, so  saying that your concept doesn't have interest after the post doesn't have answers after less than a day of being created it's not necessarily correct.
PEACE!

Thanks for explaining. I agree it is not something that, unless there was some broad interest in it, then it would not be a priority for "Lowe". The poor guy is up to his ears trying to stay abreast of an ever changing landscape with IL2. SAS updates, a half dozen mega-mods, and Microsoft OS changes to boot. I would not even want or expect Lowengrin to sit and read all of this. Which is why I put it in the public discussion arena. I see all manner of stuff being asked of Lowe, and I just wanted to create a discussion of the concept itself. Not sure but what it has already been tried and can't be done. Perhaps someone has a mod in the gazillion of them out there that almost does this or that aspect, or even if there is anyone besides you and I who have any level of interest at all is in question.

And yes you are quite correct, there are plenty of empty seats in this here forum, so I don't expect a rousing cheer. However thankfully you responded my good fellow. So perhaps that's a start. And over five dozen views does show there are a few folks meandering around in here. This fishing expedition at least caught a bit of your interest. Maybe in time more interest might develop, or not. We'll see.

The concept as it were, is certainly not flushed out. It's just rattling around in my poor old head for years now. I enjoy what may be just plain boring to others: the micro-management of all the pilots in all the squadrons in all the mission of a given campaign. Friendly and foe. Though that is up to one's taste. But to keep the campaign balanced, potentially producing more livid hairballs in the process, and the enjoyment of developing individual squadrons/pilots, and managing their careers inside the campaign, watching them grow in skill, die, survive and become an ace, etc. I'm one of those rivet counters who want/demand as much historical realism I can attain on a given campaign. Unless I cannot find any historical references, I use only verified squadrons that participated in a campaign, and use that approach for each detail of squadron management inside the campaign. A/C skins, markings, pilot names to the extent possible, actual pilot photo's etc., as much as I can verify at any rate. I get that not everyone, perhaps no one but me, is into that level of excruciating detail.

Managing all that results in a wide array of micro-management detail but that is what DCG amazingly can do all on it's own manually to a great extent already, where all the pilots of a given campaign fly, learn, increase skills, die, replace by noobs who inturn need coaching (flying), with able comrades to assist them as constructed in each squadron for each mission on each flight. It creates a more micro-strategic application of DCG. My wish is to make all of it more robust if not more automated. If possible. And if by popular demand. It goes a long ways in changing IL2 from a shoot em up to a more strategic approach to the sim. Sort of like the old "Coach" perspective in Madden NFL circa 2010 or something like that. Where if desired, one didn't even play in the game, but assigned players, picked each play, did all the strategy but not as a player in the game. This concept is for both. Ahem; "To Fly or Not to Fly." That be the question.

So this was a fishing attempt to start a discussion on the concept, leave Lowe out of it so he can keep concentrating on important issues, and let it ride or die on it's own in here. If enough people like you posted any interest, and wanted to join in and add their ideas, we might end up with something we "could" then take to Lowe. "IF" there were sufficient interest. So we're back to that. Like I said; even if flying w/o the player is "not" possible as I suspect, perhaps DCG in some fashion can be made to handling this type of micro-management in a more automated, more dynamic, less random but based on some algorithm derived from the log output in a less static fashion.

Thanks for your input. Much appreciated. Hopefully as you point out, maybe in time the idea will capture some more input in here. Or not. We'll see, as you suggested, give it some time.

Salute~  

[Klaiber]

Hi Guys,

If you ever want to get Lo's attention directly, use the @ feature on the forums.  @Lowengrin  This will send him a message, letting him know to check this thread.

Hope this helps!

[bweiss]

Thanks Klaiber, perhaps eventually. Going to let this sit a while as Fhechene suggested. Let's see if anyone has any input. Maybe a better idea, or approach, or deeper level of knowledge about the IL2 to DCG interface, so as not to bother Lowe with it just yet. Maybe get it all melted down to a few sentences/questions so that he doesn't have to read through my thinking out loud.

Salute~ 

[idefix44]

I guess (may be am I wrong ) that you think like a wargamer. IL2 is more a sim than a game for me, so I believe that your request isn't possible to satisfy.

In other words, using IL2 allows to be a WWII pilot not to be a decision maker in his General Headquarters.

However, when you play a campaign, using DCG and being a pilot, if your squadron's mates survive after the missions they complete, their skill increases (with their experience)...

 

 

[bweiss]

20 hours ago, idefix44 said:

I guess (may be am I wrong ) that you think like a wargamer. IL2 is more a sim than a game for me, so I believe that your request isn't possible to satisfy.

In other words, using IL2 allows to be a WWII pilot not to be a decision maker in his General Headquarters.

However, when you play a campaign, using DCG and being a pilot, if your squadron's mates survive after the missions they complete, their skill increases (with their experience)...

 

 

Yes I do enjoy and therefore think a bit in terms of wargames, mostly at the tactical level as in Battlefront's Combat Mission series. And yes I've had IL2 for years and years as just a good ole flight sim, that keeps getting larger in scope and broader in concept. Which is my point exactly. I don't fly online nor do wargames online other than email, so I'm only thinking in terms of off-line single player for IL2. And what, if anything DCG can do to more fully automate the concept and maybe be more robust in terms of that command hq "decision making." That is at least part of what I'm after, if possible

You aptly point out a piece of what I would like to see go further. The "squadron mates" (and in point of fact, all squadron pilots, friend and foe), of a given campaign's "squadron management" option in DCG, and the use of that which DCG already allows for manually. Currently DCG allows for a wide variety of command "decision maker" options. Including picking the target type, weather, time, who's flying with who, and what type of a/c, payload, etc., etc. I would point out then that IL2 with DCG allows for just that, being the command "decision maker" at least at the squadron level, and perhaps at the gruppe or overall command hq level, even uber-command level decisions for both sides, if desired. So I'm looking to mix in the ability to reframe from flying (if/when desirable), and to automate at least some of those command hq decisions. Particularly in the area of pilot-flight assignments. Not mandated, but optional. Fly or not, meddle with the pilots or not, employ some upper level strategy or not.

First part of that thought is; coaching/training/management, or "decision maker" as you put it for all squadron pilots as "you" the squadron leader take management for, if/when you have chosen that leadership role.  Not just your mates, but also those of your friendly squadrons, and if you so desire the enemy squadrons. As it currently stands, DCG assigns the flight leaders, and in some fashion however many pilots you've allowed for in a mission (flights). Currently that can all be done manually, but it would be far better if it were more automated by DCG, and perhaps based on a set of desirable factors (to be determined and prioritized), as currently captured in the log files for each mission. Whatever those factors might turn out to be. IOW, let DCG do the assignments but more like a (Commander), would actually do it.

I.e., it's  a fighter escort mission. Therefore, as the squadron leader you'd want your best target gunners at the stick. On the other hand, a ground-attack mission might be more successful if you used your pilots with the best ground kill scores. And so on for ship attacks, etc., etc. The numbers in the mission logs have that data. The question is; how to have DCG automatically correlate those figures with the mission requirement(s). Could for example, DCG understand the needed skill sets required for successful completion of different mission requirements? I don't know. Maybe someone does (without bothering Lowengrin at this time). If so, then the entire idea is one step closer to possible. If not, then perhaps Lowe could make it so, or not.

Second part of the thought, which I rather doubt is actually possible because of hard coding in IL2 (but not knowing that for certain) is; eliminating the "mandatory" nature of having to fly a mission if one desired not to fly, including the other squadron leaders in the mission. Why would one desire that? Because first it isn't entirely realistic. You know, amazingly there are a host of extremely talented characters in IL2 skinning that "do" count the rivets for realism. And they do make sure they are all there! So there are some people who enjoy realism as much as these apps will allow. And from a strategic standpoint, when you the squadron leader take up a flight seat, you rob one of your pilots of that experience, times a given number of squadrons that would fly in that mission for each squadron who automatically has a flight leader assigned to them as is currently done by IL2/DCG. (At least I haven't been able to keep me the squadron leader out of my flight, or any of the other squadron leaders). And given the mission at hand, it may be more advantageous to have four of your best (most experienced) pilots, dependent upon their individual skill levels and categories and mission requirements, fly and be more likely therefore of accomplishing that mission. Command strategy rears it's ugly head...

As you point out, and as the saying goes in Skyrim;  "The best techniques are passed on by the survivors." - Gaiden Shinji. It's all the better when the survivors are the ones you've coach on through your shrewd command level pilot management decisions, and not just your own experten piloting skill prowess.

Something called the vehicle mod which started with an IL2 drivable jeep that came out a few years back and actually gained some traction. You could just drive around in IL2 ala "Four Jills in a Jeep". Not sure but what that went all the way to tanks and what not. Never tried it myself, but a lot of folks appeared to have an interest. So, it would seem that there is a fair amount of interest in IL2 aside from just being a flight sim pilot. With that in mind, yes I'm thinking more in terms of "managing" the overall campaign from the standpoint of managing all the pilots at least. Or just one side if desired. Let the bandits fend fer themselves... Or ensure they are just as skilled overall and perhaps ensure a more lively, more realistic and balanced campaign. Either way, the idea takes DCG into a bit of a different realm of "decision making" to be sure. Not just cockpit decisions anymore (when do I pull that level or push that knob is no longer one's only concern?..). How far, and how well DCG could automate command level decision making is unknown by me. I just have the itch to see it happen. And doing it all manually is a long tedious process, though worth it I think, that maybe using some as yet created automated algorithm in DCG might facilitate and open up a new realm for the less adventurous or those not so inclined to twiddle around with each pilot in each squadron poking it all in "manually".

So I would say in response that IL2/DCG already allows for command hq decision making, but not as yet, if it ever will be, fully automated. Some, perhaps like yourself (I may be wrong also), but some might not want that at all. Be a waste of time for Lowengrin to create it. And that's fine. Which is why I put this in a discussion area. To get a sample size of interest, if any, in the idea, before bothering the guy with this.

There has to be a cost benefit analysis for such a proposal. Lowengrin is a pretty busy fellow and has scant time for wasted man-hours on something only a couple few people might want. And to clarify if need be, I'm by no means suggesting a substitution of the ability to fly in a mission. Rather I'm suggesting the option not to fly if desired (if possible), and to automate pilot assignment (perhaps more but let's start with just that), via pilot experience and skill factors in the mission logs. For some people, like myself, it may represent one of the most enjoyable immersion factors of the whole shebang.

As they say; in matters of love and of art, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Salute~

[Lowengrin]

I don't check in for a week and boom! 

To be honest, I spend most of my time playing DCG on auto-pilot just watching how the missions play out, programming the human pilot right out of the equation isn't such a bad idea.

[bweiss]

13 hours ago, Lowengrin said:

I don't check in for a week and boom! 

To be honest, I spend most of my time playing DCG on auto-pilot just watching how the missions play out, programming the human pilot right out of the equation isn't such a bad idea.

Hi Paul, Haha, "When the cat's away, de mices will play buddy"...

How ya been? Didn't mean to drag you into this so soon, but you opened the door so; Trick or Treat! 

Well. well, so it CAN be done? Woo-Hoo.

Okay, so since I've got you here, yes by golly that would do the trick. Now about the treat. I don't know how much of the novel I wrote you managed to read, but allowing for the option to erase the human pilot or mandatory flight of the player is one big part of what I'm looking at. Would result in; you can fly, or not fly, up to you the player, on a mission by mission basis. To be clear as to what I'm after.

Second part is; trying to understand how and in what form DCG uses the pilot skill factors and just what factors increase with experience. Essentially then, how to better use that data when DCG applies it to each mission-AI squadron pilot assignment and perhaps have DCG more fully automate that. I'm not sure (never found anyone who was), just what the skill data captured in the logs does to the IL2 AI on a micro level. IOW, how robust those skill factors make the AI pilot perform in flight and in combat. I know the number of flights completed bumps up an AI pilots experience so....

Questions:

1. Does an increased skill level make the IL2 AI pilot a better maneuvering pilot, or just a better deflection gunner, or a more accurate bomb dropper, or a better formation pilot, or all the above?

2. Are the number of flights completed the only factor used for increasing the pilot skill levels (do kill scores, or anything else factor in)?

3. How exactly does DCG determine AI squadron pilot flight assignment(s) (is it purely rank and historical precedence based only)? (Historical precedence meaning, 1=Flight leader, 2=noob or lesser skill/rank, 3=second senior rank in flt, 4=lesser rank/perhaps higher skill set as second rank pilots wingman)?

4. Can the skill factors be used by DCG to correlate an assignment priority for which then DCG would assign squadron pilots to best accomplish required mission - for AI squadrons and player squadron? (While the player does not know AI squadron mission requirements unless they pop open the files and decipher), DCG knows or at least has the data, but does DCG recognize and understand those mission objectives)? Does it know i.e., that say 78IAP2 is on an intercept mission over Ura-Guba, and therefore could be made to prioritize the best deflection gunners (shooters), into that flight?

5. If for these latter two questions (4 and 5), the answer is affirmative, could then DCG be made to use a created list of priorities (TBD), and assign pilots and squadron leaders for the entire campaign(s) squadrons (player and AI), in priority order rather than just purely static or random for each mission. Circling back to, how does DCG currently assign AI pilots to the squadron(s), based upon what factors as determined where in the data?

Maybe if I understand this well enough I can figure a better way of doing this myself manually. Or in my dreams, I'll gain enough knowledge about this and perhaps I can undertake to try and automate some of it myself. Right...

I do much of this for myself manually, but the fact is using a 18-24 squadron campaign (static fronts work best ofcourse) it can be a lot of time spent to sort through between missions and try to determine which pilots are best suited. In addition, I want to retain some of the "unknown" factor to the missions so that I don't have to pop open the files and figure out what the AI squadrons mission objectives might be. Thus my desire to use DCG to automate this aspect of overall uber-level squadron management, if possible.

Thanks Paul for entertaining this, and welcome back!

Salute~

 

[Lowengrin]

2 hours ago, bweiss said:

1. Does an increased skill level make the IL2 AI pilot a better maneuvering pilot, or just a better deflection gunner, or a more accurate bomb dropper, or a better formation pilot, or all the above?

As far as I know, increased skill level makes them better in every respect.  IL-2 has no separation of skills by type.

 

2 hours ago, bweiss said:

2. Are the number of flights completed the only factor used for increasing the pilot skill levels (do kill scores, or anything else factor in)?

In DCG, the three combine for an overall skill level.

 

2 hours ago, bweiss said:

3. How exactly does DCG determine AI squadron pilot flight assignment(s) (is it purely rank and historical precedence based only)? (Historical precedence meaning, 1=Flight leader, 2=noob or lesser skill/rank, 3=second senior rank in flt, 4=lesser rank/perhaps higher skill set as second rank pilots wingman)?

DCG takes the highest ranking pilot (or most experienced in the case of the same rank) and makes them the first flight leader (and therefore mission leader).  It takes the second highest rank for the second flight, etc. down the line tossing in the player pilot as appropriate. 

That is, unless you use Squadron Management, then you set it yourself.

 

2 hours ago, bweiss said:

4. Can the skill factors be used by DCG to correlate an assignment priority for which then DCG would assign squadron pilots to best accomplish required mission - for AI squadrons and player squadron? (While the player does not know AI squadron mission requirements unless they pop open the files and decipher), DCG knows or at least has the data, but does DCG recognize and understand those mission objectives)? Does it know i.e., that say 78IAP2 is on an intercept mission over Ura-Guba, and therefore could be made to prioritize the best deflection gunners (shooters), into that flight?

DCG could calculate "best" by number of air kills vs ground kills depending on the type of mission (and could get even more granular if I decided to break off ships from other ground targets).  However, as soon as the mission starts, the AI would treat even good ground-pounders as good dogfighters no matter what DCG has determined.

 

2 hours ago, bweiss said:

5. If for these latter two questions (4 and 5), the answer is affirmative, could then DCG be made to use a created list of priorities (TBD), and assign pilots and squadron leaders for the entire campaign(s) squadrons (player and AI), in priority order rather than just purely static or random for each mission. Circling back to, how does DCG currently assign AI pilots to the squadron(s), based upon what factors as determined where in the data?

I've never been totally happy with the squadron management.  For example, there are always 16 pilots in a squadron regardless of the number of flights/planes for that squadron.  The "excess" pilots are just hidden from view.  Nor have I particularly liked that the CO flies every mission.  You'd think he'd be busy with paperwork sometimes.  ;)

But the way AI works with the game, there's no particular reason to assign pilots based on ability to missions (since their ability in all things is fixed).  Sure, for player immersion, you could assign the guy with the most ground kills to lead a ground-attack mission, but he's not going to be any better than the ace who has no ground kills.

[bweiss]

Got it. Thanks, that's a lot of good info Paul. Gives me something to ponder about what I thought happened, and what actually does happen inside the IL2 AI and DCG. I originally figured this would be the other way around. Which was that giving the player the option not to fly "couldn't" be done, while parsing out the skill variables and applying them to the IL2 AI "could" be done. I had it backwards.  

Well, at least the option for running the sim w/o being a pilot could exist. But not for what I had envisioned. And it seems you, and I are the only people at the moment with any particular interest. Still, if/when you get time for inclusion of this as an option, it might open up something somewhere else in the vast IL2 community. Never know.

There has been, perhaps still is, ongoing work for the IL2 AI. I have not followed that closely, so I don't know if the skill variables and the way the IL2 AI combines them can be tinkered with, maybe someday. This sim has expanded in a lot of directions over time. Perhaps someone will eventually tinker with the AI at that level and open up a new frontier, or if Oleg ever finds the programmer who disappeared with the hard coding.   

Question: I guess the last question is, (everyone breaths a sigh of relief); could the option for erasing/eliminating the player pilot, allowing for a substitute as assigned, also erase the PoD (premo-of-death), if the substitute player pilot gets killed? Or would IL2 just fully treat the sub player pilot as the real player and still give a PoD if the sub is killed? Wishful thinking?

 If it could work that way, of additionally erasing the PoD for the killed sub player pilot(s), it would then change the status quo nicely where one could advance to the next campaign mission(s) even when the substitute player pilot gets killed.  Therefore having some kind of a new utility effect for folks in the community working with the IL2-DCG interface as you originally pointed out, and making me feel much better about having you read all this...

 

[Lowengrin]

I don't think IL2 would let you have a substitute pilot in the same campaign.  The campaign is linked to the pilot created in the game.  If you really wanted to continue the campaign with a new pilot, you can always create a new pilot, generate a new campaign (of the one you're currently in) and then dump most/all(?) the data files from the old campaign into the new one.  And then run DCG and hit the generate mission button.

I'm not 100% it would work without some trial and error, but unless you want to continue the old campaign with the old pilot (his stats reset to zero, but his name stays the same), it's clunky.

[bweiss]

11 hours ago, Lowengrin said:

I don't think IL2 would let you have a substitute pilot in the same campaign.  The campaign is linked to the pilot created in the game.  If you really wanted to continue the campaign with a new pilot, you can always create a new pilot, generate a new campaign (of the one you're currently in) and then dump most/all(?) the data files from the old campaign into the new one.  And then run DCG and hit the generate mission button.

I'm not 100% it would work without some trial and error, but unless you want to continue the old campaign with the old pilot (his stats reset to zero, but his name stays the same), it's clunky.

Ok thanks, got it. Didn't know I could do that either, (keep the same campaign and add a new player pilot - with some tweaking). I'll try messing around with that, see what I can do. I guess then an option to just erase the player pilot from a mission would not result in what I was looking for. It might though, for all practical purposes help some in a utilitarian way. Testing and what not.

I very much appreciate your time reading this. The answers above provide me with a more grass level view on how the IL2 AI interprets the ongoing campaign DCG pilot skill assets. Which is not how I thought it was. That will allow me to come up with a better manual system for what I want to achieve at least.

Perhaps some day, given any potential new advancements in IL2 AI coding, the DCG squadron management option could be expanded then into a more dynamic accounting and application of what DCG is already capable of achieving, but due to the current limitations of the IL2 AI is irrelevant at this time.

Thanks Paul! All good stuff.

Salute~