Jane's F/A-18 Mission & Campaign Builders Forum

Campaign Building.

by

Hey I purchased this game, new, about 2 years ago. I've gotten pretty good at it now I want to build my own missions. In mission builder, I can build single missions only. I must be missing something for campaign building cause some slots say "unavailable." Like the link button for the campaign. Is there anything that I can download, so I can build campaigns? It is the best game I've ever played. I just want to have more fun with it. Oh yeah it never came with a manual that I could read.

~Charisma

Posted on Dec 2, 2002, 10:26 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Campaign Building

by Recluse

http://ham.dogfighter.com/superhornet/campaign.htm

All information and necessary downloads and registry edits contained there...

It's a LOT of work!!!


Recluse

P.S. If you got a 2 disc package, the manual in .pdf format should be on the second disk along with the update patch.

Posted on Dec 2, 2002, 3:37 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Thanks Recluse

by Charisma

Yeah I found it. I did not look hard enough or wasn't paying attention. I appreciated all the help

Posted on Dec 2, 2002, 6:42 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Setting User Flags When Targets are Destroyed

by

I want to define 4 mission debriefs:

1) Total success: ALL factory targets are destroyed and an escaping convoy is destroyed.

2) Partial success: Not all factory targets are destroyed, but the escaping convoy is destroyed.

3) Partial success: ALL factory targets are destroyed, but the escaping convoy is not destroyed.

4) Total failure: Not all factory targets are destroyed and the escaping convoy is not destroyed.

I have something like 7 or 8 designated targets that must be destroyed at the factory complex, so scenarios 1 and 3 are easy to do in the mission debrief logic since the condition logic effectively "ANDs" the condition statements together. But scenarios 2 and 4 are difficult because you cannot "OR" statements together (I need to know if any of the designated targets survived, which is "OR" logic). The mission debrief logic would be a lot simpler if I could set a single user flag when all of the factory targets were destroyed and then use that flag in the debrief logic. But I can't figure out how to set a user flag when all designated targets are destroyed. It seems that you should be able to use a Time Event to do this, but I can't get it to work. Am I missing something or doing something wrong? Or is this simply not supported in the Mission Builder?

- Rails

Posted on Dec 1, 2002, 8:20 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Debriefs

by Recluse

For the best description of Debrief writing, see JAYP's Campaign Guide

link at: http://ham.dogfighter.com/superhornet

He does a good job of defining the truth table setup and grouping necessary.

Basically, you may have too many targets to deal with if you want to cover every single debrief scenario. There can only be ONE TRUE statement, so if you have 8 goals, there are 2^8 possibilities. This is too many for the mission builder to handle. You may, of course group them as you suggest. Here is how to set a Flag to measure destruction of multiple targets:


For simplicity, I will only use 4 targets...

In the Mission Builder, you must set up 4 GOAL STATE EVENTs to check for target destruction, since you can't predict the order in which they will be destroyed such that, for example:

1)When GOAL [TARGET 1] is DESTROYED

USER FLAG 1=TRUE

with conditions:

GOAL TARGET 2 is DESTROYED
GOAL TARGET 3 is DESTROYED
GOAL TARGET 4 is DESTROYED

2)When GOAL [TARGET 2] is DESTROYED
USER FLAG 1= TRUE

with Conditions:

GOAL TARGET 1 is DESTROYED
GOAL TARGET 3 is DESTROYED
GOAL TARGET 4 is DESTROYED

etc.... for all 4 targets.

This way, when any one target is destroyed, the GOAL STATE event will check for the destruction of the others, and only set the flag if ALL are destroyed.

You can then use the FLAG as a debrief condition. This way, you do the processing of events in the EVENT section rather than having to specify it all in the debriefs. Ends up being the same amount of work to cover all instances, but fewer debrief statements.

Recluse




Posted on Dec 2, 2002, 5:59 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Debriefs

by

Thanks, Recluse. That's the trick I needed.

- Rails

Posted on Dec 9, 2002, 8:33 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Assistance required

by Viper01

During missions, an error message appears, indicating "Lock Error - Lock Returned," followed by an eight-figure number. The error causes the game to lock up instantly. The lock-up implies a frozen screen and repeating sound. I'm not familiar with the specific cause/source of the problem, but I suspect a relation to the updated graphic device drivers.
The only solution I've applied with success is to re-install my previous graphic device drivers, something which is not exactly desirable. Any assistance would be appreciated.


Regards,

Viper01

Posted on Dec 1, 2002, 4:27 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Please help

by Viper01

Another error message has begun to appear, consequently causing F/A-18 to crash back to desktop: "DDhelp has performed an illegal operation." (Correct me if I'm wrong, my computer is currently set to another language). These pop-ups have become a source of great irritation; someone please help me!!

Posted on Dec 9, 2002, 12:27 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Beginner's Bone-head Question...

by

I have begun to learn about the Mission Builder. I thought it was a good idea to put F/A-18 in my Bride's Lap-Top, so I could sit in the TV recliner, and during a boring movie, I could build missions, etc. I noted that on my Main Computer, when I rest the cursor arrow on a Mission Builder Symbol (in the Green Field), I got a little identifying text block. On the Lap-Top, I don't..and, being new, that is a very handy thing. Is there some little 'click' somewhere that enables that ??

Chief...

Posted on Nov 26, 2002, 9:06 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

I hate it too

by

I have the same thing happen. It doesn't hurt anything to click on the button if the little dealy won't show up. That is what I do and then just cancel it when it isn't what I am looking for. After while you get familiarized with it and know the button by site anyways.

Posted on Nov 28, 2002, 9:20 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Thanks, Dusty...

by The_Chief

No big deal, I guess... I'll just print out a crib sheet to lay on the arm of the TV recliner..but it IS nice on my Sim Machine to have those buttons identified !

'Appy Turkey Day...

Chief...

Posted on Nov 28, 2002, 9:37 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Persian Gulf theatre/map implementation

by Viper01

Has TSH announced any approximate release date for the Jane's F-15 Persian Gulf theatre/map implementation into Jane's F/A-18?


Regards,

Viper01

Posted on Nov 17, 2002, 5:12 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Not yet

by Recluse

HOPING for a release before the end of the year, but it may spill over into Jan....but it is getting close.

Won't be released until it is READY...

Recluse

Posted on Nov 17, 2002, 9:02 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Hacked

by

Can anyone help me?
While playing Janes F/A-18 online somebody changed the appearance and effects of how the ocean is displayed on my game. I uninstalled the program twice and manually removed any left over folder afterwards. After installation the patch is also reinstalled. I have tried to look for it with no avail. I liked the look of the original ocean display and would like to have it back. Also, the text messages now scroll across the ocean, along with the text "PASIMULATIONS", when no message are being transmitted. I can't get rid of this. Can anybody help?

Thankx,
Tom


Posted on Nov 13, 2002, 9:49 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Probably not hacked

by

I doubt you've been hacked, my guess would be that your system might have been upgraded to the new version of DirectX and that the drivers it installed for your card don't match correctly. I would probably try to reinstall the drivers you know work for your card, or check to see if there are new drivers (which don't always mean better).

If you didn't knowingly install a new version of DirectX did you install MS CFS3? If so I've heard that it will install the new version without asking first.

Hope this helps,

Elf


Posted on Nov 15, 2002, 6:18 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Hacked

by fitness88

Tom you may be accidently pressing one of the 'F' key with ctrl or alt.

Posted on Nov 23, 2002, 8:59 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Tower Communications

by New guy

New mission designer question. How do I enable tower communications (ground airstrip) in the mission builder...

Sorry if this is way simple.

Posted on Nov 11, 2002, 7:43 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Tower Communications

by Anonymous

Try looking at your Fence settings. If you're trying to land at an "enemy" airbase you won't get ATC.

Posted on Nov 13, 2002, 5:52 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Tower comms

by Recluse

Gee, hasnt been a new message in awhile..and I stopped checking... Sorry for the delayed response.

Yes, check your FENCE settings for sure. Tower comms are automatic from a friendly airbase, but you must be within ~15-20nm of the airbase to get comms, otherwise, if there is an active carrier that you are assigned to, you will get the comms from the Carrier ATC Control instead of the airbase..

Recluse

Posted on Nov 15, 2002, 9:06 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Send Your Missions!

by

Hey Guys, I don't visit here much, but the missions I have been flying in teh VMFA-531 are great! I just want to thank you guys for a job well done Also, You know I have a resource site, and I just bought a new server to add my stuff on. Feel free to send your missions my way!

Cheers S!

Michael "Rudel" Carter II

F/A-18 Resource Depot
http://www.geocities.com/fa18resource

German Skins For IL-2 Sturmovik
http://www.geocities.com/il2resource

Posted on Nov 11, 2002, 7:22 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

WOW......

by

WOW.. .i thougt F/A-18 simulator was dead after the onlineservice went down at their homepage..
and now, iŽam in heaven again!!!
thanks to you all!!

and is there any friedly out there how likes to play online with me?
contact me at my mail!


Posted on Nov 4, 2002, 12:31 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Very very much alive!

by Recluse

Head over to the F/A-18 (JANES) forum at http://www.simhq.com for LOTS of action.

THere is quite an online flying community over at Hyperlobby as well as numerous active squads.

Hyperlobby:

http://www.hyperfighter.jinaz.cz

(I think I typed that correctly)

Heres a direct link to 2 days worth of messages:

http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/boards/cgi-bin/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=F%2FA-18+%28JANES%29&number=32&DaysPrune=2&SUBMIT=Go

Check out the enhancments by Team SuperHornet as well:

http://www.war-fighters.com/tsh

You'll be turning, burning and catching 3 wires with others in no time!

Recluse


Posted on Nov 6, 2002, 12:51 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

OOPS bad hyperlobby link...

by Recluse

should be:

http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz


no www

Sorry!

Recluse

Posted on Nov 7, 2002, 3:57 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

rudder control

by

i've just discovered what a great sim f-18 is. the only problem i noticed so far is the lack of rudder control . this can cause some problems when landing or in using guns. i tried to tweak the joystick settings and the updated patch to no avail. please help.

thanks

Posted on Oct 23, 2002, 12:14 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Rudder control

by Recluse

Yes, rudder authority is quite low. To some degree this simulates the fact that on the real jet, the onboard computers handle most of the work, so the rudder input doesn't do much. That being said, the rudders probably aren't as effective as they should be in the low speed high AOA regions. The best you can do is try tweaking the YAW control in the joystick calibration as you have been doing.

Recluse

Posted on Oct 23, 2002, 3:23 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Rudder control

by Recluse

Yes, rudder authority is quite low. To some degree this simulates the fact that on the real jet, the onboard computers handle most of the work, so the rudder input doesn't do much. That being said, the rudders probably aren't as effective as they should be in the low speed high AOA regions. The best you can do is try tweaking the YAW control in the joystick calibration as you have been doing.

Recluse

Posted on Oct 23, 2002, 3:24 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

About refueling

by

could i order to my AI's to do a refueling with refueler plane..
is it automatic when i do the refueling???

Bests regards

Posted on Oct 22, 2002, 2:35 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Refuelling

by Recluse

It depends on your settings. If you have Realistic Duration ON, each of your wingmen will take their turn on the basket as soon as you disconnect and retract your probe. If realistic Duration is set to OFF, then your wingmen will be automatically refueled as soon as you finish.

I am not sure if you need a REFUEL waypoint action in the Mission Builder for this to occur. I don't think it is necessary. Your flight will follow your lead.

Recluse



Posted on Oct 22, 2002, 3:35 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

I would understant...Mil-thrust% and %throttle in hud

by

In fa18 settings, i set mil-thrust=60%
i dont move the throttle (keep the same position),
i have the cheat "display throttle in hud"
i launch a mission and i see 080% throttle in hud..
Why this difference...different scale??


excuse my american langage ,i am french

thanks...

Posted on Oct 15, 2002, 8:49 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Mil Thrust

by Recluse

Bonjour,

FULL MIL thrust is defined as maximum 'dry' thrust (without afterburner). FULL AB is 100% of available thrust.

So, in your setting, if your throttle is set to MIL THRUST at 60% of throttle movement, you will get 80% thrust at that setting, and if you push the throttle higher, you will enter Afterburner.

The HUD Throttle display is related to engine throttle NOT the controller setting.

Recluse

Posted on Oct 16, 2002, 7:25 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

ADI

by

Either they changed the view of the ADI or I loaded a file that I can't remember nor kept history of the change in my records for downloads.

The ADI in my cpit is colored Red and yellow. The manual (Jane's) depicts monochrome (green/black). Moreover, numerics are shown within the ADI. My ADI as stated before is Red (sky), yellow (below) with no numerics.

Your knowledge of Jane's historics will be greatly appreciated, regarding this view on my MDI.

Fallen Haven



Posted on Oct 4, 2002, 6:57 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

ADI

by Recluse

Its been so long since I used the default pit, I'm not really sure what it looked like, but here are my observations based on the TSH (I believe it is Buddman's) pit.

1) If you bring up the ADI in the lower MDI, it will show red/yellow. This is the only COLOR MDI. If you bring up the ADI in any of the other MDI's it will be monochrome, Green/Black as that is all those displays are capable of

2)I do not see numerics in either display, so the picture in the manual must be from an earlier design that did not make it into production.

Recluse

Posted on Oct 5, 2002, 5:03 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

ADI - WHOOPS!! I AM SO WRONG....

by Recluse

Serves me right for not double checking.

Indeed, I get the color (Red and Yellow) ADI up in all MDI's not only the MPCD..

My mistake.

Still no numerics....but I haven't gone back to the default cockpit to check it there..

Recluse

Posted on Oct 6, 2002, 8:55 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Regedit

by Mudhen

I know I brought this up before, but do you need the patch to make the Regedit work?

Posted on Oct 2, 2002, 1:00 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Regedit

by Recluse

I don't really know..but I would guess NOT since it was a feature that was left in somewhat 'accidentally' which needed to be enabled by the edit of the registry, so I doubt they purposely added it to the patch...though it is POSSIBLE, since, once the Campaign Builder function was discovered, Matt was VERY forthcoming and helpful about its use...

Recluse

Posted on Oct 2, 2002, 3:26 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Terrain Texture updates

by ADM Mako

Hi...

I've been looking for some updates to the terrain textures I used to have and lost. One of them was the "Bright Moon" texture, that makes the moon really bright instead of drab and dark, and the other was a very well done "Sparkle" that appears as if it was for the hi-res textureset.

If anyone knows where I can get these files, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks!

ADM Mako

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 11:13 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

http://www.geocities.com/fa18resource/

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 12:33 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

CAPs that don't attack

by Mudhen

I'm working on a campaign. In the early few missions, I have the player flying around doing CAPs. However, it's unrealistic to have just the player's craft patrolling a whole region. I can't put AI jets in because they keep leaving their stations and attacking the neutrals. Any suggestions?

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 3:05 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

I had the same issue with neutral AI coming and attacking humans. To fix it, I put the neutrals 30-50 miles inside their territory, and gave them way points to follow with a max search of 15 miles. As well, knowing their territory, allows you to keep clear. I found that neutrals are very easy to attack if given the slightest provacation...don't lock them up, don't go hot on them, if they are hot on you steer away and give them a lot of room.

Having done this I now have a much more predictable neutral that behaves themselves...most of the time.

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 4:00 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

What about friendlies

by Mudhen

That settles it for neutrals, what about friendlies? Historically, I didn't many problems of neutrals attacking me or friendlies; it's friendly CAPs (F-15Cs, F-22s, F-14s) attacking neutrals. I tried almost everything. I went as far as assigning stand-off jammer functions just so they would do racetracks in the sky, but no avail (the F-15Cs in this case went on to destroy several neutral fulcrums). I haven't thoroughly tested ROE though...from my experience, even if they get spiked, they go hot on each other (like neutrals in fitness' missions), and eventually engaging in combat. Fun to watch (active radar armed aircraft usually win), but useless for campaign mission CAPs.

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 9:51 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

Did you give the same ROE to the friendlies as the neutrals and place them far enough away from the neutrals?

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 12:31 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Yeah

by Mudhen

Yeah, I placed at least 90 nm between the CAPing flights (about 50 nm each from the border)

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 2:28 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

And having done that, you still have conflicts?

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 2:54 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

For some reason yeah

by Mudhen

Yeah, I think they do (although I wasn't sure about the ROE setting). Once, my escorting SEAD aircraft took off and attack air defense installations over 100nm away, while another time, F-15Cs with stand-off jamming actions (for racetracks appearance) engaged several MiG-29s that were orbiting over 70nm away. Usually, right when the mission begins, I receive, "Charlie three one, engaging bandits."

In contrast, an F-16 flight, with full A/A load and CAP set to attack birds 40 nm away, didn't engage anybody in one mission.

Posted on Oct 2, 2002, 12:58 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

I will probably have to recreate a mission with these parameters and do some testing. I'll see if I can work it into my next mission and get back to you.

Posted on Oct 3, 2002, 1:48 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

additional info

by fitness88

Creating a "Neutral" Country Cap
Contributed by Tom "Tailspin" Jones

While working on developing missions for our campaign, I started wondering how both Sweden and Finland could fit in the scheme of things as both companies have "non-alignment" military policies. I would think that either country would prefer not to have either NATO or Russian forces enter their country during a war. My original thoughts were that I would like to see unauthorized aircraft escort out of neutral air space.

After thinking about it for while, even though the AI pilots act pretty realistic, the pilots that have the best chance of wandering into unauthorized air space would be human pilots, possibly up to 8 of them in a multiplayer game. So I set about to see if I could model this.

After doing a lot of messing with moving area events, area events, flags, escort commands etc., I found this was getting very complicated to do and was adding a lot of conditions and the real mission wasn't even built yet! I could see that I needed to follow the "KISS" method but how?

Then it dawned on me. Use a combination of the cap waypoint command and moving area event. The basic idea is place the cap close enough to the border so that when the player is near it, a warning message is display. If the player doesn't turn around pretty much right away, he will be engaged by the neutral country's cap within a minute. At 420kts, the player would cover 7 nm in a minute. Since a Russian air base is near by, I made the assumption that the cap would be forced to engage quickly to avoid a possible NATO/Russian air battle over their homeland and maybe an escalation of the war in their homeland.

To represent the Swedish caps, I used the Blue Russian Mig-29s, assuming some kind of leasing arrangement with Russia. There are no Swedish planes in the mission builder, so this was the next best choice for me. I set the planes to "neutral" the first time, but, being that they were neutral, they did not react unless I fired on them. Since that wasn't working, I set the Blue Mig-29s to enemy status. I then set the 2-plane flight up with a single cap command with a detection radius of 33nm. I made sure the waypoint was set so it was away from the Swedish border with a radius of roughly 40 nm. To do this, I added a second temporary waypoint, then moved it around the cap waypoint at various point along the border to find the 40nm distance(s). I will explain the distance difference soon. I would then move the cap waypoint right, left, up, down as needed. The fence borders were turned on for Norway and Sweden, so the player would also see "fence in" and "fence out" messages if he was flying all the way from the carrier.

Finally, I added 2 moving area events to the Blue Mig-29s. The first one was set for ANY friendlies ENTERING the moving area with a message command saying that unauthorized air space was entered. The second one was set for ANY friendlies LEAVING the moving area with a message saying that the player has left the unauthorized air space. Both were set for a 40 nm range, same as the distance from the cap waypoint.

So here is what happens: When any friendly (read human player) enters the moving area of the Mig-29s, they will get a message saying that they are unauthorized and need to leave immediately. Depending upon the Mig-29s positions around the cap, you may also get a "fence in" message at the same time or 30 seconds earlier or later. (Human factor involved here.) Since the distance between the movement area and cap detection radius is 7 nm (40nm - 33nm), if the player is traveling 420 knots, he has approximately 1 minute before the caps detect him. Once detected, the Mig-29s will attack until either the player or they are downed. If the player turns around right away and leaves the second moving area of the Mig-29s, he will get the second message saying that he has left Sweden's air space. If the player receives this message, then he knows that he is definitely out of the cap detection range. The player may also get a "fence out" message but that does not always coincide with the moving area message. This set up will continue to work until the player pushes things too far and enters the Mig-29s' 33 nm cap range. After that it is a fight to the death and there is no turning back.

One can make things even more interesting by adding a goal to the Mig-29s that they can't be destroyed, then set up a goal state event that if they are destroyed, flag 30 is set. I picked that flag number so it wouldn't always be in the way of the real mission development flags. From there, you can do things like add invisible SAMS down below that appear and fire when the flag is set. Or add a second cap sitting on the runway at the nearest airbase with an initial take-off command that also triggers when the flag is set. Add the cap waypoint for this flight so it is just 30 miles from the border but make the detection range 40 nm.

Using those examples, what I did was set up both the SAMS and the second cap. When you kill the first Swedish cap, the SAMS usually engage you in another minute or so. You can usually avoid the SAMS; however by the time you do it, the second cap, which is now a 4-plane flight , has detected you and you are now in a fight to the death with 4 planes. All because you didn't leave Swedish air space when asked. ;-D

Other notes: You have to play with ranges till you find something that satisfies you. For our missions, with a 2-plane cap, I have decided to use a cap radius of 35 nm and 33 nm if I add a 4-plane cap. The AI programming is really great and will sometimes detect you only when you are closer than the 33nm and sometime it will detect you a little farther away than the 33 nm. For me, the 35 nm detection range seems to work better with the main mission that I am setting up nearby.

So there it is. One mission builder idea that can add a little realism immersion factor to your missions. I have no doubts that there are lots of other ways also.





Posted on Oct 5, 2002, 5:38 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Thanks, but I read it already

by Mudhen

Thanks for all your help, fitness. Judging by the title, you may have guessed I read that already, actually before I started the campaign building. It actually wasn't a neutral attacking friendly problem, but vice versa.

I've been doing a lot of work lately, and figured tt may have been because of the ROE (I had different templates for each phase, and it turned out some had Green and others were red, although I though I switched them all to green. I fixed the problem by increasing the range between the CAPs, placing them parallel in a way so that radar exposure would be minimal (e.g. heading north and 80 miles between them), and changing all ROE to green.

Again, thanks for the help.

Posted on Oct 5, 2002, 6:12 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Stats

by fitness88

Can someone please explain the numbers associated with the ground targets credited to your kills in the stats screen at end of game.
ie: 2-command building-1

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 1:21 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Stats

by Recluse

I think this got answered on SIMHQ already.

Basically, each type of object has a type associated with it (e.g. the different Buildings may be designated Building-1 Building-2 etc...)

So, when you destroy them, they are shown as the sub-type. 2 Building-2 means you destroyed 2 Buildings of the -2 type. Not elegant, but elegance is what the user created Debrief is for..

Recluse

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 5:41 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

response

by fitness88

"So, when you destroy them, they are shown as the sub-type. 2 Building-2 means you destroyed 2 Buildings of the -2 type. Not elegant, but elegance is what the user created Debrief is for.."

Yes I did post in Sim HQ but did not get the answer.
I want to be able to cross reference 2 buildings of the type -2 in the stats to something tangible that I placed in the MB. When I select an object in MB it doesn't say type 2 or type 3, it has a name like command building. How do you know exactly what you destroyed based on what you know you placed at the tgt area in MB?

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 12:30 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Debriefings

by Recluse

As I said, this is where the user created debriefs come in. When you set a GOAL flag on an object, you can give the goal a name...any name you want.

So say you put a MUST DESTROY goal on a 'Command building' which may be a Building-2. You could call the GOAL whatever you want, say, SADDAM'S PLACE. Then in the debrief, you write a message that will be shown when that object is destroyed (MUST DESTROY{SADDAM'S PLACE}=TRUE.


Granted, you are limited in your options here, as it is not feasible to write all possible debriefs if you expect the player to destroy MANY objects, but the GOAL flags assure that the Player is hitting what he is supposed to hit.

You can also use the Goal flag to give in game messages:

Lets say there are 3 building goals... MOE, LARRY and CURLY. Use a GOAL STATE CHANGE EVENT with suitable message to tell the Player:

MOE has been destroyed!
LARRY has been destroyed!
CURLY has been destroyed!

If you want to see what all the building types are in a plugin, you can assign them as targets in a BOMB TARGET waypoint, then in the targetting data in Mission Planning, you can see what each building type is based on the flight member associated with it. OF COURSE, There is NO correlation betweent the Building TYPE and the Building...There can be BUILDING-2's all over the map in different objects, and maybe even several BUILDING-2's making up (e.g. a Factory site).

In short: USE GOAL FLAGS, GOAL STATE EVENTS and DEBRIEFS to figure out what you destroyed.

Recluse

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 3:42 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

thanks...that helps

by fitness88

.

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 8:31 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Campaign Text Compression Tool

by ADM Mako

Ok... I know this has been brought up before, but it's been a long time since I checked for more updates on it, and wasn't able to locate any further data on it.

The Campaign Text compression tool is SUPPOSED to create a campaign .CMP file with all the TXT files in it PLUS the added ones you create for your custom campaign, as described here on the TACOPS site.

However... I've tried this on a Win2K machine, a Win98SE machine, and now on a WinXP Pro machine... and it has NEVER worked for me. Every time, it will compress, and if you look at the file using QuickView the only file in the .CMP file is the updated or custom ones... it has NEVER put the standard campaign txt files in for me. And I have of course selected them all. Every time I have tried this the .CMP file ends up being 11k in size, while the game's standard one is something like 80k in size.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why this is? I know it can be done because of the custom campaigns available for download. A Microsoft .dll file is mentioned having a bearing on this issue here on TACOPS, but what that file is isn't mentioned.

Any help would be great... thanks.

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 1:15 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Dll problems..

by Recluse

Yup.. Fabio and others have run into this before... I guess I am lucky that it works fine on my Win98 machine. Haven't yet managed to figure out which .dll it is.

In the meanwhile, if you need to generate a .cmp file, feel free to email me your text files and I can generate the .cmp with them along with the Standard, Valhalla and Karelskaya text files for you.

Someday, maybe we will figure out what .dll it is.

email: bobtull@spam_mindspring.com

(just get rid of the spam! )

Recluse

Posted on Oct 1, 2002, 5:38 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

RE:

by ADM Mako

Ok, thanks... I'll take you up on it.

I've got a couple campaigns I have been working on, one a fictional deal about Bear Island, and the other a full fledged training campaign.

Time, as always, is the major issue, so when I finally get both of them all ready to go I'll email you the necessary txt files for the tool.

Curious... has anyone ever been able to get out of Matt Wagner what that .dll file is?

Posted on Oct 3, 2002, 8:25 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Dll

by Recluse

Not sure if Matt knows! The DLL incompatibility may have been discovered later by someone else...It should be easy to find out..I will ask around..

Recluse

Posted on Oct 3, 2002, 4:38 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

TACAN Channels and the real world...

by ADM Mako

Hi all...

I have a question... and I am pretty sure I already know the answer but I'd like confirmation from someone who knows... a real pilot for example.

In the game, we can of course assign TACAN channels to pretty much whatever we want. I've created (a long while ago) a Mission Template that I use with the TACAN channels already programmed... INCLUDING TACAN channels for the Carrier, AWACS, and TEXACO.

Now... what I'd like to know is... in the real world with modern technology if a TACAN channel is programmed into a tower for example, can EVERYBODY in an airborne aircraft see that TACAN channel? For example, if the carrier has a TACAN channel programmed, can Russian planes see that TACAN channel... and hence the Carrier? Or is there a way to program it so that only "friendly" aircraft see that Channel?

Also... what's the practice of the US Navy in this regard? I assume that it would be EMCON for the majority of the time... which would mean no TACAN's if my suspicion is true.

Because if that's the case, I guess it's a good idea to eliminate the TACAN channels assigned to my Carrier, AWACS, and TEXACO... hehe. But I want to be sure beforehand.

Thanks in advance..

ADM Mako
Marauders Virtual Navy

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 12:30 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

TACAN

by Recluse

Well, I am not a REAL pilot by any stretch, but I can tell you that the TACAN stations were left off the carrier in the campaign missions specifically because it is unrealistic to have that broadcasting to the enemy...

Might be some modern frequency hopping/encryption method to provide some IFF...but I don't know...

Recluse

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 8:08 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

RE:

by ADM Mako

Well... that was the answer I was looking for actually. I had thought I overheard that somewhere before, but coulnd't remember where and just wanted verification.

I'll just have to change my Template a bit then.

Thanks a lot!

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 9:39 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Actually....any more information would help..

by ADM Mako

(Wish the forum had an "edit post" function...)

If anyone else has any more detailed or other information, I'd still be curious to know. :D

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 9:40 AM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

More Info

by Recluse

Well, I don't know if this has a bearing (no pun intended) on your original question, but here are some sources with more information that you probably wanted on how TACAN works:

http://www.radarpages.co.uk/mob/navaids/tacan/tacan1.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/navy/nrtc/14090_ch2.pdf

I also came across a reference, actually and advertising brochure for a common shipboard TACAN set, and it said that it provided a range of about 300 nm.

I always thought that the TACAN in F/A-18 was TOO good, since being introduced to Falcon4 SP3 where the TACAN DME (distance measuring equipment) is limited depending on the airfield with some TACAN's only good to 40-50 nm.. The simulated F/A-18 TACAN IS probably too good, but 300 nm covers most missions I have flown

Recluse



Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 1:03 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

RE:

by ADM Mako

Wow... again, Thanks! That info will come in handy. Thanks for your time.

Posted on Sep 30, 2002, 1:08 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

about TACANs

by

I am a USMC KC-130 navigator, and I can answer some of your questions on TACANS.
Q. ...in the real world...can EVERYBODY in an airborne aircraftsee that TACAN channel?...
A. Yes, but only if you have a compatible transciever.
Q. What's the practice of the US Navy in this regard?
A. We (the USN and USMC) always operate under some level of EMCON procedures, althought there are several levels depending on the threat, from full coms to no coms/emissions. (Some allow TACAN usage, some don't). You would not normaly see a carrier activate it's TACAN during combat ops if there were any chance of compromise.
Gunner V

Posted on Nov 18, 2002, 5:42 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Subs attacking

by Will

Are subs able to attack other ship with the 'Attack enemies along path' action?

Posted on Sep 25, 2002, 2:45 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Sadly, No :( (No Text)

by Recluse



Posted on Sep 25, 2002, 5:00 PM

Respond to this message

Return to Index

Create your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2009 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement