ricnunes

Currently I'm creating a new campaign based on the Desert (Fictional) scenario and campaigns but in the campaign that I'm building I want that the frontline's starting position to be located considerably to the north (well within Dhimar's territory) compared to the starting position of the frontline in the stock/default campaigns but I can't seem to find where or how can I do this. Could someone help me on this regard? Thanks in advance for any replies.

Thanks Wrench

Yes, that's it! Thanks for the reply Wrench! However it was a bit of a "pain in the ass" to figure out the right coordinates, I had to look at the Strategical Nodes in the 'Campaign_data.ini' file and imagine in my mind a set of coordinates that would pass near the desired places (in relation to existing Strategical Nodes) so that the frontline is draw near the desired place. So my first question here, is there any other alternative and easier way to figure out the right coordinates for a certain point on the map? I also have an another question: In my campaign I set 4 Positions for my frontline and I notice that your example uses 11 Positions. So is there any problem about having 4 positions only or should I have more for my frontline?

First of all, thanks everyone for the replies. Actually one of the things that I tried was to place enemy units in positions within the friendly side of the frontline in hope to see the frontline starting in a different position but unfortunately without success! In this case what happens is that those enemy units (placed in the friendly side of the frontline) simply won't spawn on the map (and the frontline starts in the same place as it starts on default campaigns). If someone could help me on this regards, I would appreciate.

I know that SF2 doesn't support true MFD functionalities similar to the ones found on the real F/A-18 for example (among many other modern aircraft) but I noticed that there are two modded aircraft, one being the TMF F-14 and the other a F/A-18 Super Hornet (don't know how made it, sorry, but it's included in the Op. Darius mod). With the TMF F-14 it's possible to change the HSI (lower CRT display) to display one of three (3) different pages (NAV, Radar and RWR) using the Bomb Ripple Interval key while the VSI (upper CRT display) can also display different pages using the Bomb Ripple Quantity key. The Super Hornet's (mentioned above) left MFD can display one of two (2) pages (EW and SMS) which can be cycled using the Bomb Ripple Interval key (similar to the TMF F-14). So my questions are: - How can I implement something like this on an existing aircraft (the CF-18 or F/A-18A/C for example)? - Is it possible to use another set of keys (alternatively to the Bomb Ripple Interval/Quantity keys) in order to change/cycle thru the MDF pages? Thanks in advance for replies.

Thanks Brain32 and ToS for the explanation

First of all, thanks for the replies. To be honest I never had intention of making every MFD page that exists in real life for the CF-18A or F/A-18A. What I would like to do is something much simpler in the lines with what was already done with the TMF F-14 and/or Super Hornet. To be more precise what I would like to do is having the ability to choose for the left MFD between the SMS and EW (RWR) pages just like happens with the Super Hornet and for the right MFD I would like to be able to choose between the Radar and ADI pages. The later part (right MFD) is also currently modeled in the Super Hornet albeit the player doesn't change between Radar and ADI by pressing a key (like happens with the left MFD) but instead it's something like this: Radar on -> Shows Radar Page or Radar off -> Shows ADI page and honestly I would be happy with this solution for the right MFD for my CF-18A or F/A-18A but what I don't know or don't understand is how can I implement the solution for the left MFD? So if someone could explain me how this can be done I would appreciate.

I've been playing with the Operation Desert Storm mod for SF2 lately and I found an another problem related with this mod, this one related to the carriers. One of the planes that I've been playing with this mod the most has been the F-14. But I have a problem when trying to land the F-14 (and I suspect any other aircraft as well) on some carriers, the aircraft will "sink" inside the carrier instead of keeping itself with the wheels on the carrier's deck!! If I apply enough power than I can literally go thru the carrier and leave it behind (my aircraft doesn't explode while "sinking" and flying inside the carrier) or else it will end up crashing on the water! This issue doesn't seem to happen with all carriers (only with some). So, is how can I solve this problem? Thanks in advance for replies.

Actually I didn't have the update installed (I didn't know that there was one) but after installing it, it really seems to have solved my problem! Thanks BlueCaneCorso for the reply and for pointing out the update's download link! And of course, thanks to the others as well for trying to help me.

Recently I downloaded NATO Fighters 5 and while I'm very pleased with it, I do want to make some changes to make it more realistic, namely in the CF-18 Hornet which I notice can carry TERs (Triple Ejector Racks) with up to 3 bombs and even 3 Missiles (such as the AGM-65 Maverick) per pylon. This is not realistic since the real F/A-18 and CF-18 can only carry Twin Bomb Racks per pylon (and don't carry TERs). So far I did some editing, first by editing the LoadLimit values but I either ended up being able to carry 3 light bombs per TER or I couldn't load the heaviest bombs (such as 2000lb bombs) so I was unhappy with it. Then by looking into the CF-104(76) Starfighter data code (CF-104_76_DATA.INI) I added the following line to the CF-18_DATA.ini file: RackSpecificStationCode=HARRIER_WING while eliminating the TER, MER and TLR codes (and keeping the 2BR). This so far had the best result since it gave me a true Twin Bomb racks very similar to real F/A-18 ones but the problem is that I can't load 2 Mk83 (1000lb) bombs per pylon or even 2 BL-755 Cluster Bombs per pylon, like the real F/A-18 and CF-18 can! After this I had a look into the F-4F_DATA.ini file and I noticed a very interesting solution, which was a TER with the following code line: RackLimitOutsideOnly=TRUE But the problem here is that with this code and while effectivelly limiting the bomb load to 2 (instead of 3) within the TER rack, the 2 bombs are carried one in a side position (the outside one) and the other in the lower position. What I wish is to have a way that I can carry two bombs only in a TER rack but on both side positions (outside and inside positions) leaving the lower position always free but unfortunally I don't know how to do this! So can someone help me on this? Thanks in advance for replies.

Thanks for the reply Malibu

Yes, but the question remains: How can I incress the bomb load capacity of those racks so I can for example load 2 Mk-83 1000lb bombs in each of those racks? I tried to incress the value of the "LoadLimit=" parameter but that didn't work. :(

You mean to ask "why not just use the 2BR for the CF-18s?", right? Well, the stock 2BR carries both bombs one in front of the other (just like a MER - Multiplayer Ejector Rack but with 2 bombs only instead of 6 or more). For the CF-18, I need a Twin Bomb Rack that carries both bomb side by side. Thanks for the heads up! Could you point me where to find the 2BR that I'm using? I cannot seem to find this 2BR (the one used on the CF-104 which I adapted for the CF-18 as well).

The square solution look great! But this only works for the targeted object, right? Is there a way to implement this kind of square to ALL visible objects (friendly and enemy aircraft and ground targets and vehicles)?

Hehe, só agora reparei que havia um "cantinho" Lusofono aqui! Mais um tuga para a lista! Castelo Branco, Portugal

I don't know how the HP O/400 will be used in OFF P4 (which kind of missions will we fly with it) but we all know that the OFF map is very, very big covering areas from Britain to all of France, most in not all of Germany and even parts of northern Italy, resuming the entire WWI western front! Therefore all strategical missions that the HP O/400 did during WWI can be simulated in OFF (and within its map).

Greetings, I'm starting this thread based on my observations and doubts about the new Nieuport 24 that came with HitR expansion. I noticed that as opposed to the earlier Nieuport 17 (Lewis) that the Nieuport 24 (Lewis) doesn't have any sights (similar to the Nieuport 11). Is it supposed to be this way (is this realistic)? If yes, what's the (real) reason for this? If this really happened in real life, than this was a very wierd decision by the RFC since an older aircraft have sights while the newer one doesn't I also noticed that according to the aircraft stats that the Nieuport 24 (Lewis) and the Nieuport 24Bis (Lewis) are basically the same thing with the exception that the Nieuport 24Bis (Lewis) which should be an improved version of the Nieuport 24 (Lewis) is in fact slower (Nieuport 24-Lewis has a top speed of 116mph while the Bis has a top speed of 97mph)!! Is this correct? Is yes, why? I also noticed that the French versions of the Nieuport 24 and Nieuport 24Bis as opposed to the British ones have the same top speed (116mph)! Sorry for making these questions but the fact is that my knowlege about the Nieuport 24 (actually about the post-Nieuport 17 versions) is a bit limited and that's also the reason why I'm making these questions. Thanks in advance for replies...

What you say really makes sense! Also I want to say that what Polovski said with "Sometimes sights were removed if they actually made the view worse" makes sense for airplanes like the Nieuport 24. Thanks for the your replies guys!

Very interesting post shredward, thanks for your reply! So the N24Bis came first than the N24 "baseline", very interesting inded! I didn't know this and with your post I certainly learned more about about the WWI aviation. Once again, thanks for your post! But I still have a couple of questions? - Why does the French N24Bis is faster (the same as N24) than the British/Lewis N24Bis? (while the British/Lewis N24 has the exact same speed as the French N24 - This according to the OFF aircraft stats) - Why does the British/Lewis N17 have a gunsight while the British/Lewis N24/N24Bis doesn't have any?

Thanks for the explanation Mark! As you can see I'm one (of the many it seems) that like and prefer the new AI and while the OFF dev team members seems to prefer the "old AI" I think that from now on I'll play exclusivelly with the "new one" (since it's the one I prefer) and therefore thanks for giving us customers the option to choose wether AI we desire to play with.

I was going to post the same questions here but than I found this thread. I don't know if I understood correctly how this "Historical AI" works, but: - Does this mean that if I start OFF and start playing a campaign mission that takes place in 1915 I'll get the new HitR AI and if for example I play an another campaign mission with an another pilot and without exiting OFF but this one takes place in 1918 (for example) I still always get the new HitR AI, is this correct? - Or if I start playing a campaign mission in 1918 and for example the OFF manager "chooses" the "old AI" (version 1.32g) and if I decide (again without exiting OFF) to play with an another pilot a campaign mission in 1915 then I will always get the "old AI" (version 1.32g), is this correct? If the answer to both questions is YES, don't get me wrong but isn't this "Historical AI" a little bit of a bad decision? Would it be better to have the OFF manager to choose the AI everytime a campaign mission is generated (everytime the player hits the "Briefing Room" option) instead?

Ok done! :)

Well getting back to the subject: I must say that the more I play with the new OFF:HitR AI the more I like it! I've been flying with squadron RFC24 and fighting with my and my wingmen Airco DH2 against enemy Fokker EIII is an absolute joy! No more "yoyoing", AIs try to keep their altitude only going down when they must or need to and I could be wrong but wingmen AI seem to coordinate more with each other - for example I saw situations where 2 AIs where attacking an enemy aircraft which I found very rare to happen in previous OFF versions! The enemy AI is still agressive enough and they managed to shot me down twice during my RFC 24 campaign so I also found in terms of attacking iniciative that the AIs (both friend and foe) to be very good. As I previously said in another thread, the only thing that IMO could be improved is their evasive manouvers in general terms, but even in this "department" the AI evasive manouvers are still suficient or even good in many or most cases. I just noticed that a new patch was just released for HitR expansion which allows the player to either use the "old" or the "new" AI. The best would be to combine both by using the "new" AI with the evasive (defensive) manouvers from the "old" AI. Probably that isn't possible (or is it, OFF team?). In case that isn't possible I think from now on I'll stick with the "new" AI!

Actually I'm liking the way the "new AI" in HitR behaves to the point that I really thought that this "new AI" was in fact a new feature and NOT a porked AI! This AI fixes what I find to be the biggest OFF problem which is the "yoyoing" that aircraft do when they get at low altitudes! This "yoyoing" is in fact (and IMO) the biggest problem in OFF where many of the AI aircraft (specially low powered ones) actually end up killed by this "yoyoing" and not be enemy fire! One of the AI aircraft that usually did this was the Fokker EIII but now the "new AI" simply fixed the "yoyoing" - At least in Fokker EIII and I strongly suspect in all other aircraft as well since now the AI will keep their altitude only diving to low altitudes in cases of emergency and this folks is REALISTIC! Even when AI go to low altitudes they don't do the "yoyoing" stuff! I also started a campaing with the RFC 24 squadron and I notice that AI take longer to shot down enemy aircraft but they seemed agressive enough (AI versus AI). Neverthless I got the impression that the enemy AI was somehow less agressive towards the player but that could be because in the missions that I flew so far, the enemy AIs were quite outnumbered in a ratio of at least 3 to 1 (favouring my flight). But I also think that the an AI that is being attacked could be much more agressive in it's defensive manouvers! Also I haven't experienced the same thing as Morris did! For me, it much harder to kill someone now with HitR than before! So IMO: Is the "new AI" in HitR better than the previous OFF3 v1.32g in general terms? Yes, I strongly believe so! Does the "new AI" in HitR needs to be more defensive or "more agressive" in terms of defensve manouvers when attacked? Yes, definitly it does! Does the "new AI" in HitR needs to be more agressive when attacking the enemy? I'm kinda in doubt here. Sometimes I would say NO. But if this is to be improved (improvements are always welcome) then this shouldn't be improved by much. So basically what the future AI needs IMO is: - To be exactly the "new AI" in HitR with AI attacking manouvers slightly improved and having the AI defensive manouvers from version 1.32g!