comrpnt

Hi Dave, you're not wrong. I read a vivid account of the raid in this book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Eighth-Air-Force-American-Britain/dp/1845132211 Nail biting stuff. This is worth a look - in case you've not seen it - some great shots of low flying in-bound: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWO7UqP7acc&NR=1 Regards, Paul. :-)

Hi Eject, you will need to extract the _targets.ini file and add to it to define your own target areas and target objects. For example, in WOE go to Terrain/GermanyCE and edit file GermanyCE_targets.ini (you may need to use the CAT extractor first to get the stock file from the ObjectData.CAT file). Looking through GermanyCE_targets.ini you'll see friendly and enemy target locations defined. A simple one would be to add something like the following: [TargetAreaXXX] Name=SAM site reported at gridRef(58,77) Position=580000,770000 Radius=7000 ActiveDate=04/20/1979 InactiveDate=04/30/1979 Location=2 Alignment=ENEMY Target[001].Type=SAMRadar Target[001].Offset=0.00,0.00 Target[001].Heading=270 Target[002].Type=SAMLauncher Target[002].Offset=0.00,1000.00 Target[002].Heading=315 Target[003].Type=SAMLauncher Target[003].Offset=1000.00,0.00 Target[003].Heading=270 Target[004].Type=SAMLauncher Target[004].Offset=0.00,-1000.00 Target[004].Heading=225 Target[005].Type=SAMLauncher Target[005].Offset=-1000.00,0.00 Target[005].Heading=270 This will place a cross-shaped SAM site (1 x SAM radar and 4 x SAM launchers) on the map at x/y coords 580000,770000 with the radar in the centre of the cross. The name of the target is important if you want to make it read sensibly during the mission briefing when you load the mission during the game. For example, see the attached mission file. Active and inactive dates effectively turn on and turn off the target so that they appear and disappear from the game map, depending on the date of the mission, set in the mission file on line "StartDate=04/22/1979" Offsets are calculated as x (left/right) and y(up/down) from the "Position=" value. For example, Offset=0.00,0.00 is the same as the "Position=" value (580000,770000). Offset=1000.00,0.00 real location is, in this example, 581000,770000. Offset=0.00,1000.00 real location is, in this example, 580000,771000. Offset=-1000.00,0.00 real location is, in this example, 579000,771000. Offset=0.00,-500.00 real location is, in this example, 580000,769500. Offset=-500.00,-500.00 real location is, in this example, 579500,769500. ...and so on. You get I idea. The heading value is simply the compass heading on the game map, so 0(zero)=North(up), 90=East(right), 180=South(down), 270=West(left). ***Important: The names of the objects in the target location MUST be exactly the same as those defined in the GermanyCE_types.ini file (the "Name=" field for each 'type' entry). For example, from the WOE GermanyCE_types.ini file... [TargetType061] Name=SAMRadar FullName=SAM Site TargetType=SAM_RADAR UseGroundObject=TRUE ActiveYear=1965 TargetValue=200 RepairRate=0.555 StartDetectChance=80 StartIdentifiedChance=20 IncreaseDetectChanceKey=10 MaxVisibleDist=8000.0 DestroyedEffect=SmallRocketGroundExplosion SecondaryEffect=VehicleFireEffect SecondaryChance=50 [TargetType062] Name=SAMLauncher FullName=SAM Site TargetType=SAM_LAUNCHER UseGroundObject=TRUE ActiveYear=1965 TargetValue=100 RepairRate=0.555 StartDetectChance=20 StartIdentifiedChance=0 IncreaseDetectChanceKey=0 MaxVisibleDist=8000.0 DestroyedEffect=SmallRocketGroundExplosion SecondaryEffect=VehicleFireEffect SecondaryChance=50 Hope this helps, regards, comrpnt. WOE_SAM_test_mission.zip

Hi Steve, I use this site to gen up on target areas for some of my mission designs: http://www.rjsmith.com/topo_map.html For example, see this one: http://www.rjsmith.com/Thai-Nguyen-Center.html All the best, regards, Paul.

Indeed Derk, I was there in May when this happened. We all stood around immediately afterwards holding our breath, wondering if he was going to be able to stop before the trees at the far end - because of the gradient of the runway all you could see of her was the tail sticking up above the tarmac. Thankfully all ended well and I think the only casualty was a bit of tyre rubber, and perhaps a new pair of shorts. Glad to see this clip has made it on-line now - it shows it from a new angle. Looking at the size of her, it's amazing to see what a sticking throttle and stiff front-side wind can do. Cheers, regards, comrpnt.

Hi Ant, Jeff, what was that about "Great minds..."? I was looking into this for the final -531 mission pack. Here you go, F-100D Aggressors circa 1965, with a pairs departure from Da Nang (closely followed by a pair of F-4Bs on a rollercoaster ride through the highlands.) Everything leaves from the same base, but remember to set FriendlyAirDefenseActivity=0 to avoid being toasted by the local 'blue' AAA. Cheers, regards, Paul.

Hi Steve, confirmed. I see the same thing from the extracted _targets.ini for that entry, from that version of WOV: [TargetArea123] Name=Vinh Airfield ... Target[043].Type=blastshield Target[043].Offset=518.60,-295.60 Target[043].Heading=270 Target[050].Type=vBarrack1 Target[050].Offset=621.86,-226.03 Target[050].Heading=90 Regards, Paul.

Even though it's not immediately obvious from the title, the following mission pack - while getting older now - could easily be updated to use the F-14 in Libya (at present the A-5A is used on a deep strike mission into that terrain). Everything else is provided. See here: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=5989 Regards, comrpnt.

It's worth making a note that the entire series is about to be concluded with the release of the final installation. For that release I will be revising all of the previous sets to work with the post-October 2008 patch, compatible weapons pack and fewer pre-reqs. Then I plan to port them all into SF2V. So you may want to wait for either of those releases in the next few months. Cheers, regards, comrpnt.

It can certainly be done for single missions - in fact it has, many times over in the VMFA-531 Mission Packs (available for download here in the User Missions section). Here are some screenies... Or fly a Misty mission, if you're interested in something faster... Etc etc... Regards, comrpnt.

Hi folks, thanks for your kind words. As there is no way to create an association between objects and lights, and therefore the destruction of an object to there being 'no lights' I guess things will have to stay pretty much as they are. With one alternative. Please find attached alternate Ramp1 ini definition files with the anti-collision lights definitions removed. I left the floodlights as they were. The file names enclosed end in "_Ramp1_2.ini" so either renamed them to end in "_Ramp1.ini" or change the name of the appropriate AirfieldDataFile entries in the _targets.ini file. Some folks will choose the latest file I've supplied. For myself, I prefer the former with anti-collision lights. At least now you have a choice. Regards, comrpnt Ramp1_enhanced_lights_B.rar

It's not well documented but re-arming in a mission IS possible. Simply edit the Controls/Default.ini file (or whatever controls file you're using) and add the following line to the [ControlSet001] section REARM_WEAPONS=ALT+W Re-run the game, expend your weapons, then press the key combination defined in the line above. Hey presto - you're rearmed! Here's proof (using the FuelWeight value to prove that these shots were taken one after the other on the same flight) Armed ----- Unarmed ------- ALT+W Re-armed -------------- Now, of course, with great power comes great responsibility, so I expect folks to RTB, taxi to the arming pit and then press the rearming button. No cheating while airbourne! ;-) (BTW, it doesn't work for fuel unfortunately). I'd like to take credit for discovering this but someone else posted the details a while back and I simply made a note of them - if the original author of this tip reads this please make yourself known, I expect that folks will want to thank you personally. This is the first time I've tried it and was pleasantly surprised to see that it works. I used WOE (patched Oct 2008) as my testbed. All the best, regards, comrpnt.

Mmm, well in theory you could use landing lights from some complex static aircraft positioned on the ramp, but the cost is quite high. For example... 1. You'd need about 40 landing lights to replicate the image above - not sure how the game would cope with the demands of calculating light source and shadows from each of these sources. 2. The static - if that's what was used (and I couldn't think what else you could use) - needs to be defined in a single mission file, so couldn't be used in all situations, like campaigns or game-generated single missions. 3. The offsets and positioning of each light would involve some tricky calculations given the location of the static and the central point (offset 0,0) of the runway layout in question. 4. The lighting up time of the lights could not be controlled - they'd be on all of the time. Yes, what you see above is a compromise as the lights are not real but it's pretty simple to do, in keeping with the rest of the airfield lights and available for any one to use no matter what context - single mission, campaign, game-generated mission, whatever. Regards, comrpnt.

Pureblue, in addition to the most excellent work going on here, please find below lighting definitions for the 3 ramps in your test upload package above. First some screen shots... Floodlights with 24 x 7 anti-collision lights on top: Floodlights when lit - timed to come on at the same time as the hangar flood lights that face the ramp: And an overview of what it looks like in context, across the whole ramp: (BTW, I also included anti-collision lights for the SunShelter in AB1_Ramp1. Not shown here) The enhanced _Ramp1.ini files are attached. Simply replace the originals above with these new enhanced ones. Cheers, regards, comrpnt. Ramp1_enhanced_lights.rar

Sure - no worries. QRA sheds look good. Nice to see them being re-used. BTW, did I read somewhere that someone is working on hangars and sheds that allow you to taxi in/out without hitting the collision bug that affects the stock shelters? Cheers, kind regards, comrpnt. :-)

Actually Dave, I partially disagree. It's not well documented but re-arming in a mission IS possible. Simply edit the Controls/Default.ini file (or whatever controls file you're using) and add the following line to the [ControlSet001] section REARM_WEAPONS=ALT+W Re-run the game, expend your weapons, then press the key combination defined in the line above. Hey presto - you're rearmed! Here's proof (using the FuelWeight value to prove that these shots were taken one after the other on the same flight) Armed ----- Unarmed ------- ALT+W Re-armed -------------- Now, of course, with great power comes great responsibility, so I expect folks to RTB, taxi to the arming pit and then press the rearming button. No cheating while airbourne! ;-) (BTW, it doesn't work for fuel unfortunately). I'd like to take credit for discovering this but someone else posted the details a while back and I simply made a note of them - if the original author of this tip reads this please make yourself known, I expect that folks will want to thank you personally. This is the first time I've tried it and was pleasantly surprised to see that it works. I used WOE (patched Oct 2008) as my testbed. All the best, regards, comrpnt.

One hack you could try (which is mentioned by Luca w.r.t YAP) - and certainly I played with this for the ODS mod - is to recode the taxi positions on the airbase. The up side is that you can in theory taxi out from a ramp start and your wingmen could do the same. The down sides are: i) AI wingmen will always move up to the next taxi holding point in the list, unless an earlier one is free, so from a revetment start the AI will move the aircraft to the next revetment in line until the first one in line, and then out onto the taxiway, and then on to departure. So, in short AI aircraft will taxi through the revetments to the neighbouring one etc. ii) If a taxi holding point is free (and not necessarily the next in line in the order you specify leading back from the entrance to the appropriate runway) then the AI is a little too smart and jumps the queue and heads straight for that next available taxi holding location - effectively cutting across the grass and messing up the idea of following the taxiways around the edge of the airbase to the runway departure point. See?... NOTE THE BUFF TAKING A SHORT CUT IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE PICTURE - cheeky blighter! ...and so on. So I stopped playing around at this point. This might be worth another investigation (as small fighter airbases might be easier to control) but I'm a little busy at present so if someone wants to take this on I'll talk them through what I know in detail to get them started. Cheers, regards, comrpnt.

Hi folks - there is some excellent work going on here from all parties. Well done team! If you need help with lighting or ramp starts for missions let me know. Regards, comrpnt.

Hello Uhu, as Fubar put it, nice to hear from someone who is actually there. You ask about technical reality and my short answer is "not much". But to qualify that further, this is because the stock terrain in WOE and the rest of the TW series is pretty basic and only a rough approximation of reality - as you can testify by looking out of your window. For Op. Rubicon I chose Rostock because it represented a Warsaw PACT port within striking distance of the NATO forces I wanted to use in this scenario. Other choices were Stralund and Greifswald which are too far East for a surprise attack by a large force, such as the one I had in mind. My motivation was to pull in as many air assets as possible in a coordinated attack on a single large well-defended strategic target. But of course there are other aspects of reality that can be written into a mission for the TW series - take the excellent work of the YAP team and their story telling based on real accounts. If you can find someone who was there to ask I expect that what YAP offers will give the player as realistic an experience that can be had on a PC to that felt by the folks who were really there. For Op. Rubicon I designed the attack in phases that I envisaged would be similar to how a real mission of this type would be planned - for example, opening up the border defenses with HARM attacks, followed by waves of bombers with A2A fighter cover. Not being employed by the military as a mission planner (in real life) I wrote it as I 'imagined' it would be done. If anyone reading this has real experience of how this type of mission would be planned then I'd love to hear their comments on how they would do it differently. So I guess, in summary, there are only degrees of reality you can ever hope to get from missions in this series of games. With the historical recreations I've done, mostly for VMFA-531 in Vietnam, and also now for the ODS mod, you can get a bit more depth to the feeling that you're reliving someone elses experiences. For this particular mission though one quote still makes me smile, made by Kopis n Xiphos, "a rare example for me, a moment when I actually start to sweat even though it's only a game". That's a great outcome for me. If I can work with the right tools, such as detailed terrains, and quality aircraft and ground models, then certainly the reality that can be put into this Sim is good, and certainly worth the work. I hope you get a chance to play this scenario, despite the large number of pre-reqs required. And if a bead of sweat starts to run as the SAMs start to fly when you're settled on your bomb run approaching the 'rough approximation' that is Rostock harbour, then I consider that Mission Accomplished. Now that is reality! Cheers, regards, comrpnt. :-)

Ah, well, I solve this problem with a static version of the carrier - by simply nullifying the movement values in the _data.ini. It's a bit of a hack of course but has the desired effect and maintains the eye candy factor of the fleet. I guess you can' have it all ways but for myself I like the fleet to stay put. Not much use during a campaign though as time moves on and so does the action. Anyway, cheers. Regards, comrpnt.

Erm, well, it might be possible. I'm not a campaign author but if you can make use of _targets.ini definitions then you could use something like this... // Yankee station(S) [TargetAreaXXX] Name=Yankee Station (South) Position=740000,500000 Radius=1000 ActiveDate=03/22/1972 InactiveDate=03/24/1972 Location=1 Alignment=FRIENDLY CarrierStation=TRUE // // 1st row (lead) (Centre) Target[001].Type=Cardiff Target[001].Offset=0,3000 Target[001].Heading=0 // 2nd row (West) Target[002].Type=Cardiff Target[002].Offset=-1000,1500 Target[002].Heading=0 // 2nd row (East) Target[003].Type=Cardiff Target[003].Offset=1000,1550 Target[003].Heading=0 // 3rd row (West) Target[004].Type=Cardiff Target[004].Offset=-1950,100 Target[004].Heading=0 // 3rd row *** Carrier *** (Centre) // *** Must also be defined in Mission file // *** to be able to land on carrier //PLACE HOLDER FOR CARRIER // *** // 3rd row (East) Target[005].Type=Cardiff Target[005].Offset=1900,-20 Target[005].Heading=0 // 4th row (West) Target[006].Type=Cardiff Target[006].Offset=-1100,-1500 Target[006].Heading=0 // 4th row (Centre) Target[007].Type=CargoShip Target[007].Offset=-550,-1000 Target[007].Heading=0 // 4th row (East) Target[008].Type=Cardiff Target[008].Offset=1050,-1550 Target[008].Heading=0 // 5th row (Center) Target[009].Type=Cardiff Target[009].Offset=20,-3000 Target[009].Heading=0 Any campaign authors care to comment? When I define naval fleets in my single missions I use the _targets.ini fleet definition above (or similar) and then only add the carrier as a groundmission object in the single mission script - otherwise it doesn't get treated as a valid landing zone for my aircraft or any other AI aircraft. That's all. The rest of the fleet though are defined in _targets.ini, and then it's only the active/inactive dates that govern the fleet's availability during my scripted missions, same as it would for a campaign. This is probably worth another look. Cheers, regards, comrpnt.

MB - you star! I'm using the Mirage Factory Weapons Pack 01/25/2009, which includes a BDouglas refueling pod - but strangely no entry for it in the WeaponsData.ini, so I added one, checked the attachment types, rebuilt the dat file and hey presto, it works. Thanks a lot for your help. :-) Canadair - did you copy that? Regards, comrpnt.

Mike, try DO's CVN75 carrier - its high quality, complex and has lights drawn onto it (using TGAs I think) - not the same as aircraft lights in terms of visibility from a distance, but still useful. See here: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=2840 Cheers, regards, Paul.

Hi folks, I was thinking of using the KC-130F tanker in a set of WOV missions, but having tested this against my October 2008 install of WOV the Douglas tanks and hoses don't show up on the model's wings - it appears as clean wing. Anyone tried and succeeded in getting this working post October 2008? (BTW, all appears fine in the pre-October 2008 version I have on my machine, so this is a patch issue). The original model is here: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=1906 Thanks, regards, comrpnt.

I'm in Vietnam at the moment and the fall out from this excursion is that I've revamped the WOV airfield lighting pack to cope with the October 2008 patch for series 1. I believe that this also now makes it compatible with SF2(V) - bonus! (party!). Available here (when approved): http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=3602 Cheers, regards, comrpnt.

Thought you folks might be interested in this garage add-on... http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article...r-work-art.html In fact, it just gets better and better... http://www.style-your-garage.com/motive.ph...list&type=a Regards, comrpnt. :-)