It's not dead yet!

[sdsbolt]

probably beyond the scope of this addon but a series of missions or mini-campaign that depended on players success would really add something.

 

[gecko]

I've wished for it before, in some other threads though, but to have the QC to be basically a mission without any fixed enemy activity. The frontline (customizable perhaps) would be there, with randomly appearing air activity from both sides, active AA batteries, road traffic firing back if enemy, searchlights working, you get the idea. The entire thing alive so to speak.

I think that should be completely possible. I need to do some experimenting with how QC sets up free flight, since it uses different rules than missions. The challenge is for flights that start behind enemy lines, since normally CFS3 doesn't allow this. But some flavor of your idea (whatever I can get CFS3 to roll with) is definitely on the cards.

 

[gecko]

probably beyond the scope of this addon but a series of missions or mini-campaign that depended on players success would really add something.

This will depend on how much outcome information I can capture at the end of a CFS3 flight and pass to the interface. If I can, that sounds like a great idea. Something kind of like the old CFS2 campaigns.

 

[Frosty]

Wow!

Anything that is a step closer to more realism or variety of options in QC would be great.

I second that! I'd like to be able to change the initial QC setup in more detail, like altitude and relative position of the player to enemy aircraft
In general, not only QC, I'd like to see better tactical flying by E/A: not every fighter is boom-and-zoom etc. Essentially this is what I think the OFF etc. developers did.

 

[gecko]

Yep, more detailed QC setup including exactly the options you mention is definitely planned.

Regarding AI flying, I'd love to figure out how to do that. At present I have no idea, though as you mention, WOFF has managed to do wonders for the AI there.

 

[Pat Pattle]

I second that! I'd like to be able to change the initial QC setup in more detail, like altitude and relative position of the player to enemy aircraft
In general, not only QC, I'd like to see better tactical flying by E/A: not every fighter is boom-and-zoom etc. Essentially this is what I think the OFF etc. developers did.

I third it!

The stock QC is pretty dire, CFS3 only comes to life in Missions and Campaigns, so a new QC interface utilising mission builder type options would be great!

Having said that... QC is great for testing, so still having a quick way of getting into the game would be good.

 

[gecko]

I third it!

The stock QC is pretty dire, CFS3 only comes to life in Missions and Campaigns, so a new QC interface utilising mission builder type options would be great!

Having said that... QC is great for testing, so still having a quick way of getting into the game would be good.

This QC will still be in the spirit of the existing one to some extent. If you add too many options, it is no longer "quick." I'm still thinking through getting that balance right. QC will still be geared toward a shorter flight with a shorter set up time. Some of the suggestions here may not fit into QC, but can still be implemented in other modes. More on those in due time, but there will be more ways to fly besides Quick Combat, Single Mission, and Campaign.

 

[Pat Pattle]

This QC will still be in the spirit of the existing one to some extent. If you add too many options, it is no longer "quick." I'm still thinking through getting that balance right. QC will still be geared toward a shorter flight with a shorter set up time. Some of the suggestions here may not fit into QC, but can still be implemented in other modes. More on those in due time, but there will be more ways to fly besides Quick Combat, Single Mission, and Campaign.

To my mind, it's that when you fly in missions and the campaign you see so much more going on than you do in QC. It's hard to describe, but observing scenes like a sky full of parachutes, or a flight of friendly fighters coming to your aid just doesn't seem to happen in QC.

 

[gecko]

Yeah, QC mode is quite limited in scale, and changes some of the game dynamics in a way that limits what it makes sense to do, particularly the way it handles friendly and enemy territory. I will be doing away with those things and moving towards the ability to have more airplanes in the sky, and a more open, believable world. The extent of that is still TBD, but that's the direction I'm heading, and it seems a lot of people want similar things.

 

[gecko]

I've wished for it before, in some other threads though, but to have the QC to be basically a mission without any fixed enemy activity. The frontline (customizable perhaps) would be there, with randomly appearing air activity from both sides, active AA batteries, road traffic firing back if enemy, searchlights working, you get the idea. The entire thing alive so to speak.

So I ran a quick test tonight to see how this might be accomplished, particularly with regard to starting a quick combat flight over enemy territory. My results were exactly what I had hoped. By default if you have a frontline defined, the game assumes you are starting in friendly territory and everything on the other side of the line is enemy. Thus a British flight starting over occupied France will not encounter AA fire until crossing the channel back to Britain, assuming a frontline defined along the middle of the English Channel. If no frontline is defined, everything is neutral and nothing shoots at you anywhere. Neither of these things is what we want.

However, the global layer allows you to define an owner for every facility. If this is done according to where you would place a frontline, with an axis nationality owning everything on one side and an allied nationality owning everything on the other, this can take the place of defining a frontline and the issues that presents. If you're flying for Britain, all the German owned facilities will shoot at you and vice versa. The nationality of the ground traffic spawns is controlled by the nationality of nearby facilities, so you won't have the issue of the wrong country's ground traffic showing up in the wrong place. With the flexibility that will be possible with the new interface, you can start your quick combat flight anywhere, fly anywhere, and get an appropriate response from the ground. With a carefully designed set of routine air spawns (or possibly routine flights explicitly placed by the interface into the mission file before you run it) you have a live (and dangerous) world. Take off from an airfield in Kent, cross the channel and cause trouble and see what shows up to try to stop you, or if you have less time, just start the flight over Calais and take it from there with the same result. All without any predefined structure. Best to watch your back as you prepare to land back at base. No telling if Jerry has put up a free hunt flight looking for targets of opportunity just like you had been doing to him. Alternatively, the existing "dead" free flight world can be recreated by using a neutral global layer with no owned facilities for those times when you want to fly around without the possibility of combat.

GSL facility ownership and a frontline defined on the map (but not in the actual mission) would need to be created for each historical frontline state, but that is well within the capabilities of the new interface.

 

[Pat Pattle]

So currently, the frontline overrides the gsl, is that correct?
If so, is CFS3 doing something in the code to change ownership when you add or move a frontline in a mission in the MB?

 

[gecko]

Yes, essentially. And since using a frontline does not allow you to start in enemy territory, you can't have one in that scenario. Thankfully, facility ownership can still ensure that the facilities around you are still enemy in that case.

 

[greycap.raf]

Holy moly... so it can be done after all. That would be the single biggest thing separating CFS3 from greatness removed. And it only really needs a couple of frontline options - anything until D-Day is one and the same, then perhaps Market Garden and Bodenplatte or Varsity. Things didn't change all that drastically after that what comes to air warfare.

 

[gecko]

I'd probably do several, and don't forget May-June 1940, but yeah, I don't think it would be too bad.

 

[gecko]

Another update! Back in September I thought I was a lot closer to completing the stage I was working on than I was, but now I can say I have completed the control assignments portion of the interface. This was a major and necessary step to give the new interface all of the capabilities of the original without having to find a way to access the existing CFS3 menus to do it, which would have been very clunky. I have also tried to think through and add some new capabilities.

Here it is:

The new control assignments interface can do everything the CFS3 interface can do, and more. CFS3 allows you to make as many custom control configuration profiles as you like, and switch between them manually as desired. The new interface will also allow you to create as many configuration profiles as you want, but you can now assign them to specific aircraft, and the assigned profile will be loaded and used automatically whenever you fly that aircraft. You can assign a profile to as many aircraft types as you like. Any aircraft without a profile assigned specifically to it will use a default profile. Any profile can be designated as default.

The commands are divided into similar categories as with CFS3. It is possible to create new commands in any category by making simple edits to a few text files. These will have to be supported by aircraft-specific RSM programming, but the point is, integrating them into the interface is open source and very easy to do. Each command allows up to three keys or axes to be assigned to it. All keys, joystick buttons, joystick axes, and POV hats that CFS3 is able to recognize are supported. Even multiple POV hats on one joystick (apparently that's a thing now) are supported.

Additionally, there is now some basic support for managing head tracking software. You can now locate the exe of your head tracking software (TrackIR or one of the other programs out there) and the interface will run it automatically if it isn't running. You'll never have to worry about starting a flight only to remember your head tracking software isn't running.


Keyboard and Button Assignments

Looking at the key and button assignment menu, you can see the additional Repeat Count option carried over from CFS3 which will trigger the keystoke the specified number of times when pressed. Some commands have a new Physical Toggle Switch check box, which allows support for controllers with physical two position switches. Currently CFS3 does not support these well. This will allow you to have the switch have separate (but related) functions in each position. You can also specify which position should be considered "on" and which position is "off."



Axis Assignments

The axis assignment menu has even more new options. Setting the sensitivity and null zone is made a little easier since they are right there and not on a separate tab that you normally forget exists, unlike how it is in CFS3. Additionally, you can invert an axis right there on the menu, whereas in CFS3 you have to hand edit the xca file to do it.



Throttle Detents

One other new feature, which may be unique in flightsims (at least I'm not aware of any sim that does this) is the ability to set detents. Many of the HOTAS throttles that are out there have some kind of physical detent to give you a tactile sense of where you are in the axis travel. Some are even configurable. Many WWII aircraft had various detents, gates, or latches in their throttles as well which denoted certain limitations, or changes in operation beyond a certain point. This feature will allow you to align the physical detents on your throttle with the operation of the aircraft you are flying. If your throttle doesn't have detents, or the aircraft you are flying doesn't use them, you can ignore this feature without consequence. Both forward and rear detents are supported. In the interest of accounting for possibilities I'm not yet aware of, this capability has been given to all axis assignments, even though it will probably only be used for the throttle. You never know!

For a practical example, the Spitfire Mk.V had a gated throttle. With the throttle at the gate, the boost controller regulated the engine at +9lbs of boost all the way up to its full throttle height. Beyond the gate, the operation of the regulator changed, and the engine would produce a max takoff power setting of +12.5 lbs of boost at sea level, but it would quickly drop back to +9lbs as altitude increased, and then maintain +9lbs up to full throttle height. Thus there was no difference between the throttle at the gate, and being pushed all the way to full except at low altitudes. I modeled this behavior in the RSM module, but now you can configure it to match your actual controls. When your throttle hits the detent, the throttle in the Spitfire will hit the gate at the exact same time.



That's all for now but hopefully the next stage won't be so painfully slow. I was gratified to see the latest IL-2 Korea dev blog that details their settings and controls interface work. They said it was the most complex part of the interface. I can relate! Building this thing was terrible! The next thing will be to actually pair the interface with a working CFS3 install and reworking the in-game interface. I'm hoping it goes a bit easier than this and is more rewarding.

 

[Pat Pattle]

but you can now assign them to specific aircraft, and the assigned profile will be loaded and used automatically whenever you fly that aircraft. You can assign a profile to as many aircraft types as you like.

Hells bells you clever chap! I have no idea how you've built this interface Daniel but it looks amazing! A major step forward.

 

[Frosty]

Wow, Daniel!! That's almost like a combination of modern sims (eg. DCS) and the programming software that comes with HOTAS peripherals!! I love it!

 

[gecko]

That's kind of the idea. I don't like fiddling with extra software, though there is not replacement for what some of that programming software can do. But some of it really needs some integration from the sim side to get the physical aspects of your controllers to interact in a meaningful way with what the sim is actually doing.

Minor progress update: Last night I launched CFS3 directly to a mission from my interface for the first time. There is still some work to smooth out the transition into and out of the sim from the interface, but it shouldn't be too bad. Then it will be a matter of developing the interface to the point where it is setting up every aspect of the sim prior to the mission and auto-generating the missions themselves based on your menu selections.