FM.dat editing - mission types
-
1% => no mission generated by ATO, but mission remains available in Add Flight menu
5% => mission generated ONLY if no other a/c type is available (marginal task capabilities)10% => normal behavior
thanks for the info. so F-15A can have AG mission type 5%, and F-15E have AA mission 5%.
-
Be careful at what will be the ATO loadout possibilities …
Do not set them blindly … if you are considering such “tweak” … care about DEEEEPLY testing it before in campaign and ensure it works properly. Otherwise you might have a/c tasked on mission without any weapons.
-
Thanks DeeJay…
What about same entries but for squadron/flight … in db ? … are those relevant only for sq/flt mission type assignment ?
… as in FM.dat , those would be only for the missions assigned to plane type…Now, isn’t that a bit “complicated” … then there are 3 levels of mission type assignment , … by the plane type , by flight , and by squadron …
Of course , only 2 would be effective at the time , . by plane type AND by flight OR squadron … (flight is used only when creating flights directly, without pkg, like in TE or editor , yes? )
So now we have to watch out that mission type for plane and squadron should be consistent … if that’s what we want… I mean, with this “double” filtering simple algorithm can be put like this =>
- Even if the plane is capable to go on that mission type , its squadron is NOT/ALLOWED to fly that type of missions … yes ?
2nd questions…
What about AUTO generated missions , QRA/SCRAMBLE/ABORT … should those be enabled (>5-10%) in FM.dat or ? - I mean , every interceptor/fighter should have a percentage in QRA … ABORT should be enabled (NOT 0 ? ) for EVERY plane …
What’s the behavior… - if you know from memory, as testing that is … meh, complicatedThanks
Cheers
-
my test shows TE/Sq role scores control the mission types first.
-
Correct, yes… default behavior since F4 days. - but db entries doesn’t cover those “special” auto generated missions - that’s how it should be … and that’s the problem as those are NOW configurable in FM.dat, so more room for ****up - IF that entry isn’t “fixed value” in the code , so value is ignored
— to many guessesIMHO BEST way is to adjust only those which are adjustable in db … so don’t touch any of the special until we hear from “God”
So what’s the word ? … are those should be left alone (0) in FM.dat , or they can be adjusted as any other adjustable by default … OR they should have 100% vs 0% , eg for ABORT
As DeeJay said, misconfiguring any of these can have a tremendous impact on behavior and “gameplay” (bugs )
-for now , I think I’ve seen both. planes on QRA/scramble (confirmed 100%) and ABORT (not sure)… but how they’re set in FM.dat , I haven’t even looked at that…
-
Thanks DeeJay…
What about same entries but for squadron/flight … in db ? … are those relevant only for sq/flt mission type assignment ?
… as in FM.dat , those would be only for the missions assigned to plane type…Now, isn’t that a bit “complicated” … then there are 3 levels of mission type assignment , … by the plane type , by flight , and by squadron …
Of course , only 2 would be effective at the time , . by plane type AND by flight OR squadron … (flight is used only when creating flights directly, without pkg, like in TE or editor , yes? )
So now we have to watch out that mission type for plane and squadron should be consistent … if that’s what we want… I mean, with this “double” filtering simple algorithm can be put like this =>
- Even if the plane is capable to go on that mission type , its squadron is NOT/ALLOWED to fly that type of missions … yes ?
Consider the database role sores as general “roles” … then .dat as tasks.
The best person to answer is probably Biker.
Back in 2010-2011 prior to 1st 4.32 release, while I was working on ATO tuning and mission planning/package composition, I was looking for a way to separate DEAD role from SEAD role.
In the past, we had Sead Strike and Sead Escort which doesn’t really mean anything RL wise. So goal was to have SEAD and DEAD (since some a/c can have DEAD capabilities but no SEAD capabilities, we’ve aimed for a way to separate both roles. Problem is the former .bin database (now .xml) were managing mission tasks as groups regrouping tasks and we had no way to change the structure without breaking F4Browse (BMS Editor wasn’t mature enough at that time).So only solution was to set the the role scores “per tasks” instead of group of task somewhere else. It has been chosen to set them in .dat.
So we can set a Squadron/Vehicle “role” capable, and in the .dat, inside those role capable groups, setting “tasks” role scores. (SEAD in .bin is then separated in .dat as SEAD & DEAD). from that point we could set an a/c DEAD capable with no SEAD mission generated. (same applies for some other tasks such as Stealth Strikes, BARCAP vs HAVCAP … etc …
…
2nd questions…
What about AUTO generated missions , QRA/SCRAMBLE/ABORT … should those be enabled (>5-10%) in FM.dat or ? - I mean , every interceptor/fighter should have a percentage in QRA … ABORT should be enabled (NOT 0 ? ) for EVERY plane …
What’s the behavior… - if you know from memory, as testing that is … meh, complicatedWhat matters is the Total score (.XML % + .DAT %) : I.e.: . XML SEAD (100% regrouping SEAD & DEAD) .DAT (SEAD 0% / DEAD 100%) = SEAD 0100/2=0% and DEAD 100100/2=100%
Can’t tell you about ABORT and TRAINING … maybe is no used at all (?) … Just known that INTERCEPTION is a task automatically converted by the code from QRA when needed.
QRA in ATO … when enemy detected within a given range, QRA are converted in INTERCEPTION. (I think it can be the same for a BARCAP and/or ESCORT while in flight)
IIRC, DEEP STRIKES are also converted from “regular” STRIKES in some conditions.…
Since now BMS Editor is fully functional and F4Brose definitively dead (no more need to keep compatibility) we could now imagine changing this and either suppress .DAT or .XML role scores and set everything in the same place. I would like to … but it means more work and would require re-setting all a/c. But it would male it more intuitive and user friendly.
Maybe some day. But since it is working fine ATM, we have other priorities … considering it is working as is., not sure Biker would like to chime into that again with the risk of breaking stuff or inducing bugs.
meh, complicated
Some other things are much more complex than this.
…
About Flight/Squadron in .XML … Nothing to think about here => just set them identical.
-
… BTW, the same way, I would also dream about the same way of separating “roles” from “tasks” for the PAK/Priorities slider in campaign … so we could set a SEAD requests at a different level then DEAD … or ESCORT/BARCAP/HAVCAP on some dedicated sliders rather than just one global DCA slider. It would allow much more control of the ATO generation that today.
Maybe someday (?) … but it is a risky area. Easy to break everything by touching those stuff.
-
Hm….
I try to understand how can be modified role score for red side to make fly more CAS and SEAD even with old planes.
What should be changed in this file? Setting different sq. role in camp. and setting different role scores in DB did not had strong effect… -
THANK YOU …
Ok , hierarchy … XML > DAT (fine tune)
-
Hm….
I try to understand how can be modified role score for red side to make fly more CAS and SEAD even with old planes.
What should be changed in this file? Setting different sq. role in camp. and setting different role scores in DB did not had strong effect…Just put 100% in those scores in db for squadron and flight (identical copy) for the RED planes you want … of course … your .PRI files should be adjusted in campaign, the sliders., to allow ATO generating more of that missions… planes are just “available tools”
-you could do the same for the FM.dat (same score values) , … as DeeJay EXPLAINED , more important were LIMITERS for DEAD vs SEAD … but huh… in FM.dat then your RED - CAS/SEAD planes shouldn’t have 0 (zero) for that missions
-
Just put 100% in those scores in db for squadron and flight (identical copy) for the RED planes you want … of course … your .PRI files should be adjusted in campaign, the sliders., to allow ATO generating more of that missions… planes are just “available tools”
-you could do the same for the FM.dat (same score values) , … as DeeJay EXPLAINED , more important were LIMITERS for DEAD vs SEAD … but huh… in FM.dat then your RED - CAS/SEAD planes shouldn’t have 0 (zero) for that missions
But this is the problem. I do not see to happening this.
The sq. role scores means what planes are used by the ATO if generates SEAD. But if AI does not want generate any SEAD because of PAK priorities… -
Consider the database role sores as general “roles” … then .dat as tasks.
The best person to answer is probably Biker.
Back in 2010-2011 prior to 1st 4.32 release, while I was working on ATO tuning and mission planning/package composition, I was looking for a way to separate DEAD role from SEAD role.
In the past, we had Sead Strike and Sead Escort which doesn’t really mean anything RL wise. So goal was to have SEAD and DEAD (since some a/c can have DEAD capabilities but no SEAD capabilities, we’ve aimed for a way to separate both roles. Problem is the former .bin database (now .xml) were managing mission tasks as groups regrouping tasks and we had no way to change the structure without breaking F4Browse (BMS Editor wasn’t mature enough at that time).So only solution was to set the the role scores “per tasks” instead of group of task somewhere else. It has been chosen to set them in .dat.
So we can set a Squadron/Vehicle “role” capable, and in the .dat, inside those role capable groups, setting “tasks” role scores. (SEAD in .bin is then separated in .dat as SEAD & DEAD). from that point we could set an a/c DEAD capable with no SEAD mission generated. (same applies for some other tasks such as Stealth Strikes, BARCAP vs HAVCAP … etc …
…
What matters is the Total score (.XML % + .DAT %) : I.e.: . XML SEAD (100% regrouping SEAD & DEAD) .DAT (SEAD 0% / DEAD 100%) = SEAD 0100/2=0% and DEAD 100100/2=100%
Can’t tell you about ABORT and TRAINING … maybe is no used at all (?) … Just known that INTERCEPTION is a task automatically converted by the code from QRA when needed.
QRA in ATO … when enemy detected within a given range, QRA are converted in INTERCEPTION. (I think it can be the same for a BARCAP and/or ESCORT while in flight)
IIRC, DEEP STRIKES are also converted from “regular” STRIKES in some conditions.…
Since now BMS Editor is fully functional and F4Brose definitively dead (no more need to keep compatibility) we could now imagine changing this and either suppress .DAT or .XML role scores and set everything in the same place. I would like to … but it means more work and would require re-setting all a/c. But it would male it more intuitive and user friendly.
Maybe some day. But since it is working fine ATM, we have other priorities … considering it is working as is., not sure Biker would like to chime into that again with the risk of breaking stuff or inducing bugs.
Some other things are much more complex than this.
…
About Flight/Squadron in .XML … Nothing to think about here => just set them identical.
Probably other people will be happy to do break stuff (me including) as said in another thread im making a campaign for EMF for personal use for now and i change things all the time as u say breaking things ALL THE TIME! and editing stuff and i might have 10 different saves and 100 different priority and mission.dat files till i find what i want exactly
But this thread here is know-how and knowledge sharing my friend! Kudos to all involved -
Flights might not be generated because (depending on mission type, location, eny level, and some other pram and reason I do not master) threat is considered too high and mission generation is aborted. That is one of the possible problem with campaign engine. It is VERY complex (could be too much?) and one can’t make what he wants. Hard to know what happens. Add on top of it some Anti-missile capabilities, cruise missile … etc … and it might leads into some stuck situation where both sides consider some task too risky … and you enter into a “non mission generation” loop.
Again … I am certainly not the best to speak about those in deep details. I tried to understand a big part … but it is VERY complex and not all is known/understood (at least on my side). Maybe also some bug in the process. Not sure without knowing precisely what is what and all interactions. It is very empiric.
-
But this is the problem. I do not see to happening this.
The sq. role scores means what planes are used by the ATO if generates SEAD. But if AI does not want generate any SEAD because of PAK priorities…Oh yeah, I’ve totally forgot about PAK’s … well, try adjusting them manually for a day or two… - campaign is “INERT” , changes are not immediate , but transposed in a matter of hours
To be honest … I also haven’t seen RED Sead missions , but when checked my Patriot/Hawk(s) (in Balkans) …1/3 of them were without radars , and that only means that RED SEAD works fine… damn, maybe even too good…
Now, about details… which plane(s) , what weapons… I cannot say,… without REALLY inspecting things thoroughly … overwatching the entire campaignCheck your (BLUE) AAA/SAM battalions radars in a day or two into campaign … those ones closer to the ‘flot’ … if they are missing/destroyed … you already know .
Unfortunately there is no simple debug procedure … best way is to compare with something that ‘works’ … then see where and what makes your not working.
Cheers
-
Oh yeah, I’ve totally forgot about PAK’s … well, try adjusting them manually for a day or two… - campaign is “INERT” , changes are not immediate , but transposed in a matter of hours
To be honest … I also haven’t seen RED Sead missions , but when checked my Patriot/Hawk(s) (in Balkans) …1/3 of them were without radars , and that only means that RED SEAD works fine… damn, maybe even too good…
Now, about details… which plane(s) , what weapons… I cannot say,… without REALLY inspecting things thoroughly … overwatching the entire campaignCheck your (BLUE) AAA/SAM battalions radars in a day or two into campaign … those ones closer to the ‘flot’ … if they are missing/destroyed … you already know .
Unfortunately there is no simple debug procedure … best way is to compare with something that ‘works’ … then see where and what makes your not working.
Cheers
But I wish to create SEAD for planes without ARMs.
-
aaah , so… back in '63 ? CW eh… , … yes maybe tricky , as SEAD weapons are ARM , and DEAD weapons are AG - whatever , bombs, missiles
That opens slightly different can of worms… Need completely working CW (coldwar) campaign , etc… But I suspect it is the thing I’ve said above , no ARM weapons = no SEAD. (NOT! DEAD)
BUT!.. You may have luck with editing of Mission.dat and declaring target waypoint as A2G - vs battalions (not objectives) , look here:11,AMIS_SEADSTRIKE,AMIS_TAR_UNIT,ARO_SEAD,MPROF_STANDARD,TPROF_ATTACK,TDESC_TAO,WP_SEAD,[color]WP_GNDSTRIKE[/color],150,250,200,30,0,4,20,99,AMIS_ESCORT,55,20,0,AMIS_ADDAWACS + AMIS_ADDJSTAR + AMIS_ADDECM + AMIS_ADDESCORT + AMIS_ADDSEAD + AMIS_ADDTANKER + AMIS_HIGHTHREAT + AMIS_MATCHSPEED + AMIS_NO_TARGETABORT 12,AMIS_SEADESCORT,AMIS_TAR_LOCATION,ARO_SEAD,MPROF_STANDARD,TPROF_FLYBY,TDESC_ATA,WP_SEAD,[color]WP_SEAD[/color],150,250,200,-240,0,2,0,99,AMIS_ESCORT,0,0,0,AMIS_ADDAWACS + AMIS_ADDJSTAR + AMIS_ADDECM + AMIS_ADDESCORT + AMIS_ADDTANKER + AMIS_HIGHTHREAT + AMIS_MATCHSPEED + AMIS_NO_DIST_BONUS + AMIS_NO_TARGETABORT + AMIS_FLYALWAYS
so , above is 11=DEAD mission , and you see that changed TGT_WP (target waypoint) is GNDSTRIKE … AND NOT!!! WP_SEAD as in below 12=SEAD mission
…that is what DeeJay was talking about … ‘make SEAD/DEAD different’ - it’s just a small step , the rest is complicated- so, you COULD TRY (I don’t promise anything) to change SEAD(escort) to also have WP_GNDSTRIKE as tgt_waypoint … it may be a dirty hack , it may not work at all… but I suspect it will work as a “Dirty Harry Hack”
…as SEAD is all-around anti-AA attack (NO specific target) … vs … DEAD is attack on SPECIFIC anti-air target , defined target
Cheers
- or, another way, more stupid …, it just crossed my mind , make a new weapon , eg copy of FAB-500 , and declare it Anti-Radar … see if it will CTD , just kidding, … maybe if you FORCE declare weapon as used vs radar … who knows what will happen … no one is BRAVE enough for such delinquency … … I haven’t tried, just trying to think with you !!
-
aaah , so… back in '63 ? CW eh… , … yes maybe tricky , as SEAD weapons are ARM , and DEAD weapons are AG - whatever , bombs, missiles
That opens slightly different can of worms… Need completely working CW (coldwar) campaign , etc… But I suspect it is the thing I’ve said above , no ARM weapons = no SEAD. (NOT! DEAD)
BUT!.. You may have luck with editing of Mission.dat and declaring target waypoint as A2G - vs battalions (not objectives) , look here:11,AMIS_SEADSTRIKE,AMIS_TAR_UNIT,ARO_SEAD,MPROF_STANDARD,TPROF_ATTACK,TDESC_TAO,WP_SEAD,[color]WP_GNDSTRIKE[/color],150,250,200,30,0,4,20,99,AMIS_ESCORT,55,20,0,AMIS_ADDAWACS + AMIS_ADDJSTAR + AMIS_ADDECM + AMIS_ADDESCORT + AMIS_ADDSEAD + AMIS_ADDTANKER + AMIS_HIGHTHREAT + AMIS_MATCHSPEED + AMIS_NO_TARGETABORT 12,AMIS_SEADESCORT,AMIS_TAR_LOCATION,ARO_SEAD,MPROF_STANDARD,TPROF_FLYBY,TDESC_ATA,WP_SEAD,[color]WP_SEAD[/color],150,250,200,-240,0,2,0,99,AMIS_ESCORT,0,0,0,AMIS_ADDAWACS + AMIS_ADDJSTAR + AMIS_ADDECM + AMIS_ADDESCORT + AMIS_ADDTANKER + AMIS_HIGHTHREAT + AMIS_MATCHSPEED + AMIS_NO_DIST_BONUS + AMIS_NO_TARGETABORT + AMIS_FLYALWAYS
so , above is 11=DEAD mission , and you see that changed TGT_WP (target waypoint) is GNDSTRIKE … AND NOT!!! WP_SEAD as in below 12=SEAD mission
…that is what DeeJay was talking about … ‘make SEAD/DEAD different’ - it’s just a small step , the rest is complicated- so, you COULD TRY (I don’t promise anything) to change SEAD(escort) to also have WP_GNDSTRIKE as tgt_waypoint … it may be a dirty hack , it may not work at all… but I suspect it will work as a “Dirty Harry Hack”
…as SEAD is all-around anti-AA attack (NO specific target) … vs … DEAD is attack on SPECIFIC anti-air target , defined target
Cheers
- or, another way, more stupid …, it just crossed my mind , make a new weapon , eg copy of FAB-500 , and declare it Anti-Radar … see if it will CTD , just kidding, … maybe if you FORCE declare weapon as used vs radar … who knows what will happen … no one is BRAVE enough for such delinquency … … I haven’t tried, just trying to think with you !!
Uh, what is the code what you quote? I simply cannot find it.
-
But I wish to create SEAD for planes without ARMs.
Not possible.
A SEAD task mission requires ARM missile/weapon. … Your option is => DEAD.
-
Not possible.
A SEAD task mission requires ARM missile/weapon. … Your option is => DEAD.
In FF5.3 I could achieve that 16 plane packages attacked key objectives of the blue side. Il-28 + Q-5 + J-5/6 force.
Does it mean DEAD for you? -
Well, dear Molni, let’s see…
If all they attempted to destroy enemy air defenses, no matter of their ordnances aboard, the answer is: yes.
With best regards.