Sinu

I didn't setup dynamic weather for the server correctly -- here's the correct procedure. Download the .rar attached below. It will include a lot of .fmap files. Place those .fmaps into the server's \Data\Campaign\Save\WeatherMapsUpdates folder. Basically, click maps auto update, load veterans.fmap and hit SAVE WTH -- every hour the new fmaps will be loaded. link: http://puu.sh/t9g6E/6014ff1c43.rar

Update: I did the dynamic weather wrong. I'll have an update for Semler that will actually make the weather change. Apparently, one .fmap file will only do one weather map across the entire theater and it will not change.

I would like to mention that I have seen obvious increase in this server's stability and performance on U3. I have even been seeing nearly accurate kill counts in the debrief screens of my missions! I hope the other Viper drivers will let me know how the real world weather updates are working out. In the test flights I've flown it really adds something to the campaign.

I got the Korea Master made. I have taken the liberty of making a dynamic weather map that uses real world weather from Korea. The campaign will update its dynamic weather every hour after 06:00. The weather is accurate until about campaign day 20 where it will loop over itself. Semler, in order to enable the .fmap you need to load it manually when you start the server. Use this screen In the box select "map model" -- then select the "VG Master" weather file. It should load and begin to make dynamic weather from then on after 06:00 in-game time. VG KTO Master.rar

I am in the process of making a 4.33 campaign file. I'll also include an edited Strong DPRK campaign master file as that is a stock campaign and the better DPRK units might solve our issues with "nothing to do" on days 4-30.

Are you flying out of one of the human only Hornet squadrons or an AI one? The AI Hornet squadrons that join the war when Russia does fly a metric-crap ton of missions and might be depleting their stores. Falcon BMS calculates targeting pods and jammer pods as being "used" every time a plane flies a mission with them equipped. It really doesn't seem to care if you bring everything back at the end of a sortie. The carrier (like all BLUFOR airbases) gets automatically resupplied from time to time. Check in after awhile and see if they are still depleted.

If you're referring to the A-10 squadron out of Osan I did set them back to "set by HQ" as last I looked there were DPRK tanks about 10 miles north of Seoul and the squadron was disabled. Ever since playing on this server I have seen duplicate call-signs - specifically with the F18s off the carrier. I have never seen the same call-sign in the same package though...that's extremely weird. The campaign ATO will move the bullseye every so often, as I understand.

In speaking with guys on the Falcon BMS forum I found some interesting information regarding the effect of player flights on the campaign. Apparently, there's a variable that can be added to the "Falcon BMS.cfg" file -- "set g_nNoPlayerPlay #" Where "#" is any numerical value Default is 2 hours # sets the hours the campaign will run without having there being a negative impact on friendly forces due to players not flying missions. To summarize that quote, in default BMS if a player does not fly every 2 hours BLUFOR forces (ground, air, sea) have poor performance (which causes campaign stagnation).

You can freely change whether BMS launches in 32 bit or 64 bit by clicking the buttons in the top right corner of the BMS launcher window. Running such a low-intensity game as BMS as a client in 32 bit you're not going to see performance drops or any major changes from running it in 64 bit. Where the 64 bit utility comes into play is server side - which is another matter entirely. To summarize: Use BMS launcher to run in 32 bit. Running in 32 bit will not give you any issues compared to 64.

Okay. I've kept all new squadrons the same, along with the carrier. All I've done is change the force ratio sliders and difficulty to match your image. New version below. New VG Edited Master.rar

Okay. I made the following changes: Air Defense and Pilot difficulty set at "Veteran", all force ratio sliders set to middle position. Made Carrier Vinson appear on day 1 of campaign, its AI squadrons are not active until China/Russia joins the war. Added following player-only (not AI controlled) squadrons: Choongwon Airbase 1 F16CM52 squadron, 2 tanker squadrons Kunsan Airbase 1 F16CM52 squadron, 1 KF1652 squadron Carrier VINSON 1 FA18C squadron, 1 FA18E squadron Osan Airbase 1 F16CM52 squadron, 1 KF16C52 squadron Seosan Airbase 1 F16CM52 squadron, 1 KF16C52 squadron VG Campaign Master Edited.rar

Tried to connect to the server today and it seems like it is crashed out.

I spawned the Vinson using Mission Commander and via this man's tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l302aJ7TbsM

Flew today. AI lag was nonexistetent. Ground units appeared fine and there was no disapearing airbases or anything like that. The difficulty sliders we have selected seem to give the DRPK nigh-infinite ground unit density. I am still experiencing difficulty in getting actual "kills" versus ground units after missions where I obviously had good effect on target. NATO forces are unable to penetrate the FLOT for whatever reason - presumably due to the ridiculous amount of DPRK forces. I will do more investigation as to what that Ground Forces slider actually does - aside from adding more GUs to DPRK.

Flew today and lag seemed okay (there was just 1 or 2 aircraft spinning every now and then, nothing major) Certainly seems like the difficulty settings we are running have a significant trade off in realistic weapon performance on ground targets. I did a visual BDA of an armored battalion (18 T-62s with support vehicles) after 4 JSOWs and 4 CBU-87s and saw all vehicles on fire with the TGP. After exiting the mission there were 4 "confirmed" A-G kills. Many, many vehicles "damaged." I guess this is just how the sim increases vehicle density -- by making them way, way harder to kill?

Just played on the server today -- Ground vehicles were warping Every aircraft in the air was warping, lagging Flares and weapons were lagging Not a good day. No idea what changed. There wasn't any lag at all the last time I flew.

I can say AI performance has improved hugely ever since moving the server to the 2D screen. I haven't observed flipping or spinning AI and ground vehicles are still behaving fine. Seems like all of the things relating to hosting BMS servers is just done by tradition or rumor. Nobody seems to have documentation on how different actions (like putting the server in 2D) really effects anything. It's all a guessing game, really.

I wouldn't mind the lag if it only effected AI on the ground but it is game breakingly bad when in A-A combat... Reference this ACMI file: http://puu.sh/oBlm0/cfe03f7a51.acmi Note the spinning behavior of the MiG23s, SU-25s and the Patriot missles.

If the server has a CPU bottleneck then we are SOL. I did see on the BMS forums that there is a program that can load the server client into the 3D world but does not draw any 3D textures. This might be something to try to relieve the load on the server CPU/GPU. Note: I literally no nothing about how this thing works, I just took a quick read through its release thread. Link: http://www.bmsforum.org/forum/showthread.php?24564-REL-dedicated-server-for-Windows-with-no-GPU

I did run a test today - my friend and I took the current VG server save .cam file and he hosted it off his PC. He's in the UK and I am in the US. We didn't experience any AI lag or warping problems. Of course, that is with only two clients and is not really a good test of the loads the dedicated would experience. That indicates to me that the problem doesn't lie with the save file. I have also noticed that it is more of an intermittent problem on the dedicated server. I wonder if the server install of BMS has some kind of strange problem? Certainly unlikely but it is weird behavior nonetheless. On the bright side, we were able to get a few good flights in: http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/499147520067881016/6CCC938B9F830F1D9F0BB8681319F5F1DB3C94F6/

Still got some interesting AI behavior - my lead and I were taxiing out of Seosan when we observed the usual AI spinning and teleporting. Suddenly, lead went "poof" in a fireball and exploded on the taxiway with no warning. Apparently, he collided with an invisible F16. Very strange.

I am in the process of editing a savegame with the above changes in Semler's post - should be available in a couple of hours after this post. I think it is important to note that no matter what changes we make to balance the campaign the actually outcome of it rests with the amount of human sorties. One well executed human flight against a very active DPRK airbase can change the entire "balance" that we may think we have setup. This is excluding the obvious buffs the AI receives for successful missions (which do, /dramatically/ influence the air and ground war for several hours, I am certain about that.) As far as air defenses are concerned, there are only a finite number of strategic SAMs that the DPRK fields. It may take a few days, but no matter what changes we make AI DEAD/SEAD flights with HARMs will render those sites inoperative after some time period. It's just a matter of how long that takes. Edit: http://puu.sh/oAAEB/d417748c33.cam That's the updated save - list of changes since last campaign: Made all (except the EA-18G squadron) AI squadrons on the Vinson inactive, they should join the fight at their usual assigned time. The player squadrons are still there and the carrier is physically still there. Removed AI fragging for the Osan A-10s (this kinda makes me sad but we'll see how the ground war does without them) Edited difficulty settings as per Semler's request - ADA and Pilot skill is Veteran

I have been mostly flying the FA-18C Hornet in the wee morning hours and it has been very enjoyable. I do agree and share Brain's that the Hornet squadrons, although present on day 3 or 4, quite literally bomb the ever-living **** out of the DPRK in the early part of the war. Specifically, they go to town on the enemy AD and aircraft. I feel that this is primarily responsible because of the Super Hornet squadrons and that aircraft's ability to carry 6 HARMs, 12 JSOWs, or 12 AMRAAMs. It's just a ridiculous ordinance load. On an OCA strike a single aircraft can take 6 of the 2,000 lb penetrating JDAMs. I think a first step towards "semi-balance" might be to disable all the carrier based until day 3 or whenever the carrier usually enters the war. I am not at all knowledgeable about how to set that up, though. -- The primary influence on the ground war certainly seems to be human pilots flying missions. The US/ROK ground unit experience changes from "regulars" to "veterans" after I fly a "successful" mission rating, their morale goes up as well -- it doesn't matter what the mission was, either. AI aircraft seems to get a buff as well. After a few hours that buff goes away and the AI reverts to their original state of average experience and morale. If there's long stretches of time where human pilots are not flying missions the ground war will not advance. With the testing I've hastily done, I really don't think that destroying that 1 tank battalion of 16 units is what will influence the war -- its the human pilots giving the AI the experience and morale buff they need to destroy the enemy.

-

In conversation with Selmer this is the new edited campaign: Features: Added F16 BLK 40s to Kusan and Osan (not fragged) Added American F16 BLK 52s to Seosan (not fragged) Added an AV-8B squadron to Chungju (not fragged) Added the Carrier Vinson on day 1 with its associated AI sqdns Added two squadrons of F18Cs to Vinson (not fragged) Link: http://puu.sh/opCQI/3d1f4540a4.cam (right click -> save as .cam) I do anticipate quite some changes in the way the campaign is fought with the addition of the carrier so early in the war but we can always change and adapt the save as we see issues occurring.