SNAFU Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) --------------------------------------------------------- Stonehouse continued the work on the script and improved it: please look here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2294835&postcount=372 In the interest of making life easier for everyone I've (with some feedback and assistance from Snafu and Rivvern) moved the script onto GitHub. As part of the move I have also finally written up a user guide and Rivvern is looking at creating a checklist/quick start/memory aid one pager for people who have used the script before but need a memory jogger to make sure they've done all the bits. Access is via this website http://457stonehouse.github.io/GCICAP/ Snafu could you please update your first post when you have a spare moment? Thanks. This thread remains now for support and discussion use and all releases will be via Github. Hope this works well for everyone. Cheers, Stonehouse ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additionally "lukrop" is working on this idea and rewrote the script: You find his latest updates here: https://github.com/lukrop/GCICAP Please report feedback here: https://github.com/lukrop/GCICAP/issues ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Since DCS and its Scripting Engine moved along since I last tested my latest part of this project, I simply deleted my first post in this thread and relate to "Stonehouse" and "lukrop", who continue to work on this project. Edited December 15, 2015 by SNAFU 5 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENO Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 ... Must spread rep. "ENO" Type in anger and you will make the greatest post you will ever regret. "Sweetest's" Military Aviation Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 This is an idea I am working on since august last year and I am finally at a stage, where I can use it to my satisfaction. It runs for at least 4 hours in my missions without breaking up. Due to the complexity of these things, I can not garantee anything for long time missions, that`s why I call it 'beta'... sounds familiar huh? .. This is a great idea. I have just experimented with scripts in my test missions so far and do not use any script on my public server missions. I think there is just too much instability to add advanced scripts, at least if you’re not proficient in lua scripting yourself. When stability is 100% there are a lot of good scripts available and this adds a much appreciated function. I will definitely test it out on some missions. Rep inbound.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davis0079 Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 great stuff....this with your random airtraffic for civil stuff, then Grimes' air defense network makes for a real map....I'm building a map with these three elements that I can use as a template for making little "attack insurgent camp" missions for the blackshark and yet still have a full world revolving around me...love it.. one side question....you have hawk and patriot str as radars for blue (perfect cuz I use these alot)....anyway to get Sa-10 str added to the red side list.....i say this because i have missions with blue patriots and red sa-10s countering each other....and I'm working with a unit limit since I dont have a i7 at 5ghz....but I've managed to keep my template map down to less then 100 groups (more like 65) and 500 units.......I got about 40 groups of 10 for the air defense systems for the map, I'm hoping that the patriots for blue working under Grimes iads script will still function with your GCI..... ok...two questions....is there a limit to how many different radar groups are in the script....can sa-10, sa-6, sa-3, ect, ect, ect.......be added to make it so all search/track radars report to a higher power.... i did notice the.... if possibleEWRunittype == "55G6 EWR" or possibleEWRunittype == "1L13 EWR" --or possibleEWRunittype == "A-50" am I free to pick and choose whatever I want....I'm guessing it has to have a radar function... such a great idea...i just got too many questions....I'm off to see if this and iads step on each other... It only takes two things to fly, Airspeed and Money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagnarDa Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Good job! Will try it out when I have the chance! I am sure its 100 times better than my unfinished work. Your script is on the list now too: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1964602#post1964602 (I would appreciate help keeping the list updated!) DCS AJS37 HACKERMAN There will always be bugs. If everything is a priority nothing is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAFU Posted February 7, 2014 Author Share Posted February 7, 2014 I think there is just too much instability to add advanced scripts, at least if you’re not proficient in lua scripting yourself. When stability is 100% there are a lot of good scripts available and this adds a much appreciated function. I will definitely test it out on some missions. Currently the dynamically adding of objects is problematic, as I understood. In my DCS World installation I feel that crashing planes cause the most of my DCS software issues. So everything enhancing the frequency of planes hitting the ground - and that is what the script is doing. So I would recommend for every missions, which is designed for larger client numbers and longer runtimes - as it is necessary for public servers - to keep it simple and not use any script at all or anything on the map, which is not strictly necessary. But who likes to play in a DCS VOID? So please report back your experience, when you find some time for testing the script in bigger missions. one side question....you have hawk and patriot str as radars for blue (perfect cuz I use these alot)....anyway to get Sa-10 str added to the red side list.....i say this because i have missions with blue patriots and red sa-10s countering each other....and I'm working with a unit limit since I dont have a i7 at 5ghz....but I've managed to keep my template map down to less then 100 groups (more like 65) and 500 units.......I got about 40 groups of 10 for the air defense systems for the map, I'm hoping that the patriots for blue working under Grimes iads script will still function with your GCI..... ok...two questions....is there a limit to how many different radar groups are in the script....can sa-10, sa-6, sa-3, ect, ect, ect.......be added to make it so all search/track radars report to a higher power.... i did notice the.... if possibleEWRunittype == "55G6 EWR" or possibleEWRunittype == "1L13 EWR" --or possibleEWRunittype == "A-50" am I free to pick and choose whatever I want....I'm guessing it has to have a radar function... I didn´t test it with Grimes`IADS script yet, but I see no reason they should interfere. My script just makes a table of all units of a certain type and checks every aircraft, if it is detected by these units. If the IADS script switches of the EWR radars it might be interesting to find out, if the script function still detects the intruders. The scripting function "...TargetIsDetected(...)" does only seem to work for ground units. I didn´t get any useful results trying to use AWACS as EWR system, that`s why I used the patriot SR and HAWK SR for the blue side. But if you add the unit-type string of any unit, which has a radar, which can detect aircraft, to the line if possibleEWRunittype == "55G6 EWR" or possibleEWRunittype == "1L13 EWR" or possibleEWRunittype == "unit-type string" it should also add every unit of this type on the map to the EWR system. You just need to find out the exact name of the Sa-10 radar. You can do this by placing such a unit on a map and extract the *.miz file and take a look into the mission file and look for the string in the unit table ...["type"] = 'something'. Good job! Will try it out when I have the chance! I am sure its 100 times better than my unfinished work. Your script is on the list now too: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1964602#post1964602 (I would appreciate help keeping the list updated!) Tack Tack ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I didn´t test it with Grimes`IADS script yet, but I see no reason they should interfere. My script just makes a table of all units of a certain type and checks every aircraft, if it is detected by these units. If the IADS script switches of the EWR radars it might be interesting to find out, if the script function still detects the intruders. The IADScript typically keeps EWRs operational, but there is a chance they can shut down for short periods of time of 60 to 200 seconds. I was looking through my code to see how you could access all of the tracks shared by the network, but it seems I have a few functions that sort of do that, but act as a filter to return only tracks within a certain range of each sam site. Suppose that would be a feature worth having for an update... The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world. Current Projects: Grayflag Server, Scripting Wiki Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread) SLMOD, Wiki wishlist, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 This script works fine with Mist 3.3 also and the CAP flights attack each other so that's fine. I would like to have CAP flights that have ROE set to "Return fire" when there is no enemy aircraft threatening their borders but then change to "Free fire" if an enemy aircraft passes their border. Is this possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAFU Posted February 14, 2014 Author Share Posted February 14, 2014 (edited) As long as the CAP triggerzones are not overlapping and there is no violation of the airspace, the CAPs should remain in their CAP triggerzones and not engage anything... in theory, was in my testing, when I sperated the CAP zones from enemy CAP zones far enough. But the ROE could be implemented and the spawned with ROE Return fire (have to check if that is not already the case). When the EWR detects an intruder the idle CAP gets the task to actively engage defined group and the ROE should be OPEN FIRE. I should be easy to change, if that is not already the case. Somewher in line 2728 task must be the ROE action: { ["tasks"] = { [1] = { ["enabled"] = true, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "EngageTargetsInZone", ["number"] = 1, ["params"] = { ["targetTypes"] = { [1] = "Air", }, -- end of ["targetTypes"] ["x"] = actualCAPzoneposx, ["priority"] = 1, ["y"] = actualCAPzoneposz, ["zoneRadius"] = actualCAPzone.radius, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [1] [2] = { ["enabled"] = true, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["number"] = 2, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = 4, ["name"] = 1, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [2] [3] = { ["number"] = 3, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["enabled"] = true, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = 2, ["name"] = 3, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [3] [4] = { ["number"] = 4, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["enabled"] = true, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = 1, ["name"] = 4, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [4] [5] = { ["number"] = 5, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["enabled"] = true, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = true, ["name"] = 6, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [5] [6] = { ["number"] = 6, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["enabled"] = true, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = 264241152, ["name"] = 10, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [6] [7] = { ["number"] = 7, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["enabled"] = true, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["variantIndex"] = 2, ["name"] = 5, ["formationIndex"] = 1, ["value"] = 65538, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [7] }, -- end of ["tasks"] }, -- end of ["params"] Or in the task of waypoint 3 and following beginning line 2829: I will check and implement this in a new a version, when I find the time... :) PS: You could try to change these task by looking for IDs and values of these... My theory is that: [3] = { ["enabled"] = true, ["auto"] = false, ["id"] = "WrappedAction", ["number"] = 3, ["params"] = { ["action"] = { ["id"] = "Option", ["params"] = { ["value"] = 4, ["name"] = 1, }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of ["action"] }, -- end of ["params"] }, -- end of [3] ["value"] = 4, ["name"] = 1, means ROE Return Fire, but I have to check. Edited February 14, 2014 by SNAFU [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 OK. I guess these settings is the same as in the mission file itself? If so I can check the values and add tasks on a clean mission and compare the settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Ok, got your script running on my public server. It will be gradually tweeked and the mission gradually expanded. Take a look if you like on the 138th Virtual Norway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 SNAFU, would it be possible to add some options like: -Generate airstart bandits (Random locations inside one or many spawnzones instead of airfield) -Generate a particular type of intercept, like a HVAA attack - the reason for generating this one specifically is that it tends to be very high and very fast. Think M1.6+, 40000' or more. Is it possible to spawn interceptors/bandits only for one side? The idea is to use this as a training tool among other things. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 I have not tested this but the script runs fine on my server. If you look at the code you can set CAP flights on the sides as you like. Try setting the CAP groups to 0 on one side and test :) Like this: --parameters to be worked with: local numberofredcapzones = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAP zones for Red side local numberofbluecapzones = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAP zones for Blue side local numberofredCAPgroups = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAPs for red side local numberofblueCAPgroups = 0 --input of numbers of defined CAPs blue red side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 (edited) Yep, that's what I did. :) This is fairly good for basic population of airspace. Could be better, as always, but right now it's working very nicely IMHO. Can I disable one side completely? Ie. There's no need to have the counter running etc. I don't need it. Another question: The payload is set in the script. Is it possible to reference existing payloads instead of setting it up by pylon? This way you can even randomize payload, though this isn't exactly my goal. Edited March 1, 2014 by GGTharos [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) EDIT: Sorry, wrong script The script calling the mist.scheduleFunction gives the following error in dcs.log when run in multiplayer mode: 00033.291 INFO SCRIPTING: mist.scheduleFunction, error in scheduled function: [string "C:\Users\Jack\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS\/~mis00..."]:4254: Parameter #1 (unit name string) missed Is this critical? My testing crashes the server after about one hour when running the script. Edited March 3, 2014 by HiJack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAFU Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Ok, got your script running on my public server. It will be gradually tweeked and the mission gradually expanded. Take a look if you like on the 138th Virtual Norway. A little late now I guess, but I will check by, when online. SNAFU, would it be possible to add some options like: -Generate airstart bandits (Random locations inside one or many spawnzones instead of airfield) -Generate a particular type of intercept, like a HVAA attack - the reason for generating this one specifically is that it tends to be very high and very fast. Think M1.6+, 40000' or more. Is it possible to spawn interceptors/bandits only for one side? The idea is to use this as a training tool among other things. Airstarts are possible, you have to fiddle a little bit around with the lines of the local CAPdata table (around line 2681 look for ["type"] = "TakeOffParking", ["action"] = "From Parking Area", and change it into ["type"] = "Turning Point", ["action"] = "Turning Point", This should give the CAP flights an airstart over the airfield. If you want them to spawn in the CAP zone in the air, delete point [1] and rename point[2] into point[1] in the CAPdata table. To create certain intercept profiles it takes a little more effort.You have to modify the local interceptask in line 1476. Every point reflects a waypoint. So you see it is at the moment just a simple "direct pursuit from the actual point of the flight to 2/3 or so of the way between the target and then look again". Nothing sophisticated and lives by the repeated generation of the task. With a some time and math invested this points in the table could reflect better interceptprofiles. RagnarDa implemented some better interceptprofiles in his GCI script as far as I know, maybe it is possible to get a direction from that script. You can deactivate one side completly by commenting the timer for the side in line 3771 like f.e. this example which deactivates the intercept checks for the "red" side --timer.scheduleFunction(interceptmain, 'red', timer.getTime() + 5) timer.scheduleFunction(interceptmain, 'blue', timer.getTime() + 5) Or as HiJack said, but I don´t know, if that doesn´t cause some hickups on the way... Yep, that's what I did. This is fairly good for basic population of airspace. Could be better, as always, but right now it's working very nicely IMHO. Can I disable one side completely? Ie. There's no need to have the counter running etc. I don't need it. Another question: The payload is set in the script. Is it possible to reference existing payloads instead of setting it up by pylon? This way you can even randomize payload, though this isn't exactly my goal. Concerning the disabling one side, check if above works with taking out the time for the function. You can disable the debugging messages by setting in line 29: debuggingmessages = false To change the payloads you need to know the payloads you want. Therefore you create a payload for the plane in the ME, safe the file. Now you decompress the *.miz file and open the mission file. In this file you look for the payload and replace the one in the script. Just search for "payload" in the lua file and you find an entry for every plane type. Hope that helps. BTW: I uploaded a slightly changes version of the lua file in the first post. I actually didn´t change anything important, just deactivated the debugging message and put it all in a do-end block to limit the locals. But I had no time to put more work into this, since I am working on a complete dynamic mission template, which also contains some simple ground war logic, like fighting for triggerzones, holding and supplying them, but I guess first the dynamic added units should be getting more stable in DCS. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAFU Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 EDIT: Sorry, wrong script The script calling the mist.scheduleFunction gives the following error in dcs.log when run in multiplayer mode: 00033.291 INFO SCRIPTING: mist.scheduleFunction, error in scheduled function: [string "C:\Users\Jack\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS\/~mis00..."]:4254: Parameter #1 (unit name string) missed Is this critical? My testing crashes the server after about one hour when running the script. What do you mean "wrong script"? Line 4254, looks like a MIST problem, I usually don´t use mist.scheduleFunction? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Its' the script here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1789535#post1789535 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivvern Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Im trying to set up a base mission to be used for trainings and scenarios. I do have some problems with the CAP flights. They dont stay within their capszones and they engage eachother almost immediatly. I have moved their zones furher back but no noticable difference. Have i done anything wrong? This is what it looks like. local numberofredcapzones = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAP zones for Red side local numberofbluecapzones = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAP zones for Blue side local numberofredCAPgroups = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAPs for red side local numberofblueCAPgroups = 2 --input of numbers of defined CAPs blue red side local redCAPzone = 'redcapzone' --Triggerzones defining the Red CAP area have to be name according to 'redCAPzone1', 'redCAPzone2',...'redCAPzone[numberofredcapzones] local blueCAPzone = 'bluecapzone' --Triggerzones defining the Blue CAP area have to be name according to 'blueCAPzone1', 'blueCAPzone2',...'blueCAPzone[numberofbluecapzones] local redborderlineunitname = 'redborder' -- Name of group which waypoints define the red border local blueborderlineunitname = 'blueborder' -- Name of group which waypoints define the blue border taskingintervall = 300 -- Time intervall in which ongoing intercepts are renewed --names of red interceptorbases local redAF = {} redAF[1] = {name = 'Beslan'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' redAF[2] = {name = 'Nalchik'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' redAF[3] = {name = 'Sochi-Adler'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' --names of blue interceptorbases local blueAF = {} blueAF[1] = {name = 'Batumi'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' blueAF[2]= {name = 'Kutaisi'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' blueAF[3]= {name = 'Vaziani'} --Exact name of airfield with the triggerzone of the same name between 'xxx' debuggingmessages = TRUE -- set to true if tracking messages shall be printed env.setErrorMessageBoxEnabled(false) --set to false if debugging message box, shall not be shown in game debuggingside = 'blue' -- set side for which tracking messages shall be printed Missionfile: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16996823/2014/MA_BASE%20v0.106_CAP.miz [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] We are looking for Swedish members! http://www.masterarms.se Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Try removing all your radar on both sides and run no awacs service and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexej21 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Hi, Thank you for amazing mod. Great job ! :thumbup: I'm using this script on my server exactly according your guide but I noticed something strange: When somebody spaw to UH1 then after while another AI UH1 spawn on the farp. Somebody spawn to P51 and after while AI P51 spawn. Same for Su25 etc... ??? Thank you [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] .....Vladimir, let's go to Sukhoi....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivvern Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Try removing all your radar on both sides and run no awacs service and see what happens. Roger that. Will try. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] We are looking for Swedish members! http://www.masterarms.se Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivvern Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 No they are still turning north and engages the enemy cap... hmm. I attached the .miz in the previous post if someone want to have a look. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] We are looking for Swedish members! http://www.masterarms.se Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJack Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Not on my PC at the moment but it looks like you have red zones going ower the border? I also discovered that the CAP waypoints may be stretching outside the zones. Try moving all zones way back and also not touching the borders. The script uses the zone size to generate waypoints. To test this justn spawn red CAP flights and make sure you know where the zones start and end and watch the flight paths on F-10 map, speed up mission run to save time ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAFU Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Rivvern, I hope I have time on the weekend to take look at the mission. What HiJack said is correct, the CAP waypoints are randomly created inside the triggerzone and turning points in which the fighter use their Radar to search for targets. If the fighter detects a target he actually should not engage, due to the ROE still in RETURN FIRE only as long as no hostile A/C is in their territory. But that is theoretically the case and I have to check the ROE settings. From the picture there is nothing you did wrong. I would only use a smaller size of trigger zones for the airfield markers, since they might be confusing, but that`s all I notice at the first look. And you might want to switch off the debugging messages by setting debuggingmessages = false I actually also wanted to check the ROE of the CAPs so, if they remain in Return Fire mode as long as their own airspace is not violated. I also observed some really aggressive behavior by the CAPs in some cases, but could not really reproduce it. There is still a lot of work left on the script, like some points I always wanted to do is: -include AWACS -include seaborne radar -smart intercept profiles -only shadowing of intruders if they are of civil type -disengaging of interceptors if SAM is engaged on target -... Currently I have not enough time at hands to continue, but I try to check the ROE settings of the CAPs. Edited March 5, 2014 by SNAFU [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Unsere Facebook-Seite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts