Why Aren't We Seeing More User Created Missions?

[DFLion]

23 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Sounds like you didn't cancel the Command:Attack MCU, or provide an alternative task for the F-80s. The Attack MCU by itself doesn't stop, so if you don’t have a Force Complete as well as a new task, you've literally ordered the flight to follow the MiGs forever and fight to the death. In IL2, you should generally implement disengagement scenarios yourself; e.g. a Force Complete followed by a high priority waypoint after X aircraft die, or when the enemy reaches a certain area. The one exception is the "RTB on damage" option, but it requires a friendly airfield to return to.

Thanks AEthelraedUnread,

You are exactly right with your summary regarding the 'Force complete' MCU, the only problem is I have never been able to get them working properly? Could you kindly send me some 'linked pictographs' of the MCU's so I can get it working properly. I spend all afternoon trying to get it working, no success? 

Appreciate your help.

DFLion

[AEthelraedUnraed]

22 minutes ago, DFLion said:

Thanks AEthelraedUnread,

You are exactly right with your summary regarding the 'Force complete' MCU, the only problem is I have never been able to get them working properly? Could you kindly send me some 'linked pictographs' of the MCU's so I can get it working properly. I spend all afternoon trying to get it working, no success? 

Appreciate your help.

DFLion

I'm not on my PC right now, but the basic idea is as follows:

• Come up with some logic to decide when the enemy should disengage, and link this to a Counter MCU set to 1x. This can be when a certain amount of aircraft have been shot, when the enemy exits a certain area, when the player reaches a certain area, or ideally a combination of various options.
• Target-link the Counter to a Force Complete MCU, which is object-linked to the enemy. (This cancels its Attack command.)
• Also target-link the Counter to a Timer MCU set to 1s. (Without this, the waypoint might fire before the Force Complete, leading to the waypoint being canceled as well.)
• Link the Timer to a Waypoint MCU (object-linked to the enemy). Move this far away to wherever the enemy should retreat to and set its Priority to High. Set its speed to the maximum the enemy can reach, and set its altitude low to have the enemy dive away.
• When the enemy reaches the waypoint, have it do whatever it should do next, e.g. land or deactivate.

There are variations, but this is the basic and fail-safe logic 🙂

[SYN_Vander]

On 8/31/2026 at 11:23 PM, AEthelraedUnraed said:

IMHO, the main reason is the amount of work needed to create good missions.

• Speaking from experience, most of the time it takes to create a mission, goes into research. I read Wikipedia, websites, books, interviews etc. to find a mission or period that sounds interesting. Then I try to find relevant mission logs, or failing that, other literature that gives some more details about what happened. Often I end up spending hours cross-referencing various sources before I've got a good idea of what went on during a particular mission. Of course, if you don't make a historical mission, you can skip most of this step.
• Then comes the actual mission building. The logic itself is easy enough; it might take me 15 minutes up to an hour or so, depending on how complex the mission is. Placement of mission objects takes a bit more time though, especially if you want to place your targets in such a way that they blend into the terrain. That means you have to manually place every object. Scenery again takes a lot of time. Clutter and static aircraft at your base, things to see along the route, smoke and other effects, front-line gunfire, that sort of stuff.
• Next, there's the main testing phase. Often it's back to the drawing board as things don't work out the way they're supposed to.
• When I'm satisfied that the mission performs well enough and is fun, I finalise the map markings and mission briefing. Usually, I also provide some historical background or some backstory. This also might take a few more hours of research into the general situation on the front.
• Then there's another testing round. The mission logic should be alright at this point, but usually I have some minor details I want to change.
• Finally, after all this, the mission is complete and I can get on with the next mission in the campaign.

I suppose other mission writers like @Jaegermeister and @Juri_JS have a similar workflow?

In my case, it's not the mission logic (where the perceived "complexity" of the editor comes from) that's the main cause of missions taking so long to write. It's rather research and the extremely easy (but very tedious) placement of objects that takes the most time/effort.

Indeed, research and testing (often because you need workarounds) take 90% of the considerable amount of time needed.

[Juri_JS]

4 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

 

• Target-link the Counter to a Force Complete MCU, which is object-linked to the enemy. (This cancels its Attack command.) 

Even this doesn't always work. There was a time in Il-2 GB when setting the priority of AttackArea to High would prevent AI fighters from chasing planes too far beyond the range of the AttackArea command, but for some reason this stopped working properly years ago.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

On 9/2/2026 at 3:01 PM, Juri_JS said:

Even this doesn't always work. There was a time in Il-2 GB when setting the priority of AttackArea to High would prevent AI fighters from chasing planes too far beyond the range of the AttackArea command, but for some reason this stopped working properly years ago.

That's not my experience. I haven't had any issues with cancelling commands so far.

Of course, cancelling an Attack command doesn't automatically mean that the enemy will completely ignore you; even with a High priority waypoint, they'll take evasive action when attacked (as they should).

[DFLion]

AEthelraedUnraed,

How are you? See below an MCU layout drawing I did depicting a 'force-complete' setup I used for my latest mission 'DF_B-29 Attack_Ver.02'. It seems to work though it is hard to test? The trigger waypoint is placed near where the aircraft lands. If the aircraft runs out of ammo or fuel this setup should trigger its return to base?

Over the years I have done a lot MCU drawings like this to help me learn all the various MCU game functions - 'Start in the Air', 'Artillery', 'Takeoff', 'Trains' etc. They work much better than trying to interpret the manual. I now have learn them all without referring to them. Perhaps these sort of referral MCU cards/notes would help promote a new group of Campaign/single mission makers? I will post another example 'Start in the Air' in the Mission makers area.

Let me know your thoughts on this?

DFLion 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

2 hours ago, DFLion said:

AEthelraedUnraed,

How are you? See below an MCU layout drawing I did depicting a 'force-complete' setup I used for my latest mission 'DF_B-29 Attack_Ver.02'. It seems to work though it is hard to test? The trigger waypoint is placed near where the aircraft lands. If the aircraft runs out of ammo or fuel this setup should trigger its return to base?

Over the years I have done a lot MCU drawings like this to help me learn all the various MCU game functions - 'Start in the Air', 'Artillery', 'Takeoff', 'Trains' etc. They work much better than trying to interpret the manual. I now have learn them all without referring to them. Perhaps these sort of referral MCU cards/notes would help promote a new group of Campaign/single mission makers? I will post another example 'Start in the Air' in the Mission makers area.

Let me know your thoughts on this?

DFLion 

This works. A couple of remarks:

• OnBingoFuel is not needed (nor are damage triggers). Planes will automatically return to base in those cases, provided that their "RTB on critical damage" option is checked, and a friendly airfield is available.
• It's not drawn here, but the waypoint needs to have High priority. To summarise, Low MCU priority means "this is just a suggestion; go after any target you like", Medium priority means "Try to do as ordered, but you're free to engage if necessary", and High priority means "Go after the target only; use maneouvres only for disengagement and ignore all other targets".

[DFLion]

20 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

This works. A couple of remarks:

• OnBingoFuel is not needed (nor are damage triggers). Planes will automatically return to base in those cases, provided that their "RTB on critical damage" option is checked, and a friendly airfield is available.
• It's not drawn here, but the waypoint needs to have High priority. To summarise, Low MCU priority means "this is just a suggestion; go after any target you like", Medium priority means "Try to do as ordered, but you're free to engage if necessary", and High priority means "Go after the target only; use maneouvres only for disengagement and ignore all other targets".

Thanks for your follow-up. I noticed that when you add the event 'OnBingoFuel' when they are low on fuel they will return to a base if available, especially if you are a USAF a/c flying around the Yalu river, fuel is critical around there. You mentioned damaged triggers, they are the ones inside the plane MCU? If the event 'OnPlaneBingoMainMG' is engaged, does that work when your a/c runs out of ammo? I will change the waypoints to High priority and see what happens?

DFLion

[AEthelraedUnraed]

2 hours ago, DFLion said:

Thanks for your follow-up. I noticed that when you add the event 'OnBingoFuel' when they are low on fuel they will return to a base if available, especially if you are a USAF a/c flying around the Yalu river, fuel is critical around there. You mentioned damaged triggers, they are the ones inside the plane MCU? If the event 'OnPlaneBingoMainMG' is engaged, does that work when your a/c runs out of ammo? I will change the waypoints to High priority and see what happens?

DFLion

No I don't mean a trigger. Inside the Advanced Properties of the aircraft, there's an option similar to "RTB on damage" (I'm not on my PC right now, so can't check its exact name). If checked, aircraft will individually land at the nearest friendly fake_field object when they are critically damaged. They should also automatically and individually land at the nearest friendly fake_field if they're critically low on fuel.

OnBingoMainMG is the event that fires when your main MG is out of ammo (duh). For bombs, you should use the similar OnBingoBombs event.

One thing to keep in mind, is that Events are individual, while commands are group-based. In other words, each plane individually triggers its OnBingoBombs etc. events, while Waypoint MCUs etc. affect all aircraft in the linked aircraft's group. That's why I recommended the "RTB on damage" option instead. Although it obviously depends on what you want; if you want all aircraft to disengage if one of them runs out of ammo, you should use events.

Finally, when creating mission logic but especially if you're using events, you should always think about what might happen that breaks the logic. E.g. if a plane is shot down before it runs out of ammo, the OnBingoMainMG event will never fire. If your logic depends on this event, you need to have some alternative pathway as a failsafe.