The thing that always bugged me about this sim was the lac of immersion of the ground war, which a combat helo sim just HAS to have. It always seemed your targets were a couple tanks and apc's parked at a intersection somewhere. Longbow 2 was amazing in this aspect, there was always a ground war going on around you with advancing/defending tanks/apc's, artillery firing, etc.
Correct- there's no identifiable scale, organization or tactics employed by the ground forces- just disjointed, mixed small units gathering and sitting at map nodes. The result is that single helicopters defeat everyone from combat jets to sinking ships to decimating armies. Gunship! is more accurate with respect to using realistic force templates and ground units behaving with some sense of realism. This game is more in the realm of shoot em up. I personally think this detracts from the simulation aspect quite a bit, but to each his own.
I think the dynamic campaign in EECH is pretty amazing. Except for the lack of ground battles of course. Screens look great though. I've been playing a bit and having a great time
The thing that always bugged me about this sim was the lac of immersion of the ground war, which a combat helo sim just HAS to have. It always seemed your targets were a couple tanks and apc's parked at a intersection somewhere. Longbow 2 was amazing in this aspect, there was always a ground war going on around you with advancing/defending tanks/apc's, artillery firing, etc.
You do get that in EECH. I've seen tanks being bombarded from enemy tank groups, and even ships. Then once a tank group had been destroyed, the attacking force advanced.l Granted, it's quite predictable with them parked at intersections, but there is ground movements happening as well.
There's no army on Earth where the basic maneuver element is a platoon strength mix of tanks, trucks or PCs, except maybe for a ragtag rebel group which only has a couple of them.
A company or battalion sized unit would be attached to a higher level HQ at minimum. This game would be entirely different if it followed some sort of reality than what does throw at you- and would be more fun. It wouldn't be based on some fantasy form of attrition warfare where each side simply exhausts itself by throwing units piecemeal at each other. You'd have to find and determine whether you've encountered a large formation or simply the vanguard units and security screens, rear echelon units, and so on. Each side rather employs the same type of battleplan- which is just simply park small units around some nexus and sit there or move on to the next map node.
If the leaders of these EECH armies actually deployed the forces in this manner so that they are picked off and obliterated by a handful of helicopters, they would be shot for gross incompetence.
Kontakt-simple question-what is your other choice at this point, which is better than eech?Simulators helicopters are dead and will be dead, CH did not come out ever.black shark sucks with dead not dynamic campaign.Gunship? Great game for two nights.Apache Air asaault same.Longbow is long dead
I'm not a flight sim fan, so take it for what's it worth- I've only been exposed to a handful of them, none less than 10 years old.
I have both EECH and Gunship!, succinctly stated, Gunship! had a primitive, arcadish flight model out of the box, but by far is a better demonstration of tactics used by mechanized forces on a modern battlefield. They used more real world force templates that a Red Force enemy might employ, at least up to battalion scale. I got more enjoyment out of scripted or handmade missions which could do more specific things rather than generic 'dynamic campaigns' where it always played the same way out every time. EECH has better flight characteristics and more suited for just going around blowing things up- it's actually necessary, or the campaign seemed to stalemate, the computer logic simply was not creative enough to plan breakthroughs and coordinate even battalion level maneuvers. The player had to hijack missions and go off on his own and identify and destroy centers of gravity in order to speed the campaign along, or it would just slog in tit for tat attrition fighting. Many times the computer would plan an attack right into the teeth of defenses or just assign meaningless errands, and I would ignore those and take control of everything,
I should also add: I remember weather patterns and day/night cycles just being too abrupt. Rain squalls during what looks like a clear day just seemed to cycle off and on every few minutes- probably another thing that could stand to be modded.
It already is a personal choice� who what likes Each of these games has many advantages and many disadvantages.But unfortunately, only one has a dynamic campaign.It is very difficult to create dynamic campaigns. Now I read that even in the new falcon BMS ground units�� one side� doing nothing, they are dead and stand in place without attack.Unfortunately, dynamic campaign times are over, and not come back.
'Dynamic campaigns' are seemingly preferred because they don't ship with canned missions- so seemingly giving you a different game every time, but not really. The campaigns are really playing out the same way every time, usually there's a lot less specific goals in mind. The computer has to be programmed with a generic set of instructions that work in each and every circumstance, a one sized hat fits all- consequently, it has to do all things, but not necessarily exceeding really well at any of them. So while a canned mission might task you to attack and defend a bridgehead, then retreat or relocate and defend a new position or assault a new location, dynamic campaigns really don't achieve that level of 'dynamic' mechanics. It's more generally, attack, defend against attack, or follow a set of waypoints, destroying everything along the way.
The best dynamic campaign would be one run entirely by humans rather than by a computer.
DCS will get dynamic campaing in future. Its been made in small steps because its way too complex and expensive to made in one part.
BMS -> there known bug in campaings where red side units wont shoot blue tanks if player is near. It will be fixed soon.
Best dynamic campaings are still in falcon, but thouse are so complex to make that microprose and lead pursuit are no more. So thats why DCS wont try to make it fast.
In future, all right And will require 16 core processor and 32 GB of memory I bet for ~ 5 years we will see a dynamic campaigns, DCS only release unfinished crap,and a lot of promises,how long ago combat helo.
"It takes forever +/- 2 weeks for the A-10 to get anywhere significant..." Ice
"Ha! If it gets him on the deck its a start!" MigBuster
"What people like and what critics praise are rarely the same thing. 'Critic' is just another one of those unnecessary, overpaid, parasitic jobs that the human race has churned out so that clever slackers won't have to actually get a real job and possibly soil their hands." Sauron
'Dynamic campaigns' are seemingly preferred because they don't ship with canned missions- so seemingly giving you a different game every time, but not really. The campaigns are really playing out the same way every time, usually there's a lot less specific goals in mind. The computer has to be programmed with a generic set of instructions that work in each and every circumstance, a one sized hat fits all- consequently, it has to do all things, but not necessarily exceeding really well at any of them. So while a canned mission might task you to attack and defend a bridgehead, then retreat or relocate and defend a new position or assault a new location, dynamic campaigns really don't achieve that level of 'dynamic' mechanics. It's more generally, attack, defend against attack, or follow a set of waypoints, destroying everything along the way.
The best dynamic campaign would be one run entirely by humans rather than by a computer.
Well, wrong! Just look at Falcon4 (BMS for example). You have several types of different missions, I would dare to say more mission types than any Static campaign that I ever saw. Yes, I admit that with static missions (in static campaigns) you can have all sorts of triggers and events that can result in your mission objectives being completely or drastically changed (sort like storyline). BUT on the other side the player will only successfully complete any static mission once since these missions always play the exact same way a thing that doesn't happen with a dynamic campaign since missions are automatically generated each time a campaign is started and depending on previous mission results - While yes, some missions in a dynamic campaign will or could trend to repeat themselves but since these missions are generated automatically and randomly the player will never have the EXACT same campaign experience everytime he/she starts a campaign. Besides and also adding to the random factor, in a dynamic campaign every unit (aircraft, ground vehicles, buildings, etc...) that you or your allies or your enemies destroy will be destroyed in the future - A dynamic campaign keeps track of every unit and its status within the battlefield, because of this if you play an exact same mission that you previously played you most likely won't find the exact same enemies (aircraft, air defences, etc...) that you did last time (a thing that of course doesn't happen in a static campaign)
Regarding "a dynamic campaign run entirely by humans rather than by a computer", this means that: 1- You must play in Multiplayer. 2- At least one human (for each side) must play as a Supreme Commander. And guess what --> I don't like to play combat flight sims in Multiplayer (except for very rare times and ONLY in CO-OP) and I also don't like to act as a Supreme Commander (specially in a combat flight sim). So for me, the best campaign is still an AI controlled and generated dynamic campaign.
I won't say that there couldn't be some advantages in a static campaigns (for example in recreating historical missions) BUT the advantages of a dynamic campaign far surpasses the ones in a static campaigns (for example: repeatability and randomness).
Unfortunately, dynamic campaign times are over, and not come back.
There's nothing more wrong than that! If history taught us anything is that history repeats itself. If flight sim devs want to have more customers they must be innovative and making dynamic campaign is one way to be "innovative". Besides while making a dynamic campaign is harder, more time and resource consuming, once there's a stable dynamic campaign engine created for a game/sim, those game/sim devs, modders or anyone else will be able to create a new (dynamic) campaign much faster than even a new static campaign.
How did you get that second screenshot to be all murky and brown?
Was it raining or bad weather?
I run all my screenshots through a photo editor. The second screenshot ,I decided looked good with a "sepia" effect. Removes color ,but unlike standard black and white ,it gives it a nice antique look.
Anyone ever flown or witnessed an insertion mission ? After destroying an enemy base , I flew a descending recon mission to that same base. After transmitting recon and confirming no further targets ,an Insertion Mission appeared to that area. I quickly accepted and jumped in the Blackhawk. I've played for years , and this is my first experience with this type of mission in EECH.
I've assembled multiple screenshots below , as I consider these scenes very rare and elusive. This is my flight and troop deployment to the previously destroyed enemy base. Enjoy ! (Sorry for the lowered quality in some of the pictures. I had to compensate for low lighting ,so troops were visible. It was dark and the sun was setting)
___Approaching landing zone___
___Landed at insertion coordinates (doors still closed)___
___Side door opening___
___Side door completely open . . . First soldier jumping out___
___Troops being deployed___
___Still unloading . . . I lost count of how many___
As a matter of fact currently in the Taiwan stock campaign I have flown 6 successive insertion missions to the same enemy BLUE FARP and every time it tells me mission completed but the base still remains in enemy hands.
But each time I fly back with more troops carrying MI-24s, I see my troops on the ground already that I left from each prior insertion mission.
I even saw an enemy Sea Cobra flying over the base and shooting at those ground troops of mine before landing on the base still marked in BLUE.
The other thing if an insertion mission has been flown over it and completed and the base is still in enemy hands, before another insertion mission is assigned to the same base, it should be at least recon mission ---? strike mission if necessary ---> BDA if strike mission was performed ---> then insertion mission but NOPE, another insertion mission is generated right away.
I can't say what's appropriate or what's supposed to happen. All I can do is compare notes. Notice : I am playing blue side ,also a different map and campaign.
But , before the recon & insertion mission , I did wipe out everything at the base.(buildings ,radar dishes ,fuel tanks ,etc.) Also destroyed enemy helicopters sitting on the pads in the nearby Farp along with fuel, ammo ,& anything else that was shootable.
Maybe one or more enemy helicopters were on a mission when you destroyed their Farp. (Making it an incomplete capture until that helicopter or helicopters are destroyed)
I have noticed that after my insertion , the troops ran around for a few minutes then the destroyed enemy Farp turned from Red(enemy) to Blue(friendly) ,but the enemy base still remains Red and on the map.
Another recon mission appeared for that particular base to see if rebuilding was happening. But no more insertions.
every time it tells me mission completed but the base still remains in enemy hands.
it's my fault. instead of immediate base capture troops has to "hold it" for some time. when time is comes and too much troops are died (or all of them died) - capture is failed. but insertion is successful - you did your job. insertion missions will be really interesting when there is will be some enemy infantries fighting back. you insert troops under heavy fire, taking off and flying around the base shooting from side machine gun. but now it's quite boring.
I do not speak English and I don't understand the meaning of the word "ugly" ! You don't like the shape of the KA 29 or you don't like this camouflage?Translation of Google
In previous versions of side lights looked better. I replaced the texture on the "GUN_FLARE001.bmp",but it is also not very nice. I like when the side lights are like a star not like when they have like a ball.Translation Google
I have been playing it and I edited the CHC in several campaigns (Taiwan, Europe, Puerto Rico, Norway, Lebanon, Kuwait, Skagway, Alaska, Kenai, Cuba) to make the aircraft carriers more useful.
Razorworks/Common/Map then Map 1 to Map 32 and under each map you have different campaign for that location: Europe, Lebanon, Taiwan, etc etc
Those Marine helicopters and recon helicopters: Cobra, Huey, Little Bird, Viper, KA-20, Super Cobra, they just sit there and do nothing most of the time, they don't even fly CAP to protect their own carriers.
After I edited the CHC, all the carriers on both sides only carry Mi-24, MI-28, KA-52, Apache Longbows, Comanches and Blackhawks.
Also the Red side has KA-52 that are Recon, not Recon Attack. They also just sit at their FARP and Airbases doing nothing except for a recon mission here and there.
They don't fly any SEAD, CAP, BAI, CAS, Ground Strike, Anti-Ship Strike missions.
I replaced all of them with Recon Attack KA-52.
I also added extra transport choppers and aircraft to airfield whenever it allows me.
Like the Yemen campaign, the Blue side only has one medium transport chopper to carry all the supply and repair mission that keeps popping up.
I also increased air power or made them more even whenever needed
One campaign had one fighter and one CAS aircraft on one side while the other side outnumber them 5-1 in fighters, naval fighter, interceptor, attack aircraft and CAS aircraft.
2 months ago I found out that you can change the assigned choppers.
For example, you pick a mission (SEAD, BAI, CAS) and it gives you a Blackhawk or a MI-24 but you want to fly a different chopper for it.
Click on SEAD, Click Accept Mission, now Don't Click Auto Select or Confirm yet, go to the left column and Click Available Unassigned and it will give you a list of other available choppers.
Click their call sign one by one until you find the ones that are from the FARP or Airbase the SEAD mission is starting from and pick the one you want.
Sometimes they may be more than one or two to choose from for the same FARP and Airbase.
I like to get an Apache or Comanche or KA for SEAD and attack missions, not a Blackhawk or MI-24.
I reserve the Blackhawk and MI-24 for insertion, ground strike or CAS or BAI where you know there is no air defense left at the target or nearby.
Click Apache or Comanche, then go Click Confirm and Cockpit.
On transfer it seems it always want to transfer a medium or heavy supply chopper to the front line when you need more combat units in the front.
I change the transfer from a supply chopper to a Apache or Comanche or KA.
Or sometimes I get a Blackhawk or MI-24 when I see there are none up there and you know soon you will need to run an insertion mission up there. I also like to change payloads.
I always change Apache and Blackhawk payloads to 16 Hellfire.
Comanche payload on RECON is always 4 Hellfire and 4 Stingers.
I like to change it to 10 Hellfire and 8 Stinger which is the same payout for all Comanche missions except CAP.
Non RECON missions payload for Comanche are always 12 Hellfire and 4 stingers, I prefer 10 Hellfire and 8 Stingers.
ON CAP, it defaults to 28 stingers, I prefer 16 Stingers (8 on each of the wings) and 6 Hellfires on the inside bay.
On the Mi-24 I always change one of the 40 S8 or 60 S5 to 4 more Schturm.
The MI-28 ground mission payload is 16 Schturm and 40 S8: I like to change those S8 to 8 Vikhla for air to air defense.
In the EECH.ini file, if you don't know this already.
I open it with a notepad and edit
GOTO (teleport) to ON
that allows me to take a Transfer mission after it taken off, I take control of the first chopper, change the waypoint to W by pressing W continuously, then I use the Teleport to move that to within 1-2 km of the landing base you are transferring to.
BEST TO PAUSE THE GAME FIRST.
Then I do the same to the rest of the choppers in the Transfer mission if there is more than one chopper.
I seen Transfer (like in the Cuba maps) that are 200-400 KM in distance, forget that. Get them to where they need to go.
Also again in the EECH.ini file, look for Campaign Commander if you don't have that on already.
That allows you to left click on item with the X highlighted on the right column on the screen, to generate missions before the computer AI gives them to you.
I like to left click on AA to get as many SEAD going to get all the AA out of the way.
I right click on missions that I don't want to run yet or like in Taiwan, there will be one supply after another AI generated, I right click on their X to clear them out.
When you see a BDA you can right click X it out and left click on it again and it changes to Insertion. You now can run an Insertion mission there without running a BDA first (naval ships not included).
Play with the campaign commander, don't be afraid to X something out and then X it again to activate another mission the same FARP or Military Base or Airfield.
I have come across Wtrike missions and 4econ missions to FARP, Military Bases and Airfield that I X out and when I left click to X them again, they changed to insertion.
Strike mission on FARP and Airfield, if you can fly close enough to use your guns instead of missiles, you only need to take out enough buildings for it to become mission complete and create an insertion mission.
Missions hitting a bunker or a ground target can create collateral damage taking out choppers and aircraft, you want to capture as many of those as possible.
I take out the ground infantry, any AA and SAM, and the ground building the AA/SAM/TANKS/APC come out of.
I have captured airfields and FARP with enemy armor still around it or in it and with all the aircraft and choppers intact.
When you start a mission before the helicopter takes off, (press P to pause) you can change payloads by clicking on Payload on top of the screen.
Then choose each of the helicopter for the mission, one to four, and use the preset on the left (Air to Air, Ground, Scout) or change them manually in the pylons under helicopter graphics.
There are also key short cuts while you are in the cockpit Shift 7 for Ground, Shift 8 for Air, Shift 9 for Scout
@Whirly: find the EECH.ini file and go to Teleport and change it from 0 to 1
also change Campaign Commander from 0 to 1 if you haven't done so. By activating it, you can now click on an enemy unit, FARP, ship or airfield to generate missions instead of waiting for the AI to generate for you.
left click to generate, right click to cancel if you change your mind.
I like to generate SEAD missions first and get as many enemy SAM out of the way.
Thanks Mace !
Have some mercy,� traffic control also has the right to the lunch break 
This is from game? without Photoshop?
! You don't like the shape of the KA 29 or you don't like this camouflage?Translation of Google
I like KA 29
![[Linked Image]](http://simhq.com/forum/files/usergals/2017/02/full-19919-132430-image020.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/54/37/1fXqyCiP_t.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/d4/44/Z68xXLki_t.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/3f/09/uGL9atLg_t.jpg)