Leaderboard

I missed you guys.. How are you all ? :)

В поцессе..Су-25 из Черниговки:pilotfly:

Hi All, In the spirit of helping to kickstart more mission making and make it easier, I want to share my templates. There are templates for most types of groups you will need for Russia, Georgia, and the USA. INSTALL INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Backup your old templates.bs file if you have any templates. 2. Copy the templates.bs file to your BlackShark subfolder in your DCS or FC2 game folder USAGE INSTRUCTIONS: Placement: After placing with the template tool, use the directional indicator to spin them so that any weapons units face the enemy. Artillery: Should be placed with the guns toward the target in a line or they won't fire, also they need to be in range of course. A battalion of 8 guns, only 4 will fire on a single target point at once until the ammo runs out, and then the next 4. Unless it is an MRL/MLRS type launcher, this takes forever. So if you want all 8 to attack at once, then set two target points on the same spot and they will all attack. SAM sites: the point in the "V" shape should point towards the enemy, however most radars and launchers have 360degree traverse, but the other units would point the wrong way. I've based the SAM sites off the information found in the mission editor hot tips thread as much as possible with the units available, like service trucks, cargo trucks etc. FARP: place the FARP object right where the infantry guy is. This FARP should "work", but for scenery you should add FARP tent, ammo, command, and other static objects, and some defensive units. Statics can't be part of templates, and I won't add defence to FARPs as it's up to your mission design what sort of defence you want. There is no FARP for USA - they should use a Georgian FARP. Infantry: With Infantry + APCs/IFVs in the template, it's intended that you don't set the waypoint speed any faster than the infantry can walk. Otherwise you probably want to create a new "mounted" group for fast movement, and then deactivate that at the destination and activate the dismounted group. Airborne/Amphibious: For paradrop groups like BTR-RD and amphibious groups like MTLBU, you can simulate a paradrop or amphibious landing by activating the group near the beach and displaying a message on a trigger. This could make for some interesting missions with ships/helicopters and combined operations. Other Countries: To duplicate a template into another country, place two groups from the template. Then change the country on the second one - this will reset all to the default unit though. Then using the first group that you placed as a reference, you can simply change the "type" of each unit to match the other group and save the template. All this is best used with the mission editor mod to save alot of time! If anyone else has any templates to share, or can add/update this with any better military knowledge please share. Also anyone know if it's possible to combine two templates? I've opened the file but it looks like it would take alot of manual typing to renumber all the groups. If anyones good at scripting perl or something like that maybe... Cheers TAIPAN_ templates.rar

Version 1.3 fixed MODMan install issues. Download @lockonfiles.ru PreviewVideo This Mod package contains the best MOD sounds around. Some single sounds like Tank, Truck and HeliRotors are blended togehter from different mod versions and or mixed into original ED sounds. This created a good dirty crossover hybridsound from original to modfiles. It fits my personal flavor and I guess some will agree on the selection and the new sounds. MOD packages used as source material or have been used unmodified as follows: Diveplanes AudioMod Tango Romeos Battefield FX Dragons edited Battlefield FX 5.0 HokumSounds (Slightly mixed into Original barely audible) and of course the Original Eagly Dynamics sounds as basement. Hope you enjoy it. Comments and improvement suggestions highly welcome. Special Thanks to Diveplane, TangoRomeo,Dragon and Frazer providing the source material and a lot of hard work! Changes in 1.1 -Removed crackles, gaps, DC offset, volume and bad loops. -modified Machinegun.wav and the 2A42 sounds. -Adjusted volumes Changes 1.2 -tweaked volumes again -fixed some tiny errors -claims to be the best DCS and FC 2 soundmod by now. :) Changes 1.3 -Improved MODman compatibility

Nice job... Out

Does anybody think that this might be good book to learn tactics from to employ in FC2 http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Tactics-Maneuvering-New/dp/0870210599/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Одобрям :thumbup:

@thereminqblank: The screen quality is fair to good. About what I'd expect from any Acer brand monitor. Not as good as a Samsung by any stretch but very acceptable. I tried an Elo touch screen and the display quality of those was not nearly as good as the Acer. And the Acer is much much cheaper than any Elo display.... and bigger. Hope this helps, Mack

That last 5minutes costed me atleast 3years of my life :clap_2:

Weathered MiG-29A/G/S skins for FC2.0, created by 3Sqn_ruggbutt, repackaged in a single .cdds format file by myself :) Download here (MODMAN compatible) http://www.mediafire.com/?zykwwzdimyj

По разным причинам и обстоятельствам передам проект в хорошие руки. Заявки на электронную почту в профиле.

To N_Bear Ответил в личке.

Boeing may assemble An-124 transport planes - paper This might be a good cooperation since the market needs a good lifter and the DoD and NATO charter these planes already for long haul transports. http://en.rian.ru/business/20100611/159386299.html rhino

Не зарегистрирован на Вашем родном форуме http://forum.aviaraf.ru/, поэтому задам вопрос здесь. Уже давненько захожу на Ваш сервер на Ка-50. В принципе нравиться. Иногда думаю, не вступить-ли в сквад, в частности в Ваш. Но посмотрел я на тестовые упражнения, которые нужно сдать для зачисления в ОВВЭ Оса, и честно говоря, пришел в некоторое недоумение. Проясните пожалуйста: 1. Во время выполнения всех базовых упражнений, для примера, по висению, снимаются баллы отклонение от заданной высоты на 1м, смещение по горизонтали свыше 10м. При наборе скорости, торможении за отклонение от заданной скорости. Объясните мне зачем все это в онлайне? Ну не видел я ни разу, что-бы кто нибудь из =RAV= пилотов так извращался. Все заводятся, взлетают и идут работать в зависимости от характера целей, степени их разведанности и возможности воздушной угрозы. Ка-50 вообще вертолет для визуального полета и боевого применения, ИХМО соблюдать какие-то режимы по скорости и высоте нужно или на параде, или в крайнем случае, при полетах в зоне сильно загруженных портов. 2. Почти во всех упражнениях требуется или полностью отключить каналы автопилота, или канал высоты и направления. Опять-же зачем? Использование автопилота в Ка-50 это штатный режим, отключение - ИХМО выпендреж. Если-же автопилот по какой-либо причине не работает (повреждена в бою гидросистема и т.д) то тем более нет смысла в соблюдении параметров полета с точностью до метров и км/час. Только-бы до площадки доползти, шасси выпустить от запасной гидросистемы или на брюхо сесть. 3. Посадка на авторотации. Ошибка за каждые 6 метров смещения от центра полосы. Для чего? Авторотация - аварийный режим при отказе двигателей. Если уж в бою подбили, хорошо до площадки дотянуть и на авторотации сесть, на полосу, рулежку хоть куда. Ну и с выходом из вихревого кольца. Опят какие-то цифры. Выйти нужно и все. Вот лучше-бы принимали зачеты по умению обращения с АБРИСОМ, ПВИ-800, по умению настройки пульта управления УВ-26, по умению использования остальных систем, начиная от запуска двигателя, причем в ручную. В конце концов, по боевому применению неуправляемого и управляемого оружия. Ни хочу никого обидеть, или навязать свое мнение, но такое уж оно есть.

Okey, back on topic people, and be mindful of your manners. If you want to discuss the merits of A2A weaponry on the Ka-50 or it's survivability without them, please start a separate thread to that purpose.

Maybe he's not too bright, I don't know. But he sure as hell isn't telepathic :). You have to say what you mean first before people can understand what you mean. :P. Nate

да норм.... зато ща стока верпилов в сети летает с ником строение :)... читаешь чат .. строение убило строение и само погибло от строения но успело катапультироваться :lol:

I meant lack of self defence A/A weapon, and defenceless in FC2 environment; not a level of detail or realism. You ain't too bright are you?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289185/Navigators-gag-amuses-plane-spotters-fighter-jet-races-Snowdonia.html :megalol:

What is the point of buying the most realistic simulator for the desktop just to fly the simulated aircraft in a way that no RL pilot would ever dare to think about? Why not let the Ka-50 fire sharks with lasers on their heads, while your at it? To me that sounds just as absurd, pointless almost. Just my 2 cents.

The PZL-130 is smaller, uglier (those fins are hideous :D) and chubbier than the Tucano. The Super Tucano is a bit bigger and more badass than it's older brother. I've found this cool comparsion: Here are some pics of the Armée de l'Air EMB-312F. Retired in 2009, unfortunately... During 1993's Le Bourget...

Для оффлайн-миссий да, онлайн нет. В онлайн-миссию не впихнешь больше одной картинки для каждой стороны. Т.е. впихнуть-то можно, но показывать будет только одну. В оффлайне миссию можно запустить в режиме планировщика, такую бы фишку для онлайна, многие бы проблемы решило. И да, конечно, миссиядел, должен не ленится, и по подробнее в брифинге описывать не только что происходит, но и задачу каждому подразделению, особенно штурмам и акулам, им тяжелее всего найти цель даже зная где она, а если не знать....

Попробуйте вот это. Уберите с названия файла (3). Отпишитесь о результате. base-menu-window (3).rar

funny you're saying that LOL!

Reason why 104 is popular IMO is because they are an extremely chilled out crowd with no heirs about themselves. They are easy to talk to and don't pretend to sit on some sort of all knowing of pedestal when talking to you. And that's how it should be. Simple equation: More friendly = More people join to fly on your server. More Ego = More people give you the middle finger and go fly on the 104th LOL! Peace

Yes. This makes sense to me. The following could be performed on the server: * weapon guidance and hit detection scheme server-side (printscreen cheat on clients would not affect missile impact). * enforce weapon guidance only locked targets or those the pilot is looking at. * since a second machine is involved the missile guidance calculations could be made far more realistic than at the moment. * basic fuel, countermeasures, and stores caclulation performed periodically server-side. * flight path checks, no more clients moving at Mach-25 and pulling more. If it was written in Java (yeah, I'm a pusher, but only 'cause it is a good drug) then you would have: * Host anywhere: Windows (32- or 64- bit, any version from 2000 onward, without recompile!), Linux, Mac etc. * Good multithreading support (C++ resource management with threads is just too hard to get right). You get to use all 6 cores dual-threading on that lovely Phenom II x6 1090 T you just bought. * Users can use free tools without restriction (don't have to buy or steal IDE and SDK like .NET Windows tools). * Get to use all the good existing libraries (log4j, JUnit, Spring, Metro etc etc) without re-inventing the whole stack from scratch. Java has great built-in libraries but the 3rd party stuff cannot be paralelled in scope. * Produce TacView-like output server-side only which is later streamed to clients. * Stop the flamewars over whether and how much Integrity Checking to use - it would no longer be necessary to perform IC. The only thing holding us back is knowing the network protocol of LockOn, otherwise we could produce such a thing and it would scale to many users and more complex battles than we have now. Unfortunately the packet protocol is undocumented :( There are those who argue that weapon collision detection cannot be performed on the server due to lag. Well, the 'truth' has to be determined somewhere and the server is the only trusted and shared place to do it. Plus, the server has a single consistent view of the battle, rather than each client having a slightly different view due to lag. Sure the client will have visual cues that are slightly different from the server's picture, preventing last minute G pulls to avoid missiles, but that is not such a bad thing and you can still think you have dodged fire due to what you see on screen but still die (although usually this is more likely with very low-flying and ground collisions). Since the server wouldn't be running graphics it would do a better job than any client. The other things about not requiring graphics means that the any of the large number of game hosting services can be used to serve a game. At the moment it is very expensive to provision an appropriate server with a good connection since a rackmount is desirable (co-locations like these) but most rackmounts don't come with video cards. In the USA it is not a problem to get these but elsewhere (bordering Antarctica like me) this is an expensive hassle. If you throw in a server that can be run on Linux (as well as Windows, of course) then someone doesn't have to pay the Microsoft Tax to host. You would see a lot more LockOn servers out there as a result. So, the question about dedicated servers really boils down to, is it possible to get or reverse engineer the LockOn client-server protocol? Will ED be so kind as to document this for us, so we can do the rest?

Afterburner is for pussies, stay and hang around the battle field and dodge tracers like a man!

I have the same stick and is now collecting dust. I made this video a year or so ago. I don't know if Saitek or ED have done anything in the mean time to make this stick work better: 5kAipkQwBvU

Puuh, great news! Thanks for testing and hangin on to get it to work. Now I can finally be sure that this package is working. Rep +1!

АФМ - Афигеть Можно...

Thanks Mustang, I'll try them later :)

..ok.... next try ;)

Появились Магниторезисторы (MagRez) на основе датчика KMZ41 по 10 евро

I think Yoou'll be amazed by the versatility of this IO Card.. I use it in the hand pendant I made to run my CnC router.. And here it has Toggle switches, push-buttons, potmeters, a couple of encoders AND a LCD display connected. All if it to the same tiny IO Card..!

Hello, I have worked on a very heavy project on FC for 1 year and a half. the HD PITS mod wich is already available. I would like to work now on BS with the same standart of quality. If someone from ED team could help me, i would save a lot of time. I need the templates for BS pits so i wouldn't have to spend hours to find wich part of the bmp or tga files BS uses to map the game. Thanks a lot.:thumbup:

This statement is correct. Period. Yes, it is and even the smiley is right: It sucks air from above and blows it down in order to fly. Accept it. :)

Speed mentioned the same principle with the helo land at wayopint request, but maybe this could be as simple as creating a single and invisible FARP landing point as a structure that could be placed on the terrain? I'd also like to see the ability for units that get spawned as a result of a trigger to be able to occupy the same space. For evample, I place a block on road with 2xBTR's if one condition is met, or 2xT80 if it is not met, what happens in the game however is that the units do not function.

I donno if this has been stated anywhere but.... "Write Flags to Log" action with a corresponding "load flag log" action. or "Send Flags" action which just sends the status of selected flags to the next mission. The idea is simple. For a SP or MP mission they are all based around the same basic mission and triggers. Each mission has a trigger for units to be alive or dead. Major units like sam sites and who controls what airbase. So in the A-10 campaign on FC2 where a Buk site is in the same location every mission, if it gets killed it sets a flag to true. Then when the next mission loads it checks to see if it should be alive or not, if its alive Spawn it, if not do nothing or set a series of events off by triggers where said buk system becomes replaced. Its not the best solution to a persistent/dynamic missions people want, but it brings the capability there.

Hello, I created another thread, but Panzertard suggested me to merge it with this one. Some my suggestions are additions to Grimes' ones and some might be inspiration. So here's my post: ------- Hi, I fly online missions for few months, but I'm quite not satisfied with the way enemy forces are acting, in fact, they're not acting much. I would really like to have dynamic mission with a lot of moving ground units (not just positioned in one location or moving only from wpt1 to wpt2...) according to status of mission, position of players (e.g. detected by radars), number of players and lot more conditions, as in real battle. As I'm not fully aware of mission editor limitations, I have some questions for experienced mission creators or ED team. Is it possible to have such things like: 1) MOVING UNITS ACCORDING TO BATTLE SITUATION, BUT NOT ONCE(!) (e.g. players detected by radars, trigger zones...) - think of this as the possibility to have enemy dynamicly reacting to your position situation: groups of enemy ground units in the city around the target area (e.g. factory), 3 possible ingress ways (e.g. valleys) a) player(s) detected in ingress area -> one group of ground units moving toward threat to eliminate it b) player(s) out of ingress area for certain time (threat eliminated or attack canceled) -> group moving back to target area (target reinforcement) - these 2 steps can repeat as many times as the group is not killed by player(s) - more advanced would be, if many players are detected in one ingress area and for certain time not in other ingress areas, so more than one group would be sent toward them to eliminate threat ASAP and as far as possible from target - this could lead in weak point in defense (as in real situation) of other ingress areas 2) REPEATED REINFORCEMENT (in other words: respawn of units) - this could be applied to many situations, i'll use one example a) FARP is overran by player(s) (or our forces) b) necesary units to use FARP for rearm and refuel are in FARP vicinity c) some of necesary units are destroyed (player mistake, enemy forces killed them,...) -> cannot use FARP for rearm - as long as the condition of using FARP for rearm is not met, repeatedly (e.g. every 15mins) send those missing units from our main base again -> this would lead into possibility to have fully functional FARP repeatedly (and not only once until some units are destroyed) Units respawning could also result in need to hold some strategic positions by constantly fighting enemy forces (as in real), which could be one of mission goals. 3) RANDOM POSITION OF UNITS (some lua scripting) It's generally good idea to have units randomly positioned in battlefield. But I'm not talking about pre-making a lot of units in mission editor and activating them with trigger RANDOM(50%). I'm talking about pre-defining many spawn positions of one unit and randomly activating it in one of these positions. This would require some lua scripting (not a problem for me), but I'm not sure if this can be done within mission file. There is an array of mission objects and not even one function. Is it possible to define user functions there? It looks like regular lua file to me. User functions would really extend mission variability. Imagine that! It really depends on how this file is handled by the game engine...

Что человек, то мнение. Я не силен в 3D MAX, но текстуры мне делать нравиться. Нравиться видеть как из серенькой поверхности появляется что то красивое. Как предбражается модель. Для меня это тоже творческий процесс.