Ripcord

It tells you that it WILL BE possible at some point in the future.

There is a pretty good one for FSX, by a guy named AJ Weber. I would think it could be imported. Sure, I understand there is a little more to it than that, would need to DCS to get in and create the proper operating settings for the helos -- otherwise it would act as just another ship with a helo pad on stern. But this isn't a modder's thread... my point is that a good model is out there.

Agreed - they are clearly making it a priority to get everything they already have working in ONE WORLD, and like it or not, that world is going to be Eastern Black Sea region. They do this first, and later we will see - maybe the priorities will change? So we know that the Nevada project has started and stopped and restarted -- no doubt this a huge part of the delay but there are possibly other technology issues as well -- they keep updating this unified DCS WORLD and so who knows, perhaps that impacts the development of this new terrain? MAYBE (crazy theory here) part of the long delay in NEVADA is some form of standartization that will enable ED or a third party GOING FORWARD to generate these terrains much more easily and seamlessly. Maybe this EDGE technology is a central part of this effort? Regardless, we simply cannot just assume that new terrain development is always going to continue at the same pace as now. Now is about laying the groundwork (I hope).

what is a social network? :huh:

heh heh heh.... ladies and gentlemen, don't forget to tip your waitresses... will be here all week. :D

This is really going to be a cool feature for AI. Will be nice to have a HAVCAP AI flight to escort AWACS.

True. Before it was WHAT?..., or even IF? Now it is WHEN? Much better problem to have. Naturally interest is much higher....

A good moderator is a helpful soul, an understanding and knowledgeable type, a bit like a bartender or a good tax accountant. I suppose the testing takes a helluva lot of time as well, though maybe not as much time as the coding/building/fixing, etc. that is done by the programming teams. Hopefully those guys are less medicated, btw!! Anyway all these threads asking when? when? when? you know they kinda starting adding up, creating a cumulative effect -- just one or two of them gets old after awhile, but we have now like a half dozen of them, just for third party mods, plus FC3 (when?) and of course Nevada (when?) and DCS Next Jet (when?).... getting REAL old. Now on top of all this, imagine that you pre-ordered TacPack from VRS -- holy cow! At least made it out in Beta, so now its just other people asking when it will be available for purchase. Always something. Arrrrggggghhhhhh The upside here is that there is suddenly so much going on!!! Remember when all the whining was not WHEN? but about how the genre was dead/dying and nothing new was coming out.... nobody singing that tune anymore, is there?

Exactly!!

Gotta say I like where this is going -- we do need some more/different configurations of FARP bases. I am trying to think of another world conflict in which AV-8Bs were used, and other than maybe the gulf war, I cannot think of any. And I'm really not that sure if they were used actively in the gulf war -- maybe they don't cope well with sand, so they kept them out on the ships. Just wondering how the USMC uses their harriers IRL....

Same is true for those that would build a good in-depth payware compaign. First I think the reason we see so few campaigns (like none) for DCSW is that there is no way to protect against redistruction of the files. It is not stand-alone software that can be installed in conjunction with some keygen installer software, it is just a bunch of files that are placed in a folder. Some developers recognize this and they don't think it is a huge problem, others aren't so sure.

Damn, where is the 'like' button? way to go Razbam, keep up the good work!!

I am a fan of the EA-6B and so far RAZBAM has the best version out there --Virtavia is OK but cockpit is ugly, and I won't even comment on the Abacus offering. Can't comment on the other aircraft because I don't own them and I don't own other version to compare them against, but as far as the EA-6B goes, RAZBAM has earned a good name with me.

Perhaps none -- it is just the only way I've done it so far, and I was considering possible theories as to why this is not working for you.

I am all over this -- hopefully this generates some extra revenue that will help keep the DCS projects moving forward. This is going to be really cool on AJ Weber's LHA.

Damn, this is one helluva a good question for a first post!! :thumbup: Welcome. I would have gone at this with some form of F10 added a series of radio messages -- move units: (a) south of river (b) over river © thru woods to grandma's house, etc. And of course use flags to make the units move, etc., something similar to Druid's trick for making the tanker reposition itself. As the player, spot it however you like but realistically the TGP is going to be pretty critical to doing this.

Alright, here is one way of doing this -- I haven't tried it in MP but it worked in SP. I'd like for some folks to try it out in MP, just to ensure that it behaves as expected. Simply put, the Player/Client flights are deactivated when the enemy forces get within a certain radius of the airbase. They are NOT deactivated, however, provided that the flight is able to start up and get moving at a minimal speed (10 mph). This way our players that do spawn and take off in time are not deactivated. AFAIK this should prevent somebody from joining as a pilot leading any of these flights - alfa, bravo or charlie -- once the base has been overrrun -- or really, just one the enemy forces get close enough to really do damage. Please PM me or post here if something does not quite work as expected. Again, since this is just for testing purposes, I did not build in the triggers for the red FARP, just for the Blue flights at Senaki. The reason I added so many units is that I've been testing other features and who knows, maybe this thing will develop into a worthy MP mission. Another simpler way to do this same thing is to run a timer -- basically do not allow anybody to join these flights (deactivate them) after some period of time, probably 20-30 minutes. This would allow players/clients a reasonable amount of time to run thru the startup procedures and get rolling before any enemy forces would be physically able to crash thru the front lines and reach the base. If the player is rolling (at a minimum speed) within the 20-30 minute start up window, then that flight would not be deactivated, and they flight the mission as normal. Otherwise, all player/client flights get deactivated when the timer runs out. The down side is that players have to start/spawn at more or less the same time, but I don't really view that as a negative -- others might. MPbasespawn_test.miz

Still works like it did back in 1.1.0.9 It is a three step process. 1. Set your flight in a parked space, use the current mission start time (no delay). Be sure to check the UNCONTROLLED check box, which is right next to the HIDDEN ON MAP checkbox, right under the callsign dropdown menus. 2. Go the Triggered Actions menu (next in line after the weapons/payload menu) and select Add. You want to select PERFORM COMMAND, and then select START. 3. Create one-time trigger to activate the flight. The Action you want is the AI TASK. Then you just select your START action for whatever flight you want to trigger. Until you trigger it that way, you'll see the aircraft sitting there on the ramp, parked, with no pilot in it. Then when you trigger it, you'll the pilot appear in the cockpit and the taxi lights will come on. Magik! If you do not want the aircraft to take off ever, just sit on the ramp (or in a shelter), then skip steps 2 and 3 and just let it sit there with an the 'uncontrolled' box check.

Use 'start from ramp' and assign a parking spot using the dropdown menu. Some of parking spaces are on the ramp, some are in the shelters. Select a few until you get it where you want it. If you need the make the aircraft stay parked for a while before taxiing out for takeoff, there is a way to do that -- but I think it may have changed in DCS World since A-10C 1.1.1.1 so I would need to research a bit more before I could answer. EDIT: After checking I see that this info is still valid: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1255593#post1255593

Try this out.... Cibit has a good guide here in PDF http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1161326&postcount=1 EDIT: I looked at your mission, nothing really I can add -- I would have gone with 30-80 on your FM dial for frequency, but I'm really not sure what you would not work fine as well.

Do the Ural-375 PBU Command Post trucks actually have any function in terms of artillery fire control or communications/coordination with other units? I am guessing that they are just another kind of truck with it's own specific 3d model and all, really just for looks -- but figured I'd ask.

This is really a very good comment/post here, and it illustrates much how much CA changes the game. A-10C missions, the way we knew them, were perhaps a bit limited in that you took off, destroyed your AI ground units and that was about all you could do. But really, that CAS mission should have been just one part of a larger operation going on, eg,. a war is happening down there, with a moving FLOT and objectives that are larger than just me flying this hop. I hate to invoke the F4 name here, but that was ever-present in almost any mission or TE that you flew. Now with CA, I think the mission builder HAS to be mindful of this -- is the mission won for the Player Flight A when he kills X, Y and Z? Or is the mission won for the BLUE side when they reach village ABC or capture some other objective? Maybe the hog flight kills it's targets but the enemy still overruns friendly positions? Interesting to consider, really.

I think we are all saying the same thing -- sure it's not fun for the guy that connects and get's zapped before he can even adjust his googles. So why host a mission that allows that? One answer is that the ME won't support it -- but I think it will. Just takes some time to build a proper mission that we can test. Gotta travel this week so probably now this will be sorted by the time I get back, but I'm going to experiment with this in any case.

I don't get it -- there is nothing wrong with a player succeeding and capturing his objective. Why is the answer 'prevent the ground player from succeeding'? If they cannot win, why play? We are 'blaming' the wrong party here.... Why should the mission allow more helos/aircraft to spawn once the FARP/airbase has fallen? If you are a client flying MP, then get in and takeoff and join the engagement BEFORE the base falls. The mission should be built to prevent that client from joining at that point. OK hold on, let me get into ME and whip up something to be tested.....

The problem with what you describe here is that would need to know in advance which ground unit is the offending client. As mission builder, would it not be better/simpler to just explode new spawned units after X minutes of time into the mission? Just write it into the MP mission brief -- don't spawn into this mission after X minutes. That way it is highly unlikely, maybe even impossible, for the red side to capture the blue base and be in position to whack blue aircraft that spawn... or no, really what you would need to manage is the ability for clients to spawn at that airbase after X minutes into the start of a mission. Could you not simply DEACTIVATE the Client Flight at the airbase after X minutes/seconds, on the condition that it is (a) still on the ground and (b) has not departed a small trigger zone around the airport. Or better, DEACTIVATE the Client Flight at the base in the event that enemy units have entered that trigger zone -- eg., the base has been overrun. Would that not work?