trevoC

What values are available to you on the map side that you can call and inject into math.randomseed() instead of an aircraft value if this is a map? I've never built a mission or campaign but I'm guessing there are plenty of variables available that count up or are constantly changing. My example assumed an aircraft but I get the impression its a map or mission you are working on.

Sorry guys I didn't read far enough back (still haven't so forgive me if even this doesn't help) You could use any of the following: math.randomseed(os.clock()) math.randomseed(os.date("%S")) math.randomseed(os.clock() + collectgarbage("count")) you could dream up others. os.clock returns the amoutnn of cpu time used by the program so that will always be different (in seconds i believe so if you call this more than once per second it would be no good) os.date("%S")) is the same... seconds from date bottom example just combins values if you need something that changes more often than the system time. Does DCS not allow you to access OS.x? Is that the problem. you could seed the number generator with a fixed value that is derived from one of the instruments of the aircraft for example. math.randomseed(GPSCoordinates) -- seed the random number generator with a fixed value local random_number = math.random(1, 100) print(random_number) What about that....

The math.random function in Lua does not generate weighted results by default. It generates uniformly distributed pseudo-random numbers, which means that each possible value has an equal probability of being selected. For example, if you use math.random(1, 6) to simulate a six-sided die roll, each of the possible outcomes (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) has an equal chance of being selected, assuming a good seed value. The problems described above are probably a bad seed value.

The reason you get non-random results is because you cannot use math.random() without seeding the random number generator first. See below. math.randomseed(os.time()) -- Seed the random number generator with the current time local randomNumber = math.random(1, 100) -- Generate a random number between 1 and 100 print(randomNumber) -- Output the random number to the console The math.random function in Lua generates what is known as a pseudo-random number, which means that the sequence of numbers it generates may appear to be random, but it is actually deterministic and can be reproduced if the same seed value is used. By default, the Lua random number generator is initialized with a fixed seed value, which means that if you call math.random multiple times without changing the seed, you will get the same sequence of numbers every time. To generate a more "random" sequence of numbers, you can seed the random number generator with a more unpredictable value, such as the current time. In the example I gave earlier, math.randomseed(os.time()) seeds the random number generator with the current time, which should help to produce a more unpredictable sequence of numbers. However, it's important to note that even with a good seed value, the math.random function is still deterministic and the sequence of numbers it generates can be predicted if you know the seed value and the algorithm used to generate the numbers. If you need truly random numbers for security or cryptographic purposes, you should use a different source of randomness, such as the operating system's built-in random number generator, or a hardware random number generator but this falls outside the scope of what I'm guessing is more basic needs in DCS for which the above is just fine.

As WWII goes (other than the already announced Hellcat and Corsair which I can't wait for) I'd like to see a Hawker Hurricane or P-38. Also can't wait for the lancaster.... oooooweeeee that'll be sweet to start up.

A poll would be unlikely to help or guide any real life access to aircraft. First, I'm assuming you mean the next ED module as they are going to be directing third parties. Second, I'm guessing their decision to develop something is based on so many external factors (access to aircraft, permission, access to de-classified information etc...) that it wouldn't matter what people voted for. Yes, just because you have access to all information on X aircraft doesn't mean it will be next, but if you don't have any of that information you are guaranteed it won't be next. At best you might be able to run a poll that lists the aircraft ED feel they are capable of making based on the above, but I'm guessing they haven't done exhaustive research on every aircraft they could possibly do either. Also, I think the current announcements are going to keep them busy for a long time.

I'd love to fly the Kiowa, but after enjoying all of the helicopters in DCS except the Gazelle I think I'll wait until I can see that they can create a realistic FM for the gazelle before getting excited over a module I probably won't fly. And by no means am I frugal with my module purchases as I own them all except 4 at the moment. Being a pilot in RL and flying many rc helicopters I just can't come to terms with how the gazelle handles. If I hear great things about the Kiowa I may reconsider (obviously) as it looks awesome, but so did the Gazelle and I just can't bring myself to fly and enjoy it.

Another point would be that realistically bluefor would (even today) be going up against much older aircraft in most theatres of war except for a handful of countries like Russia so a more modern F style aircraft is more likely to encounter an older mirage or MiG than an Su-35. It would only be a direct conflict with Russia that modern equipment would match.

I'll assume you mean in multiplayer. There's plenty to do in campaigns and missions. We all want full fidelity redfor aircraft, but its not like ED can choose who decides to give them enough access to these aircraft to develop them. Although they do manage who gets to develop aircraft for DCS (in regards to third parties) its not like they dictate the direction these third parties have to take or develop either. Everyone is aware that a full fidelity MiG-29 or Su-25/27/34/35 etc.. would be a smashing success. I know that ED wants these more than anyone, but you can't just make it up. You need access to them and not just access to them but permission.

If your VR system is off (in my case I just don't launch the WMR interface) and load DCS it will load 2D. If your launch interface has started it will launch 3D. Not sure it could be much easier.

Here is hoping that the World map comes out before WWIII.

I didn't imply they shouldn't. I'm looking forward to engine improvements so I can cap them again. Just removing the idea from anyone (or addressing it) that some magic code will make flight sims run with extreme settings at 240 fps. Never going to happen.

With 30 years experience in flying almost all sims that have ever existed, nothing is more true than this. New improvements in equipment create a vacuum that flight sims are extremely good in filling instantly.

even an Mi-4 would be cool but I would really like a 28

Anyone else love to see an Mi-26. I'd guess unlike other military hardware this would be easier to model and gain access to. Would love to see a heavy lift in DCS which seems to be the goto helicopter simulator for me recently.

WTF, WOW.. this is seriously awesome work. I'm guessing this sits on top of the ka-50 which is perfect obviously as they are essentially the same bird in many respects. Such great work. This is one of my most wanted modules. Loving it. Can't wait to feed the Alligator.

Waiting for campaigns on this map is going to be painful. Can't wait to fly it.

oh wow.... I need a flyable skymaster with rockets.

I agree about sat imagery. As old as DCS maps are, I enjoy the crafted nature of them. There are many times they look better IMO than even MSFS 2020. Obviously there are times they don't. I'm fine with the crafted nature of DCS maps and having to purchase them. Especially for things like WWII era maps that are period specific.

IMO VR Boundary restrictions (although at first glance seem reasonable) are horrible in practice. they do not add to immersion when you are still moving your head, but your virtual view has stopped. This disconnect from your VR view to your actual movement never happens in real life. Restricting your movement in VR will not prevent people from moving outside that boundary physically. On the flip side, You can prevent yourself from moving outside the boundary of the aircraft by NOT DOING IT. This method prevents the disconnect from ever happening. This boundary is also plenty buggy from my experience and will many times prevent you from looking where you could easily look otherwise. Imagine trying to look down beside your seat to flip a switch but are unable to do so because your virtual helmet is hitting the canopy. I guarantee that many of the switches I view would be prevented from me using that viewing angle even though my line of sight is not outside the cockpit. I have hundreds of hours in DCS and the only time my line of site is outside the cockpit is when I've done so on my own accord. I can't imagine this being a huge problem for anyone unless you are not setup correctly. This is the worst Idea I've heard so far for VR users and it would be incredibly frustrating if implemented.

Feel the same. Its one thing to have old textures in a module you purchased 10 years ago that isn't sold anymore, but these modules are all sold as current. Personally, I'd be appeased with a Texture upgrade to the worst offenders to hold me over. I don't fly mig-15/19/21 because they look horrible. The Mi-8 and Huey are some of my favorite machines but they desperately need an upgrade.

If it was a purely fictional map that was a non-wartime map that looked much like any current map then no. If it were a fictional map based on a wartime 2000's conflict where the map had frontlines and dug in positions and temporary airbases and buildups. This I would buy. Something that might represent a global conflict on that frontline in that era etc.... and could represent what the geography of an area might look like when it is militarized for that era's conflict. Hope that made sense.

I know it may seem like the standard/boring option, but I think there is a reason for that. These offer IMO not only scenarios that work well with the aircraft lineup, but also some variety in campaigns for the future. Vietnam/Afghanistan Another cool region IMO would be the Taiwan Strait with parts of mainland China and Taiwan but I realize they may want to avoid that s-show.

Personally, I don't think North America lends itself well to any of the era aircraft in DCS. The training option is well covered in Nevada map IMO. There are so many more options to compliment the aircraft we have in DCS like Vietnam etc... I can't imagine many people wanting this map or campaign makers wanting to target this map.

According to numerous WWII Documentary reference footage this is the most accurate representation of colour from that era. null