Tank50us

Well, if it combines certain functionalities that are currently only community projects (like the various mod managers), and make it easier to get certain things working right, then I'm all for it.

I wonder.... if this new launcher you speak of is anything like a particular ground combat sim, it may make the life of mod devs a little easier... I mean... if you think about it, downloading a list that has the launcher go out and grab mods and liveries for you would make life a little easier for many.

Especially if it's optional. But, what always gets me are those who gripe about those overlays when the ability to turn them off is right there in the options.

I believe it is. It's certainly in the game files. That said, there is a couple Diesel Generators, and any of them can be plunked down to play the visual role of a Huffer if that's what someone's looking for.

Actually, the sim can easily handle it, and still be pretty convincing. Just like with the aircraft, which have modeled 'damage zones', the same can be done with the vehicles. Destroy the tracks of a tank, it can't move for a bit. Destroy the engine, the vehicle stops, and its powered systems (like the turret) slow down. Hit the weapons, they get knocked out and can't shoot. An ATGM hits the ammo, and the Turret crew joins the local space program. One thing I'd like to see is that if a tank is knocked out (and its turret not get sent into LEO), I'd like to see the crew abandon the tank, maybe even make a run for their lines, or just take cover behind their tank.

*cracks knuckles* OK... while I would also love the Super Tomcat... Heatblur has already said they can't really do it at this time. The USN won't give them the required data to make it for fear that Iran could get it and use that data to upgrade their Tomcats. In a few years, when Irans F-14s aren't even capable of flying, they may be able to do it. But only if they can get the data from the USN.

Those would work fine for those with GPUs and systems that are of decent enough quality that they can see the lights. The overlay, which could be made optional, would certainly help those who don't have those higher quality systems, or those with cruddy enough eyesight they just have a hard time seeing the lights anyway.

That would be nice. I've suggested similar overlays, including that... however they keep getting shut down.

I'd argue that it depends on the plane, and the persons setup. Obviously someone with a full simpit and VR is going to have an easier time than someone just starting out with a Sidewinder. This is ultimately why I'm in favor of either visual aids or handicaps for those that need them. Meanwhile if you don't need it, you can turn it off in the settings. Hell, one thing that would be nice is if Combined Arms allowed someone to sit in the tanker and actually guide you in like the real Boom Operator does. Or if the AI would talk you in (or at the very least warn you that the plane is about to turn)

This is pretty sound advice. One thing I'd like to add though, if you're planning on doing long missions with other people, then it's best to do your practicing while on a server. "Train how you fight" is a big deal in this biz. One thing I wish ED would add is an optional 'visual aid' for those lineup lights, similar to the Meatball of the Super Carrier module. This would help those with less than optimal monitors or visual acuity actually see the blasted things, while at the same time being something that could be toggled 'off' by those who just don't want it. I once made another post here on the forums that I think would be good for those with disabilities: a 'hand off' macro. You would have to get well within parameters to refuel, but once in, it would take control of the aircraft until disconnect, at which point you'd have control again, though it could be interrupted at any point (like if a Red crossed the border and you needed to go intercept). One thing that's always annoyed me are those who somehow claim it to be 'unbalanced' if such features existed... when in reality since the only ones refueling on a tanker are your own sides jets... I don't see how it would break the balance, or even the immersion of other players if someone is using any kind of aid to help them do what is easily a very complex task.

Yeah, it's coming. I think it was supposed to come when 2.9 dropped, but I get the feeling that it ran into a snag and got pushed back to a later date.

Yeah, I agree with this. What we need in DCS is a "RedFor" Insurgent faction and a "BluFor" insurgent faction since insurgent forces can be on either side of a conflict (the Alliance and US led coalition vs Taliban and AlQuida are a good example of this during OEF). One thing I think we need for the Insurgents are some 'cars with armed passengers', basically a car with a guy leaning out with an AK or something, and is only visible when attacking something. Imagine a COIN mission like that, where the cars you're seeing could be civilians or could be hostile... but until they start shooting at you, you can't tell for certain.

So, I had an issue today while in the F-15E... First, my guys did a ferry to get to a base closer to our target. We (Viper, MudHen, and Tomcat), shut down, did any repairs, rearmed/refueled, and went for our attacks. My rearmed load was 6x BLU-107, and 6x CBU-97 (Three on the 'tank' pylons, 3 on the CFT), 2x AIM120, 2x AIM9M Since I'm not yet familiar with the full startup and shut down yet, I used auto start and shut down My landing at Vody resulted in a burst nose gear tire, which I had repair Now the incident Immediately after Take-off the aircraft started what I can only describe as "Bucking". The HUD kept saying "Terrain Fly Up" and "No Armament" The only thing I can think of is that it was thinking I was trying to fly into the ground.... at 20,000ft ASL and over open terrain heading towards Mozdok (the target airfield) Anyone know what could have caused this odd aircraft behavior?

If I understand correctly, this is a publicly advertised capability of the Aegis combat system, Patriot (at least the PAC3 TMK), and has existed since the F-14s introduction. Obviously this is not a wide capability, but it is a capability that the US Military has invested heavily in.

actually, if you watch closely, many unguided weapons do 'spin' on their way in, just very slowly. I'm not sure if this is by design, or a result of outside conditions, but it's certainly there... it's just inconsistent. Not that it really matters that much anyway since usually if you're the one that dropped the weapon, you're probably more concerned with avoiding a sudden interaction with the terrain to watch it hit the target.

So, to clarify, those that grab the Steam version and don't opt into the betas will one day not have to worry about the version differences any longer?

As much as I'd like a Delta Hornet, I don't think we'll be getting one for a while. It would be nice to have though, especially for training new pilots in the Hornet.

And if you need them to start up at some point, go into the "Triggered Actions" tab, and add the action: Perform Command -> "Start", and the aircraft will start up and do whatever it is it's instructed to do from then on. This is particularly good if you want the aircraft to be part of an Alert force sitting on the ground and starting up when there's an attack on an airbase or something.

Thank you

good point... my bad... @BIGNEWY@NineLine could this be moved to the correct area?

First and foremost, most, if not all of the locations I'm about to suggest have been suggested in the past at one point or another. The point of this is to discuss potential locations, and the time frames to be modeled. Finally, none of the locations I'm about suggest would be modeled in their current day forms. The reason for this is both due to technical reasons (some of the locations have a large number of detailed buildings that will drag frame-rates to a crawl), and political reasons. With those bits put out... off we go: Location: Carribean Year: 1962 Reasons: in 1962, this region was a potential flashpoint for the Cold War. Outside of the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the potential US Invasion of Cuba had the Cold War gone hot, players could perform modern incarnations of the CMC, as well as Counter-Narco missions, Maritime Patrol, SAR, Mass Evac, Location: Adriatic Year: 1955 Reasons: Although the map year would be set after WW2, the Italian Front was a major part of the Allied war effort in WW2, laying the foundation for several historic battles. During the Cold War, the countries east of the Adriatic were all under the control of the Soviet Union, making for another potential flashpoint for the Cold War. Being set in the 50s, or even the early 60s, would allow for the majority of the airbases and airports in the region to be capable of handling modern jets. Location: North Sea Year: 1960s Reasons: Like Italy above, this was a major potential flashpoint during the Cold War, and during WW2, there were several battles that took place. You have a potential the Eastern Front, as well as the Allied Air Raids on Berlin. In the Cold War you have the Berlin Airlift, or a jumping off point for a Third World War scenario. Most importantly to fans of the AJS-37 Viggin, this would be their playground. Location: Korean Paninsula Year: 1976 Reasons: One obvious reason is a reinactment of the 1950-1953 Korean War, with the Saber and Mig15 squaring off. As well as high potential for more modern jets performing border patrols near the DMZ. Given the proximity to China, this could also be a flashpoint for any conflict with China. For WW2 buffs, the potential for running "Operation Downfall" is also present. Location: South China Sea Year: 1969 Reasons: Other than the obvious (Vietnam War), there's a potential for combat actions between the US and China/Soviet Union forces operating in the area. With the right WW2 kit, you could also recreate the battles between the French forces and the Vietmin, or part of the Allied Campaign to retake the Philippines. Those looking for a more modern approach, some of the natural Paracel Islands were present, so possible modern amphibious operations could be conducted. That's all I've got for now. What do you guys think?

Right here: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/455-a-10ca-10c-ii/ It's not a wish section, but there's most likely someone that would be willing to make the livery in question. There's also the DCS Livery Discord: https://discord.gg/y8MdfMZH At that Discord, there may be someone also willing to take on the challenge, though you may have to pay someone for it. If that's not an issue for you, there's plenty of talented livery designers that will gladly do it.

Wouldn't this be better as a livery request?

Believe me, many have been calling for assists to help with AAR, but there's usually someone that comes in here and basically goes "GitGud", even when the suggestion/request is just a visual aid to help a person get in the right position.

Thanks