Rex

Thanks very much! That seems to have helped!

I just had the Mission Editor CTD twice, taking all of my unsaved work with it, when I tried to load a Static Unit from a Mod (possibly the VPC Field Equipment Mod). It feels like you'd just get a "resource cannot be loaded" message while it continues on it's way. To be clear, it DOES write the "resource cannot be loaded" message in a popup, but it then panics, aborts the app, then tries to write a dump. In fact, I managed to get a video of the exact moment DCS realizes it cannot find the resource I have specified: I can't say for sure, but it might be a slight overreaction? 2025-01-10 09:42:46.034 WARNING VISUALIZER (9308): terrainSampleOptions aren't set for DemoScene with terrain rendering 2025-01-10 09:42:46.037 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (27420): ITerrainContextImpl4::setTrafficDecimation(1) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.037 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (27420): ITerrainContextImpl4::setDate( day=1, month=10) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.037 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (27420): ITerrainContextImpl4::setTextureMode(full=1) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.043 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (29956): ITerrainContextImpl4::setTrafficDecimation(1) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.043 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (29956): ITerrainContextImpl4::setDate( day=1, month=10) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.043 INFO EDTERRAIN4 (29956): ITerrainContextImpl4::setTextureMode(full=1) 2025-01-10 09:42:46.399 WARNING VISUALIZER (9308): terrainSampleOptions aren't set for DemoScene with terrain rendering 2025-01-10 09:42:46.403 WARNING SCENE (9308): Scene was removed with 1 alive objects 2025-01-10 09:42:46.408 WARNING VISUALIZER (9308): terrainSampleOptions aren't set for DemoScene with terrain rendering 2025-01-10 09:42:46.524 WARNING SCENE (9308): Scene was removed with 1 alive objects 2025-01-10 09:42:46.526 WARNING VISUALIZER (9308): terrainSampleOptions aren't set for DemoScene with terrain rendering 2025-01-10 09:42:57.532 INFO DX11BACKEND (4564): Compile shader: model/fake_omni_lights.fx:DIRECTX11=true;USE_DCS_DEFERRED=1; 2025-01-10 09:42:57.532 ERROR EDCORE (4564): Can't open file: /shaders/model/fake_omni_lights.fx. 2025-01-10 09:42:57.573 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [0, 0] 2025-01-10 09:43:06.306 ERROR EDCORE (4564): Can't open file: /shaders/model/fake_omni_lights.fx. 2025-01-10 09:43:06.342 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [5120, 1440] 2025-01-10 09:43:06.380 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [0, 0] 2025-01-10 09:43:07.285 ERROR EDCORE (4564): Can't open file: /shaders/model/fake_omni_lights.fx. 2025-01-10 09:43:07.317 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [5120, 1440] 2025-01-10 09:43:07.353 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [0, 0] 2025-01-10 09:43:09.902 INFO DXGUI_WIN_ADAPTER (Main): resize main window to [5120, 1440] 2025-01-10 09:43:09.965 INFO EDCORE (Main): try to write dump information

In each case I've logged in within 3 days, so I'm not sure why this happens. As mentioned, in once case it actually kicked me out less than an hour after authorizing. This seems to be of questionable usefulness, as the only time you'd really need to use DCS offline is when you don't have a connection. This also means that when DCS servers go down, we can't auth for offline sessions. I mean, it's certainly a benefit for people with ESP/precognition. Although those people are usually too busy trading stocks and playing the lottery to use DCS, so I'm not sure how much they'll actually use it. I guess the rest of us are on our own. Yeah, the thing about EULAs is that they are wish-lists on the part of the drafter (in this case the company), which may or may not comport with the legal realities of the jurisdictions in which they are being enforced. I mean, Zappos had a EULA too: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericgoldman/2012/10/10/how-zappos-user-agreement-failed-in-court-and-left-zappos-legally-naked/ And I'm willing to bet that most EULAs have similar unilateral-modification clauses, rendering many of them wholly unenforceable, depending on jurisdiction. I'm not stating an opinion on the DCS EULA, simply that EULAs in general are not the last word on every matter, and in the case of inability-to-access-purchases, probably would have an uphill climb to be upheld. Same with "licenses", people have to be able to benefit from they licenses the purchase. Also, if authorization is required, what happens when authorization is not possible? Is the customer bound by contract to pound sand in every denial scenario? In the USA, that would fall under contra preferentum, but I can't say for other countries. Remember, though, lawyers (the usual drafters of EULAs) don't get paid for avoiding litigation. In order for a contract to be formed, consideration has to be exchanged, and that consideration cannot be illusory (ie. you have to pay us but we may or may not provide what you paid us for at our discretion). Both parties must be ENTITLED to their respective consideration. Obviously that's the USA, and I don't imagine that it would be easy to sue ED from the USA (nor do I personally have any inclination or desire to do so). I'm simply saying that the EULA doe s not offer the blanket, ironclad protection against prevention of access that many companies assume that it does. In many jurisdiction, the customer actually does have a claim to the good and services they pay for. That said, the way things are going, if you give it a few years, this will probably no longer be the case. I think EU folks have far more consumer rights than we do, though, so that might be an even tougher nut to crack from a EULA perspective. I reiterate, the whole thing is very disappointing to me. The goodwill I've historically felt has certainly suffered, and the notion that nobody really cares about that is finally reaching the acceptance phase. The relationship between consumers and the companies they patronize certainly is a hostile one (at least in the USA), and I don't think exceptions to this exist any longer. Assuming they ever did.

Thanks for your tips, I appreciate the help. I don't use DCS connected to a VPN as it typically increases latency, and I reboot generally once a day. I have other potential causes of IP issues, though (see below). I'm a software developer and am fairly literate about such thing, but am by no means infallible. I'm a Unix/Linux guy and only use Windows for things like DCS, so I'm far from a Windows expert, but I suppose I've used it enough to be at least proficient. I'm not really puzzled about the connection itself being interrupted. I have a hypothesis that the auth issues may be caused by a mid-session IP change (I have multiple IP addresses on a multi-WAN router), but it's not relevant because my problem isn't connectivity per-se. Even assuming this is the issue, it's still disconcerting to get zero time locally with paid modules if the connection gets interrupted, as well as to get booted out of a Mission Editor session because of an IP address change. Note that I am not criticizing or blaming DCS for my potential network issues, nor am I asking them to troubleshoot them. I'm simply disturbed by the way they now deal with it (completely severing access to all of my paid modules for even 1 minute of non-connectivity). I used to get 2-3 days grace period to reconnect, but now they are requiring a 24/7 internet connection or their removing access to your paid modules. I cannot even fly locally in my own home on my own computer. Network issues can happen any number of places for any number of reasons, and now any and all of those reasons completely negate all of my paid modules until the problem is cleared up. Essentially, I'll be punished regardless of whose fault it is. ED, me, my ISP, their ISP, some random Script Kiddie DDOSing an intermittent node, the customer will get punished for any and all of it. Unfortunately, the customer usually is the first party to be punished for problems, and that's on top of the problems I already have of my own. I never punish ED for those problems, and if I did, I can 100% guarantee you that they would be very, very unhappy if I did. Ensuring the customer is deprived of their paid content regardless of issue's cause is generally looked down upon, and even in the customer-hostile USA, the practice is controversial. It's something that everyone expects from, for instance, EA, because that company has never had anything but contempt for its customers. I never before felt that was the case with ED. With their frequent flyer miles, generous sales, try-before-you-buy program, grace period on authentication, etc, I always felt comfortable giving them my money because they seemed to take steps to prevent us from being without our content for trivial reasons. They were a company and hobby that tends to inspire a little more loyalty and dedication as we each depend on each other's support to thrive. Now, I feel basically as if we've been put on notice that they intend to screw us as hard as the typical gaming company, so we need to start looking out for our own interests because they are going to look out for theirs. For instance, even though I have a Steam account with numerous games, I never use Steam to purchase DCS products because I want ED to have that 30% and not Steam. It's not a ton of money, but it's probably $300 - $400 that they otherwise wouldn't have, and for that, I was happy. It was totally and completely a goodwill dividend. I don't usually consider these things, I'm an American and I generally enjoy a hostile relationship with the companies I do business with. If I have an opportunity to screw them before they screw me, well I'd be a sucker not to take it. I didn't feel this way toward ED. ED is the only company I have gladly inconvenience myself for, so this move feels like a slap in the face. Apparently some people claim they can still use the sim in "offline mode". I was one of those people until recently. Why some can and some can't, I'm not sure, but it actually booted me from a previously-authorized connection a week or so ago, and that's an extremely negative outcome. Talk about a middle finger being thrust your way. Knowing that can happen at any time stays in your head and, well, it certainly does not add to the enjoyment. Especially when I've paid so much to enjoy this hobby, and in my opinion, it's been worth every cent, and I'm happy to give them more. I didn't expect it to be yanked from me randomly for issues that I will sometimes have no control over, though. Going forward, however, I'll know that it can and will be taken away for any failure between Seattle (where I am), and wherever DCS is (Russia or whatever). That's a lot of hops, and a lot of potential for things to not be 100%. I've seen them through some issues before and I've always supported and stood up for them. This is the first time I've really been bummed out about something ED has done. I'm disappointed.

This doesn't really make any sense. "Jackasses hacking" has nothing to do with being unable to use your modules offline in single-player mode, and if you allow "jackasses hacking" to take all of our paid modules away from us, then that's your fault. (not you specifically but the people selling said modules) Your using a bunch of generalities as blanket exceptions to things things that they should not apply apply to. It reminds me if the "all software has bugs" brainwashing campaign my industry foisted on the masses a decade ago. Everytime we released untested crap, there was always two or three people yelling "All softweare has bugs!" to anyone who would listen. We didn't even have to try to mitigate it, the masses had their opiate, and it gave us an awful lot of leeway we should never have had. I'll be honest, I kinda miss that scapegoat. It was nice while it lasted. Now people expect us to QA our stuff, and it's so much more time consuming, not to mention, expensive. Hmmm, maybe this "all systems need updating thanks to jackass hackers" isn't such a bad position after all. Hold that thought, I'm going to see if it has legs. Blasted hackers! Will they ever stop hacking??!! I don't see where I have an offline mode anymore (I used to). Can you tell me how you're currently accessing it?

As thrilled as I am for both of you, I only get the option to play with free modules when it happens. It's Friday night and that's the only option I am being presented with now, and I am not pleased. Also, I got kicked out when my "login expired" and lost a bunch of Mission Editor work. My experience used to be like both of yours, and I used to have two or so days to connect. Now not only can I not use paid modules, I can't even stay logged in if it disconnects. P.S. Seems other people have hit it too. This thread is from 2022/2023. More recent one:

I'm really pissed off today. I've gotten the "you can only use free modules" popup several times, and now just I got booted from my DCS session because the "Login Expired". Seriously? This is the new acceptable? This switch to an always-on connection is abhorrent, repugnant, and just play wrong, and if it's not criminal it very well should be because it punishes customers (and only customers) when anything less than perfect network conditions arise. This is that case whether that imperfection has anything to do with the customer or not. I don't mind paying $1,000+ for DCS modules, they are worth every penny in my opinion. I do mind, however, when I cannot use them, solely so that ED can look after it's own interests while wiping it's backside with my interests. It's going to take one full-blown outage for this house of cards to come crashing down, and when it does, it will be completely self-inflicted. Frankly, I don't know what you were thinking with this one, as it didn't use to be this way. We used to have a 2-3 day grace period for reconnection, and now we have zero? That's one hell of a bet being placed on endless perfection, and it's a bet you're going to lose. Not "if" but "when", and given that it was planned this way, I don't know how much "understanding: or "patience" you have a right to ask of us when our inconvenience is the official plan whenever a problem arises. The thing is, I have problems of my own that I have never once asked you to suffer for, and I doubt you'd be willing to suffer for if I asked. Be decent enough to return the favor. I love DCS and I'd challenge someone to find another Internet user who has said more consistently glowing things about the sim, or someone who has always sided with the company on every issue, even when the company was arguably wrong. When you start ruining my hard-wearned weekends, however ... for things that any half-sane human being can predict (like network issues), then we're no longer friends. I'm a software developer that has to deal with things like network issues all week, and I have no desire to spend my Saturday doing so as well. Everything else works. I'm extremely pissed off with this nonsense.

I got it too. I really, really hate getting that message. It's a blatant reminder that $1,000+ worth of content is one network glitch away from not existing. It's not a matter of "if" either, but a matter of "when". The most likely answer? The vacation week you ook off and desperately need. You know, the one where you'd planned to spend quality time with your favorite hobby? Yeah, that one. Not looking forward to that happening, and I know it's coming. Generally speaking, I never criticize ED. I just like what they're doing too much. That said, making their network problems, our problem, and penalizing us the cost of our expensive modules for their potential infrastructure problems are the one thing they do that I absolutely abhor, and think should be illegal.

In just an hour, it's meade editing large missions so much easier! I didn't even know I wanted this, but I'll be damned if it isn't my favorite feature you guys have released in years. Whoever's idea this was ... outstanding call!

Don't forgot those other conspiracy theorists like the "there were no Vietnamese ships in the Gulf of Tonkin" types! Those people make me sick! There were all kinds of ships. hund er thous er millions ... yeah millions of ships were there! And they all fired on the American ships who were sitting there, minding their own business and spreading Democrafreedom! "Conspiracy theory" means "false", people! Yes, 100% of the time. That's why it's called "theory" and not "conspiracy fact"! Duh! And don't even get my started on the "anti-flouride" people! Loons! The lot of them. Wait, what do you mean they're in the process of revision water fluoridation recommendations? Based on what a bunch of looney right-win ... oh, I see. Stuff like https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10706776/ " Twenty-one of the 23 studies concluded that higher fluoride exposure was associated with lower intelligence." Yeah, but you can't trust scientists! They lie! And hey, remember those wingnuts who were all like "the vaccine will not prevent you from getting or spreading COVID!" HA! Thanks to safe & effective vaccine, only 94% of Americans got COVID! If those "special" people had their way, the rate would have been closer to 95%, or maybe even 96%! Well no thank you, conspiracy nuts, I'll stick to science. I mean, you know, the science that agrees with me! The rest of you can take your "own research" and stick it where the sun don't shine! You know, Seattle. Stick it there!

No, no, no, no, no, apparently you didn't get the memo, we're a FREE COUNTRY. We don't "raid homes" here, we have a 4th Amendment to protect against that kind of thing, and our rights are jealously guarded by a judiciary that does not trivially allow them to be trampled on without a damn good reason. Warrants only have something like a 99.6% approval rate which means that Heatblur would have a 0.4% chance of NOT being raided. Have faith in the integrity of your nation! Also, I bought a "game" on Steam called "Nuclear War Simulator" which attempts to accurately model the effects of various classes of nuclear weapons. To the best of my knowledge, he has hadn't any issues with the alphabet agencies. Honestly, it makes no sense that they would care. Nuclear-capable nations are already aware of what various yields do, hell, most of the scientific community knowns what various yields. They're even on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B28_nuclear_bomb (note to devs: there's your source for the "classified" information) Yes, the the data is "classified" all right. It's classified as "#@$% everyone already knows". Heatblur wouldn't be revealing any "secrets" and it's really unlikely that a bunch of random badmen are going to develop nukes + the platforms to deliver them. If they did, DCS would be the least of our problems, and I don't imagine DCS would either help or hinder them. Hell, that Star Wars game where people have to to drop a weapon in the Deathstar's ventilation shaft is a potential threat in that case. I may be wrong. Common sense is not our nation's strong suit, but I like to think some level of reason would prevail before the Heatblur guy had to worry about getting stovepiped in Leavenworth. At least I sure hope hope that's the case. Otherwise we'd really be swimming in a bag of horse excrement with our mouths wide open.

So they're classified, big deal, how hard would it be to take an educated guess at the yield and model a really, really big explosion? Are people really going to say, "wait a minute that bomb took out one tree too many ... I want a refund!" Okay, forget I asked that question. DCS fans can be an anal lot, and I could totally see that happening.

Nuclear weapons are destructive, obviously, but like almost everything, their destructive power is exaggerated. Over 2,000 nuclear detonations have happened on earth (some quite large), and here we all are. As it turns out, atmospheric ignition doesn't actually happen (fortunately for all of us). Despite these 2,000-ish detonations, instead of nuclear winter, people claim that we need to worry about global warming instead. The largest detonation ever, the Tsar Bomba, created a fireball with a radius if about 3 miles. Terrifying if you're in that three miles (or not since you won't know what hit you), but, for instance, the plane that dropped it landed safely. So while nuclear weapons are scary as hell, and they definitely will kill a massive number of people should they ever strike large cities en-masse, I don't think they will bring about the end of the world. Sure, they would end the mission in DCS, but who cares? Watching an enormous explosion coalesce into a mushroom cloud in the DCS environment would be so cool, that it would totally be worth having to reset the mission. I mean, it's a hell of a climax to a mission, that's for sure. It would be super-exciting to have them, and if you didn't immediately start creating missions for no other reason that to nuke random locations, then I weep for your loss of curiosity, creativity, and excitement. If we ever got (real) nukes, dare I say that I wouldn't sleep for a month as I set about nuking every village, town, city and tree in the sim. I'd make everyone I know watch along with me, and I would enjoy every single solitary last second of it. If anyone truly would not want it, I'd have to seriously question why they even use DCS in the first place, as the thing that sets DCS apart from MS Flight Sim, X-Plane, etc, is the fact that we can we can send our opponents hurtling toward the ground in a ball of fire, before turning his ground units into kindle and blowing nearby buildings to smithereens. Nukes are just a natural progression of this. If you don't want them, fair enough, don't use them. Don't take the option away from everyone else just because you don't see the point. If I spend all day playing 5 minute missions that begin and end with me blowing my opponents to kingdom come with a single warhead, then it means that is what I want to do. Yes, I'm still a 5 year-old mentally and I'm easily amused by things that go boom, but I already have a job and real-world problems, and if that's how I get my kicks then the more power to me, and you, and whomever else. DCS, make proper big nukes with the accompanying awe-inspiring visuals and I'll send you a blank check to fill in as you see fit. (not really, I'm making a point, but I'd probably pay a relatively decent amount for the pleasure) Anyway, that's my two cents and it's worth every penny. eh, plans change I once swore to everyone who would listen that I'd never have kids. Then I did. More than one! To be fair, the wife helped a little, but it goes to illustrate the point. Plans change.

Fixed: AI aircraft sometimes ignore bombing waypoint action. I don't know if this was just intended to fix the specific "bombing" action, but it has not effected "Attack Map Object" tasks. I just loaded up 10 Luftwaffe airplane groups with "Attack Map Object" actions in London, and armed them all with bombs. JU-88, Dora, and Antons. 1 of the 10 groups delivered it's bombs. The rest just flew over/near the targets and left.

It's almost impossible to pick favorites because I love each map for different reasons. There isn't one I could put at the bottom of a list. With that being said, I'm surprised to see Normandy near the bottom of yours. Especially with Normandy 2.0 having been released. It has both London and Paris, as well as the Eifel Tower, Arc Du Triumph, Mont St Michael, Westminster Abbey, Windsor Castle, Omaha Beach, to name just a few + tons of airfields, including dozens of temporary airfields. It's a spectacular map. And I can still max out the frames in VR. If you haven't flown it in awhile, I'd invite you to revisit it and see what they've done with it in the last couple of years.

Looks like it might be related to Tacview.

I've been getting a lot of CTDs lately, especially with missions that have a lot of ground units. Many times it doesn't write a track file too, because it's "skipped due to large size". The thing is 20MB is not very large at all. Isn't this a rather low limit to use for not writing a track file? 7382 2024-10-11 05:28:10.709 INFO APP (Main): E:\DCS\DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\Bf-109K-4\bin\Bf109K4.dll, 9667072 bytes, created 3:10:2024-4.34.31, written 3:10:2024-4.34.31, accessed 11:10:2024-5.28.11 7383 2024-10-11 05:28:10.709 INFO APP (Main): E:\DCS\DCS World OpenBeta\bin-mt\Jueves.dll, 2491904 bytes, created 3:10:2024-4.34.27, written 3:10:2024-4.34.27, accessed 11:10:2024-5.28.11 7384 2024-10-11 05:28:10.709 INFO APP (Main): try to write track file 7385 2024-10-11 05:28:11.691 INFO APP (Main): 'C:\Users\Rex\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Logs\dcs.20241011-052811.crash' deleted successfully 7386 2024-10-11 05:28:11.745 INFO APP (Main): 'C:\Users\Rex\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Logs\dcs.20241011-052811.dmp' deleted successfully 7387 2024-10-11 05:28:11.745 WARNING APP (Main): file 'C:\Users\Rex\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Tracks/LastMissionTrack.trk' skipped due to large size, 20.179279 MB Last Crash: 7038 2024-10-11 05:28:10.484 INFO EDCORE (Main): try to write dump information 7039 2024-10-11 05:28:10.487 INFO EDCORE (Main): # -------------- 20241011-052811 -------------- 7040 2024-10-11 05:28:10.488 INFO EDCORE (Main): DCS/2.9.8.1214 (x86_64; MT; Windows NT 10.0.22631) 7041 2024-10-11 05:28:10.490 INFO EDCORE (Main): E:\DCS\DCS World OpenBeta\bin-mt\lua.dll 7042 2024-10-11 05:28:10.491 INFO EDCORE (Main): # C0000005 ACCESS_VIOLATION at 00007fff7f18066c 00:00000000 7043 2024-10-11 05:28:10.492 INFO EDCORE (Main): SymInit: Symbol-SearchPath: 'E:\DCS\DCS World OpenBeta\bin-mt;', symOptions: 532, UserName: 'Rex' 7044 2024-10-11 05:28:10.493 INFO EDCORE (Main): OS-Version: 10.0.22631 () 0x100-0x1 7045 2024-10-11 05:28:10.495 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000001066c (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0x132C 7046 2024-10-11 05:28:10.496 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000010397 (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0x1057 7047 2024-10-11 05:28:10.497 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000010304 (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0xFC4 7048 2024-10-11 05:28:10.498 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000001003a (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0xCFA 7049 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000000fdfe (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0xABE 7050 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000013b0b (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0x47CB 7051 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000024c5 (lua): lua_settable + 0x25 7052 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000006f2bc1 (DCS): SW + 0x207B51 7053 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000006f3646 (DCS): SW + 0x2085D6 7054 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000001ee12 (edObjects): RegStorage::setHostID + 0x11F2 7055 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000020159 (edObjects): RegisterManager::Create + 0x8B9 7056 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000006f28ef (DCS): SW + 0x20787F 7057 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000006ee5 (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x4B5 7058 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000000689c (lua): lua_setlocal + 0x9FC 7059 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000070cf (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x69F 7060 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000006a9e (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x6E 7061 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000001c00 (lua): lua_pcall + 0x60 7062 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000188cb (tacview): (function-name not available) + 0x0 7063 2024-10-11 05:28:10.500 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000027f05 (tacview): luaopen_tacview + 0x38A5 7064 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000003413e (tacview): luaopen_tacview + 0xFADE 7065 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000024656 (tacview): (function-name not available) + 0x0 7066 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000006ee5 (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x4B5 7067 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000131cc (lua): luaS_newlstr + 0x3E8C 7068 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000068ab (lua): lua_setlocal + 0xA0B 7069 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000000070cf (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x69F 7070 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000006a9e (lua): luaD_growstack + 0x6E 7071 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000001c00 (lua): lua_pcall + 0x60 7072 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000078fd6 (edCore): ED_lua_pcall + 0x236 7073 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000007357d (edCore): Lua::Config::call_func + 0xED 7074 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000a6e33d (DCS): SW + 0x5832CD 7075 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000090cd05 (DCS): SW + 0x421C95 7076 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000009325b2 (DCS): SW + 0x447542 7077 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000008ecb04 (DCS): SW + 0x401A94 7078 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000008ee233 (DCS): SW + 0x4031C3 7079 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x00000000022990ad (DCS): AmdPowerXpressRequestHighPerformance + 0x120B0A9 7080 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x0000000000ccde52 (DCS): SW + 0x7E2DE2 7081 2024-10-11 05:28:10.501 INFO EDCORE (Main): 0x000000000001257d (KERNEL32): BaseThreadInitThunk + 0x1D 7082 2024-10-11 05:28:10.668 INFO EDCORE (Main): Minidump created.

Eh? In what way? I just flew the F-16 and the rudder worked great.

61 new military bases have been added: Syria 24 Israel 17 Jordan 5 Lebanon 15

Changed actions on 20 units from CAP to Intercept. Unfortunately, I'd had a previous en-route task attached, so when I tried to start the mission, I was greeted with a long list of errors. The Enroute Task that I have associated with the groups doesn't work with Intercept, and I knew the drill .... tedious manual delete of enroute task #1, manual delete of enroute task #2, manual delete of enroute task #3 and on and on. But it seemed rather unnecessarily tedious. After all, if the task doesn't work, there are two automatic actions that would seem to make way more sense. Either: 1) Delete It 2) Ignore it (possibly while highlighting it as an ignored task) The current forbid-save action is the word of all worlds. After all, if I ever wanted to change it back, it would be yet another tedious editing session. Being unable to save barring a lengthy editing session is definitely not a good thing, as it leaves us open to data loss. Can the ME just delete the actions if they don't work with the task type? Or barring that, silently ignore them, perhaps while highlighting them in red as it currently does? Sometimes the task types can be a little finicky, and it's not uncommon to have to play with them to get the desired activity out of the AI. Thank you.

Yeah, I see what you mean. And wow, it's impressive that you got away with the buttons for so long. I think, I did for like my first week. Honestly, it may be possible for the jets. I think you could got away with buttons for the F/A-18 maybe, assuming you don't use the rudder that much. In the case of the Kurfurst, I think you'd have to have analog control for the toe brakes because I'm modulating them until I'm airborne, and sometimes have both activated to some degree at the same time... 40% right, 10% left, or what have you and I subtly modulate them back and forth ... almost like stick movement during AA refueling. I don't really pay attention anymore. It's like walking, you just do it second nature without thinking now, but my hat definitely is off to anyone who can button-steer the 109. In fact, I think they should put "Requires Pedals" on the "Requirements" list for the plane so people realize how critical they are. Unless you trim out the plane in the main screen settings, you also need to ride the rudder a bit to keep the plane level (there's no in-plane aileron or rudder trim), so I work the pedals even once airborne. You could possibly get away with something like a twist-grip for rudder, though. After solely flying jets for a long time, I learned that I absolutely positively need two things to fly warbirds: 1) Good pedals 2) Force feedback stick Without #2 I couldn't fly piston planes. I pulled into a stall every single time, and I just abandon trying. Force-Feedback really opened up the genre for me. When I can feel that first hint of buffet, I know exactly how to make it do what I need. Without that feel, it's a completely different endeavor. It probably doesn't speak much for my skill that I am so inflexible and need relatively expensive gear just to get off the ground, but unfortunately, it's true. I need dedicated hardware controls for everything (I even have hardware MFDs) and as much tactile feedback as I can get or I'm useless. Oh who am I kidding ... I'm useless with them. Just slightly less so with the gear.

I don't think he's asking for them to change the flight model. I think he's expressing his difficulty with the controls. Honestly, I'm not sure I'd advocate changing anything from EDs point of view, but if someone is struggling, I'm not going to <profanity> on them for expressing their difficulties. I know the individual words in this sentence, but I don't fully understand the complete sentence. I THINK you're saying that I am a moderator and I am censoring you? If that is what you are saying then you are incorrect. I have no moderator permissions whatsoever in the DCS Forums. Frankly I'm not even sure how you came to this conclusion. I'm just a regular user, and relative to most of these other guys, I'm one of the newer members. In addition, I have never reported anyone or asked a moderator to moderate anyone. On any forum anywhere. I may not agree with you about everything, but I appreciate your point of view and would not do anything to limit it.

Indeed, if he had any sense, he'd save the anger for the forums of the game that he has no reason to get mad about. You have to forgive the flawed people, they haven't mastered this perfectly-directed-anger thing to the degree that you have. It clearly bothers you to see people get frustrated over things that don't bother you, which is much more legitimate than letting a game bother you. I mean it must be, since you do it.

Is empathy that hard to come by? I don't think it's that hard to understand the man's frustration. I don't think people recognize how integral pedals are to taildraggers, and if you're used to using a twist-stick to compensate, it must be very frustrating as the Kurfürst uses differential braking and not the rudders per-se. I'm sure that's taken a lot of people off-guard, but if you have a disability, it's gotta be frustrating as hell.

I was not aware of this, I honestly thought everyone had rudder pedals, as most of the aircraft and helicopters are patently unflyable without them. And since they are simulators, I figured they were necessary. I had not thought of the injuries that you spoke of. I guess that would call for somewhat creative solutions. Can you map the twist grip, so that when you twist it while pressing the SHIFT key, it instead operates the wheel brakes? I completely agree with you that it would be impossible to taxi the Kurfurst without pedals. I fly it every day, and have gotten decent with ground control, but if you took away my pedals, I'd be unable to do anything. So it's not anything that you're doing wrong, you're just trying to do the impossible. It would be possible if you could figure out some alternative, but the alternative must be analog, and not on/off.