Rex

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.

I don't think I'd be able to fly the Kurfurst with buttons for braking. It's my primary plane and I fly it every day, but I very rarely, if ever, fully lock a brake unless I'm trying to turn while going slow. I have pedals and rarely step on them all the way. After landing and getting down below 50kph or so, I never press both at the same time because, yes, it will nose-plant at relatively slow speeds. To stop quickly, I walk the brakes left - right - left - right quickly oscillating back and forth, about 1/2 - 3/4ths strength, while making sure never to step on the both at the same time. If I stepped on one or the other 100%, I imagine I'd get the same behavior your experienced. Unfortunately, these things are too nuanced to to use off/on controls unless you can figure out a way to do it very quickly, and average the force out over time. I'd imagine that would take a lot of practice, though. You mentioned that you can't step on pedals, you can probably emulate pedals with the pinkie switch or one of the analog joystick controls. Maybe even the twist-grip of the joystick if you have one, left for left brake, right for right brake, as long as it's analog, you could probably make it work.

I'm probably the most reliable defender of DCS on the forums, whether DCS is on the right or wrong, but this is the one issue where you lose me. I own all of the maps and probably 75% of the aircraft in DCS, so I'm in for over $1,000 which has been money well-spent. With that being said, having that $1K entirely dependent on the auth server being up - transfers 100% of your infrastructure risk to me ... while enjoying 0% of it's control or ability to rectify it. Alas, I already have a job, I already have ample responsibilities, none of which I make ED share. I would appreciate the reciprocation of not placing me squarely in the crosshairs every time you guys have a server glitch. Frankly, I've grown tired of auth server roulette, and never wanted to play in the first place. Worse still, I'm losing with ever-increasing frequency. This is not acceptable.

FWIW, if I drop into F10 before it crashes, and give the unit another waypoint while the mission is in-progress. he will pull out of the dive and abort the suicide attempt. It may just be a matter of knowing that somebody cares.

I'm writing a large Nevada Map mission which is not yet complete, but after downloading the new version of DCS today, I did notice something immediately. In the mission I have a KJ-2000 performing AWACS, with a single waypoint, and that waypoint has only two actions: 1. AWACS -a 2. Orbit(H) = Hwpt = 30840 ft) In a circular orbit. When I started the mission, the aircraft immediately went into a nearly 90 degree vertical dive, and explodes agains the desert floor. I started the mission again and it did the same thing. I solved it by giving it a Racetrack, but just fyi.

The screen shots were to illustrate that the groups don't show up in the 'Attack Group' dialog, I don't actually spawn them over the guns and expect them to fire. Not sure I understand. Are you saying it's intentional? FWIW, the FLAK units in the missions in question don't have route points and are configured to be in Alarm State: RED at start.

Thank you so much! P.S. In my case, I found that parameter in V1_Missle.lua

Ground-based Air Defense has been exhibiting significantly reduced fire, and in most cases, no fire at all. You also can no longer order AAA/SAM batteries to fire from the Mission Editor any more, because the presence of aircraft in the mission is not acknowledged by, for instance, the "Attack Group" dialog. (see images) It's also impossible to order them to fire as Game Master from the F10 menu when a mission is in-progress. The "Add Target" button is frozen. Every now and then, if I have a battery of say, 6 guns, one ... maybe two will randomly fire at a passing aircraft, but it's sporadic and non-predictable and the majority of guns will stay silent. Map & Era seem to not make a difference. All pictured units are active at mission start. (no late activations) Open Beta version 2.9.6.57650

Ah, those are warnings. I'm not sure what the "limit" denotes, well, I take that back, it has to be degrees of slope as that's the only thing that makes sense. If the parenthesis are the acceptable limit then I wonder why the first one is warning. Maybe 9 degrees is close enough to 10 to warn. Anyway, thanks.

I've seen them after the new update, but I have no idea what they mean.

The thing under the dashboard on the lower-left, near the left pedal, that looks vaguely like an oil filter ... sometimes it continues "vibrating" even after engine dies/is turned off.

Fair enough, thank you On a related note, what percentage of K-4 pilots flew without MW50? During the Battle of Normandy, from the little of been able to find since the Luftwaffe wasn't a huge factor, it seems like most planes were able to come up with the 30.4 gallons of MW50 (15.2 gallons being the more scarce Methanol). So even though there weren't many 109s in the Normandy skies, those that were present appeared to almost always have MW50 ... again, from what I've been able to discern. Don't tell anyone, but the truth is, I wasn't actually there.

Hey guys, my rocket keeps launching then immediately crashing into the ground. Any ideas?

Does anyone else have to suppress a childish laugh every time they hear "Biggen Hill" mentioned? Or rather, would anyone else admit to it?

These are awesome! Thank you!

I know that the Reich had control of the field with ground units, but were Luftwaffe planes actually based at Carpiquet in June 1944? It seems unlikely that they would be flying planes in and out of the field once the ALG B-x fields started being built nearby. Although it would have been interesting if the Germans were flying out of Carpiquet while the Allies were flying out of Rucqueville. It would have been like, instant AA engagement, and you'd practically be in each other's FLAK range as soon as you got airborne. I've studied everything I could get my hands on, and from my non-expert analysis, the Normandy 2.0 Map is showing a representation of Normandy as it existed somewhere between July 20 - August 31 1944. I found a few online resources but I still struggle to find a good accounting of which and how many planes were operating where in June 1944, and this is especially true of German planes. Does anyone know of any good books or resources I could get my hands on? Thanks.

I got "scammed" (I guess opinions will vary on the definition) via Steam, and they didn't do a thing for me. Basically, someone was selling an app, and I thought it was mostly complete, albeit in Early Access. Turns out it was a "developer preview" that was being launched in "a year or so", and they were offering it up at the outset to raise funds. I was really annoyed, but they assured everyone that we were getting a big loyalty discount by purchasing early and that it would be way more on official launch, yada yada. Well, after taking my money (and lots of others I'm sure), they simply walked away from the project, leaving us with, essentially, nothing. It took several months until we realize it had been abandoned, though, and Steam said that since it was over 30 days from purchase, I could go <evacuate> in my hat. Even though it was clearly a ruse. From their perspective, the dev may have made a legitimate effort to finish it, but honestly, not much of one. Some devs are using Steam as essentially a Kickstarter clone, but as it stands, Steam won't do a damn thing for you. Personally, I've always bought direct from ED because I don't want to give ED 30% less for their products. That's a significant slice of the pie. Also, ED has always had great sales, and have been generous with the Frequent Flyer Miles, and over the years they've given me a couple of really good models, completely for free. Yet another reason I would never refund a plane. They've already given me a couple of free ones. Even if I lose on the F-15E, I still come out ahead. I do take your point, though. It is a person-by-person thing.

Whoa, with 10 choices, I didn't think one map would get over 50%. That's decisive. I like Syria too. I think it's a great map. I like pretty much all of them, though. What is it about Syria that makes it so many people's favorite?

Refunds? Geez, has it gotten that bad already? I just learned about all of this today and it breaks my heart. That said, even if they never release another update for it, I've gotten my money's worth from the F-15E this past year, and I wouldn't accept a refund if ED begged me to take it. There is no other company that does was ED does and if anything happened to them, it would significantly impact the quality of my life. They could send me a bucket of dog turds and I wouldn't refund it. Anyway, you realize that if you get a refund, you may not be able to get the plane back? I mean, even if development stops, it's already pretty damn good, and it'll continue working for probably quite some time, and if you refund it, and they pull it from the store, you have no Strike Eagle. Not trying to be flippant, I grew up poor and I well know what it's like not to have money, but we're not talking enough money to pay the rent with. What's the rush? Right now, it's just a possibility that you'll lose the plane. If you refund it, it's a guarantee. Food for thought I suppose. I really hope this can be resolved. I sure hope it's not hopeless.

I have a 5120 x 1440 monitor, and anytime I want to view something in the mission editor, external view, or encyclopedia, it feels like my face is mashed up against it. I've always been perplex as to why everything is so incredibly zoomed in to the point that you don't always know what you're looking at. They have these beautiful models, but you can't easily see the whole thing. "What is this? Hmmmm, let me scroll right for awhile .... more .... more .... (one week later) ... I see a win .... keep scrolling .... Christmas comes around, oh look, it's a Mig29, how lovely!" Okay, I exaggerate, slightly, but you get the point. Fellas, if you need to be that close to things to see then, it may be time to schedule an eye appointment. Alas, it's not a one time thing. After scrolling out, the moment you change units, it automatically switches back to Mister Magoo mode, and you have to start all over again. I have to scroll out out out each and every time. I set the default to 140 degrees in the settings, but this has had no effect. Sweet mother of mercy, please tell me there is a way to permanently set the field of view to something a little more sane. I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me how to do this.