gmangnall

Im a content creator and it can be hugely frustrating. I know the track feature is more complex...it replays all inputs from joysticks etc and literally replays the mission just as you flew it based on your control inputs which are recorded...good for bugs and trouble shooting, but any randomisation throws it off. But surely you could take the position data that tacview has and apply the DCS models to that data. You would still need some of the data from track files for example to tell the model to put it's gear/flaps down but much of it could be discarded such as HUD brightness...and more importantly throttle stick and rudder positions....all that data replaced with the tacview style data to calculate where stuff is. Never gonna happen though is it.

We all know trackfile replays are unreliable for replays and I think most of us understand why, however Tacview IS typically reliable in regards to aircraft, vehicle and weapons locations. Could DCS not scrap trackfiles for replays and instead just model replays on the same data that tacview uses? Obviously track files are still needed for bug and fault finding. Maybe an option in the menu to enable/disable both replays AND trackfiles for performance reasons so you could enable both or disable both if you wished.

I know replays are not 100% reliable, however it would be really cool if you could fly a mission, save the track file and then fly the same mission in another aircraft with the track file replaying your original flight. Initially I though this would be a godsend for making videos, however it has the potential for incredible SP (and even MP) missions.

SA-10 is hitting targets which are masked from the track radar....as if it were active homing, however the RWR remains silent. Maybe it magically transitions it IR guidance? SA10 kill.trk

It would be nice if it were possible to move individual units in a group using tactical command even if not driveable. For example an SA11 TEL. You can move the group but only deploy to the standard formations. It would be good to be able to position the units individually......even if whole group movement remained the same i.e. when moving the group leader they all fall into echelon, vee etc.

Just in time as I am being the bad guy using CA SA8 and SA15s this weekend.

I never have an issue

There are some superb shots here - I particularly like the Phantom over Marianas, Apaches near the pyramids, the Hind and the Apaches leading the tanks....there is only one picture which doesn't seem to warrant being here.....and that's the winner! How on earth did that win?

I cannot believe this is a decision made by OnReTech. Their hand must have been forced.

Again the video shows the skeet missing most of the time...that's the issue...it's far too accurate. Also an improved damage model would help. We need more than the command and conquer style damage bar. A tank should have at least track, gun, turret and hull as separate entities...ideally engine, optics as well. It would be soooo much better if you could hit a track so a tank cannot move - but can fire...or vice versa. Killing one crewman would slow down firing, killing all crew would stop it.

The EFP in a BLU108 is more than capable of penetrating the top armour of most if not all tanks, it's copper EFP could possibly penetrate 500mm RHA - but probably much less as NLAW with twice the size warhead can only do 500mm...even so teh top armour of say a T72 is around 200mm...it's not capable of penetrating the glacis plate. More importantly is capable of missing most of the time. Your vid is a computer generated video showing "how it's supposed to work", my video is actual film of it in real life.....not quite the same as we see in game.....and you can CLEARY see them missing and bouncing off the armour the only part which looks like it might have got a mission kill is 36 in where a tank with it's turret turned gets hit. Now these vehicles have no fuel or ammunition on board to brew up but irrespective there seems zero correlation between what we see in DCS and this. Your own video even states that it's good against light armour and the softer parts of an MBT. Can a CBU-105 kill a tank...probably.....but not the mass destruction we see in DCS.

Yes - very overpowered IMO

I am getting direct hits with a sidearm, sometimes it damages a target such as a snowdrift, sometimes it destroy is - but often there is zero damage. Even if damaged it's usually not enough to disable the radar. Oh and the sidearm turns north if fired without a lock.

I know it doesn't work that way....however I cannot imagine that this would be a priority for any member of staff.

Because if ED spent 30 seconds implementing this - it would be 30 seconds spend NOT doing something useful like fixing the actual game. Don't get me wrong - it would be cool to have - but uncool to spend any effort on until a thousand other important things are resolved.

The mission editor is an utter shambles which needs a complete overhaul....and you want custom liveries on bombs lol.

We desperately need some capability to have pseudo realistic ground combat. It's not possible to have infantry defending against light armour such an an aav. They just stand there and die without even firing (they fire at some armoured vehicles). There is no infantry anti tank capability except a Russian RPG. Units make no attempt to flee or take cover. In open fields the unit with the longest range almost always wins as they just shoot and kill the enemy who stand and die. tank vs tank, infantry vs infantry combat or even tank vs infantry combat takes time.....in DCS it's over in a minute or two unless you do some clever scripting to slow it down. It makes real CAS missions impossible.

I have a solution which might work for you. I created a farp with no ammo - 327ft behind my Harrier which is 1ft inside the zone. I have send in my chinook which drops off a crate and the chinooks arrival triggers a humvee to enter the farp zone allowing me to take the wheelchocks off the Harrier at which point I use a audio/speech file to prompt the pilot to move to the re-arming area....which is another invisilble farp >328ft infront of the start location. As you roll forward you leave the old farp and into the new one....which has a few select weapons available. Perfect....well it is for me. My humvee/wheelchock fudge wont work for a helo..but maybe you could instead have your helo with no fuel so it cannot fly at the start...of just an instruction to fly to a slightly different area for re-arming.

Following. I am trying to do the same. I have an idea to fudge something by driving the necessary vehicles in to make the FARP work ....but ED in their wisdom have made FARPs fully self contained so you no longer need command bunkers, etc etc etc.

Pay their employees with what? ED have their money.

Sidearm goes dumb on launch and turns anti clock wise unless at the point of launch the sidearm gets a lock on a radar. Even if this is a deliberate change to prevent lock on after launch, there seems no reason why the missile should turn anti clockwise. Additionally Sidearm should "pop up" and not fly in a straight line ..usually into the ground in DCS.

There is an easy fix....PAY RAZBAM. Harrier, Mirage and F-15E all broken now.

Surely it could carry troops - especially if there are no weapons....it would open up a whole world of cool missions like SF inserts and extractions.

Probably not the biggest priority - and probably hard to fix.....but if it is easy to fix this would be nice for video makers......the rain simply passes through water as per the screenshot.

how do I crease smoked glass for the Harrier. I have a AV8_T10.dds file which works (copied from another skin), however if I make any changes to it in photoshop it goes from tinted glass to solid black. The source file does not seem to have an alpha channel (that i know of) Is there an option when exporting to DDS? Any ideas welcome.