gmangnall

Ramon airbase hangar 61 has a tree in it..and OVDA airbase has 3 parking areas with number 100 - and no 98 or 99.

Thank you....I now feel dumb

JTAC appears to be broken. Works fine on the Hornet, A-10, Viper, F5 and F14 so I assume that this is a Harrier only issue in which you cannot get JTAC/AFAC via the F10 menu. JTAC broken.trk

I cannot find any way for the AI to fire HOT3 missiles. They fire rockets and I can set up AH-1 an dAH-64 to fire Hellfire....but not HOT3

rather amusinglyt I set up a test. 2 M109s one with an FC and one without.. All 3 rounds were as close or closer and the 3rd rond wa a direct hit.....without the FC

Yes there is towed artillery in the WW2 assets pack

In Combined Arms if you look at a target without optics it shows true bearing but if you look through optics it shows magnetic. This is clearly confusing. They should surely be the same...and labelled....ideally switchable.

Units with ATGM capability eg Javelin, NLAW, Karl Gustav, and especially Redfor ones such as Kornet and the Chinese HJ-12. Also playable infantry JTAC

Hi Patricio. The ground units seem to be much harder to kill than the default ED infantry units so if a bomb goes off the ED soldiers die and your gronud units stay standing. Is there a LUA entry which I can tweak?

Each flight of 4 or so aircraft on each channel...so if you have a strike package of say 12 aircraft in 3 flights of 4 aircraft. there will be 3 frequencies. then seperate frequencies for AWACS, JTAC etc. Im surprised aircraft dont all have 3 radios. 1 for flight, 1 for guard and a 3rd for comms to other flights/jtac etc.

I don't think very many - if any are correct. I think ED need ot start from scratch. What we need though is consistency. As soon an an engine starts there should be visibility.

The problem with physics is it takes a lot of computing power so you have to take shortcuts for less important things. 20 years ago thats why we had primitive hit based damaged models.....which DCS still has now. FLIR is important but can be "faked" well enough without doing physicals modelling which is likely to be far too intensive for CPUs 100% This have baked implementation is the worst possible situation....unless you are making a You Tube video to sell a few copies of Apache

I have added a TRK file and several screen shots. I have a column of tanks, apcs and trucks. The close up of the truck has clearly visible tryes irrespective of hot or cold start. The close up of the T-90 is virtually invisible irrespective of hot or colt start. With the wider view you can see 6 vehicles in TV mode but only 3 in FLIR. Having the hot start fixed in the next patch is going to be a big improvement.....but there is still the issue of some models. As I said a T-90 is almost invisilbe when cold....which is fair enough. Ural 375 has hot wheels.....whereas a Zil135 seems to show white hot instead of black hot. Then we have dust trails clearly visible....but only on wheeled vehicles and not tracked vehicles After 5 minutes running most tanks can barely be seen with just a little heat from the engine deck (far harder to see than a dust trail)....hot exhaust should sufely be immediately visible and more so than a dust trail. Even after 10 minutes it's hard to see the T-90 but it's becoming visible. These are all from the Harrier as it's got the clearest display but it's the same in the viper etc. I understand the ambition...but we need to have consistency. This should never have been rushed out for the Apache. I love DCS but this seems to sum up EDs decision making which seems to prioritise things which can be put on a You Tube video for the latest module and hell to what's actually good for the game and the old model is actually better then the current half implemented & inconsistent system. There appears to be no common sense applied. Tank engine firing up obviously gives out heat. A vehicle driving at 10mph isn't going to kick up dust visible from further away than the tank exhaust. Accuracy and realism is great...but consistency is more important. FLIR test.trk

Lets be honest the new FLIR system is utterly ludicrous. Some vehicles like the T-90 are impossible to see - they start cold irrespective of if they are ticked to start cold and even when hot are nigh on invisible. - whilst some vehicles (esp trucks) can be seen from the moon. It was better then we had the old model as at least it was consistent. The current system is an utter joke. Either get all models working correctly or none. Here is a video of FLIR looking at a rabbit (10:06) and we cannot see a tank!

If the harrier can carry it then it should be allowed. Limiting to what the USMC use seems ludicrous. You can edit the LUA file to allow the odl loadouts - but it fails IC

Yup - something is very very broken....and if a Viper is near to ann explosion....fuel leak...but just the viper. I can fire Zuni rockets and normal rockets no problem. APWKS guided rockets....same as mavericks. ED seem to have the resources to add new features which look good on You Tube...but cannot be bothered fixing the actual game - that doesn't sell copies does it.

This is a must have mod and everyone should at least consider making a donation.....but Patricio...the pointing ground crew; can we have one pointing the other way (or am I missing something)

I previously made a donation - and have donated again for this update. Well done patricio #Pukin-Dog

Hi Grimes the late activation option works a treat!!!! Thank you!!!! I might take a look at the LUA option though I utterly suck at coding. Id have to read on how to define a table....but I am sure that's jsut about within my capability

Magic - why didnt I think of that (late activation of players). Thank you for both suggestions - I will give them a try

Thank you Grimes!!!!! But back to my original question..... what I'd like is for the condition to check if a flag exists (at mission start). What I am looking to achieve is to set up say 4 SAM sites but only one of them be created so if flag1=true SAM 1 gets created and if flag 2=2 only sam2 is created....but I have to use this condition becasue I only actually want the threat rings creating. Once that's created I will (in some random cases but not all) delete the SAM and move it elsewhere (e.g. simulating bad intel). Is there code I can put in theh condition to achieve this?

If you set it at 50% the unit will appear at full health.....half the time. The other half it will not spawn.. I have read the documention and for a unit to spawn - BOTH conditions must be met......one condition being "the condition" and the other being the %

@TJTAS - that doesn't do what I need it to. Your suggestion kinda works, however it will show the threat rings for both SAMs even if only one gets activated. The only way to ensure that a threat ring is created (or not) is via the group condition @Exorcet As above - it doesn't solve that I am trying to achieve. @ADHS - if you put the group condition as 0% the unit will not be created.

The percantage is most defintely the chance of spawning and not the unit health. For a unit to spawn it needs to meet both the condition (if set) and the percentage. I have used the condition to activate a trigger AFTER mission start e.g. activating a flag.

You are completely missing what I am trying to do. The code I need isn't in the triggers section of the editor. It's in the group section. When you create a group in the editor you can set the unit, callsign waypoints etc. Near to the top of that screen there is a field for "condition" and one for %. If you leave the condition blank and the % as 100 the unit will be created at the start of the mission. If set at 50% then there will be a 50% chance that the unit is created (not 50% every second). I am tryng to populate this field such that if flag1=1 (set at mission start via the usual triggers) the unit is created and if flag1 doesn't =1 then the unit is not created. null nullImage shows the condition field I am talking about