Dangerzone

Strongly suggest sticking with Skatezillaz DCS Updater for launching DCS still. It’s been doing a terrific job at launching DCS with different configurations for ages and it’s pretty solid/reliable.

lol. Sorry, I meant ED. Typo. Crazy, since I haven’t purchased an EA title in over a decade.

EDIT: Apparently this is no longer a viable solution. It seems ED have broken this as well, without giving us the option that we need. Sounds like the solution at the moment is to "hurry up and hope & wait" for ED to get around to implementing something that actually works properly. OK - I've found one way for this to be successful - but it requires 'hacking' the DCS install. I'm not sure whether this is just a server side thing (if so, it may mean that us mission hosters may be able to have dynamic spawning on dynamically spawned FARPS moving forward)! It involves editing the Scripts\ui\MultiplayerSelectRoleMap\MultiplayerSelectDynamicDialog.lua file, and commenting out certain IF statements so that the dynamic spawn will spawn regardless. (Note: This has the sideeffect that dynamic spawn will always be available for all airfields, as it ignores the dynamic spawn true/false in the mission file). I'm hoping there's a more eloquent way of achieving this that doesn't involve modifying (hacking) the .lua file on the server. function getAllDynamicsAirdromes() airdromes = Terrain.GetTerrainConfig("Airdromes") local dynamicsAirdromes = {} for i, v in pairs(airdromes) do local settings = DCS.getDynamicSpawnSettings(i, true) --if settings.dynamicSpawnAvailable == true then base.table.insert(dynamicsAirdromes, i) --end end return dynamicsAirdromes end function isDynamicSpawnAllowForAirbase(airbaseId, isAirdrome) -- local settings = DCS.getDynamicSpawnSettings(airbaseId, isAirdrome) -- if settings and settings.dynamicSpawnAvailable == true then return true -- end -- return false end function getDynamicsAirdromes(coalition) local dynamicsAirdromes = {} airdromes = Terrain.GetTerrainConfig("Airdromes") for i, value in pairs(DCS.getAirdromesCoalition()) do airdromesCoalitions[value.airdromeId] = coalitionIndices[value.coalition] end for i, v in pairs(airdromes) do local settings = DCS.getDynamicSpawnSettings(i, true) --if settings and settings.dynamicSpawnAvailable == true and coalition == airdromesCoalitions[i] then if settings and coalition == airdromesCoalitions[i] then v.airdromeId = i v.airbaseType = _('Airfield') base.table.insert(dynamicsAirdromes, v) end end return dynamicsAirdromes end function getDynamicsFarpsAndCarriers(coalition) local farpsAndCarriersData = {} local addFunc = function(data, airbaseType) for i, v in pairs(data) do local settings = DCS.getDynamicSpawnSettings(i, false) --if settings and settings.dynamicSpawnAvailable == true and coalition == v.coalition then if settings and coalition == v.coalition then v.unitId = i v.airbaseType = airbaseType base.table.insert(farpsAndCarriersData, v) end end end local farpsAndCarriers = DCS.getFarpsAndCarriersMissionData() addFunc(farpsAndCarriers.farps, _('Heliport')) addFunc(farpsAndCarriers.carriers, _('Aircraft carrier')) return farpsAndCarriersData end

I've managed to find a 'hack' to do this, but not sure if there's a more elegant way. By changing the 'warehouse' file within the .miz file I can replace all references of: ["dynamicSpawn"] = false, with ["dynamicSpawn"] = true, Likewise, it might also pay to replace ["unlimitedAircrafts"] = false, with ["unlimitedAircrafts"] = true,

Hi, Just wondering if there's a quick way to enable Dynamic spawning at all airbases and FARPS or if we need to go through individually and assign them. I couldn't find anything in the ME. Just wondering if there's a way to enable it through LUA/script?

Thanks, but I’m not talking about ED miles. That works. I’m talking about store credit (which is separate). I didn’t see an option to use it, but I did see an option to use ED miles.

Hi, I have the following code below. Using the F10 menu, that allows a player in a helicopter can create a FARP 100m in front of them. (This is just for testing at the moment). The problem I have, is when the new FARP is created, it doesn't appear to be available in the dynamic spawn slot list. I can see the original static FARP created via the ME in the dynamic spawn list, but not the newly created FARP. I have attached a working copy of the mission - to replicate simply start a multiplayer server, spawn into the UH-1 and choose spawn farp from the F10 menu. Thanks & Regards DZ -- Define the function to create a static FARP at a given position function createFARP(position) local farp = { ["category"] = "Heliports", ["shape_name"] = "FARP", -- Full FARP shape name ["type"] = "FARP", ["unitId"] = mist.getNextUnitId(), -- Ensure this function is available in your environment ["x"] = position.x, ["y"] = position.z, -- Note: 'y' in DCS is actually the z-axis for world coordinates ["name"] = "Spawned FARP", ["heading"] = 0, ["dead"] = false, ["dynamicSpawn"] = true, } coalition.addStaticObject(country.id.USA, farp) end -- Define the function to get player coordinates, display them with an offset, and create a FARP function getPlayerCoordinates(unit) if unit then local unitPosition = unit:getPosition().p local unitOrientation = unit:getPosition().x -- Normalize the forward vector local forwardVector = { x = unitOrientation.x, y = unitOrientation.y, z = unitOrientation.z } local length = math.sqrt(forwardVector.x^2 + forwardVector.y^2 + forwardVector.z^2) forwardVector.x = forwardVector.x / length forwardVector.y = forwardVector.y / length forwardVector.z = forwardVector.z / length -- Apply the 100m offset local offsetPosition = { x = unitPosition.x + forwardVector.x * 100, y = unitPosition.y + forwardVector.y * 100, z = unitPosition.z + forwardVector.z * 100 } -- Display the offset coordinates local lat, lon, alt = coord.LOtoLL(offsetPosition) trigger.action.outTextForUnit(unit:getID(), string.format("Your offset coordinates:\nLatitude: %.6f\nLongitude: %.6f\nAltitude: %.1f meters", lat, lon, alt), 10) -- Create the FARP at the offset position createFARP(offsetPosition) else trigger.action.outText("Unit not found.", 10) end end -- Add the F10 menu for a group function addF10MenuForGroup(group) if group then for i = 1, #group:getUnits() do local unit = group:getUnit(i) if unit then missionCommands.addCommandForGroup(group:getID(), "Get Offset Coordinates and Create FARP", nil, getPlayerCoordinates, unit) end end end end -- Iterate over all groups and add the F10 menu function addF10MenuForAllPlayers() local coalitionGroups -- Process helicopter groups for both sides coalitionGroups = coalition.getGroups(coalition.side.BLUE, Group.Category.HELICOPTER) for i = 1, #coalitionGroups do addF10MenuForGroup(coalitionGroups[i]) end end -- Schedule the menu addition do addF10MenuForAllPlayers() end DynamicFarp.miz

That's encouraging for us who are waiting to get the crystal light that doesn't have DFR.

I think I recalled somewhere that we could expect more information and video's closer to the release date. I haven't seen either yet, so I wasn't expecting it to be released with this patch. I'll start getting a little excited once I hear Wes's familiar voice saying "Hey everybody".

Maybe there's a chance then that they may still bring back this feature with cows too... (I'm kinda hoping that what they did to break it is for all the units, and when they fix it, it may just flow through to cows too... Forever hopeful )

Hi, I just purchased a module update today (FC). I have credit in my account, but I never got the chance to apply the credit to my purchase. It allowed me the option to apply ED Miles, but then took me straight to my credit card details, and withdrew the funds from my c/card account. I'm not too worried about getting this order changed as I plan on buying more modules in the near future that I can use my credit on, but was just wondering what is the trick to using existing credit in the EA store. (I'm talking about credit for module refunds, not ED miles)? Cheers DZ

Thanks. I appreciate the vote of confidence, but there is no way to apply. It’s by invitation only, and I believe they have more than they need anyway at the moment.

Actually, the idea of Open Beta as I understand it - is to give users an Open Beta version for testing - not to have access to features earlier if you're happy with the bugs. Yes - some may use it for game play, but that wasn't the intended purpose. I too would love to see Open Beta and a Release version, as I would love to be able to test out the new features with my current missions and scripts, and have time to work on (or give feedback of bugs) prior to it actually going to the live main missions and servers - you know, use open beta for actual beta testing like I used to... But ... ED tried that, and it failed. More people used Open Beta, not for testing but actual game play. Then more server owners switch to Open Beta for their main servers because more people wanted features sooner. Then more players went to Open Beta servers because that's where most of the players are. Then ED had to recommend a 'beta' version for new players to use for multiplayer because there were too fewer serves on Stable release in comparison. Then players got upset that there were bugs in the Open Beta version because it was their 'main' install for playing even though it was labelled Beta. There are plenty of complaints on this forum about people upset with the bugs in Open Beta because it was effectively the main version. Then for the few of us remaining on stable for primary gaming and using open beta for testing (as designed)... well, the actual release cycles got further delayed out sometimes to 3 or 4 months to a point where we were either left way behind, or compelled to switch to Open beta. It was a deadly spiral that was only getting worse with each passing month. So, while I would love to see Open Beta returned as Open Beta and see it treated as a true "Beta" test version, I know it's not practical because it won't be treated as a "Beta" test version. Even the replies here seem to indicate that people want it because they want the features sooner, not because they're willing to do actual beta testing, or provide proper bug reports. (With tracks, etc). So, I think ED have made the best choice under the current circumstances, where beta users are vetted to those who actually will use it for "Beta" testing purposes - so we don't run into the same issues we had again previously. Yes - this sucks for me as well, because I too, am outside of that closed beta circle - and though I would really love to do some scripting on the new features soon to be released both to have scripts ready on release day, and beta test missions to know that they're going to work with the new changes on the day of release (the real reason for a beta version), if it's between having what we had a year ago , vs what we have now - I'll take what we have now.

Aaah - I believe external views have a different model of the cockpit along with the rest of the airframe. I think you'll find that the MDF's, etc aren't showing what you'd see when you're in a F1 view as well. The only way to get that sort of high quality video I believe is with the F1 view and doing some fancy stuff to change your view angle, etc. I believe you can change your view by holding down Right CTRL+ALT and using the numpad (if I recall correctly - I'm not at my PC to double check) - which allows you to get down low, etc. As for how to move the camera ever so slowly though in a particular direction, that I'm not sure of sorry.

Nodak got it right. Only thing I'll add - you can't have too many options. You don't need to use them, but there could be a reason that someone else wishes to use a different sharpening reason that's not relevant to us. I'll always accept more options than less.

LOL - it wasn't just me confused by the revival of this thread by a post that seems unrelated. i mean... I've heard insurance companies are becoming keen to gather more information, by paying vehicle repair shops in the states to put in GPS tracking into vehicles without the owners knowledge/consent but had no idea that they were going as far to be interested in what tree's we're being removed by FARPS in DCS.

Thanks for confirming the crystal is the same. Sounds like I’ll have the same issue with the Pimax as the Reverb then. It’s not MDFs that are forwards that I’m concerned about. It’s the CNIs like in the Chinook or C130 when they’re in the centre console near your thigh that are difficult. I strain looking at the radio in the F14. That’s not too because it’s for a brief moment, but having to put in an entire flight plan, etc is going to give a stiff neck. In MSFS you can toggle between 2D and VR while in game, so if you’re going to spend 5+ minutes entering things in there’s relief DCS doesn’t have this and VR neck safer also won’t fix this unfortunately. Maybe the crystal light with its wider FOV will help not have to strain my neck as much but without DFR I’m still skeptical that I’ll have to look more centre view and thus twist my neck more than IRL.

Thanks, if you use the VR centre that you’ve highlighted there in VR while looking up and you stay looking up, does that mean you’re looking directly straight ahead in the cockpit? Because for me in the HP reverb I would still be looking up. It would resent my left right and forward backward axis but not my up-and-down axis. And I don’t know if that is a WMR thing or a HP thing and if it will be different with the Pimax.

Yes - you can pick them up, take them above a certain height, and drop them. They will be destroyed because they were dropped from too-high a height.

Hi Flappy. Yes - it was possible back then to know if a cow was hit, or killed. I never played ARMA, so I'm not sure what you're referring to there sorry. I built a whole fun don't-take-it-too-seriously gag mission based on having to engage enemy troops while sparing cattle which broke back when cows were first released, that we used from time to time for fun, (that was received more popular than I expected) until it got broke with a DCS update in 2022. I've been having some people in my squadron ask when it's going to be returning. I've been waiting since then until then for DCS to fix it so I can continue with it. I get that they're not tactical, but I thought since the event_dead event used to work, that it was a bug when it stopped working (and then I thought I had confirmation when event_dead was broken on other statics too). I even came up while waiting with a secondary 'silly' idea for a silly night with my squadron with cows again, that I even made a make-shift trailer for that as I know some people loved the quirkiness of some of these more casual/quirky nights and weird ideas. (Things I do when I don't have enough sleep and get weird humour ) I figured since EVENT_DEAD used to work with cows, that it was originally intended and only temporarily broken - not deliberately removed (as I know it can take quite some time for bugs to be fixed ). But, If, as you're saying - it's a deliberate decision by ED to remove event_dead from cows and it will not be returning, I'll discard the mission and my scripting so I'm not waiting in vain for it to be fixed, and tell the guys that the farm mission won't be able to come back again, so to stop asking. Thanks for all your help with this.

Thanks for the quick response. Just to confirm, cows (which was working prior to December 2022) will nownever be fixed / returned to their original functionality? That there has been a decision to permanently change the way cows work, and it's going to be impossible to know whether or not they have been killed/hit moving forward?

Are you sure? That sounds like a lot of bull to me. But then again, maybe I should rethink because damaging lots of cows could lead to a cowtastrophie!

I'm talking about recentering vertically. DCS recenters on 2 axis. The left/right axis, and the forward/back axis. It doesn't recenter on the vertical, or tilt axis, hence my original question as to whether something is possible.

The UH-1 slowly creeps forward on the Tarawa, and eventually will crash into the ocean if it's not started up and airborne in time. Track file attached shows the bug in action. Cheers UH-1 Bug.trk

Hey Flappie - you wouldn't happen to know if this is being addressed in the next update would you please?