gnomechild

Hello, not sure if this is a known issue already being looked at, but when doing helicopter sling loading online, there is a very high probability for the crate to teleport to a distant location right after its unhooked. It usually ends up underground. I don't have any useful tracks since this only happens online and I haven't set up an online mission short enough to get this in one track. I have lots of videos I will upload as well as some of the output from a script on my server that tracks the cargo location returned from the :getPoint() method on the static object. Here are some examples of the issue: Crate_Teleport.mp4 Crate Vanished.mp4 For that second video, this was the last recorded location of the crate before DCS considered it dead null @NineLine, sorry I appear to have accidentally posted this in the wrong forum section. Could you move this to multiplayer bugs for me?

Also really curious if there's any way to set the area for fog with the weather system in some way? Right now every fog effect is applied to the entire map, and the only way I've found to get fog in the mountains ends up with several thousand feet of fog at sea level. Hoping there's something more I'm missing because it's pretty hard to use anywhere without making the map look very odd

First off, thank you again for the amazing assets included with this pack provided to all of us for free. These are already some of my most used assets and are absolutely invaluable for cold war mission making. The L118 in particular is a huge addition to the game as up to this point there are no towed artillery units available to mission editors. However, there is a small issue with the ammunition provided for the L118. The gun is using the UOF412 shell which belong to the KS-19 AAA gun. It has a very high muzzle velocity, very flat trajectory, and (relatively) tiny warhead compared to an actual artillery shell. I recognize that this is most likely a placeholder ammunition until a 105mm shell is made for the game. But if I might make a recommendation, I would use any other artillery shell for a placeholder until the correct ammunition is available. The flat trajectory of the shell prevents the L118 from working as one would expect an artillery piece to work and the ability to engage units with indirect fire is EXTREMELY limited. For example, here are three different artillery pieces all set to fire at a point 12km away: My suggestion would be to replace the shell with the 122mm shell from the 2S1. It's a little bigger than the 105mm, but the gun functions much more like a real artillery piece when it's in there and the difference between a 122mm and a 105mm is much less than the difference between 105mm arty and 100mm AAA. I have tested it by replacing a line in the SA pack Launchers.lua from GT_t.WS_t.L118.LN[1].PL[1].shell_name = {"UOF412_100HE"}; to GT_t.WS_t.L118.LN[1].PL[1].shell_name = {"2A18_122"}; and it works great. Thanks again!

FYI this is included now. I'm not sure when it was added but it's here now. One of the ground crew dialogue options, not on the arming menu

Another day, another crash dcs.log-20240812-130208.zip

Have had DCS server crash twice in the last two days with the same error 0x000000000088bacf (DCS_server): SW + 0x3A217F 0x0000000000889658 (DCS_server): SW + 0x39FD08 0x0000000000887ad0 (DCS_server): SW + 0x39E180 0x000000000064fed6 (DCS_server): SW + 0x166586 0x00000000005e25ac (DCS_server): SW + 0xF8C5C 0x00000000000045ab (World): wSimTrace::CommandsTraceDiscreteIsOn + 0x3EB 0x0000000000004bc2 (World): wSimCalendar::DoActionsUntil + 0x262 0x0000000000904ff8 (DCS_server): SW + 0x41B6A8 0x0000000000904cd1 (DCS_server): SW + 0x41B381 0x000000000092a0b1 (DCS_server): SW + 0x440761 0x00000000008e4be4 (DCS_server): SW + 0x3FB294 0x00000000008e631d (DCS_server): SW + 0x3FC9CD 0x00000000022699e4 (DCS_server): AmdPowerXpressRequestHighPerformance + 0x11EB9E0 0x0000000000cbff5e (DCS_server): SW + 0x7D660E 0x0000000000017374 (KERNEL32): BaseThreadInitThunk + 0x14 dcs.log-20240810-201208.zip dcs.log-20240811-191742.zip

I think it's pretty clear the "misunderstanding" was the customer reaction and the position this put ED into. I imagine they were rather busy dealing with refund requests they'd rather not have this weekend lol. Hopefully lessons learned

Good decision. Hopefully in the future any internal worries about who models what can be hashed out before selling the product

Don't tell them that we'll lose even more

So Ugra complained about map encroachment a year after the fact, directly to OnReTech, and ORT removed content from the map immediately with no communication with customers. And throughout all of this nobody spoke to the company that actually owns and runs the game or thought that this was a completely terrible idea? Does this game feel like a bad joke to anyone else at times?

Just waiting for the inevitable poor soul to post something like this, "Just got back from a long break away from DCS, can't wait to fly some missions in northern Israel in my F-15E on Sinai!" Please OnReTech. Don't let this happen to your customers!

Yep. So now having a mission using both ends of Israel simply needs you to end your mission and open a new one. That sucks

Especially considering the rather famous history of air wars over both northern and southern Israel. Now instead of having a map with both we have two maps with neither! Great...

This is a terrible decision. Hopefully the map area can be restored. It seems bizarre that anyone would think it was a good idea to remove area and detail from a map that people have already purchased and have been making missions on.

Woohoo! Thanks Flappie!