Mordant

Gonna be honest, finding a 230 page-long thread for a server I played on frequently is an interesting experience. I have flown on Cold War for around a year now, mainly F-5s or Ka-50(now I'm somewhat competent with the Fishbed and I want to try the Sabre for the lols). I had no idea there were so many missions, or that Alpenwolf still updates it lol. But here are a few of my questions: -I haven't noticed anything different between the briefings, so it may just be me being blind, but how do I know what's special about a certain mission? -Are there new missions being made, or just improvements to previous ones? -I read way back in this thread that Alpenwolf doesn't have NTTR, and while that's fine I feel like having just one mission out of the 15 would be nice for those of us who still have the module. Is this a possibility, let alone probable? -While I often want to hop in a Tomcat(not to crush the other team, I just really like the Tomcat), it's often not an activated slot and the aircraft won't spawn. If I wanted to hop in a 29 however, it almost always spawns. Is this just because Red completed an objective before blue did or something? Similar to question 1. I do want to thank Alpenwolf and the community for this wonderful server, it's what got me into PvP in the first place. Thanks for creating this, and I'm surprised I didn't notice this thread sooner : ) Smooth Skies, Mordant

I would love an F-111! I don't have any particular connection at all, but I do love the look and prospects of what a DCS F-111 could produce. Also the slats look cool, never understood but totally liked the little triangle vane things where the wing met the fuselage. Just kinda looked different, not to mention the fuel dump + burner airshow trick

Tiny bit off topic, but how do I slave the Aim-9 to the target lock? I understand generally dogfight mode and radar stuffs but I didn't know the F-5 had Aim-9 slave, could've helped me in a few situations...

This is a shot in the dark and I'm 50/50 whether this already exists and I just didn't find it or it doesn't exist. I have used CA a lot in the past and to put it simply I would love to have the same JTAC/Aircraft relationship in SP that we have when the human is in the pilot's seat, but in reverse. I would love it if I could set up a simple mission with lets say a harrier with 4 GBU-12s and 2 65Es and get him on the target I'm looking at. IIRC I saw an A-10CII thread about getting their wingman to attack the human's SPI, and while it was implemented it wasn't a direct radio command such as Flight->Engage->Datalink(or smth else idk)->My SPI, it was some other non descript radio command. Having this as a command for CA2 in the works will be wonderful for SP unless its already in the game and I just couldn't find it. Smooth Skies, Mordant

So just don't take tanks? From what I understand you either watch your speed very very carefully or you don't take tanks... I personally love not worrying about fuel, so I want to take tanks. Does this wing twisting still happen if you reach critical mach after you've pickled the tanks? Or is this the answer: To specify, my understanding of this statement is that the wing twist remains if you've exceeded critical mach with the tanks on, then the tanks are pickled. If the tanks have been dropped and I exceed critical mach, am I ok? Smooth Skies, Mordant

I think its worth noting that these types of things can be somewhat difficult to get pinpoint info on. Obviously, people can find plenty of Sidewinders being launched in live fire exercise and I definitely would appreciate it if they don't always go in a perfectly straight line and actually acted like a Sidewinder irl but theres some info we just can't get. Like others have said, it's being worked on, and DCS(as I'm sure everyone knows) is almost constantly being worked on. I wouldn't discount it for the future as the -120 and -27's have been updated and improved already. Smooth skies, Mordant

You sir, are a wonder! Thanks so much for replying, I had no idea this existed! Well, I guess my typing wasn't exactly for nothing! : )

Incredibly unfortunate that this isn't planned, but I have to ask: Even if it isn't planned, could it be possible to add lets say +1 year into the modules future? It's obviously not critical to the module's existence, but it would be nice because its the only module that caught my eye with skis...

Let's be honest. Combined Arms sucks right now. But I love it. JTAC-ing and acting as a FAC is my lifeblood when I'm not in the air myself. There's a certain level of creativity and natural discovery when you're on the ground where you're not normally at. Plus, there's so much more you can find on a map rather than 32k feet in the air. It's just so much fun to have something not too ground intensive as Arma or Squad while keeping the same basic functions of ground forces while utilizing the amazing flight engine in DCS to enhance the experience of the pilots in the air. However, that's where things start to go wrong. Vehicles drive weirdly, some of their vehicles are less than optimal, not as many things are drivable(notably for me, URALs and Rearm/Refueling trucks. Being able to deploy ground troops from a truck rather than only from a helo is something I think CA is really missing. For the R/R trucks it would be awesome to be able to setup mini-FARPs from the ground), and the F10 UI could use a massive revamp as it is not intuitive for your average user(aka yours truly). With those problems in mind, I think it may be time to take another look at re-doing CA. From what Steam is telling me, CA was released May 31, 2012. 10 Years! Off the top of my head, from the time CA was around the A-10, M2000(not sure if this existed around 2012), Ka-50, and a few others were around and all of those have been revamped(A-10CII, M2000 has been vastly changed and updated including the recent HUD vector graphics and TAF systems, and the Ka-50 went from BS1 to BS2 and they're already getting close to BS3 completion). Especially with the A-10 and Ka-50 the A-10C was updated until they did the CII which is somewhat revamped. The Ka-50 is about to be on its 3rd iteration! Is it too much to ask to finally update, revamp, redo, or just re-beautify Combined Arms to the next level? If I understand the non-CA community, one of the main things that is keeping them from the module is mainly the UI, limited availability in MP, and general disinterest. It is my belief a lot of these can be fixed if there was a revamped CA. A simpler UI, better vehicle movement physics, and generally make it more accessible for the end user. If this can be changed I think the general public(and notably MP server owners) will be more welcome to the module and will allow for a better experience for everyone. I went a bit ranty, and it's a lot of the same "just make it better" talk, but I seriously think it's worth it. If we can make a CA2 with a trailer as good as the OG CA, my life will be complete. That video was sick! (Combined Arms Video for Reference) TL;DR: CA has a lot of potential, and with so many other modules getting redone I feel CA deserves to be redone to make it the best module it can be. Smooth skies, Mordant

Over-G does appear to be modeled on the Tomcat, Eagle, and even the Hornet and Viper(if the wings are somewhat damaged, they will snap off. If they're at a normal strength and not damaged, the FCS does regulate for the most part the maximum G-load so that they dont break) On overspeed, I completely agree. There needs to be implementation for this. I think a possible issue may be that top speeds are one of those ticket items that just don't get released to the public too soon, it's always "Higher than Mach 2" or "Above 1300kts" which is vague and can't be put into the game as something that can destroy your aircraft. Overspeed is already implemented on most if not all the helos in the game. I'm a Gazelle nut, and in the Minigun you can easily go overspeed and it will break your rotors. Most notable helo with overspeed issues is the Black Shark due to its counter-rotating rotors. They do clip each other and basically self implode the rotors if you get too fast. Lastly the Hip may or may not be exempt and I'm like 95% sure the Hind has overspeed damage on the rotors. TL;DR: Overspeed is already on helos and Over-G is for the most part modeled, but overspeed needs to be implemented on everything even if the info we get from aircraft manufacturers may be dubious or vague. Smooth skies, Mordant

100% agree. I used it initially during my two week trial period and loved it! That was until I intentionally did a stall spin and didn't recover... but I didn't die on impact with the ground? I have seen plenty of videos of weird ground stuff after lawn darting, and in general it seems the multi-crew got bugged throughout the ages. It just seemed to get worse and worse... I used it as a light spotter plane with a buddy in the back seat and another P-47 actually engaging the threats, and it really opened my eyes about just how incomplete it actually is(or at least bugged). I started the aircraft up(*with* him in my backseat the entire time) and he said the propeller wasn't moving an inch. During taxi, he mentioned how the flaps weren't down(they were), and on takeoff he had to raise the gear on his end because it didn't show his gear was up when I brought it up. It seems to just be desync but its really bad and completely ruining to the immersion. It particularly sucks this is how it is for so many modules. The F-5E still has the RWR bug, the Burner-Mil bug(both of which are pretty much deal-breakers as having the RWR not functional is obvious but as landing is really difficult with wacky engine physics), and is generally not updated to the current standard. I would be perfectly fine and I would love it if ED took the time after the Apache to finish things off with these older modules instead of a new aircraft. This doesn't even get into Combined Arms, which probably needs a brand new module, CA2 does sound epic. Whatever happens, this module was and should be the pinnacle of flight sim training especially for military aircraft like the ones in DCS. Its a shame it looks like this... Smooth Skies, Mordant

I figured out the controls and all those are set, but it does appear that when I move the Options.lua it does indeed have the same issue. Guess I'll be busy for the next few hours Thanks for your help(again)!

I did just that, but how do I regain my settings? game looks really bad now lol

Oh my apologies, I didn't know it was User Created. I'll definitely check that out, but my point still stands about ED's mismatched cockpit/externals...

I've been told its this: However I'm not sure I want to go through with renaming this kind of stuff. I did it for the Mission Editor so I could save some files(different issue), and it completely redid everything I had worked on(loadouts primarily). Is this even the same issue?

Maybe it's just the liveries then... Is this what you got when you had the worn cockpit and selected a skin? Even with the worn cockpit it still seems like the native skins look clean

Either this is a large coincidence or I just royally screwed my PC up... I started my trial for the MiG-21 and attempted to download it using Skatezilla's tool(without opening DCS in between the trial activation and download attempt). After that, I tried to load DCS and I got a black screen and nothing further. Nvidia recognized it as the game but obviously theres not much I could do on a black screen. After this I Task Manager'ed DCS and attempted to load up Skatezilla's tool to repair. I did the quick repair and it didn't find anything. I restarted my PC. I'll shorten the next events, but heres how it goes from there: -Open SZ Tool -It shows me the loading box then disappears and never opens the tool -Try to open DCS, results in black screen -Restart PC -Run SZ Tool as admin -same previous thing occurs -Run dcs as admin, it black screens -I hard reset my pc, as in shut down and turn off the power for a hot minute(previously I had been pressing the restart button on my pc) -same problem occurs when running both programs as admin With SZ's tool and DCS both not opening, I'm not sure what to do. I'd try and do the full DCS repair from SZ's tool, but obviously I can't. All help would be nice. Last .log is attached, main thing being this line: 2021-11-21 22:50:37.174 ALERT Dispatcher: Error starting Game GUI: [string "./MissionEditor/modules/TableUtils.lua"]:3: assertion failed! Smooth Skies, Mordant dcs.log

I know external models are very difficult, but it's something that always nags me about a lot of DCS planes. While the interiors are typically somewhat worn or like the A-10CII you can choose worn or factory new for the interior, all the exterior bits look relatively clean and factory new. Could it be possible to add a worn exterior to the worn interior option? I know that the majority is going to be the textures with a bit more fluid leaks, chipped pain, and maybe some dirt/grime and the like, but it gives the aircraft more character. Plus, in my mind, what's the point in having a worn interior if the exterior is pristine? It may be a bit far fetched but I don't think outside of the ARC-210 there's really anything else for the A-10CII than this(imo). Smooth Skies, Mordant

While it seems small I think this would add a lot more character to the current maps... Snow in DCS right now is basically white dirt, but even then having dedicated skis would be wonderful

I think personally if ED did the L-39, Razbam could do the OV-10 with great returns. Similar purposes, apart from training. It's an incredible airplane and I'd love to see it flying in DCS one day. Guess we should just add it to the long list of Vietnam Era aircraft we don't have yet...

+1 for pretty much all, although I think my hope is that it just gets polished to the 2.7 level. It just feels like a relic of the olden DCS days... Trailer for it is still sick though, my favorite by far

I'm not a lawyer, and I certainly don't speak for ED, but I still think it's not a good idea to do this. The Apache is a very high profile launch. The pre-order video has around 300k views as of now. Not everyone knows its WIP. Plus, if the information ED has released is correct, we aren't waiting more than another month for the actual module. The WIP label is not only correct for the current state of the module but it is there for those who don't know whether its still WIP or not. Just wait a few more weeks and you can get a back round picture made just for you for the low low price of $80(or whatever the release price is, assuming you haven't pre-ordered). I'm just as excited as you and I also would love to have some natural screenies, but the problem that creates has too high a risk(for a penalty as small as it may be), for the reward of a couple screenshots a few weeks before release. Mordant

I had an inkling that was an issue, 3060 0, 3060Ti 1. I am a TrackIr guy so I shouldn't have as much of a penalty for graphics. Either way, 3060 0, 3060Ti 2 I play on a 1440p 75hz monitor, so as long as its higher than 75fps its doing fine. I do play a lot of Multiplayer on GaW and other Hoggit servers so I should be ok. 3060 0, 3060Ti 3. I would absolutely go with a 3070 if I could(and if my power supply wouldn't die). Right now my local Micro Center has decently priced cards on a raffle. Because my store is one of the least populated and I've already accidently won a raffle for the wrong card(big oops). In conclusion, thanks for all your help. I didn't know DCS wasn't as VRAM heavy. I completely understand the memory bus is too small, and that's kinda the dealbreaker here. If I can scrape a few more bucks up I'll grab a 3070 but from a 3060 vs. 3060Ti standpoint the Ti is the best choice for DCS(and other games). Cheers!

Coming up on 2 years on this thread alone(not including everybody asking for Vietnam before this thread), I really hope ED has been doing some super secret map making in the backround for all these years

Hello all, I'm sure this has asked before but a 5 minute fury of google searches and a quick question on Hoggits discord didn't answer my question, so I've come to the forums. I have been hunting for a new GPU to replace my poor life decision of a 1650 4gb. Heres the catch: I am confident I can get a 3060 or a 3060Ti and the main difference is VRAM. Unless theres another massive improvement on the 3060Ti over the 3060, the 3060 has more VRAM than the Ti. Would it be lucrative or even worth it to sacrifice some computing power for more VRAM? I'm not sure how VRAM saturated DCS can be because obviously I'm always pegged at 4gb regardless. In general I don't know what DCS uses the most of a graphics card. Thanks for all your help! Smooth skies, Mordant