peachmonkey

There has been an uplift or more like an influx of IL2 players in DCS WW2 MP because of the spotting improvement via this mod. ED has successfully shunned them all off by shooting itself in a foot. Kudos.

word of caution for the Il2 folks: DCS licensing works completely different. - Map is considered a module (DLC), you must have it in order to play on it in SP and MP - whatever units (tanks, artillery, boats, etc) you place in your map are also part of module(s) (DLC). Some of these unit modules are free, and some aren't. For example: the WWII units are part of the "WWII Asset Pack" module and you must own this module (DLC) in order to play on any map that uses the units from this module. The WWII asset pack module isn't free and the player needs to buy it.

I believe he was asking you to provide any source at this point, primary or secondary. If you have a document/excerpt stating they were used, you can simply provide it to continue the discussion. There probably won't be a serious discussion if the secondary source happens to be some verbal "i heard from my grandfather, who was good friends with Jack who fought in Normandy and he saw a 109 with gun pods, which looked like a K4" or someone's post on some mil/sim forum from 20 years ago stating a similar "fact".

lack of Antialiasing makes any map look like the blinking and shimmering Las Vegas, it simply looks like ass..

I get your point, but you are surrounded by crutches in this and any other flight sim. Somehow getting the most realistic setting for spotting seems like a departure from the overall flavor. There are multitudes of problems with spotting, one of them being lack of any sort of contrast at medium distances. The object simply merges with the surrounding space. Saying that it's realistic is then saying that the pixelated non-true color landscape with lack of true light sources is also realistic. Your assessment is pretty one sided.

will try it out, it'd be funny if the switch is backwards..

all we can do is continue to voice our frustrations to ED. The fact they haven't included this mod into IC as of yet is puzzling. My optimistic side thinks that ED finally accepted it as a problem and wants to keep the MP community pacified with the mod. The pessimistic side of me thinks they simply don't care about either IC or the spotting issue, aka business as usual.

yup, can attest to Anton as well, the pitot heat switch doesn't improve its operation in the snowing freezing conditions/temps regardless if it's engaged from the start or in-flight.

yup, it does. The bindings themselves are saved into .xml file that have a unique UUID in the name, but figuring out which one belongs to which in DCS Controls menu is a trial and error business.

yes, and it does, and no, devs aren't looking into this because according to them 'everything is OK'. Meanwhile, you can use the below mod (passes IC check in MP) to get you on the same level of spotting as the 1080p players.

On the A8, if one of the wing cannons get damaged, the AC is clearly getting slewed towards the working cannon during firing, albeit not hugely, but it affects aiming considerably.

you're still using the RHINO ForceTrim with this though, right? I've tried the above setting about 6 months ago (without forcetrim) and even though it was flyable, it was still pretty wonky and unstable, I need a continuous stick input and couldn't fly hands off. With Forcetrim in Rhino obviously it's no longer a problem, but the point is I still need an outside program for that. I guess there's a preference among players on how to actually fly the AC's. Anyhow, I'm glad you keep looking into this to find all possible solutions!!

yay, will for sure try it out tonight! Thank you, @Barthek!

you're welcome, @Digitalvole another comment about engine management: - if you're doing A2G attacks, which are on deck obviously, then the turbo isn't used (it's a high altitude feature), so the only thing you need to look for is simply not to over-boos the engine (i.e. above 52" without water injection, or 64" with water), compared to P51 where there's an overboost protection/regulator in place. Once you set the RPM's they stay where they need to, etc. i.e. it's not a big departure from other planes. - However, when you start fighting enemy AC, that's where the engine mgmt becomes critical/requires more attention. So, you can practice doing A2G sorties and don't get tangled up in dog fights, and the workload won't be that much bigger than P51's. Once you get comfortable with A2G you can try venturing into the air battles. So, from the re-playability perspective P47 is a very interesting AC with many capabilities. With P51 you can also do A2G, but with the current ED's aimbot ground fire you'll have a much tougher time because a single rifle hit can penetrate the waterjacket and you'll have to turn for home pretty much immediately. So there are pro's and con's anywhere you look.

hello, If it were an option during the WW2... could we possibly get the AP and HE ammo in Tracerless configuration? The current tracerless ammo is a mixed bag and not as effective either against ground or air targets. At least that's what it feels like .. which I know isn't a great argument, please correct me if I'm totally off ...

P47 is very heavy. ~9.800kg for Mosquito ~7,900kg for P47 ~4,100kg for P51 ~3,000kg for the Spit So it is by far not a nimble aircraft. Down on deck it becomes very obvious. However, it has excellent high altitude performance at 20,000'+. If you meet LW AC's at high altitude you have a very high chance of getting an upper hand IF you're a master of the controls and don't blow up your engine due to MP, overheat, rpm over-speed, or turbo rpm over-speed. Multi-faceted engine controls are its weak side. To me, it's actually a PLUS, the harder the better , obviously you will make your own conclusions. It also can take a lot of ground and enemy AC fire before it goes down (as long as it's not on fire), so its survivability is much higher than any of the water-cooled ac's. If you want to geek out, get P47.

hi, @Droning_On out of curiosity and for my edification, where can I find these logs? All I was able to find are the notes in SP briefing at the end of the mission that lists out all of the 'failures'. The logs you are showing are bit more in depth. I you could point me to the location in files I would greatly appreciate it! cheers. nm, it's in debrief.log file..

see if this video helps. You need to preconfigure the map & units in the proper way for it to work.

@havebugagain, big thank you for pointing me to this solution!!! It freaking works!! For anyone with RHINO the solution to the curves vs. trim issues = this is the way to do it. 1) enable ForceTrim feature in VPforce 2) enable "Override Trim" as well, this will over-ride the SpringCenter position that DCS generates. If you leave it off the Trim won't work. 3) set the "Slew Rate" = ~20 or higher for faster trim, albeit less precise. 4) assign buttons to Top/Bottom (pitch) and Left/Right (roll) 5) On Mossie i run a Y saturation (instead of curves) to flatten out the response curve, and it works wonderfully. On P47 I run a curve of 40+ to get a nicely balanced pitch response. Couple of gotcha's: - the spring center moves forward about ~35% of the Y throw (i.e. from the center position), i.e. the stick center will move away from you, having an S type of stick extension will help to offset it (I use VirPil S extension, 20cm). The overall move of the center forward 30% doesn't affect the operation of Mossie one bit, since it has a pretty wide Y band that goes way outside of Mossie's practical limits. - in Mossie, if you use the Rhino's trim (i.e. the above force-trim feature) for Y axis only (pitch), and continue to use in-game Aileron trim (X axis), then anytime you move the X trim it will reset the Y center back to the original place causing Mossie to violently pitch up (and requires re-trimming again). Because of it, I recommend you use both Y and X Rhino force-trimmers and avoid using in-game x/y trimmers. (Interestingly enough, it's an issue with Mossie only. I've tried a similar setup with P47 and trimming roll axis (x) doesn't reset Pitch axis (Y) at all, go figure . Edit: Actually, P47 has the same issue, never mind. Gotta use both x/y hw trimmers in these models.)

gotcha, thank you again, @havebug! I thought those 0 numbers represented some multipliers, hence I didn't even try assigning buttons because of it and was looking for them somewhere else entirely. I'll test it out and will give you a shout back. Cheers!

gotcha, so, as far as trim in VPForce, are you talking about the Force Trim? (see picture below) if so: - how where do you assign the actual buttons to these trim functions? I can't figure this part out.. - are you also using Curves in FFB axis in DCS for Mossie? null

color me interested! Can you elaborate a bit on your setup? - "removed trim function" <--- what do you mean by this? Setting the trim to 0 in Mossie cockpit? - "input loopback" <--- that's for the Grip, right? (picture below). and with the loopback app you combined your Throttle with Rhino base so you can use the trim... But what trim are you referring to in this case? There's some "Force Trim" in vpforce, it's for helicopters I think... I guess my question is how do you trim (with what) Mossie without using in-cockpit trim bindings.. ? null

A big bomb will do it (250kg or 500kg). I tried knocking them out with a 50kg which should be possible, but alas I got no success with those...

this is an awesome update, @GR00VYJERRY! I've been waiting for some action in the newly added map areas. Thank you for the great work!

you're right, it is in Steam, I stand corrected. But I clearly remember trying to buy it after stumbling over it in the forums, and Steam had the entry, but there was no price, it was a while ago though, maybe it was due to some incompatibility.