Chapelmaggot

Alright, thank you very much! It seems there was, in fact, a massive oversight on my part Have a great day and fly safe! Chap

How would I go about doing this, if you don't mind me asking?

Yes, templates are a very good tool in the Mission Editor, but as far as I know, they can only be created with a single group of units. And even if there was the option to create a template with multiple groups, there still isn't a way to select these different groups "comfortably". I hope there isn't an obvious overlook here on my part. Thanks a lot for the suggestion though!

First of all, how did I stumble upon this problem? Well, it all started when I was browsing the User Files section for some .miz-files with historically accurate unit placement for a WW2 mission on The Channel Map. Now, after some searching, I stumbled upon 2 very nicely made missions by @bell_rj which featured a) realistic air defense placement for German Luftwaffe airfields in France and b) realistic air defense placement for the English coast (Dover and the like). The following images show these two missions: Mission a) The Channel Luftwaffe Airfield defences v0.1 (by @bell_rj) Mission Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3313435/ Mission b) Dover defences (The Channel Map) v0.2 (by @bell_rj) Mission Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3313328/ Now, here's my problem... These two .miz-files are VERY nicely made and they both provide a very immersive and captivating experience on their own, but there seems to be no apparent or non-tedious way of merging them together. I would love to have realistic air defense placement on both the blue and the red side of the map. Yes, I could copy each and every individual group from one mission to another, or I could go open up Notepad and "manually" copy data from one mission to another, but both of these options are absolutely HORRIBLE in reality. There are (probably - I haven't checked) a hundred individual groups scattered around Dover in Mission b), which would make copying each and every one of them a huge pain... Imagine this sequence of steps: *Load into Mission a)* --> *Copy Group 1* --> *Load into Mission b)* --> *Paste Group 1* --> ... Now repeat that for (probably) 100+ groups. Yeah... That is literally going to take hours upon hours of copying, loading and pasting. I hope you can all understand what my problem is. As of right now, I am not aware of a way to copy a large amount of groups/units from one .miz-file to another... Or at least, there isn't a convenient and user-friendly way to do this, which has been bugging me for quite a while now. The example I've given here is only one of many times that I've come across this problem. I've mostly experienced this while creating my own missions, since I'm not usually one to download .miz-files made by other people. In this example it is a bit different, but that doesn't change the point I'm trying to make. What would solve this problem? I'm fairly certain that other people, especially other avid mission creators, have come across this problem as well, and I am also fairly certain that we would all wish for a simpler, more convenient and more user-friendly way to copy a multitude of groups and units from one mission to another. Transferring a single group from Mission a) to Mission b) is possible, but transferring two or more isn't. All I wish for is to be able to select multiple groups at once - not by tediously Shift-clicking each and every single one scattered across the map - in the Unit List or simply to press Ctrl+A to select all units currently in the mission. A selection tool similar to that in Windows Explorer (holding left-click and dragging a box over the files you want to select) would also be a game-changing addition, if implemented in the DCS Mission Editor in the realm of unit-/group selection. Finally... I want to thank you very much for reading this hyper-specific post and I hope to hear from other people with a) similar issues, or b) a solution to this problem that I wasn't aware of (or was simply too unintelligent to find). Fly safe! Chap

I'm not even joking... I was tearing up when I realized what was going on while watching the YouTube Premiere... You guys are amazing and I wish you all the best!

I feel like this would be a major step for new air to ground combat, which we desperately need! I absolutely agree with everything you've just said!

YES! I agree with everything you said 100%. I do believe the Hind is going to be amazing either way but obviously I'd love to see major improvements to infantry and ground units. That would elevate the Hind from amazing to really amazing. I totally agree!

Fair enough, you're probably right. It's just that, with the Hind and other CAS helicopters coming to DCS, people are really hoping for such changes because they seem like the next step for Close Air Support missions. That's probably why there's a lot of discussion about these topics in the helicopter forums. Thanks for your help!

I totally agree! In a thread discussing the Hind's role and potential in DCS ( https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/272632-hind-tempting-obviously-but-what-exactly-are-we-going-to-do-with-it/?tab=comments#comment-4676092 ), I have posted the following 2 comments. These fit in here perfectly so I'll just repost them. "Maybe I'm not educated enough to add to this thread so please excuse my somewhat uneducated opinion, but I feel like improvement to ground troops is necessary for the Hind to reach its full potential. We need more infantry, we need terrorists, we need small militia groups and insurgents (I'm talking about the 3d models here) but mainly, we need better AI. AI that's scared, intimidated, AI that will retreat, maybe even surrender. We need AI that "thinks" (or at least feels like it thinks) and acts depending on their chances of victory. Ground unit behavior and ground combat needs to be improved upon greatly to get the most out of the Hind. Don't get me wrong, I'm still excited as ever to get to fly the damn thing but I feel like these are some features that need to be worked on. I've always felt this way, even a few years back. One day it'll all come true, I'm sure. I just felt the need to say this cause it's SUCH a necessity for even more immersive combat, especially for a multirole(-ish) chopper like the Hind. That would be the next step towards an all-round amazing battlefield simulation and it would greatly improve the Hind's versatility in combat." "Exactly. While writing my post, all I could think of was buzzing around the Syria Map with my Hind, scouting around the place and engaging where it is necessary. Right now, air-to-ground can be pretty damn frustrating. Even in the Hornet I sometimes feel frustrated because the ground units just don't... Well... Do anything dynamic. They sit there and shoot. You hit them with a GBU. So they scatter. Now they sit there and shoot. You hit them with 2 Mavericks. They scatter. They sit there and shoot. I don't know... It just doesn't feel... Well... Human (I'm not sure if this is the right word but you know what I mean). And well... That's just the perspective from a Hornet. Now imagine being much closer to the action in the Hind and seeing the same damn behavior from ground units and even infantry. Sitting, shooting, dying, scattering, sitting, shooting, dying, scattering. It just keeps repeating. I don't know... It feels like a massive missed opportunity. Especially with infantry and close-quarter combat this kind of behavior ruins the authenticity of the experience and makes CAS, the Hind's primary role, a little stale."

Exactly. While writing my post, all I could think of was buzzing around the Syria Map with my Hind, scouting around the place and engaging where it is necessary. Right now, air-to-ground can be pretty damn frustrating. Even in the Hornet I sometimes feel frustrated because the ground units just don't... Well... Do anything dynamic. They sit there and shoot. You hit them with a GBU. So they scatter. Now they sit there and shoot. You hit them with 2 Mavericks. They scatter. They sit there and shoot. I don't know... It just doesn't feel... Well... Human (I'm not sure if this is the right word but you know what I mean). And well... That's just the perspective from a Hornet. Now imagine being much closer to the action in the Hind and seeing the same damn behavior from ground units and even infantry. Sitting, shooting, dying, scattering, sitting, shooting, dying, scattering. It just keeps repeating. I don't know... It feels like a massive missed opportunity. Especially with infantry and close-quarter combat this kind of behavior ruins the authenticity of the experience and makes CAS, the Hind's primary role, a little stale.

Maybe I'm not educated enough to add to this thread so please excuse my somewhat uneducated opinion, but I feel like improvement to ground troops is necessary for the Hind to reach its full potential. We need more infantry, we need terrorists, we need small militia groups and insurgents (I'm talking about the 3d models here) but mainly, we need better AI. AI that's scared, intimidated, AI that will retreat, maybe even surrender. We need AI that "thinks" (or at least feels like it thinks) and acts depending on their chances of victory. Ground unit behavior and ground combat needs to be improved upon greatly to get the most out of the Hind. Don't get me wrong, I'm still excited as ever to get to fly the damn thing but I feel like these are some features that need to be worked on. I've always felt this way, even a few years back. One day it'll all come true, I'm sure. I just felt the need to say this cause it's SUCH a necessity for even more immersive combat, especially for a multirole(-ish) chopper like the Hind. That would be the next step towards an all-round amazing battlefield simulation and it would greatly improve the Hind's versatility in combat.

Hello there! This is my very first forum post and I want to address something rather important. While the Anton's cockpit is beautifully done, I - someone with German as their first language - have spotted a little typo on the "Kraftstoffpumpen"- or fuel pump-panel next to the pilot's right hip. There are 5 circuitbreakers on this panel and the most forward one has the label "Außenaschluß". This is most definetly a typo. The correct spelling would be "Außenanschluß". This circuitbreaker enables ground power to be connected with the aircraft. In German, the word "außen" means "outside" and "Anschluß" means "connection", so the word "Außenanschluß" basically means "outside connection". Without the letter n, this word doesn't make any sense. I wanted to bring this to your attention not because it ruins the Anton experience, but because I feel like a typo would be a pretty easy fix. Cheers from Germany and thanks for providing such great products!