Stonehouse

Introducing CAS missions and Helo's would be essentially creating parallel versions of GCICAP with the appropriate skew as the waypoint actions, mission profiles etc etc are totally different - so pretty much "some work" really is a lot of work in translation. It was on the list at the time I was working on it and I had test bed recon stuff reporting sea, ground contacts as per the GCI radars so theoretically could then have generated cas flights (which was the aim) but that was a long, long while ago now, perhaps contact lukrop and see if he is keen? If you are talking about a cold war situation and stopping the pursuit continuing too far into your airspace then that was another one on the to do list that didn't get done. Probably the easiest way would be to RTB the interceptors once they get into the opposing air defence territory as long as it is a cold war.

Ok hopefully the attachment works this time - my JSGME set up which I believe works ok. DCS_Animals_Mod_V0.1.zip

They are the same in concept as lukrop wrote his script using the functionality of the old one for his design base. Setups are basically the same from what I recall so probably can be switched with minimal effort. His code does things completely differently though so while the net result is similar there are some differences. Quirks if you will. If you are seeing just the first CAP group start on the runway rather than out in their CAP zone it probably isn't that it is borked just that you need to change the startairborne flag to 1 if the latter is your preference. If you have the spawn mode set to spawn GCI and CAPs on the ramp and they instead appear on the runway then perhaps there is an issue. There are a whole block of parameters at the head of the script for the mission designer to customise to get the behaviour they want.

From memory that should only affect the first group of CAP aircraft at the start of the mission. Basically it was to either have them on the runway ready to roll and heading for their cap zone after take off (when it is set to 0) or to spawn already in the zone (set to 1). There should also be a spawn style parameter where you choose what should happen for all other groups. This can be set so groups spawn onto the ramp, the runway or already airborne - the variable used be Spawnmode in the old script. The mission designer needs to set these two parms to suit what they want to happen in their mission. I don't believe lukrop changed the functionality of the script in this regard even though the code to achieve it changed. Could have a bug in his code of course as happens to everyone.

I haven't changed anything I think for this one and I find them under statics ground vehicles in the editor. Is that where you are looking?

Thanks Skatezilla that is a really great discovery. It will save me quite a chunk of disk space if I can get it working for myself. Cheers, Stonehouse

Ok it's been a long while since I used or tested GCI CAP and things may have changed but from what I recall whenever I was testing code changes in SP I would see exactly the same thing as Sierra99 and then it would act as I said when the same mission was used in MP. If you look back through the thread you will see others have asked the same question. The conclusion at the time was that it was a DCS feature to pretty much avoid AI spawning onto players aircraft. lol maybe my memory has a few leaks too. If I get time I will see if I can try it out but it isn't really my script to work on or support anymore

Might work or might not re: integrity checks. I never got around to testing it properly. Mod itself definitely works - well I got the B17 to do so. Probably would still want the host and client to have the same mod units even if cosmetic non integrity check triggering ones were different or else some will see the modded unit and some will not. Also not sure if client and host mod selections differing triggers an integrity check itself. If you get a chance to test it I - and I am sure others - would be interested in the results. Pretty much use the alternative mod location: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=170161

Do they spawn in or are they placed on the ramp at mission start via the editor? It is the spawning in that is the cause as I understand it.

That is a DCS thing not the script. In single player AI set to start on the ramp always start on the runway instead. Presumably in MP different code ensures that when a player and AI spawn they don't occupy the same ramp position but in SP it gets around this by simply starting all the AI on the runway. Suggested test, create a simple mission without the script or mist and see what happens.

It's the same with any mod using the P51 to provide the internal cockpit and make it flyable for players. Pretty much every update needs you to do it to be sure.

I think the point trying to be made is that in earth's gravitational field everything is experiencing +1G. ie that is normal even on objects sitting still. So what they are saying is if the instruments are telling you 0.1G then you have accelerated in a dive to offset gravity (1G or 9.81 m per sec squared) by 0.9G for a resultant of 0.1G. Only thing to clarify from your viewpoint really is - in level flight/sitting on the ground do the instruments register 1G or 0G? ie are they telling you the total of the vectors or the difference to normal gravity. I'm pretty sure it is the former but being at work can't check and that is also what Skatezilla and the rest are saying. If it was the latter then perhaps you have a point as that would be in effect saying that you climbed and were experiencing 0.1 above normal gravity.

ok possibly look at mist.getUnitsInMovingZones where you can specify a zone based on a unit's position (the player in this case) with the radius of the zone being passed to the mist function to define the distance to search for enemies and again pass it a table of unit names to check to see if they are in the zone (ground units this time). The function again returns a table of units and you could then determine the closest and then send a message to the player giving the grid using the co-ords of the closest ground unit (which you had to work out to find out the distance). There would be other ways too. I assume you meant ground units since you are talking about kill boxes.

lol I did wonder, it was kind of like the thread took a hard right and headed off into the wilderness hehe

There is a mist.getUnitsInZones. Basically you pass it a table of unit names and a table of zone names and an optional zone type and it returns a table of the units from the unit name table passed in that are in any of the named zones.

Some old stuff that might give you at least points to cover https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=61044 https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/379279/

Sorry there is a underscore in their username Morkva_55 Link is here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166007 Unfortunately he seems to have made what I believe are the lua files uneditable presumably for copy protection reasons although that is just a guess on my part and there may be other reasons. However the set up would be similar and you can perhaps create an lua if you look at the infantry units in \DCS World\Scripts\Database\vehicles\IFV. The EDM files for pilots are in DCS World\Bazar\World\Shapes. Worst case you might be able to PM Morkva and see if he can help you as I would guess for him it would be quite an easy job since the shapes are all built.

The answer is no I think but it might be possible to create the various lua's and entries to use the existing EDM files to add it as an infantry unit. Morkva55 add some AT soldiers recently so it would probably be similar.

Don't know - you must already be looking for destination airports that meet a certain set of criteria I assume to avoid situations where you take off and land again because the destination is so close. So definitely while you are right in that there would be a lot of work involved I believe you really do have the seed for it there. DCG is all about ground units moving from a start point to a victory location. His design had intermediate locations in between the two and in one mission the ground units would follow a predefined path (built by plotting a ground unit path in a template mission) from start to next intermediate location (you would probably use trigger zones for locations and rely on the campaign designer to make it sensible distances apart as per DCG) and in the next mission then to next intermediate location etc until they got the victory location. If they met enemy ground units then they fought it out. If they died then replacements would be generated eventually at the start point. Strike aircraft missions would be generated to support the ground unit movements (basically attacking the most forward enemy unit on the same path as a friendly unit - ie clearing the way) and then intercepts would be generated in response to the strike aircraft missions. Depending on plane type human pilots would be tasked to one of the strike or intercepts. If your home airfield got overrun then you would get a transfer flight to another airfield further to the rear. If you get too far from the front then you get a transfer to a captured base. You could have multiple start points and multiple paths to the victory location all defined by a template groups path. The starting ground groups and air groups etc are placed in friendly territory and go from there. That is the basics anyway. He added ships and supply and other things over a number of years of development (he's still going actually). Even the basics described above would be an amazing step up for DCS.

Passing thought, if you are generating these off a template mission and remembering there is already something like DAWS save mission utility by Chromium here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=149899 it seems to me that you have right there the basic requirements for a DCG (IL2 dynamic campaign generator by Lowengrin) style DCS dynamic campaign generator. Obviously would still need further work but the concept seems workable re: (1) template mission is starting point for campaign. (2) your mission generator looks at it and generates a mission which is flown (3) At the end of the mission DAWS save mission used to create a new template mission showing updated compositions and locations which is then feed into your mission generator to create the next mission. (4) rinse and repeat until victory conditions met

Yes the climb rates experienced in game are over the top. We did some extra work on the DC3 (think Saturn V for first test versions of DC3) fudging the SFM and engine numbers very much by "feel" - rather than knowing what we were doing and using accurate flight data - to make it even partially acceptable. However the vertical velocities (Vy_max)quoted in the top half of the lua's are as accurate as I can find and or calculate from rates of climb figures so I know it is more complicated than it seems on the surface. Some of the top half numbers seem to do nothing and others have a drastic effect (weights for example).

The numbers in the lua (sort of top half) are actually correct assuming the various internet reference sites floating about and reference books I own are not drastically wrong. What is wrong and we freely admit it is the SFM stuff towards the bottom of the lua and the engine thrust & modelling. eg at present the P38 doesn't take off if the correct weights are used so you may notice that it has been assigned less empty mass than is correct. At this point I really don't know if this is because we are using the P51 fm and cockpit so the second engine is ignored (even though it is specified in the lua) or the power/drag/lift coefficients are wrong (most likely or possibly it is both). As an fyi a real life an empty P38 masses more than a fully fuelled P51 with full ammo for the 50cals. Basically as they are the mods are all WIP placeholders intended to give people something use and allow WW2 to get kind of bootstrapped in DCS world early with the intention to come back and revise things over time as our knowledge increases. However we have very little information to work with in regard to the SFM and what we do have is seemingly quite out dated. Additionally the level of actual aerodynamic info needed to correctly build the SFM is - even from our position of little knowledge - obviously very large and not always easily available. Believe me if you try to actually do the work you get a whole new level of respect for the 3rd party devs and ED's aircraft builders and it is no wonder sometimes that things take a long time or sometimes need tweaking. If you want to give it a go then the starting point is probably here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116901 The guys working on the community A4 have said they are thinking about producing updated doco which would be very kind of them if they do and much appreciated. I can only hope they will when they have time. It doesn't cover the damage table I'm afraid and that has been trial and error for us so is also quite a painful experience as well as being quite subjective...eg we were given the feedback that the B17 seemed too weak so tweak the numbers up until it seems about right but there is no formula I know of for 1 damage point = x amount of durability of a material being hit by some sort of reference ammunition and it is all perception only. The new damage model that is coming may help with this but it also seems quite complex from the point of view of including it in a mod and again will require a lot of info about the aircrafts systems to get it right as it seems to go down to hydraulic lines etc plus information on how to implement it in DCS World which not being 3rd party devs we will probably have to guess about. Cheers, Stonehouse

Thanks! will pass that onto Markindel as that is his area.

Not sure that it is working at present. In the 1.5 beta thread it is still listed as an open scripting issue. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=147792

Not sure of the legalities of just adding Lilkiki's fire objects to the base set of statics but it would be a nice tribute if it was possible. Generally though from a mission builders viewpoint it would be nice to have placeable fire and smoke objects that could be set on from the mission start or be triggered via a trigger action or script and in an ideal world have a dialogue to allow the size of fire and smoke column and colour of smoke to be set. (eg black, white, grey). Something for smoke must already be there to handle the smoke from factories etc. A setting for level of damage to buildings in the mission editor would also be good. Probably by area like a brush in GIMP etc. Thinking ahead to the Normandy map (but applicable to any map and campaign including modern), as the invasion progressed there was increasing structure damage as fighting moved inland. Always having the buildings look fresh and whole won't be correct.