Stonehouse

Speaking of battlefields - bit off topic but a reminder that Lilkiki's fire objects are really great to set the scene and add additional smoke and fire to ground targets that get bombed. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2545192&postcount=39 I am hoping eventually that ED adds a set of different smoke and fire objects that can be used by mission builders to give atmosphere to missions and generally improve the look and feel. Thanks again Kuky your tweaks make a really big difference to how things look in game

Hi Kuky, I was just looking over at the other thread about the changes to the heat blur effect and while looking for the hotAir.lua file I noticed that wingtipContrail.lua is found in the DCSxxx/Config/Effect/ParticleSystem2 folder - was your post a typo with the folder as you listed? Cheers, Stonehouse

I've been updating the missions I've published previously on user files to DCS 1.5, latest mist etc so they will work with DCS 1.5.2 and I've been finding that even though the update seems to go through ok and the update date is refreshed to reflect the day I re upload the mission that they don't show up as new user files. So anyone who is interested in them and wishes to get the latest version doesn't see them in the list of newest files. I'm guessing that the "newest" sort filter is looking exclusively at the date the user file entry was created and ignoring the change date or something similar. Could this please be fixed if possible? Thanks, Stonehouse

Guarding the Eagles Nest updated to DCS 1.5+ etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/777654/ Axis - Uninvited Guests updated to DCS 1.5+ etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/775700/ TvT Uninvited Guests updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/775719/ TvT Eagles nest updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/777659/

Yes please!

:thumbup:That's good news. Glad to hear it. Don't worry embedded spaces or one less underscore is a common problem and you are not the first to suffer from it

He's trying to create a skin that is changeable on the fly. So if for instance you used the skin on 4 different aircraft you might be able to use a random number to end up with say a slightly different weathering texture on each one. It does kind of work at a basic level. We have a squadron skin that comes in two flavours western front and desert - by setting a local var at the top of the description lua you switch between the two texture sets but the weathering etc is the same. He came up with the idea of trying to go to the next step to attempt to make the skins more dynamic. Not talking about tail numbers etc as that's handled by the game already.

Hi wdrago, the information at http://457stonehouse.github.io/GCICAP/ really only applies fully to the script that is there. One final version of this script will be released. Lukrop has replaced me in development of the GCICAP script and going forward his work is found here https://github.com/lukrop/GCICAP Lukrop points people towards the pdf in my location because he doesn't have a similar document himself. The pdf in my location only partially - maybe 60-70% - applies to his script and at present his version of the script is not 100% stable and he is trying to solve some largish issues with it. You will most likely have to wait for him to release an updated version with the problems he is having resolved. The very first post in this thread explains the above too. If you are having problems getting it working I would guess you haven't got the set up in the mission editor correct in regard to the settings in the script. Something you've missed like the script expecting 3 CAP zones and you only have 2 in the mission or template aircraft missing or the pilot name incorrectly entered. You can always post up the mission and someone will help sort it out I am sure.

Possibly you have no code defects and are simply encountering one of these http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2494017&postcount=1 client or client group related issues

Ok well the options like rudder assistance are in C:\Users\your username\Saved Games\DCS\Config\options.lua P-51D and TF-51D are at lines 158 and 166 and if rudder assistance and autorudder are off the sections of lua should look like: ["P-51D"] = { ["CPLocalList"] = "default", ["assistance"] = 0, ["autoRudder"] = false, }, and ["TF-51D"] = { ["CPLocalList"] = "default", ["assistance"] = 0, ["autoRudder"] = false, }, Quite possibly Echo38 was on the right track and your DCS folder under saved games is corrupt somehow and if your options.lua sections look like above then perhaps as he suggested rename the DCS folder to force the game to create a new one, set up the basic control mappings for the P-51 and see if it makes a difference. If it does problem solved (other than you need to redo your mappings) and if not you can delete the newly created DCS folder and just rename the old one back.

Thanks for the kind thoughts, but let's just say he has a lack of patience issue. We've all tried that sort of advice to him but somehow it goes in one ear and out the other. Makes life difficult......

Pretty much you need to either find sound samples on the net or from some other source or get a good text to speech app and build your own. If you do a search here you'll find threads about it from the last year or so. Particularly from memory Baltic_Dragon (now selling their campaign as DLC through ED) had some good posts on the subject.

For whatever it is worth, I have no take off assistance set on ie 0% and I just ran three tests. As a reference note I am using a Warthog set and Saitek combat pedals. I put a P51 on the runway at Batumi ready to take off. Test one was stick left neutral, no trim, no rudder input, no flaps and the only control used was advancing the throttle to max as quickly as my respect for the cost of the Warthog permits. The result was a rapid left hand departure off the runway onto the grass and flipping tail over nose to end up a broken burning wreck. Second test run was same but using maybe 20-30 deg back stick. The departure was a bit slower but still quite quick and ended the same way. The third test was the same except that this time I held the stick fully back so the tail wheel had the minimum amount of swivel. This time I got about half way down the runway before ending up on the grass and had partially lifted off. If I had quickly relaxed the back pressure I might have achieved a very sloppy take off from the grass probably right on the edge of losing control and stalling but I held the back stick. End result was wing stall a few metres off the deck and upside down as a burning wreck. Each test the only controls used were either the throttle alone or throttle and pitch axis of the joystick. Conclusion is that nothing material has changed that I can see - which is a shame in some ways as a guy I fly regularly with has stopped flying the P51 because he feels it is too hard to get off the ground but won't "stoop" to using take off assistance so I was kind of half hoping in a sort of back to front way that something had changed just because it's hard to fly the P51 (which I like to do) as a whole squadron as he refuses to join in once he hears the plane is in the mission. Needless to say he won't even try the 109 or 190. I know this doesn't prove anything other than I see something different to the people saying there is no torque effect etc but trying to be logical and take the simplest solution approach it sounds like the difference is most likely in the individual's installation of DCS or how they have it configured and not the FM as if it was in the flight model I would have do something different to make the above behaviour take place or else I would see the same lack of torque etc.

Definitely agree on the need to indicate version in the filename of the script lua. From the mission builder point of view if I put a script on the action of a trigger and then revisit the mission sometime later I want to be able to tell at a glance from the lua filename in the action list what version it is and do not want to be forced to unzip the mission file and inspect the lua file contents to determine the version. To do otherwise may make slightly less work for the script developer but puts a lot more workload on the user.

Thanks Kuky for both the files and the reply. Cheers, Stonehouse

Off topic apologies but I noticed in the same general folder area there are things for explosions and in particular a series named sky something - does anyone know if that has any connection to the trigger.explosion effect that we've been using for the flak script? I was thinking it may be possible to mod the resulting explosion to look a bit smaller and better, any ideas?

@lukrop, I had a spare moment today over my lunch break and was looking at the latest version of GCICAP and the issues you have listed. I noticed you are still using S_EVENT_PILOT_DEAD and I believe it is quite possible this could be part of your problem because: Checking the wiki is seems somewhat related to human pilots I've noticed with other scripts that not all events are fired if something else of equal priority happens eg: S_EVENT_CRASH does not also get an S_EVENT_DEAD Also you can get an S_EVENT_DEAD and not get an S_EVENT_CRASH if the plane blows up in mid air due to catastrophic damage. If you think about it you really don't care about the pilots health only the airframe. I think perhaps you are assuming that crash or blowing up will always result in a pilot dead event however even if you ignore the second point above I can easily think of a situation where it doesn't - say a AI plane is shot up and the pilot bails. You won't get a pilot dead event but the airframe will eventually get destroyed. It might take 30 mins or more for the pilot to despawn via DCS internals and even then may not generate a pilot dead event. I believe you should try replacing "S_EVENT_PILOT_DEAD" in your conditions with S_EVENT_DEAD so that it becomes: Note you also may get an ENGINE_SHUTDOWN event without the plane landing. Damage, flame out etc. Particularly true for multi-engine aircraft like the A10 although you are probably ok because you are checking later as to whether the aircraft is airborne. Cheer, Stonehouse

Think it was a 1.5 beta scripting issue. Perhaps it hasn't been fixed yet not sure but from the known scripting issues over in the 1.5 beta thread. "31682 - Client groups not accessible in multiplayer."

Very nifty piece of work.

You don't install it as such but instead add a mission start trigger to your mission in the editor and select the action be a DO SCRIPT FILE and then click open to browse in the usual windows dialog sort of fashion to where you saved the mist lua file, select it and click ok in the dialog box. What happens behind the scenes is that when you save the mission a copy of the mist lua file is embedded in the mission file for the mission to use. That way the whole thing is encapsulated and avoids users having to download scripts to get the mission to work. I think it does tell you in the user guide pdf but aren't 100% sure on that. FYI It also does mean that you need to delete the action with the script file, save the mission and then re-add it if you are upgrading a script to a later version in an existing mission. This is because the script embedded in the mission is a separate copy of the actual lua file.

Are you thinking a set of actions from which one is chosen at random if the condition is satisfied? Otherwise from a logic point of view DCS would need a sub condition on the action to allow it to choose the right one. You could probably do something similar already by having very similar but mutually exclusive conditions with a different action on each one if you see what I am getting at.

It'd be nice to be able to specify the style of bombing (level, dive, loft etc etc) too

I've had the odd strange thing happen in regard to taxiways etc under 1.5 beta but at the time it was identified as being caused by specifying a parking slot for a ground spawning aircraft. I don't believe the bug has been fixed yet although I do believe it is on their to-do list. I have double and triple checked that the Jan2015 for DCS 1.5 script no longer specifies a parking slot so if you notice persistent issues with a particular airfield it's probably worth raising a post over in the DCS 1.5 bugs thread so someone can look into it as it should no longer be something caused (hopefully) by the GCICAP script. I am pretty sure Ajax's scripts are used by his virtual squadron for most of their MP missions so you may want to PM him directly to ask about it. He's a nice bloke and very helpful although I think he is helping out getting SLMOD going so may not have oodles of time to spare. I certainly have used them in the past for MP but only the AWACs script not the scrambleCAP one.

Wolf in the fold updated to DCS 1.5 along with several other changes to bring things up to date. <Edit, version 1.7 uploaded 09/2/2016 to fix some further issues found during play testing> https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/348122/ Allied Uninvited Guests updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/775695/ Robbing the Eagles nest updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/777532/ TvT Uninvited Guests updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/775719/ TvT Eagles nest updated to DCS 1.5 etc https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/777659/

AWACS doesn't work as EWR. This is due to DCS not the script. Only the ground based EWR units 55G6 EWR, 1L13 EWR, Hawk sr, Patriot str work with the script (as listed in user guide). The message thing is a known issue with mist.message.add - I suggest turning off GCI messages for the final version and instead use Ajax's excellent AWACS script. http://www.159thgar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=75796&sid=fed0e9563766f3c802019398a141e04b There is no limit to number of waypoints and I just zoom in as far as I can in the editor to place the last over the first. Border design and layout is really what suits your mission. Spawning is random as to which base/CAP zone is used (depending on whether you pick ground or air starts) but I would expect each sides initial CAPs to spawn in roughly at the same time. Sometimes if you are using group size 4 and ground starts you'll see the first group spawn in 2 which will take off and then the last pair will spawn in and take off. This is just that the particular runway only supports two aircraft taking off at a time. But generally speaking initial CAPs for a side spawn roughly at the same time. If you aren't seeing this then perhaps you have a setup issue still.