artao

I only just discovered this yesterday while watching a large tank battle I'd set up. A tank gets destroyed and the rest in the column just drive right through it. Two opposing enemy columns pass each other on a bridge going opposite directions while fighting ... and pass right through each other. I realize this is a flight sim, but seriously. WTAF. I don't wanna hear "it's too hard" because simulations -- including flight sims -- have been able to deal with this fine for decades. This behavior destroys legit common tactics. Something I learned from Jane's AH-64D Longbow was to first take out the lead and rear vehicles in an advancing column. This traps the rest of the vehicles between them and they become easy to pick off. Not with THIS vehicle behavior. Taking out vehicles on a bridge or intersection to clog it up. Not with this behavior. The deeper I learn about some things in DCS the more disappointed and frustrated I get. Over a decade in development and THIS is still the vehicle behavior? How many more years will it take to correct this? This seriously destroys tactically using weapons in many circumstances. I can't believe it's like this, I was stunned to a gaping mouth when I saw it happening. Very disappointed. Tank Battle A01.miz

AHA! Two problems. I had the MLRS too close to the battle. Moved them much further back. Also, they need to be on level ground. Which is fiddly to figure out in the ME. Then I noticed they weren't starting loaded with rockets. So I set them to "Visible Before Activation." That solved it. They now elevate their tubes and fire as intended. I thought setting them to Alarm State: Red made them totally ready to go. Is this a bug or a feature? Not particularly intuitive. I was trying to figure out how to alter the loadout when I was like, "Maybe this'll work." Cuz I'd tried everything else I could think of. Working mission attached. Nothing to play at the moment really unless you wanny fly a Huey around an armor battle. Tank Battle A01.miz

Mission attached. Just setting up a big armor battle, nothing for the player to do at this point. Just experimenting. I cannot for the life of me figure out why the MLRS units won't fire. At first I had both Smerches but decided to try Urugan for one of them to see if that made a difference. They don't even raise their tubes. They have attached ammo trucks. Pulling my hair out here. Please help. Tank Battle A01.miz

Yes, but Claude AI is better at the scripting. ChatGPT is better for brainstorming and prose writing. Claude writing the Lua for me is actually helping ME learn a bit of Lua. Cuz of course it generally needs bug testing and tweaking, so I gotta be able to read and understand what the code is doing to discuss it it Claude. ChatGPT keeps trying to code but just ... No. I keep telling it to stop, but it just won't. LOL

So I've got this here mission I'm recreating. I had it working like half a year ago or so, maybe a year, and Win 10 took a dump on me and I had to wipe and reinstall. Lost everything on the C drive. Now I have a more solid plan cuz I know what I did, so it went quicker. Synopsis: Exfil a delta team from an insurgent held valley in the middle of the night, flying from eastern Lebanon to just inside the border of Syria. Claude AI helped (well mostly itself) wrote the random spawning script, which works perfectly. I manually and individually set about half the units to Alarm State Red, ROE Free, Disperse for 600s, the others also include Engage Air Weapons Yes and 100% Engagement Distance. The insurgents are armed with AKMs and RPGs, with a few AAA trucks roaming about. Both ChatGPT and Claude AI tell me that ground units can't attack air units with AKMs and RPGs. But I remember it working in the past when I tried. Claude tells me there was an AI behavior change. Yes? How can I get these gorram insurgents to fire on the helo? NOTE: Mission is currently set to be flown by AI, for testing. Spec Forces Extraction A06.miz

I can't say I'll print this one, but I've certainly printed such long manuals in the past. And will again. My printer is very ink-effecient tho, and is an ink well based one so ink are much cheaper than cartridge-based ones.

Yeah. The Huey shouldn't do a loop when you take your hands off the controls. LOL (I've had that happen a few times. Like ... WTAF... restart the mission and it doesn't happen) Also, the FFB. If hydraulics go out, them controls should get heavy. Cyclic and even moreso collective -- and FFB collectives exist. To quote ChatGPT, "now that Immersion’s FFB patents have expired, the sim industry has zero excuse not to support force feedback as a first-class feature. It’s ridiculous that we’re still stuck with half-baked or inconsistent FFB in 2025"

Hydraulics are the only reason helo controls feel as light as they do. Those hydraulics go out and you start feeling the forces on them rotors, cyclic and collective. Now that FFB is becoming more common (I personally have an old Logitech G940 ... check ebay, seriously. 80usd total after troubleshooting) -- including FFB collectives (wish i had one) -- this really needs to be addressed. It's my understanding that you feel it in the collective more than the cyclic. But FFB is very important for proper feel, and the only reason we flight simmers haven't been enjoying it like racing simmers have (where it's considered pretty essential) is patents idiocy. Now that THAT is over, we can expect FFB to become as common in flying sims as it is in racing sims. And ALL the modules need work on that level. Step up please. Thanks. FFB is back and growing and will soon be considered essential for flight simming just as it is for racing. To quote ChatGPT, "now that Immersion’s FFB patents have expired, the sim industry has zero excuse not to support force feedback as a first-class feature. It’s ridiculous that we’re still stuck with half-baked or inconsistent FFB in 2025 ..."

Okay, I see what happened and I've corrected it myself. What is waypoint 8 in the mission SHOULD BE waypoint 9, it's Mormon Peak. Waypoints 8 and 9 are reversed. So I deleted waypoint 8 then added a new waypoint over Mormon Peak after the L1 refueling landing. Also, Iabled waypoints with LS, M5, and L1. And I added a labeled box for the No Fly Container over Groom Lake/Area 51. It'd be nice to have that in all the missions. EDIT: I also noticed that the push point, waypoint 2, was set to orbit until 16:12 rather than 16:14, so I corrected that as well. I noticed this cuz the target waypoint, M5, was flagged red due to ground speed of 33 kts and ToT fixed at 16:28. All the other waypoints had locked ground speed so I unlocked all those as well, then added locked ground speed of mach 0.6 to waypoint 4, the target IP, and mach 0.8 at the target waypoint, leaving all the others alone.

As simple as that. Waypoint 8 is way WAY out of proper position. Pretty quick fix. Please thanks. Compare screenshot to pg13 in the briefing document. EDIT: I thought it was just in mission 3, then got to mission 4. It seems to be in all missions involving landings for refueling at Lincoln County. In fact, mission 4 and up go to waypoint 8 (Mormon Peak) then back up to waypoint 9 (Lincoln Co. Airfield) and then don't bother going back to Nellis AFB at all. Has no one else ever played this campaign such that they didn't notice this stuff? Am I the only one who plays these? I'm correcting them as I go, but it sure would be neat if I didn't have to. Since there's an update coming out, please add this to it. Properly labeling waypoints and adjusting timings, altitudes, and speeds as well would be appreciated, as I find I'm needing to do that as well. Also, putting a box in where the No Fly Container is would be super helpful and super easy to do. I did these things for missions 3 and 4, but decided to just fix the waypoints for the rest. And it is all the rest. They end at Lincoln. Co. airfield rather than refuel there and continue to Nellis like the briefings say.

AGL I reckon.

No matter if I'm flying above 1500ft or not, I'm still told to get above 1500ft. I've just started blowing it off, but still. It gets annoying.

I've been trying to replay the campaign with no deaths. So far no good. I guess skills DO fade fast if you don't fly often. BUT! Now that FFB is working right in DCS again (for me) helo is much easier. This happens in a couple missions. Mission 1 is where I'm fighting with that right now, landing at the hilltop for the artillery supplies drop off, but I know it happens in others too. Not always, but sometimes. Particularly on rough low-angle landings. I would provide a track, but all I have starts glitching out after the landing for supplies pick-up. Once I didn't notice and tried to take off but the landing skid stuck inside the pad and the helo spun and broke off the tail. Incidentally, at that hilltop landing site the smoke is a bit close to the pad I think. If quite restricts the approach. putting it further from the pad would be much appreciated; even outside the FSB perimeter would be ideal, at least 20m away. Pretty please. And then I'm having the problem of not being able to contact the team with the distress call after the drop off.

It seems save game isn't available for any campaigns. None I've checked at least, so I gave up checking. Reflying Paradise Lost, trying to "Iron Man" it, and some of those missions are long and have multiple steps. I hope ED gets it working with campaigns soon.

I could have been clearer. I'm fine paying for a new module ... A discounted price. Not full price. We've been waiting quite awhile. When I bought the MiG-21 like 2 yrs ago I was unaware of its issues. Now that I know, well .. I wish I'd known then. I still enjoy flying it, but there's always the "It's not right" in my head while doing so. Any updates to what now exists tho? No payment. Updates have been LONG coming, and it'll take likely a five-plus years for them to come out with a new MiG-21 module.