BBQ

Fellow OC's, I just upgraded to an AMD 8 core FX which comes stock at I think 4.0 or 4.1. Using the "Auto" OC'ing features, I've been around 4.35 with no problems. However, when I bump up the "CPU Ratio" setting from 20 to 21, everything is stable, except that when I run DCS, I get this horrible studdering effect. Does anyone know what might be causing this? I've got a Corsair liquid cooled radiator/fan setup -- temp is 44 deg C., which I think is totally fine. (I'm no expert at OC'ing -- really just a novice at best). Any suggestions, or is it simply a case of OC'ing too much?

I didn't exactly "solve" my problem -- but in case others end up looking in this thread -- some tips: 1. All else failing, look at a campaign mission within the editor to see how the DCS staff created the JTACs in their missions. 2. If using something like an armored HMMVV, be sure to add an advanced waypoint action of "ROE"-->"Hold Fire" so that the JTAC doesn't destroy the targets you're hoping he will task you with! 3. Adding the "invisible" command in the advanced waypoint actions is nice -- but just because they are invisible doesn't mean they can't be killed. (especially when you stick one smack in the middle of an enemy formation). If that is a concern, consider also making them invulnerable/immortal. 4. Generally speaking, the JTAC needs LOS (line of sight) to the targets. However, if you're using the "Engage Group" (as opposed to the "Assign Group"action), you can enable the "Visible" option, which makes it a mute point -- they will be able to task targets even when they are not within the JTACs LOS. 5. First order of business regarding advanced waypoint actions is to: Set callsign Set Frequency (it's been requested to stay w/in 30.00000 to 50.00000 range on FM) Invisible/Immortal "Assign Group 1" "Assign Group 2"

Diving back into the ME after a fairly long hiatus -- and having problems getting the FAC to assign targets. I've re-read all the threads about the whole "engage group" vs. "assign group" vs. "FAC" vs. triggered actions/advanced waypoint actions, the wiki, and also looked at missions in the editor that I know have a working FAC. My problem: I always get "No Tasking Available." Here's a screenshot of the advanced waypoint actions:

I stand corrected (regarding hogs not leaving any for our armor). Thanks for the knowledge!

AFAIK the A10 rounds work on the tanks -- just as they did in the Iraq wars ;). Pretty sure Iraqi tanks were mostly destroyed by aircraft as opposed to US armor. Key word being "most".

Just saw this Should u buy it? Two words:

Had an "epiphany" type experience in CA this morning. I mainly bought it for A) to support ED, and B) as a kind of Mission Editor tool -- I could just go into mission and see how things were actually going, for a set battle, e.g. I could see how the various units move around, deal with obstacles, etc. So this morning I'm checking out one of the included missions (CA) to get the feel for how to play from that perspective. I jumped into an MBT, was able to call in some CAS, danger close, and it was freakin' awesome! Hard to describe really -- except the whole world seems less, well -- artificial. At one point I had to break from cover, along with 4 or 5 other MBTs that were in my group, to reach another area of cover, in order to get closer to the enemy. I was like "Go! Go! Go!", and when I finally reached the cover and turned around, I was rooting for the last guy to make it, as he was getting hit pretty hard. Then I was like, "Did I just actually root for a piece of friggin' AI?? But it makes sense -- I had ordered us to move -- it was my command, and so I felt like, obligated or something, to keep these guys safe. I can't imagine what actual leaders go through IRL when they make these decisions. I could have sat there playing for hours -- without ever even getting into a cockpit ;) What can I say? Expect the un-expected. I was so use to living "at altitude" in my "office", that the perspective from the ground blew me away -- especially watching the a/c that I requested as the JTAC, start schwacking the enemy. It was a beautiful thing.

aha! So I'm getting the old "It's a feature not a bug" thing (I'm a software tester by trade.) So let's call them legitimate gripes. Gripe number one is a wish that the damage model would be more accurate (as to the cause). Gripe number two would be the ATC AI would be better. Gripe number three would be that AI pilots would taxi and take off better! Not really gripes really - just wishes - as I can't see how anyone could possibly complain about this awesome piece of software!

Beslan has only one taxi-way to the runway, roughly in the middle of the runway. In order to takeoff, the pilot must taxi (on the runway) to either end, and then takeoff. There is a little skirt/apron at the threshold that allows aircraft to turn around. At 17:03, I couldn't set my altimeter QFE to the required setting -- it wouldn't go below the setting equal to 500 ft. That's bug #1. I continued on and tried to troubleshoot the problem with the takeoff (practically that is), and this time I waited at the threshold until #2 could get clear and wait on the apron. However, he wouldn't move onto the apron even though he had plenty of room to do so. He just sat there a bit short of the threshold. I moved around, giving him even more room -- but alas, he wouldn't budge. I was able to scoot past him, maybe a meter of wingtip clearance between us. So that is bug #2 (AI won't move to apron). After I took off, #2 began his roll-out and of course #3 requested clearance, which was given, and as #2 passed him they each gave up a wing, and both ejected! So that's bug #3. Finally, I noticed #2's aircraft took on some rounds, which is a mystery, as #3 hadn't unloaded his gun to my knowledge. That's bug #4. Bug #1 occurs at 17:04. (and after I get clearance to takeoff -- verify ATC QFE setting) Bug #2 occurs around 17:28 (Sorry, didn't write down time, but it happens a few minutes before Bug #3). Bug #3 occurs at 17:33. Bug #4 occurs either instantly at 17:33 or a minute or two later (see screenshot below). Attached files: Track

I created a pdf of all the commands (only voice commands, that is). It might be too small for some -- just zoom in to 200% with your PDF reader and/or Print enlarged by 200%: Download PDF of VAC voice commands

I thought this might be a bug -- but if anyone knows otherwise, please let me know -- I created a mission starting from Novorossisyk aerodrome, input the correct freq. (see screenshot), and was unable to contact ATC -- there was no entry available for selection for Novorossisyk (again, see screenshot). It just occurred to me that it might have to do with which "side" the aerodrome is on? (red or blue). I'm pretty sure I made it blue, since I was intending to fly an A10C from the USA.

I wonder if there are any plans to update the "briefing" images -- IIRC, they are limited to something like 512x512, which is fine for some kind of image/screenshot to glance at -- but in the past (Vergeev Group comes to mind), mission builders tried to use those images to detail flight plans, engagement areas, etc. The one's the VG created were astonishingly accurate -- didn't know at the time, but have since read alot about Soviet/Afghan war, including a bunch of plates/maps -- and I did a double-take and wondered where I had seen all of that symbology on a map before -- spooled up the VG campaign and there they were. Until this is "fixed" in the ME, I thought I would just include PDF's or something, along with any missions, but would be nice to be able to include them in the .miz itself.

Thanks fellas -- and Bahger, will definitely adopt your methods -- I appreciate the knowledge.

For a number of months now I've been planning a potential single-player campaign -- having done tons of research related to the imagined conflict -- and it's looking like I don't have much further to go before I start creating the Air Tasking Order (ATO). I've also started creating the voice-overs (yours truly). Before I take the dive and plunge into the ME wholeheartedly, I wondered if anyone wanted to comment on the potential risk of creating missions, et. al, knowing that the "code" of the DCS World is in constant flux; i.e., what are the chances that in the end, my campaign might not work, e.g., in the new world as rendered by "EDGE", etc. I'm thinking that's just the nature of beast -- i.e., software development -- but one of my goals will be to have "best practices" in place to minimize any potential problems. For example, I can certainly do all the VOs with no risk, as they will be used no matter what the software looks like. Any comments, suggestions, or just feel like sounding-off, please reply!

I have same problem Pizzicato -- did you find a solution?

Sabre -- just wanted to let you know that these qualification campaigns are top-notch, very well-done. I'm having a lot of fun flying them, and know how much time and effort it takes to put something of this quality together. Hopefully in the near future I'll be starting my own project. I consider your missions and the venerable Vergeev Group effort as the golden standard towards which to aim.

Yeah, stop recruiting soldiers with Jedi training :lol:

I haven't read the entire thread, but did search for "initialize" and only found one item that wasn't relevant -- In the ME, I loaded the Mistv1_1.lua in the "Initialize Script" (not sure if that is exact name) field at the bottom of the Trigger Menu, created one trigger to happen 5 seconds into mission (the demo script provided), and sure enough, I started getting data displayed on the screen after 5 seconds. Is this the "preferred" way to start Mist now, as opposed to creating a trigger at Mission Start with a "Do Script" action?

Just wanted to thank Ricardo, devrim, and ZMEY, and anyone else who had a part in creating this beautiful cockpit. Thanks!

takes me a while to d/load the new files -- and ends up, I didn't choose the right installation during the install when it prompts you for which "version" you are upgrading from. All good now -- though a bunch of activations down the drain.

Should go in "Tips" thread if not already there.

I think I've still got a valid issue -- which file to download -- the "Module" or the "Previous Version"? Initially I just assumed I could install in this order: DCS World v1.2.4 A10C v1.2.4 (activate) Combined Arms v.1.2.4 (activate) Blackshark v1.00 from DVD (activate) DCS: Black Shark 2 Upgrade v1.2.4 (attempted to activate, cannot -- using license that was listed underneath the download)

I'm missing something here -- when I go to Downloads --> Modules, the current available build is "DCS: Black Shark 2 Upgrade 1.2.4 (download version)" The filename to download is KA-50_1.2.4.11652_168.exe Then, if I go to the Downloads --> Previous Versions area, the build is labeled "DCS: Black Shark 2 Upgrade 1.1.1.1 (English download version)" The filename of the 4 files start with KA-50_full_en_bsupd_1.1.1.1 Yet PoleCat is suggesting I find a file named KA-50_bs1update_en_1.2.2.7122_23.exe:cry: Will someone please straighten me out on this?

Trouble Ticket #: 21740 (error report attached, generated from activation tool)