Frogisis

Cool, that was my thinking. I took a peek at the first mission of all 3 Hog campaigns in the ME when I was teaching myself how to use it, and it seems like a good order in terms of a buildup of atmosphere and complexity. Dang, I looked at that SIMHQ link and now I got the AAR bug...

Augh, that used to be a butt! I'll never complain about JTAC not marking targets again! OK, that's not true... (Awesome AAR, by the way. I can't wait to do the other campaigns now that I finished the helpful tour up the theater's coast that is Georgian Hammer.)

I came here to post about this but after a search I'll just bump this thread instead. Rockets do seem to be really, really weak. I barely have to touch a truck with the GAU and it bursts into flame, but I just emptied an entire tube of rockets onto the same type of truck with about the same spread and it trundled away unscathed. Tacview even shows me scoring hits on it with all seven of them (though I realize it's pretty generous with counting hits). Sometimes they seem to work like you'd expect - I took out a BTR with 3, and one time that whole little knot of trucks and infantry in Instant Action with all 7 (though that could have mostly been the GAU I followed up with), so maybe it's been addressed but since the last post was in October I'm guessing not. It's too bad, because I really like the idea of classic unguided rockets, I just wish they were more usefully implemented, especially now that we have that resource manager where they'd be the perfect "freebie" ordinance. Does anyone know if there's a way to mod this in the interim? Copy and rename a file for Russian rockets that do have (more believable) splash damage or something?

Awesome! Both of those things were sorely missing. Finding yourself out ahead of the rest of your group was one of the things that made taking over an individual vehicle to go and fight a more risky proposition that was strictly necessary. I realize that might have been part of a design tradeoff, since the player's a better shot than the AI and so should have to put his neck out, but it seemed like having them all stick by me should be an option, or that they should come to where I am when I relinquish control, instead of having that tank run back to its friends as if I were an evil spirit that had been possessing it. Will you be able to direct air assets while just playing as JTAC, or will you need to be the commander for that side? Super useful. This is some of the most sorely wanted but clumsiest to find info for your forces. Especially minimum range for MRLS. Right now if you click on the target spot for a fire mission that was set in the ME to see how it's coming along, it seems to set the radius back to zero, which is kinda annoying. YES. I liked the shake for ambiance and again, I read the lack of stabilization as a gameplay challenge to get you to trade off firing vs. moving, but of course it's too good an idea not to be on real tanks, and that's kinda important or else I'd be on the BF3 forums. Turret lock etc. sounds great for roads and cross-country, too. This is easily what I'm most excited about. Not only does it make the utility units relevant as more than just props, TGP red herrings, or shooting gallery ducks, but since virtual tanks cost the taxpayers neither dollars nor sons, I like to have grandiose setpiece battles where I sometimes find my brave armored columns have nothing but machine gun ammo left by the time they reach the dastardly Baron's stronghold. I hope some templates will be included so you can confidently fill a mission with whatever you want to be plentiful or scarce. Since we've also got fuel trucks, though, will ground units now be able to run out of gas? Also, will the skill level you set for utility units have any bearing on how fast they perform their resupplying, or is that all on the combat unit's end (or both)? Yeah, I guess it is a little on the big side. I still hope tanks get a muzzle flash like IFVs do, however. I'm not sure what this represents... Is there some entire category of icons we've been missing? What kind of information will these provide that we're not currently seeing? Or is this just replacing the current little "tank" and "AAA" etc. symbols with the official NATO/Russian symbols you see in the editor? That actually sounds pretty useful... The title of this thread confuses me a little, though - This is just a preview of an upcoming update, right? The fact that there's a specific date in the title kinda throws me off and makes me wonder if my auto updater is broken or I'm missing a download link or something. Is this a "stay tuned in the next few days" kind of thing, or more of a "come back in February" thing, or should I know enough now not to ask those sorts of questions?

The dream is coming true! I love it!

You know, I bet there's actually a lot of fudging you could do with the mission editor to make infantry more useful until they get some official attention. I always ignore it because it feels against the spirit of the whole realistic sim thing, but it might finally be a good reason to use the "immortal" option - Say you place some infantry in a town or a forest, and each little fire team starts off invulnerable, but there's a trigger zone around them set in such a way that every few minutes or so a check is performed that has a small chance of making one of them mortal again as long as opposing units are inside it. If opposing infantry enter that zone to engage them, then both are rendered entirely vulnerable. It'd require a lot of finesse to have it so that they're not all mowed down by waiting tanks as soon as one friendly rifleman strays into the area, as if he'd lured them out like an ice cream man, but I'm sure it could be done with some clever flags and triggers. Maybe make the trigger zone really small and require the whole opposing squad to be inside it to represent them routing the troops from their fortifications or something... That could be another interesting mechanic: bunkers and RPG troops that "activate" along the route your forces are advancing, representing the camouflaged entrances to underground tunnels or some other fortification, and you would have to get a squad or two close to one of them to "go inside" (be deleted) and then some series of probability triggers would play out to see whether you shut it down along the whole route. As long as they're in the feeble state they currently are, for suspension of disbelief I don't think it's any worse than a lot of the other stuff we currently have ground units doing, or more accurately not doing. Yeah, I'm actually gonna give this a try once I get all this stupid work done...

That's awesome, congratulations! It really isn't that difficult once you actually understand why you're doing all the steps and how they relate to each other instead of just going through it by rote. It got to the point where there'd be a minute I'd just be twiddling my thumbs (or hitting the time acceleration) while I waited for the EGI to align, but now I've discovered all sorts of neat little things I can do to customize my jet just the way I like it. Slew speeds, weapon ripple quantities, HOF for sensor fused munitions, radio presets, relative volumes including Betty, radar altimeter tape on the HUD, etc...

I've been wondering about this myself, so I just browsed through the file structure and here's what I was able to figure out: The skins are in the "Bazar/liveries/A-10C/" folder, but instead of being a set of texture files, they're a subfolder containing a "description.lua" file with a catalog of .dds images to use on different parts of the plane, and what country has access to that paint job. An A-10 skin seems to be made of 12 basic parts, "1-a" through "1-L" (presumably capital so it won't be mistaken for an "i") and then next to it in the description is the name of the corresponding compressed .dds file stored in "Bazar/World/textures/A-10.zip". If you look at the descriptions, some of them mix and match parts from different "sets", which you can see if you look at the skins themselves (some have those gray stripes on the wings, etc). And then there are four lines about where it puts the numbers, which apparently you pick by putting either "TactNumbers-USAF-Light_black"(or something else) or "empty" in the line for where you want your livery to have its numbers. So really all you need to do to make a new skin is copy and rewrite a folder and its accompanying "description.lua" file in "Bazar/liveries/A-10C/" so it contains a list of the textures you want to use for each part, and make sure the "countries = {"XXX","XXX"}" line at the very bottom has the three letters for the country you want to use that skin. But, there's a wrinkle in that the skins for non-US countries have their components in the same directory as the "description.lua" file, in which case the argument for that line is set to "false" instead of "true", which I guess is how it tells the texture loader where to look for that component. So you could either put the textures in with the description file in its unique subdirectory and set everything in it to "false," or add them to the "A-10C.zip" file and set everything to "true." So to recap, it seems when picking a skin DCS World looks for a subdirectory in "Bazar/liveries/A-10C/" which will be the name of the skin as long as it has a "description.lua" in it containing the three letter code for the country you've set the plane to, and then that .lua file tells it where to find the 12 components of the skin (1-a through 1-L), what they're called, what set of number decals to use, and which of four places on the plane to paste them or not. I originally mentioned that I though the set in the .zip file called "def_1" was a blank template but it's actually really weathered - However, a quick google search netted me the real deal: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php/topic/35919-dcs-a-10c-template/

Something that might be interesting is a special zone or other gizmo that "generates" infantry - In another thread someone was talking about how even little convoys and things would be equipped with rifles and MANPADs and such to ward off aircraft, so it might make seemingly harmless trucks and other supply targets of opportunity more fun and surprising to engage if they had a probability of randomly spawning some riflemen who'd take pot shots at you or even a mini-SAM (Of course this could be done with the mission editor, but in that case there's no reason that logic couldn't be baked right in as something you could toggle). That could dovetail nicely with adding individual pedestrians as civilian traffic, too, if only just to have them walk into view and then run away and be deleted once out of sight - Obviously people aren't going to be out for a stroll down the street in the middle of a battle, but it'd be really cool to see a little figure sprint across the street through your TGP, presumably on his/her way to make sure old so-and-so is still safe. After all, we already have city buses calmly plying their routes past freshly burning tanks, and people driving so sedately you'd think they're out to buy some ear plugs to block out all those annoying explosions.

You really can feel the difference with the AFM - It's much more like you're actually moving through a fluid instead of just moving in the "abstract" way that an airplane moves. The feeling of inertia seems a lot thinner without it, as well. When the plane starts to do something you don't want, there are physical signs beforehand, such as shaking, whereas with the basic flight model you just go into some bad state if you break a hidden rule. ~ All things being equal, I'd rather see the current selection of aircraft get nice new models, cockpits, and flight dynamics, but if that's not in the cards, it'd be neat to see some Western European aircraft join the lineup, like the Tornado, the Gripen, and the Rafale. I know the Tornado's got a lot of fans, and those last two I think are just gorgeous. I'd also like to see some other regions of the world join in on the coalitions - It'd be nice to get China, South Korea, and Japan in on the action, as well as places in South America, the Middle East (beyond Turkey and Israel), and Africa. Also, didn't there used to be just "Insurgents"? Would be down for seeing that restored, along with a "UN" side, with those spiffy white paint jobs in the User Files section. It'd be neat if we could even set up 3-way conflicts, though I'm not sure if there's actually modern military doctrine for that which we could draw from (what color would they be? etc.)

YES. Though first I would like to see a BF-109 and an A6M Zero, then maybe a Spitfire. Then a P-38. Then an F-16. Then the entire Saab stable, from Draken to Gripen. Then maybe a Rafale. I don't really have the time or money for many more planes besides the ones we have now, and am waiting to see how the current crop turns out, but I would 100% buy a Gripen or a Rafale.

Thanks for pointing this out - I was just about to post in this thread wondering why this was the case but it's a good thing I ran a search, first. Not that I begrudge anyone for wanting to fly trainers or other more unglamorous jets when theoretically anything is possible (my guess was that a lot of people had genuine soft spots for these planes either for their designs or nostalgia for their own training, or that here was a military market for getting cadets ready for trainers as well), but it does seem like an odd choice on the face of it. This makes it make a lot more sense, however.

Yeah, I've had that, too, where if you order a specific attack pattern, he'll set it up but then just seem to get cold feet and veer off at the last minute without firing. It seems to happen regardless of the direction I set. The other issue I've been having, though, is that if you tell him to just go ahead and freely "engage [target type]", lately he just attacks EVERYTHING and uses up all his weapons inside a minute or two. It certainly clears out the battlefield, but it leaves him with just guns should there be new threats that appear later on, or if you yourself wish you still had a Maverick left to nail that one last little stubborn tank and go home. This used to be my go-to wingman command as opposed to specific targets, since he'd take out all the Xs he could currently see (great for air defenses), then rejoin and be ready for whatever was next, but now it just puts him in Berserker Mode, and he usually wanders off into a SAM zone and then drops all his stores anyway once it shoots at him (Incidentally I'd like to see a command telling him how cautious to be, so that an RWR threat could override an attack, though I suppose "orbit here" could serve the same function if you want to micromanage him). This would only be a minor procedural wrinkle if you could then order him to RTB and rearm, but it seems that for now he's only got what he's got. I dunno if he'll do this if you just land without telling him to RTB independently, and then he just follows you back into the air, but after the time he crashed into me on the runway while landing, I haven't been taking that chance. I understand programming an NPC AI is very difficult since these different bits of scripting logic have unintended emergent consequences, but I think it'd be a good idea to include more "fudge commands" like that in the radio menu for now, to make up for the fact that in real life you could have a little live exchange to sort things out. (P.S. What happened to the "fence in/out" commands?)

This happened to me a couple times, too... I don't remember exactly what caused it or how I resolved it, but it had to do with something I tried to modify in the game's files, and went away when I restored the backup. So... it can be fixed, is what I'm trying to say. Using the backups from the autoupdater might be a helpful tactic or at least let you figure out what's causing the trouble if you do it a bit at a time.

I used to use that exact stick until I got an X52 for about 90 bucks, which isn't as elegant as the Thrustmaster Warthog and requires a little bit of fudging with the layout, but is ultimately not that big a departure. A basic joystick like the Sidewinder works alright as long as you customize the keyboard layout so that it's easy to manipulate with one hand. I had something based around the standard "W,A,S,D," as the China Hat, and then all the other controls radiating out from that, and it was almost like a de facto HOTAS.

I was/am getting them, too, but I just bit the bullet and turned off vsynch, and now everything is a lot more consistent, and I deal with tearing instead of stutters. Ultimately, though, I don't think there's much we can do on our end, since the CPU is being swamped by "world" calculations at the sim's current level of development.

I would like to be able to request a mark from the JTAC. Not sure how the mark is determined now, if it's random or what, but I just did a night mission where a single "package" of armored targets was spread over about a dozen square miles, with just some coordinates radioed to me in the center. For the first tank, the JTAC used the IR pointer, but each time after that it was just "re-attack is authorized" and I had to fly around and around and around looking for each isolated unit with no further coordinates despite my requests, and it didn't strike me as challenging so much as inelegant and wasteful. Much in the same way you can ask JTAC to repeat the brief, it'd be nice if you could ask them to mark it again if they have that capability active in the first place. Maybe there could be some kind of catch, like if they light up too many things they give away their position and are no longer an invisible unit. Also still pining for an in-flight music option/directory a la IL-2. The feels!

They're almost universally never as good, either - If, as they say, "genius is the capacity for taking infinite pains," you're only going to get the effort required to make something extraordinary when motivated by the desire to work on it for its own sake, and the eye for quality that develops as a consequence, which money can certainly attract, but not inculate.

Awesome, I can't wait to hear it. It's seriously almost there, I think. Oh, no way, I didn't know that. If that really is what's consistently done, then let's go for it, but I hope not - Actual affirmations give a little bit more of a sense of presence and character, and I would guess that in real life there'd be units that allow a margin of flexibility in just intra-element comms in terms of what specific wording everyone thinks is clearest. And also, because it's a playback instead of a live, conscious person, if it just stopped at "Two," I'd be liable to wonder if something's wrong with the AI scripting and the rest of a message is getting dropped. I think it's pretty realistic already by virtue being serious radio comms and not containing any cheers or Hollywood catchphrases, but then I'd call Flaming Cliffs realistic just because I'd put scrolling arcade shooters on the same continuum of "airplane games."

Are you using simple or regular comms? I think the "orientation" of the comm hat might have gotten switched in this update, since I couldn't contact my wingman when messing around earlier tonight until I tried a different button.

"My god, it's full of Flankers!" This is unbelievably cool and I must fly it.

This is awesome. Really great idea. My flight feels so modern and with-it now. Whoever's doing this has a pretty good range, and I actually like the way the "o'clock" section came out. It's nice to have the character keep a cool head for just spotting targets, and saving the higher tension for evasive maneuvers and the like, in addition to the fact that you're going to be hearing them a lot so anything too intense is going to become grating after a while. I'd actually err on the side of "boring" if anything. The "emergency" ones all came out great (especially "sam launch" and "tally bandit," with that little crack at the end), but a couple, mainly the "fox" and "guns" calls, sound just a little bit cartoonish to me, as opposed to the professional confidence of the ground attack calls. Great job, though - I've always thought it was kinda lame to have only male voices and I'm glad somebody did something about it. The same person doing a JTAC or AWACS would be great, too, especially if she can do different voices (or if you just conscripted a different friend or whomever). EDIT: I was only listening to the samples individually before since I was technically supposed to be working, but I just flew a mission where she got targeted by a Strela, and goes, "Two: SAM LAUNCH!!! ...3 o'clock." All those samples sound great by themselves, but as much as I'd miss the higher energy, I think those need to be toned down to a kind of taut steeliness to match the surrounding speech while still being tense.

You know what? I think I will. All that was really holding me back was that setting up the recording software sounded like a total chore. Ughhhhhh omg all the things I'd have to click that aren't in a cockpit... Think I'll make a basic mission that shows off the various weapons and how the other elements on the field interact, then fly it from takeoff to landing while talking through what's going on to someone with zero experience, i.e. someone at the level of this Nerd^3 guy. The only DCS "explanatory" videos I've really seen have been either tips & tricks for people who already get it, or jokey "this shit is bananas! I can't even imagine how people do this lol" videos about how opaque and baffling everything is if you're not already initiated, so I think it'd be cool to have one that bridges the two, showing everything being done while still saying "it's not that scary, think of it like using three separate smartphones..." Maybe it'd help sims become 0.006% less niche.

Aw dang! That gray one at the top, now that's a capital-F Fighter jet. Nothing to visually break up that sloping nose, and just emphasizing how it cuts through the sky... That there is some class. Also dig the "ACE" demo-y skin. Has a kind of "Near Future Pacific Rim Prototype" feel.

That's what was fun about it, that you keep saying "Noooo! You're almost there! That one! That one! Augh you were so close!" It's kinda like in a horror movie where you're yelling at the character onscreen to not go through That Door. After seeing the Giant Bomb one and now this one, I was imaging earlier today I'd make a "let's play" video where I'd walk through a mission while explaining things to people who know nothing about sims - It would at least make them seem less intimidating, I'd think.