Kocrachon

My squadron is running into this issue also. We have 3 servers, 2 running from the same IP space but on two different physical boxes using the Dedicated Server Client. IP address: 47.188.42.117 Port: 10300 F99TH.COM Server 1 - The Fighting 99th Dedicated IP address: 47.188.42.117 Port: 10310 F99TH.COM Server 3 - The Fighting 99th Dedicated If I restart one dedicated server client, then it will pop up in the list but the other one disappears. If i restart the other server, it will pop up but then the first one disappears again. So it seems like the latest server to 'boot up' gets to show up in the server list. Here is logs from both as I restarted them. Server #1 https://pastebin.com/KvU47zfG Old - https://pastebin.com/iA3SpV4m Server #3 https://pastebin.com/64WkLKNe Old - too big to paste

Thanks grimes!

Hey All, I'm trying to write a script that detects if an aircraft has specific munitions equiped. Right now here is what I have weapRestrict.weapon2BAN={"AIM-120C","AIM-120B","R-77"} (Example Munitions) With if weapRestrict.weapon2BAN[bwCount] == checkPayload[bCount].desc.typeName then trigger.action.outText("Restricted Weapon detected: " .. checkPayload[bCount].desc.typeName .. ", this weapon is BANNED, ".. e.initiator:getPlayerName() .. " kicking to spectator", 120) But I can't seem to figure out the name of the "Nukes" to add to my weapon2Ban list. I checked the Weapons Database file but I couldn't find them obviously as RN-28 or RN-24. Im doing this instead of setting warehouse limits because warehouse limits break with patches frequently, so I wanted a more stable solution so I can leave on unlimited weapons.

I could see that being true, but I also feel like islands are not great for MP modern because open ocean means no terrain masking... But everything else, yeah.

Well, its not exactly the same. There are systems in place (F-18 for example) that willmake the Maverick act more like a Anti Ship missile. As in, instead of the normal top down attack, the Maverick will go for a side shit of the ship. So the F-16C might have a similar feature to make the Maverick strike the proper spot of a shop instead of attacking from the top as if it were a tank.

I think its been stated that the F-16C's radar did not support AIM-7, thats why they had to build a specific model of F-16 called the ADF model.. http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article14.html So the limit is technical, not just "We don't want to give it". The F-16C doesn't support the AIM-7. To give it support would be fiction. At that point, why not just as to give it an AIM-54 so it can compete with F-14s?

Early 90s you are talking an F-16A series which is basically an entirely different aircraft when you look at its engine and its avionic. So that is a moot point anyways.

But...why? We have small maps and fairly rough looking buildings and terrain. Why not use something like FSX or Xplane 11 with some texture mods and get the whole world at your fingertips? As a pilot and flight simmer, I would find flying these same few maps as a civlian aircraft very very very repetitive very quick because of how few airfields and locations there are, of the lack of ATC or any real flight planning or what not. It just feels like adding a civilian aircraft in itself would be very shallow and not do much justice as most of the other flight realism for civilian pilot systems is just not there.

Title says it all. I want to disable specific munitions in my missions (like Nukes), but doing so means I need to go through and set a large value for each and every munition and then copy that over to each airfield. So being able to set unlimited ammo but then disable specific ammos would be nice.

TPOD wont be worked on until the HARM is done as they have said the person/team doing hte HARM is the same person/team taking on the TPOD.

Agreed, some time the missions are already a little easy/boring. Right now my plan is to have the enemy "replace" their sam sites X amount of time after its been killed. So this way players haver to keep suppressing enemy defenses. There are a lot automation I will need to place to solve a lot of these OP weapon issues when it comes in terms of limitation with AI SAM sites and such. I also plan to limit weapons. Like I don't play to allow JSOWs in my missions just because those will be too much to design around.

Simple question. I'm am designing a mission, and I noticed every server I have ever played on, people use the E-3 AWACS and I never see the use of the E-2 Hawkeye. Is there a reason for that? Does the Hawkeye not have as good of range in game or something?

Is it possible to run this without "forcing" players to have it? It would be nice to run this on my squads server without forcing everyone in our community to download the mod. In the past I thought mods could be used and people would just see a generic "flanker" model.

For me, this breaks down to 4 issues. 1) Not in patch notes. The fact that people spent so long trying to figure out the issue is a terrible terrible end user experience. 2) Yes, its a beta. But a beta is not when critical issues like this are supposed to happen. Beta is, at least with every company I have worked form, a near final release for testing to find remaining bugs. Something like this is typically found during QA and Alpha stages. My current company has Dev Branch, Alpha Branch, beta Branch, and Release. Often times we call Beta pre-prod. So its polished enough with some additional testing needing. ED beta acts far more like a Alpha and Beta combined. 3) I don't get why this even happened to begin with. Was it just default profiles were prioritized? That seems like a major flaw that should have been caused early for anyone, even in dev branch, that used custom keybinds. Was it they tried to force a new standard on us and old profiles are no longer valid? As a programer, I don't see how they couldnt just do a simple config update. Almost all keybinds are going to be a key,value pair. You should be able to update the key value, or add a new key and grab the value from the old key, and delete the old key afterwards. This is the type of stuff coding was made for. Tables, Dictionaries, etc are all easy enough to update in any coding language. 4) Apologists. I get we are in a Niche industry, and that ED is not a AAA studio like EA. But we need less people trying to defending terrible practices like this. If at the very least, this was in the patch notes, this could have gone 90% smoother. We can be critical without being jerks, but apologists need to stop defending every bad decision.

Ban List not working? Hey All, The ban list seems to not be working with the latest version. I have a user who was banned via slmod, but 2 days later they are able to join the server. I look at the LUA file, and the user is banned by IP and by UUID, and I verfied the person in the server is the person with the same IP and the same UUID that is on the LUA, but they are some how still in the server. I can provide the lua if desired, I'd prefer to keep it private to avoid drama. The version is 7.2, I have not tried the dev 7.5 branch.

Ah, that is likely it.

I have had issues where the code has reset on me for the AV8. I set the code to 1688, all of a sudden later, the code was back to 1111.

This one? https://www.amazon.com/CH-Products-200-571-Fighterstick-USB/dp/B00006B84X

Hey All, I currently have a friend who wants to get into DCS, he is going to start with the F-15. I am trying to guage what people's experience is with some HOTASs out there in his budget range. Our first idea was the X-52 PRO https://www.amazon.com/Saitek-X52-Flight-System-Controller/dp/B000LQ4HTS I used the regular X-52 for about 10 years, but I remember some quality issues. Although I may be biased as a Warthog HOTAS owner. I also hear a lot of complaints about "Quailty Check" issues with Saitek latley, so thats my other concern. Reviews are also not so great. Next up was the T16000M + Rudder Pedals. https://www.amazon.com/Thrustmaster-T16000M-FCS-Flight-Pack/dp/B01N2PE8CZ/ Now, i have no experience with it, nor do I know anyone who does when compared against the X-52 PRO. The most I have read about it, is less buttons, and not as ergonomic. Rest of the HOTAS beyond these two are either way too few buttons, or just not as good. But I am looking for input. He also plans to use it for Star Citizen, but I think that is a moot point compared to DCS.

Perhaps someone can help me out with this issue. I have 4 monitors. 3 monitors are 1080p Monitors bent around in a cockpit style. I then have a 4th monitor with the Thrusmaster MFDs attached to it. Right now, I am in a pickle because when I try to configure it, I get one screen with a super stretched out cockpit. Here is my lua. --***DO NOT MODIFY THESE COMMENT LINES*** --LOCATION Config\MonitorSetup --HOOKTO --Monitor lua _ = function(p) return p; end; name = _('A-10C '); Description = 'Setup for A-10C 3 monitor and MFDs.' Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = 5760; height = 1080; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 5.3333333333333333333333333333; } } LEFT_MFCD = { x = 5819; y = 238; width = 453; height = 453; } RIGHT_MFCD = { x = 6623; y = 245; width = 454; height = 454; } --CDU_EXPORT UIMainView = Viewports.Center

No offense but I don't think understand anything about how reverse engineering works with anything technology related. You do know that, china, which is years ahead of Iran in many military designs and technology, took forever to reverse engineer an engine given to them by Russia right? http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/29/us-china-engine-idUSBRE89S17B20121029 They found it easier to start a whole new jet engine from scratch because reverse engineering was way too complicated. Now lets look at Iran, who took nearly 35 years to reverse engineer a missile, and even then, we are not sure how good it even is yet. http://theaviationist.com/2013/09/26/farouk-missile/ So to assume that they are able to create all of the other parts of the F-14, especially engine systems or radar, is not entirely likely.

Here is my config, I used the easy monitor configuration tool and it seems to have worked, but the RWR and CDU do not seem to show up, only the MFCDs. _ = function(p) return p; end; name = _('MultiMon'); Description = 'MultiMon' Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = 1920; height = 1080; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.77777777777778; } } ED_A10C_RIGHT_MFCD = { x = 1920; y = 0; width = 1047; height = 1047; } ED_A10C_LEFT_MFCD = { x = 2971; y = 0; width = 626; height = 626; } ED_A10C_RWR = { x = 3329; y = 630; width = 300; height = 300; } ED_A10C_CDU = { x = 2979; y = 642; width = 356; height = 270; } ED_KA50_Shkval = { x = 1923; y = 2; width = 1555; height = 1044; } UIMainView = Viewports.Center

PM sent

Is there any way for me to edit my order so I can add state? My coupon is considered redeemed so I cant just redo the order.

I am still getting the error when I try Repeat payment >>. Maybe my state "WA" or "Washington" is missing? I would cancel the transaction and retry but its now claiming my coupon is redeemed so I cant reuse it to try again.