sirrah

Ah ok I was sure I'd tried that, but I'm starting to have doubts now Tnx! (hopefully it gets fixed anyways)

Looking good @Nightdare So, I'm curious: With the knowledge you have now, building all this stuff (time and costs invested), do you still consider button boxes available on the market, to be too expensive? Again, not judging, just honestly curious

I'm sure I've seen a thread about this somewhere (possibly in the bug section) but I can't find it anywhere now Yesterday I was doing some online flying and had that issue where the TPOD just didn't want to activate after rearming my jet on the ground. I did read a workaround for this issue somewhere, but I can't remember what it was. Can anyone please point me in the right direction? (I assume this bug was already reported)

Just to make sure: Are you sure you're not just experiencing "drift" due to an asymmetric loadout? (e.g. having the tpod loaded on station 5R)

Good luck with AI pathing, when placing static objects on, or too close to taxiways in your missions

All very much personal preferences of course (there is no right or wrong here) and it depends on what you're looking for: pew pew, or transporting beer. While I own and love all DCS helo modules, the Apache is (by far) my personal favorite. It is nimble, there's lots of stuff to learn (I see that as a plus) and it's weapon systems are extremely effective. The cockpit view is awesome, textures are spot on and the pilot body makes it very immersive. Also, using the gun in the Apache (especially in VR), might just be the best thing to experience in all that DCS has to offer (again, my opinion ). If you want more of a mix, (slingload) cargo and firepower, you might want to go for the Hind.

Hi mate Those are community mods you're mentioning. You can't expect ED and 3rd party devs to accommodate for user made mods. Now if you also can't place any "heavies" from the core game (KC-135, Il-76, B-52 etc.), that would be something to report here as a bug. (oh, and by the way, Syria is from Ugra Media. So if something needs fixing on this map, it's up to Ugra, not ED)

Check the UI-layer controls for double bindings

Why create a new thread while there's one (in fact many) already? You even replied to it

You are right, creating random event is possible without scripting, but I've used this feature in some of my missions and from my experience it can get seriously tricky and complicated quite quickly. It would help a lot (especially to those with less ME skills) if we for instance at least had a "spawn probability" percentage field, for late activation units.

Such a little feature would indeed be handy. (Eventually also for airflieds)

Yes, that's what I said in my previous post. It will however be more cumbersome for mission editor (involves triggers and anticipating on what players might or might not do). Also, I'm very curious on what the sudden and quickly "emerging fog" will look like from the air. Imagine trying to simulate a fogged up situation only at the players homeplate: Looking at current implementation, a trigger would have to initiate high density fog to suddenly appear over the homeplate, when the player comes near. This will mean that the player will effectively see the fog appear out of nowhere. While in real life, you'd see the high density fog layer from a long distance away, like a "cloud" blanket over your homeplate. But hey, I'm probably just getting ahead of things here . Let's see how it turns out. It would at some point just be cool if we could easily change the weather/fog type completely and have it kinda area bound (take-off in foggy overcast conditions and have the target area 100nm away, with lightly scattered clouds)

Well, I guess it can also be achieved/simulated with a repetitive trigger (if player inside zone -> fog on). Just a bit more cumbersome and unrealistic.

Watching this small sneak peak, am I correct that we will not be able to create local fog? Happy to see fog nonetheless, but just wondering (local fog would make it easy to create "divert to alternate" kinda scenarios)

Exactly. Only 80 people, of which 20 even voted "no"