xaoslaad

For me disabling HID was enough. But I am disabling one controller for one game so it is hardly authoritative. You'll probably want/have to test it for your case.

Yes, but if the controller isn't enabled when the game starts it ignores it. Remove 'start' from before the line to run the game and it will wait, unless its a steam url as above and steam is already running. You can then probably also remove the timeout line.

It doesn't change the fact that it did exist and was flown successfully in combat. People aren't especially flying around UH-1H's or P-51D's anymore either. Why does that preclude it from being in the game or suggest the modeling of that aircraft is somehow inaccurate? I can only guess that's the point you're trying to make anyway.

Is this inaccurate? It says it not only existed/exists but that it was also successfully deployed in combat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25#Su-25T edit: number3 beat me to it. What he said.

I think the Su-25 has an edge if you intend to use unguided weapons. Gun pods, rockets, dumb bombs, etc. It's faster and more maneuverable so using the T for this stuff is like taking a step back in performance for no reason. If you intend to use guided weapons or a mix though it will necessitate using the T's features. Also, bare in mind there are only something like 32 Ka-50's build with 5 variants if you include the two-seat Ka-50-2 which was probably a precursor to the Ka-52. Not many will be identical. That doesn't mean ED took a whole lot of artistic license - from what I understand it is a very well modeled representation of one of the variants. On the other hand the Su-25T had something like 11 built. 3 prototypes and 8 production...

Head tracking. you either put a clip on a ball cap or a pro clip on your headphones and it is able to sense head movement. It amplifies the motion of your head so Looking a bit to the ldft or right can have you look straight back in the pit and thus can take a little getting used to, but once you do you'll never want to go back. When programming your X-52 give thought to how the stick in the pit is layed out (or look at pictures of the thrustmaster warthog). You have TMS, DMS, Trim, countermeasures on the stick. You can pretty closely duplicate that using. the pinky switch as a modifier. You can similarly do the same with the throttle. It wont be perfect, but it will be close. Anyway, there are some good profiles in the user files section so look for one that mostly works for you and modify to taste.

because steam has to start up and log in if it hasnt been started already before the game will start. 30 seconds is overkill as the whole thing doesn't take 20 seconds, but the wiggle room is not hurting anything.

I created a batch file like this to disable the device, start my program, and then enable the device again. In the case of rocksmith as long as it's disabled when the game starts it doesn't detect the pedals and doesn't cause an issue. DCS seems pretty much the same way, though I'm not sure it's universal. devcon disable "HID\VID_06A3&PID_0764&REV_0201" start "c:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\Steam.exe" steam://rungameid/221680 timeout /t 30 devcon enable "HID\VID_06A3&PID_0764&REV_0201" I then created a shortcut on the desktop and set it to run as administrator since it appears devcon needs administrative rights to go ahead and enable/disable devices. Thanks, this is great.

Snacko, haven't tried scripting it yet, but when disabling it manually doing the HID device is enough for my case (but disabling the USB instead would make the HID device just disappear, and also worked)... You may just have to play a bit to get the desired effect, but it couldn't hurt to just try the HID device for starters, I don't think...

Thanks. Rocksmith 2014 hates my Saitek pedals (they have the effect of hitting pressing down constantly( and I've been going in and disabling the HID device rather than unplug it for awhile now, but being able to click a bat file is even easier. Maybe I can go the extra mile and script , disable, launch, enable and just forget it all together. :thumbup:

The way you access ground units is a bit different. You need to enter a ground commander slot (there's another type of slot as well - the name escapes me) then go into the F10 view, select a controllable unit and click Me at the top and you should be dropped into the unit.

I don't see why giving beta or alpha access to a module requires an NDA. How many games give public alpha/beta access without any such thing, especially since steam started the early access stuff. I'm not terribly hopeful either, bUt in reality all you need is download links and to send out keys... since you can't fly without a key I'd argue the downloads don't evem need to be particularly locked down. Not knowing the whole process though I'm guessing there's probably something to make it not so simple.

I had no interest in physical stuff and my selections in the backer page reflected that. It might be better to compile a list of people who have selected physical rewards and seeing if they'd be willing to substitute - hopefully most if not all can be convinced; small runs of specialized stuff is probably going to cost a small fortune...

yep, already put in an edit :) "Edit: last post just beat me to it - guess that's more or less how they saw it too."

I'd argue it doesn't matter 'when' they were promised the key any more. I pledged at a sufficient level that I got my P-51D key right away, but it seems WWII is going to be released pretty much one piece at a time until we get the map/ground units at the end (and the 262/AI-B-17G even later). Why not start with the release of the available P-51D now instead of making them wait to the end for what reason I can't say. I pledged alpha teir 4 access and I'm guessing we won't be seeing anything alpha/beta now that we have this piecemeal release process. Just as an example, with an airfraft due in August with promise of beta access ("...DCS World FW-190D-9 with beta access (when available in early 2014)...") I'd suspect it's at or near that level now yet I hold out little hope of seeing anything prior to its launch, though I'd love if those of us that pledged it would still get the Alpha/Beta access to the products as promised. This isn't a complaint against ED. I'm hugely grateful that they are picking up where RRG failed - just pointing out that since the game (release plan) has changed and some of the promises may be hard to fulfill that it probably just makes sense to give everyone obligated their keys when possible... At least that's my two cents. They probably flawed for some reason, I'm sure. Edit: last post just beat me to it - guess that's more or less how they saw it too.

Funny, I think they should drop missions you play in multiplayer right into your missions folder with a .miz extension ready to go without hassle like so many other games do.

Oh, wait, except it's not. As I said, I have someone actively discouraging me from joining their server because I might like to use one of their maps. Maybe they're the same $2-3 person but unless they speak up I can't vouch for that. I do development too. I work on multiple open source projects. I submit fixes, bug reports, and pull requests to add features infrequently. I get no monetary incentive for it. It just improves stuff I use. Hell, I patch and build linux kernels for a distro to work on an ARM system and put them in a repo for others to consume all free of charge (couldn't sell it if I wanted to but I don't even ask for donations despite it sometimes taking hours to get them working, especially in the beginning...) People thank me when it works, sometimes. Occasionally someone stars, watches, or forks my github repo which makes me laugh that they would consider my junk worthy. And that's more than enough thanks for me. Maybe because I come from a culture of share/improve the idea that I want to keep something I created to myself because I haven't figured out how to make a dime off of it is foreign to me.

What Irregular Programming and Elukka have said boils down to what I believe. If this were Unreal, Arma III, or a myriad of other games people would be vying to get the most downloads for their maps/missions/whatever, putting them up on Steam Workshop, download sites as map packs, etc. They'd love to see their name plastered in the briefing/credits and get their 15 minutes of fame. And it is generally great for the games, providing good content, and re-playability. Not only that if someone has done something really clever in a mission and I'm inspired to do something else similar and so inclined I could look at the triggers in the mission editor to learn how to do that without recreating the wheel. But only when you get to flight sims do you see this jealous guarding of missions. I think it does nothing to grow the community or encourage people to play. I was actually playing last night and talking to a server maintainer who told me he preferred people did not copy off his missions. He had some arguments for that and I've made mine for why I think it's OK. We agreed to disagree and because I respect him I won't be putting up any servers with his missions (and I can actually say I have honestly _never_ done this anyway which makes the next part all the more amusing). On the other hand I got a private message from another server maintainer on these forums telling me never to join his server and how dare I even think about the prospect of copying his 'intellectual property'. Simply put: give me a break. Apparently I am not allowed to have my own opinion any more and should be bullied into stepping in line. Sorry, I'll stick to single player missions before that happens. As an aside, I think the fact that a copy of content that can be sold, if people have done that in the past as it sounds, is dumped on even non-purchasers systems if they play in a multi-player mission is a huge design flaw in the game.

It would be pretty lame to take credit for someone elses work, but its just about as lame to insist people only play it on your server. What happens when that server goes away (wont be the first time I've seen that happen)? what if you and your friends are on the side of the planet and I can't play with you no matter how much I love you. Or I have classes the night of the week you play. It really is silly.

That's f'ing amazing. Thanks for the mention of it.

Last paragraph is interesting, especially about DU being pyrophoric and fragments igniting after impact. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy_penetrator

3 missiles to take down one hind, plus a bit of gun, still lands it and walks away. track attached. HindDamage.trk

Easiest way to demonstrate how ridiculous the Hinds are is to load up the Su-25 instant action mission and shove 2 R-60's into the face of one of the Hinds. It will continue to fly like nothing happened. If you really need a track I can create one but it's not hard to duplicate. This is the shark to comanche conversion program. Flew back to base like that no problem last night.

The rail bridges are the worst, but vehicles will fall through other bridges and do funny things like drive on water as well. And with the mission with the bus that is invincible until it reaches its destination we tried destroying the bridge to get it moving again. No such luck. It continued to sit there. Once this happens the mission is doomed.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1988745&postcount=9208 No tail, missing wing, nose off the front, no hydraulics, an engine out... was able to maintain control and though I was bleeding altitude slowly I was able to put the thing on the ground behind friendly lines safely.