mjeh

yes I just tested this and it is as you say, you need to host a multiplayer game for the load mission action to work, it does not at all work if you start it as a single player game (I realize me repeating that isn't very helpful, but you beat me to it ;) )

Hm, nice way to track whether someone landed. Thanks for the tips :)

Yes, me either :( The only thing I can think of right now would be to use some flag juggling to check number of flying NPCs everytime "on crash" event triggers (since it trigs on both players and NPCs so long as they're airborne) and if it didn't decrease then I can assume a player was the cause and do my trigger actions as necessary from there. I don't really have many airborne NPC units in the game, so this could be a passable solution in this case. Ugly, but if it works... We really need object references in the mission editor. Does lua-scripting give access to this?

argh, it seems I was wrong and this trigger zone solution suffers the same problem. I assumed your aircraft would immediately disappear when you seleted a new one, this is not the case unfortunately, and thus the switched condition does not come into play. I did however notice that you will always get a "player crashed"-message when you change aircraft, even when mid-air. Maybe I could hook the "on crash" event, hmm.

Actually a huge trigger zone with condition switch trigger to see if the unit is present will be sufficient even without the flag juggling, since I believe the client aircraft disappears instantly when you go to the aircraft select screen (I could be wrong here, will need some testing). Anyway, brilliant suggestion! Thanks! As for the set failure I suspect you're right since it seems (as with cockpit argument conditions and the "takes control" event) that it looks for -player- aircraft rather than -client- aircraft. well that's my theory anyway

certainly, but what's to stop them from simply ditching and getting a new aircraft instead of landing? therein lies the problem :)

I'll give some more context for my problem, maybe this will help spark some ideas; I am making a competitive team effort mission where I want to penalize the team if its players choose to ditch their aircraft and get new ones instead of landing to rearm/ repair. I don't want it to be _impossible_ to ditch and get a new aircraft, I just want to penalize it (this isn't supposed to be a realistic mission by any measure) so that it becomes more of a tactical decision whether to ditch or whether to land The best solution I've come up with so far is as I said; Condition Switch event trigger with check for condition: Unit is alive ([client-controlled aircraft]) for each of the client-controlled aircraft followed by trigger logic (not important in the context) The reason this fails is as previously mentioned, the trigger fires the first time you get an aircraft (condition evaluates true), and then after that only if the aircraft actually _dies_ (condition evaluates false) before you get a new one (condition evaluates true again, thus a condition switch); if you get a new one (condition true) while the old one is still alive (condition true) the trigger won't fire (unswitched condition value) and the event will be uncaught, opening up possibilities to exploit these mechanics for the benefit of your team.

the problem isn't in determining whether an aircraft is player controlled or not, it is in determining the moment when a player takes control of it and hooking an event trigger to it that said, even hooking the event that any aircraft spawns would be an improvement at this point in time

A continuous check wouldn't be helpful in this case since I need the trigger to fire when, and only when, (but every time!) a client takes control of a client controllable aircraft. Thanks for your answer, though!

Object references! (A unit sets off a trigger? -> give pointer to this specific unit)

Hi! I need to hook the event every time that a player mans an aircraft in multiplayer, and attach some trigger logic to that. So far I've tried the "takes control" event, this does not display the desired behaviour in a multiplayer game. The most successful attempt I've had so far is using "switched condition" event with condition "unit is alive" for each unit tagged as client controllable. This works fine but is exploitable since it does not trigger if the player selects a new aircraft from the same unit group, without dying/ crashing first (for example mid air). Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Hi! Is it possible to use an AI unit as fire control for an artillery unit, and if so, how? I've tried setting invisible and immortal units with direct view of the target area and assigning them callsigns and radio frequencies and all, but nothing seems to work. I know you can set up trigger zones and order the units to fire at point whenever something enters that zone, but I find this solution to be very static and the resulting accuracy to be insufficient.

Indeed, I totally forgot about the CH one! Sadly though, I can't find anyone who deals them here in Norway and would have to import so the cost would exceed that of a TMWT with rudder pedals. If I'm splashing that much cash anyway, I might as well just get the TMWT since I mostly fly the hog :) Shame really, the CH products seem thoroughly solid This is true, but it kind of defeats the purpose of a HOTAS in the first place if you have to move your hand away from the throttle all the time. How would you compare the two if you were to be a bit more specific? And yes I completely agree, the order of business is DCS -> TrackIR -> HOTAS. Already got the TrackIR down :) nasty business :( hehe, indeed!

Thanks for your reply, joey! On the throttle base weight that was just a guess on my part having looked at videos of people lifting it around, but good to hear that I was wrong here. All rudder pedal sets are indeed clunky, but it seems to me that perhaps the G940 one is especially so? Again just a guess based on watching pics and videos as I've never actually seen one in person. As for the need for fixes and fiddling I've read that the G940 is plagued with a bug limiting the accuracy of the axis, and that a makeshift fix is only available for the stick axis. This could very well be dated information, however. But then, there are threads like this one: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=45695&highlight=g940

DISCLAIMER: Through some manner of witchcraft and/ or sorcery I am unable to write short, precise sentences. Read at your own peril! Come end of january I'm getting a HOTAS system of some make, and I need some help and input from you veterans to decide which one to go for. Through the research I've done so far it seems to me that there are mainly four alternatives, as I don't want anything considered "entry level"; Saitek's X52 Pro and X68F, Logitech's G940 and obviously TM's Warthog. Here are my thoughts on the alternatives so far: Saitek X68F Not readily available in my country and is incredibly enough priced signifficantly higher than the TMW here, coupled with the fact that I am reluctant to buy a force sensitive joystick without first trying it to see how I like the feel. Therefore, I am not considering this setup. Logitech G940 Seems to have some good things going for it like adequate number of hat switches and the fact that you get rudder pedals included, but from just glancing at user experiences and reviews I have identified a few points of concern; A reported "wobbly" tendency of the axis due to low centering force The throttle base does not seem sufficiently weighted (I have limited desk space and need to be able to move it out of the way without hassle, drilling holes and screwing/ gluing it in place is not an option) Rudder pedal set seems clunky and too space consuming in the debth dimension Logitech support reportedly unsatisfactory Large need for "fixes" and general fiddling to get it to work. As it stands this list is enough to put me off this alternative, but I would still love to hear input on these points and users' experiences from actually using the set. Saitek X52 Pro This looks to me like a very solid choice, and it is by far the cheapest alternative. I'm loving the adjustable hand rest, the ergonomics of the throttle and the slider wheels. Very attractive design too, although this is hardly even a secondary concern. I've found it hard to find good reviews that focus on anything other than the sheer number of buttons though, so I'm left with a few questions and points of concern; Is the number of hat switches really sufficient for hi fi sims such as the DCS family? The mouse slew thingy seems rather a novelty Same goes for the LCD screen It is hard to find a good appraisal of its accuracy, but from the SimHQ review it seems less than stellar (?) The X52 reportedly has axis bleed between X and Y axis, I am unable to find information as to whether this is fixed in the Pro version (?) It is considered to be loose, maybe too much so (?) The X52 reportedly suffers from deadzone issues, no info on whether this is fixed in the Pro version (?) Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS Needs no further introduction in this forum I'm sure ;) There are however some concerns; Reported "stickiness", could someone explain this further? Jagged axis? May need to be lubed up (harr) several times per month (?) May die if used without firmware update Price!!! No rudder pedals included, adding signifficantly to the already high cost Obvious choice for DCS A-10C, not so obvious for other titles (even other current and future DCS titles) My criteria, in no particular order Price Accuracy Number of buttons, hat switches in particular Comfortable in use Relatively easy to stow away (means no fixing in place on my desk) Wife Acceptance Factor (WAF) Feel Build quality Ruggedness, needs to last a few years at least Need for maintenance Quality of customer support from manufacturer Whether it makes my hair fairer and teeth whiter, although this is a secondary concern Admittedly, I partly write this post to summarize my own thoughts to help myself decide, but I am very interested in opinions, experiences and general input. I am especially interested to hear input on the points of concern, concerns I haven't considered, and especially especially interested in hearing from people who have used 2 or more of these systems and can give a good comparison insight. If I were to decide based on common sense and WAF, the Saitek X52 Pro would win hands down, and it is currently the lead contender. But as we all know, in the business of pretend flight and/ or tank busting, the needs of passion and feel can easily outweigh such mundane concerns as common sense and WAF :pilotfly: If you don't want to read my wall of text, here's the base line; Is the TMWT experience even close to being that much better than the X52 Pro experience that it warrants the very steep rise in cost? Any input will be much appreciated! Mjeh out

Pesky wingmen! Well, I don't really need them to fly close to eachother anyway :) Thanks for the input!

Indeed! This begs a follow up question, though; Will the AI avoid mid air-collisions?

Thank you for clearing that up :)

First post, hello everyone :) First off I'm sorry if this has already been posted and/ or answered, I did some searching here and in the lock on section, but I could not find anything related. So, my problem is that whenever I try to set up a group of multiple large aircraft in the mission editor, only one (the lead, I assume?) aircraft from the group actually pops up when I run the mission in the sim. I have confirmed this behaviour with both il-76 and various tupolev bombers, and in both DCS and Lock On sims. Workaround is obviously to set up more groups of aircraft, but I guess my question is this; Can large aircraft have wingmen?