mjeh

I think pretty much every flight simulator I've seen has at some point marketed itself as "as realistic as it gets" or similar, not that I'm defending the practice. I don't think it's entirely fair to say that il-2s success is due to there not being any competition, because even if the market was stale for a while, at the time of il-2's release there were other ww2 sims. None of them managed to garner the community support and the continuous sales to match the il-2 series though, so they had to have done something right. :) You're probably right that it's better to learn from a high fidelity sim from the start, but I think a lot of people don't have the time or patience for that straight away. They have to be eased in through a more casual-friendly, entry level product. Take the Lock On series, for example; I bet many of the guys that are now confidently slewing their TGP around creating markpoints east and west and transmitting them to various wingmen over SADL while hacking the G-suit port to power their coffee makers, once took their first stumbling steps in a "RShift+Home-to-start" Lock On aircraft. I'm sure many of them would've come around to DCS anyway, but all of them? I doubt it :) Because it opens up DCS World to a wider market and that means bigger community, more mods and more importantly, more money in ED's coffers to produce the high fidelity sims that we love :) While it's true you can play ka-50 and the other mods in game mode, I don't think they're very fun products in that mode. I think we need some products to entice the "press 'i' to start engine"-crowd (I was one of those guys for a long time so don't think I'm hating on them - They are people too!) to come over to DCS, just like FC3 for example. People that stick with it will likely migrate over to the high fidelity models in time, and we'd all be better off for it. EDIT: And just to clarify, I do absolutely not mean that such entry level products should be developed at the cost of longer development times for high fidelity products! I'm bitten by the high fi bug and can't go back, but if ED can reach out to a bigger market (I'd love to see the civilian ac crowd start to populate our skies, for example), either through own effort or through 3rd parties, then I'm very much for it. That's all. :)

As far as I know, Oleg and his team made the most successful ww2 flightsim to date (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). I think it's fair to say most people who are getting started with flight simming start out with relatively low realism settings all around, otherwise the learning curve is just too steep. With that in mind, I think it would be a very good idea for ED or partners to release some lock on-style collection of medium fidelity ww2 birds. For the beginners it would provide an easy and compelling way in, and for the rest of us it would serve to populate our WW2 missions with time appropriate AI planes.

Thanks. Google translate isn't extremely accurate sometimes, am I right to assume that all the vehicles/ aircraft on that list at some point will be available in the game as AI? (or get a new 3d model for the ones that already are)

Mavericks are sometimes troublesome against ships. I prefer dive bombing with dumb bombs

incidentally, when ricochets impact then you get the HE bullet impact sound. you don't for regular, non richochet, impacts :(

don't know if it's possible in single player, but if you start the mission through the multiplayer client then it certainly is.

"They"? A professional 3D artist is a 3D artist and a professional programmer is a programmer, and while there's nothing to stop a person from having multiple skillsets the art department does one job and the programming department does quite another. As evident, the external models for the upcoming releases (f-15c, f-18c, fw-190d9) are already done or close to done, and the f-15c cockpit is already done (or mostly done, see FC3) as well. Considering this, working on renewing some of the older art assets doesn't necessarily detract from the overall progress of DCS at all. Also, there are several examples of reviews and quasi-reviews that thrash DCS for including some of the older art assets (including the tu-22 model). So while I think we all agree that upgrading older assets shouldn't happen at the cost of progress for new releases, I disagree that it is unimportant. It's a question of immersion, after all. Yes, but that's what unofficial mods are for. Official mods require quality assurance which does indeed take resources away from product testing of official releases. While I don't know much about mod making for DCS, I suspect there's a lot more involved than simply creating an external 3D model to make a fully functioning AI plane.

There is absolutely nothing to substantiate that it's a flyable, the only thing that has been announced is that the tu-22 is getting a new 3D model. An upgrade which is sorely needed, I might add, considering its current flanker era-looking model

now that's just mean :)

from the march newsletter;

Predefined locations and force templates, yes

Unless you're a real lua-wizard, you're pretty much going to have to use preset locations

Triggers will still be able to reference the unit group if you hide them from the map. There was a bug where units that were "hidden on map" didn't show up on the F10-map, even if your mission options dictated that they should. I don't know if this was fixed, IIRC it was slated for a fix in either 1.2.3 or 1.2.4, but don't quote me on that :)

Set the waypoint type from the waypoint you want to change the formation. (Eg from "off road" to "echelon left" or whichever formation you want to use)

Yes I noticed and was in the process of editing before you sniped ;) Condition of units isn't implemented yet, I think it will set a condition that needs to be met before the unit group in question is spawned. Flags were covered pretty well by Oznerol, but I can elaborate some I guess. They're basically useful for storing values, these values can then be used for conditions for further triggers. Say you have 3 events that happen through triggers, A, B and C. You want event B to happen 30 seconds after A and event C to happen 60 seconds after B. An easy way to do this through flags is when you activate the trigger for event A, you set flag 1 to ON. (I think this will give it default value of 1 but not sure, main point is it is now active which means you can read if it is). Then, as condition for trigger B, you have Time since flag (1) -> 30 seconds. As condition for trigger C, Time since flag (1) -> 90 seconds. (You can of course make trigger B set flag 2, and then do Time since flag (2) -> 60 seconds.) There's a practically infinite number of other uses for flags, just play around with them and you'll see :)

While that will work, the aircraft won't be visible on the tarmac before it starts. Late activation means the unit group isn't spawned in until triggered to. You need to tick the 'Uncontrolled' box, which becomes available once you've selected 'ramp start' on the first waypoint. You must then go into 'triggered actions' which is a submenu of the waypoint menu, and add 'perform command -> start'. You can then use this as a hook for the trigger to activate the aircraft, like so; ONCE -> Time more (xxxx) -> AI Task (start) See attached mission for difference in how the two methods work Aircraft Spawn Test.miz

Truth be told, though, there has been no indication that EDGE will do anything to make DCS more "multicore"

Happy to be of use, I learned something in the process myself too :thumbup:

"Flag is more" is definitely a "greater than-operator", rather than an "equal or greather than-operator", I assume it's conversely the same for "Flag is less" edit: to be perfectly clear, a "Flag is more than 1" condition will not be true if the flag's value is 1. It will only be true once the flag value is 2 or greater.

audacity edit: darn snipers everywhere :P

EDGE has been called a lot of things, terrain engine, 3d engine, graphics engine, etc. According to answers by producer Wags in an interview, it's the new image generator that will allow for larger, more detailed maps with higher number of objects, improved terrain height map resolution, as well as allow for better graphical effects *. Note that this is freeform from my memory and not at all an exact quote. As far as I understand, EDGE is tied to the Nevada map in the sense that Nevada has become some sort of showcase for EDGE, and their development is more or less parallell * I interpret this to encompass smoke, explosions, shading etc

As you've discovered, if you're going to have triggers that act based on the value of the flag then it's good practice to initialize the flag to a safe value first. Do you have to? No, not strictly, but your mission may display unpredictable (and in most cases, unwanted) behaviour if you don't. Adding a "time more" condition (eg time more than 30 seconds) to said trigger is one way to ensure you have time to initialize the flag value properly before it is read and used.

Took a while to compile it, I'll tell you that :D Good luck on your mission!

Try with a different headset, only way I can think of to rule in or out

I see you've set up mission goals for scoring points. Have you accounted for the fact that there are also points automatically added for every enemy you destroy, through the built in scoring system? See following post for point value per enemy by type: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1604932&postcount=1