ShuRugal

corrected pitch ladder not changing color, set dashed lines for negative pitch. Alternate texture file included with numbers in-line with pitch bars (end-user must swap out files, instructions in readme) Files will be online at link in OP pending moderator approval.

most decent video editors have a crop feature you can use to do that. edit: ninja'd, by two hours. whoops.

So, i'm trying to do this with the slider on the X55 (it works like a toggle, on when fwd, off when aft) to map it to work the airbrakes of FC3 aircraft properly. However, I cannot for the life of me find the data to enter into the .diff file for D and U. I tried looking up the default input files in the DCS/mods folder, but those files appear incomplete, having data on only commands specific to each aircraft. Where are the common FC3 default commands stored???

As title says. Just updated to 1.2.9, and I noticed that in landing configuration, AI SU-27 flaps extend too far downward and clip with the R-27s on the ET stations. Player aircraft does not exhibit same problem. Don't know if this is new to 1.2.9 or was pre-existing.

I'll look into it.

it should be, i uploaded and it appears to be approved

If you get one, you will need to get a separate set of rudder pedals: I know several rotorheads who have tried the X-65, and they found it impossible to precisely control the twist input without influencing X and Y input as well.

Based on the speed that the shells can be seen moving , I would be surprised if it took any more than 5 minutes start to finish.

Update: Spread pitch scale to edges of center HUD real-estate. Modified 30/60 degree bank indicators to align correctly with new bird mark. Thanks to PeterP for pointing me at the materials.lua file!

Thank you Peter, I knew it had to be in one of those files! I'll give it a try ASAP.

Glad y'all like it. If I can ever figure out how to point the LUA files at new texture files, I intend to do some more work on it, but the stock texture doesn't have enough space for what I want to do.

+100 what? what online games are you people playing that are filled with love-struck 15 year olds, because i've yet to see one in DCS.

This is part of it. I really -really- don't care for the way 104th sets up their missions. Ground attack objectives for both teams is well within friendly lines, and the CAP waypoints are set up to throw fighters into a 30k-foot jousting tourney without ever coming within 100km of the ground attackers. This seems to me like a ridiculous setup for several reasons: Why are there red troops so close to blue base, and blue troops so close to red base? Why are the fighters not given any waypoints to allow them to intercept enemy attack aircraft and defend valuable troops and armor? Isn't the whole point of a fighter to defend friendly assets? either by intercepting enemy ground attack flights, or screening friendly ground attack against enemy air cover? Unfortunately, the 104th if the only open server which regularly has enough players on it to get some interesting back-and-forth action going (or any at all, for that matter). The other night i actually managed to talk a couple other reds into jumping into Migs with me and coming in on the sneak to harass enemy ground units, and we were so successful at it that by our third sortie, the entire game dynamic had shifted so that blufor fighters were actually providing close cover on their attack units, and we had a hell of a low-level furball going on. but this crap last night was something completely else. I don't know if this guy was just insanely good, or me and the other handful of people who were in and out of red CAP just happened to all be absolutely terrible, or what, but it was a miserable damn experience.

I already use visual references for navigating. Have to in a ground-attack environment, especially in the KA-50 (which is my forte in this sim) how? If this is something that 'a lot of people' are doing, then clearly i need to know the principal so i can practice it and be competitive. alright all good points. clearly. the bold is my biggest problem, and it's because of the second bit. the answer to all that is "nope." Any resources would be useful. done that, mostly all i can find are threads full of people whining that their AIM-120 didn't kill everyone in the air at once and go on to burn down the Kremlin.

such as? basically. I have yet to find myself in a situation where I'm close enough to use an R-27 before the other guy knows i'm there. got any resources I can study up on? will supply one later, dont have time to wait on the upload atm. You still haven't answered my question as to what those are, exactly. I'm willing to change my expectations, if there's a reason I can understand for doing so. I have noticed that. Somehow I still manage to get killed by them from much greater ranges. Well, yes, but it's still an accurate depiction of what happens why I try that approach. I've tried doing it the other way as well, and it seems like having that radar on tells the other guy where I am a whole lot more reliably than it tells me where he is. sounds like i need to keep digging, then. I would appreciate some direction on where to dig, though.

I was in your boat a few months ago. I ended up re-installing to a different directory and that solved it. Something on my machine was interfering with the exe connecting properly, but i never could figure out what. disabled firewall, windows defender, windows firewall, the works, but never located the offender.

No, what I don't like is to run a head-on justing match against other fighters which, under best case scenario (If i take an F-15) have identical performance characteristics. Call me silly, but in BCT they taught us that only an idiot goes into a heads-up slugfest against an equally-capable opponent, and only a dead man goes into the same against his betters. As my drill sergeant liked to say, a fair fight's a loosing fight. He claimed to have shot second. So, don't use R-27s. got it. the second time, when I did exactly the same thing, sure. The other eight times when I tried a different approach each time? sometimes simultaneously with two F-15s who both were also shooting different approaches? This dude was freaking everywhere at once, knew where all of us were without having his radar on for more than two seconds at a time (I never got more than 1 RWR beep out of him each time it picked him up, until he locked me), and none of us able to find him on any kind of sensor, active or passive? like what? I just told you, in the line you quoted right there, that even looking straight at him on maximum zoom he had not yet come into my visual range. And before you ask how i know i was looking straight at him, I got a nice view of his missiles coming straight in for my face, and when I hit silk, he came out of the exact same patch of sky i was watching about ten second slater. I realize that you probably don't mean it this way, but after reading these two lines I am having a very hard time not interpreting your post as "haha, u sux donkey d1x!!" Right, so we're taking away AIM-120s too right? since they have serious range/speed/stealth/tracking advantages the other side doesn't get? And, aside from that, I usually see servers set up with RU and US jets on both teams. With that, there is no reason at all to not include the support assets that the russian planes are designed around. fixed that for you. Also, what "in game issues" would i be suffering from that suddenly make ground support a legitimate thing to ask for (since you're dead set that it isn't otherwise) assuming i know where to look. Usually I don't until I start getting RWR spiked. How do I know where to look in time for it to do some good? what does this even mean? How to identify friend from foe in a jamming environment? I know how to do that, ping them and call 'raygun'. Doesn't help much when 2/3 of the server population is too lazy for TS and not paying attention to text (or i don't have time to type it soon enough to not get shot if he turns out to be a bandit). Is there a better way to do this? If so, what? okay. how? I've learned to get around that by cruising around at 90% RPM on the engines. I can make most of my ingresses without even emptying my single drop tank now. I seem to be quite good at getting punished for flying them in those capabilities, too. Of course, it could be that I have absolutely no idea what those capabilities are supposed to be: the manual is not particularly enlightening on that subject, and most MP mission design seems to be "here are fighters, go fly at other fighters", which just seems like a good way to get shot (has been for me so far, anyway).

maybe i'm doing something wrong, but flying russian jets at high altitude with radar on (flanker or fulcrum) always seems to get me shot; I never seem to pick anything up on my radar until the other guy already has missiles on the way, even when I turned out to be co-altitude with the guy and pointed straight at him.

So, a little background: I've been getting a feel for head-to-head multiplayer the last few weeks flying on the 104th. So far my experience has been up and down, but generally positive. I have concluded that I don't care even a little bit for "F-15 vs F-15 at 30k feet; Will your missile reach him before his reaches you?" so I've been focusing more on the Mig-29S and the SU-27. Of the two, I like the way the Mig handles and the R77 well enough that it's my usual pick, but I can't stand the craptastic radar set, and the fuel capacity always disappoints. I would fly the SU-27 all the time, if only it could carry the R77. So far, I've developed a basic strategy that works more or less: run through the mountains into the AO for enemy ground attacks, harass until fighter shows up, then use terrain to force him in close enough for my passives to pick him up while he's looking the wrong way. I've been greatly enjoying this style of gameplay, even though I end up dead as often as i make the other guy dead. So far i've been able to maintain a 1:1 kill/death ratio most nights. Tonight, however, was absolutely ****ing miserable. I wanted to throw my laptop by the time I was done, and I still want my two hours back. Server population was fairly light tonight, one to two F-15s on blue, handful of A-10s, one KA. Red had two or three ground attacks, and one or two F-15s. I took a Red 27 and proceeded to thread mountains. Almost immediately upon arriving in the AO, blue F-15 shows up on my RWR, hard on my six, so close he'd've smelled it if i shit. I come hard about, lock him up, and start throwing ERs and ETs like there's no tomorrow. Well, there wasn't. He got lock right after I started shooting, and (surprise surprise) his 120 arrived first. Okay, whatever, it was probably a fluke, him showing up out of nowhere like that, perfectly positioned for a kill without ever having shown up on my RWR or EOS. Next sortie, it happens again. Not even out of the mountains yet, having taken a very roundabout route well off blue CAP waypoints for that mission, and nowhere near the bullseyes. Come out of a mountain and there he is, 12-o-clock, slightly high, 100% strength on my RWR. Couldn't find him with my radar or EOS though. Even zoomed in full and tried out the Mk1 eyeball, but he was too far out to be large enough for the graphics engine to feel like drawing. I spend the next two minutes weaving back and forth through every crease and fold in the terrain i can find, trying to shed missiles. No joy, I eat it without ever seeing him. Every subsequent sortie that evening goes the same way. Everywhere I go, up high, down low, around the back, straight up the front, this guy is already there, in perfect firing position, and none of my sensors acknowledge his presence. Ten deaths and 0 kills later, and I'm sick of this shit. And, on top of all that frustration, for the hour-ish that I had other teammates, not one of them ever bothered to get on TS. Why, for the love of god, is it so freaking hard to get people to use comms in this game? I spent twenty minutes at one point chasing one of these guys around because he couldn't be arsed to respond to 'raygun' when i locked up his jammer. Asked why he's not on TS so we can communicate better and not do that shit, and it's just "Oh, that would be a good idea huh.", but he never bothered to follow through with it. This bullcrap is why we need built-in voice comms. I swear I'm just going to start shooting missiles at every jammer I see, unless they respond to a TS raygun call. Also, i've been kind of put off by this before, but never as worked up about it as I am right now: Why do multiplayer servers never have ground radar support for the russian birds? Do you people not realize that the russian birds are designed around the idea of using ground radar and AWACS to provide real-time situational awareness to their pilots? That without that additional SA, we are sitting ducks for F-15 drivers, unless we can sucker them into the mountains?

for my offline usage, I have found a medium-dark grey period or apostrophe to answer very well. When you're talking about a character that comprises only 2-3 piels, color makes much less of a difference than you might expect (I have used lime-green before, and still had difficulty picking it up). The bigger thing is that it draws something instead of nothing. Another thing that helps keep it toned down is that labels don't get bigger when you zoom in; if you set up a 2px label, it's always going to be a 2px label. But don't take my word for it. Give it a try. I slapped this together in about 5 minutes when I was practicing dogfights against the FW-190, because I got tired of not being able to see the prick when I was looking straight at him, but I also don't like how easy the default labels make finding things. Some fine tuning is probably in order, but I think anyone would agree that this hardly makes for instant (or even particularly easy) detection of enemy aircraft. TinyLabels.zip

sounds like good news to me, since the AI doesn't stop lobbing missiles at me when they are masked by buildings and trees. the default labels make it way too easy, sure. That's why we use a modified labels.lua which engages labels at a range and size which approximates real-world visual acquisition parameters. I don't have a hardware limitation, you have a hardware advantage. hardly, since game flight mode would give the same advantage to those with sticks as well, whereas what i am proposing merely evens the playing field. A properly implemented labels.lua would not change anything for players using large, ultra-high resolution displays, it would only bring players with more budget-minded and space-limited systems into the same range. What i'm advocating here is not that servers should be enabling full labels, ever, that goes completely overboard making targets easier to find. What I am saying is that some research should be done to find out what the average range a target becomes visible (as in, large enough at default zoom level for the monitor to physically draw it) on various large-screen and ultra-res displays, and a new labels.lua should be drawn up which renders an appropriately-sized character (apostrophe, comma, period, dash, asterix, whatever) within that range. This method does not provide a universal "easy factor" and it gives no particular advantages to anyone. Properly implemented, this should be damn nearly transparent to anyone using a hyper-display, while making it possible (though by no means easy) for players not so financially gifted to remain competitive.

Smack him with a vikhr. sometimes infantry units die without falling down. Had this happen with that guy as well. If you vikhr him and he's still standing, you know he wont shoot.

in which case they will have even less room to complain when i buddysplatter them. which is what an ignore/mute feature is for. Really, though, i don't expect this to be much of a problem. Even playing the "for the masses" shooters and console games with voicecomms, i've never really had a problem with loudmouths on comms, and in the rare instances i did, i muted them and solved it handily enough.

Labels on their default settings, yes. But if labels.lua is modified to only show a ' starting from 10km, that levels out the playing field between largescreen displays and the rest of us. I would go with a large screen myself, but i have neither the space nor the funds to devote to such a setup.

I find myself agreeing with Iceman on this one. It would be nice to see a server implement a labels.lua which was tweaked to provide a dot, dash, or whatever, at the range you would be able to begin to see the contact IRL. My problem is with airborne targets, though. unless the target is smoking/contrailing, anything further away than about a kilometer is invisible at default zoom, and I run 1920x1080 resolution. Even if i know exactly where to look and zoom in fully, a target outside 2km is still less than a single pixel on my display. I've been flying with labels off for years now (because that's the way it's done MP, not because of my own preferences) and I find the limiting factor not to be my own ability to find a target, but the ability of my hardware to display that target. Labels are cheating because they make the other guy easier to spot? Okay, well, in that case, having a 30" 4k display is also cheating, because they make the other guy easier to spot. Should we have a server setting that forces everyone to run 1920x1080 in a window at the same size? Because that is the only other way to force everyone to the same level of target-detection ability.