Renato71

Definetely lands on closest airport, regardles on the presence of the enemy troops. I've noted that when working on some coop missions. Ai tried to land despite heavy AA fire. As for the side of the airport, it is defined indirectly, using take-off and landing wpts from Mission Editor. I guess original ME was not designed with improvisation and necessities in mind.

Thanks, I'll be patiently waiting for those details :) As for XML, I have no experince in using it (I do not count editing the meinit into this "experience"). I was hoping just for solution for this option of tacview, without the need to learn everything about XML from the scratch. Since you provided this option, do you already have any meaning to use this debriefing? Is anybody using this option at all, and how do you do that? Some example perhaps? Thanks in advance

Great work DArt! Original ME was quite horrible to work with when you try to add great number of units. Your tool looks like it is afording much more :) I'll go straight to your forum...

Hi, I would like to use that option to export Debriefing. Do you have any example of how to do that? Currently I create the Debriefing and that's it. Don't know what to do with that. XML parsing is not my strong side. Any tutorial around here as how to use this debriefing? Any totorial about setting up the statistics for server at all? Thanks

I think that changing the scoring system on the fly is not a good thing. Such changes should be announced in advance, and if scoring is rotated monthly, then it should be changed when stats for new month are started, not in the middle of the gameplay. Nobody likes to join a game that has one set of rules at the start, and changes the rules as the games goes by. Some people may see this as adapting the rules to your own needs, not as making them fair. Fair changes should be introduced with a new start (of the month). When you join certain server that has its own statistics you will do your best do make use of those stats. Naturally, there are people that are boasting with particular part of the score, but it is the total score created by the server and under server rules that matters most. Each server has different flying rules and different scoring rules. Even if I do not personally agree with some scoring systems, I think that such diversity gives us two things: 1 - Finding out what scoring and flying rules represents flying skills to the their best (which is also a good testing ground for proposed LO ladder) 2 - Giving an opportunity to people to find a scoring system that they consider as correct and just. Person A thinks that server 1 has better rules; person B has the same opinion about server 2. Each chooses preferred server. Flankerator choose TuAF for the rules declared at the start of the game (month). He joined up to TuAF server and played a lot because of this and that reason. No matter the real reason, you cannot blame him for taking the advantage of the scoring system and ask for banning! Such reaction is childish. It proves only that accuser was not smart enough to read the rules. As the game itself has some flaws that are misused by some, we should not hold it back against others that they are using flaws in scoring system and/or missions to their benefit. Maybe Flankerator really has no other timeframe available to play? Accusing him for "choosing a particular timeframe" is like accusing anyone that jumps around for printscreening, while that person could have some genuine lagg issues. For example, I would appreciate bonus scoring for ground targets destroyed by cannon. Currently, there is no such bonus on TuAF-II. Boberros is using this to the best advantage, destroying numerous targets with missiles, and very few with canon. Should we ban him on TuAF on account of that? Destroying thousands of AI easy way? I see no reason - he is playing smart, using scoring rules to his advantage and for that I applaud him. Even if there are some of you that thing how easy it is what he is doing, then they better try to fly Su-25T for 6 hours and make 100 landings without crashing a plane! That alone is enough for a substantial award. Look it on the bright side - even if Flankerator is doing this on purpose, this will make erros in missions and scoring more visible. There was a mention about escort leaving AWACS. Well, this means that mission is flawed, not scoring! There should be a replacement or refuleing for escort. I would be grateful to someone that spotted such error in my own mission, even if using MY scoring AGAINST me ;) Server rules are server rules. We can discuss about them, but they should not be changed in the middle of the game (month). Sticking up with one sets of rules until they expire is THE most fair concept of them all. Cheers!

Hi littlejohn, I suggest you try plying around with LOCFG - Lockon GUI Configurator. Go to Views -> Cockpit Here you can change field of view and your height for each aricraft. Also, increase Minimum field of view. This has the effect of "zoom out". As for zoom itself, I'm not sure if such setting exist. I also have to zoom in or out depending on the aircraft I fly. Hope that helps at least to some extent :)

Hi, I think that stats like this are great idea. As for nick protection, have you considered linking this stats to HyperLobby? I mean, if there is no possibility for other person to log into HL using my nick, could it be possible to use HL to protect nicks? This way people will not have to log into several different places. Alternatively, a separate HL look-alike application that will provide a list of only "approved/affiliated" servers. This is quite an issue if IP filtering is going to be used, as some people live in countries where IP addresses are assigned only dynamically. As for scoring, as I'm mainly flying Su-25T, I can suggest only few a2g tips… A) As basis, why not use original points from LO? I think that they are most realistically assigned and will cut short any discussion on that subject. Also, a player can gat a general idea about his/hers score while playing LO. B) Bonus points for weapons used. Below are examples. Bonus can be added to the basic score of the unit: 3 - cannon 2.5 - non-cluster bombs and unguided rockets 2 - cluster bombs 0.5 - actively guided missiles 0 - fire and forget missiles C) RTB bonus: No points for landing only. One can destroy ten enemy trucks, but RTB after destroying each, thus earning more by RTB itself then by units. As it matters what base is used for landing (main, any own, neutral, enemy), the list of such bases should be provide by server, per mission. So, if you can implement such thing - mission name and bases used per side - then it will be possible to award: 200% (of the score earned during the flight) - main airbase 150% - any own 100% - neutral 50% - enemy Above means 2 times, 1.5 time, full score, and half score earned during the flight. D) Safe eject bonus = 5 E) No bonus for winning side F) a2a score for a2g aircraft No negative for being shot down, 5 max for victory. This will discourage vulchers, especially on a2g servers. Negative 10 for making TK.

It is you that are twisting the subject to your own agenda, going to extreme ideas while I suggest inserting something REAL. You are the one that should take time to read slower. Or more then two rows are to hard to read? Also, I do not get what was the point in giving me a negative rep just because I suggest realistic modding and you have some personal issues? What is wrong with you? Do you give negative rep to everybody that questions your comments? Jeez, you are some tense person. Relax dude. How many negative have you given to Boberro? I guess his rep took a huge downfall since you joined up... To bring back to the subject, if ED is going to devote full attention to DCS and BS, I see no reason for contolled modding of FC. People could submit their work, and all ED has to do is to approve and give blessing (or not). I have hard time believing that LO/FC is limited to current number of flyables. ED does not have to be the one to add additional flyables (or the replace the existing ones), but why not instruct the people how to do that? Like, there are those great models of various Mirages. Why waste those on AI? If ED could make few more flyable slots, I bet that French guys could find real pilots that will be more then happy to participate. Demand for a high quality of visual and flying models for additional aircraft is OK, but let's be realistic - not all aircraft are modeled to the same level. I remember the thread about MiG-21 that was to be added as AI. Quite a big demand (in my eyes) were put before the guy(s) that worked on it, while in the same time horrible models for other AI aircraft existed. If I recall correctly, MiG-21 will not be accepted if not modeled almost to the same level as Su-25T! Well, that's why I suggest replacing old Su-25 - it needs rebuilding, so why not make new model even more exiting and replace it with another aircraft? Maybe some western counterpart, like Jaguar? Cheers.

Less modability? Do you have any mod installed? Over last two years freelance modders have achived more then DCS. Their "breaking the rule" is what keeps this game alive. Without modability and freaks that mendle around and users that support them there would be no great skins, terains, models and utilities. But, I guess you are neither user of mods or supporter. We need modability, but it has to be contolled by the server, as in any other game. @=2IAE=MetoBG: I'm sorry, my fault not to include that option :( Please do not hold that against me. In fact, to reflect the real life more properly, I would rather replace Su-25T with some other aircraft that is more widely used, but such suggestion would not receive warm welcome. No matter which one gets replaced - oh well, even changed in mod - I would like that those codes for variable sweep could be available to the modders. That will not make any X-wing. Just variable wing. But then, I didn't expect much of a support. Just take a lok at J-10 thread... Rick made such a great job, and half of the replies go like "make F-15" or straight OT :(

Hi all, As I 'm aware that adding new aircraft is not possible (yet?), I was wandering if anybody is interested into supporting a suggestion to replace old Su-25 with flyable MiG-27K or Su-17M4? I think we all agree that old Su-25 model needs rework. But why waste time on that? Because of its outdated electronics it is very useless in this game. In real life, it can make the difference, but here… Well, nobody is flying it online, except for occasional fun or curiosity. It is Su-25T that has most attraction and proves that ED's decision to add this aircraft was a correct one. MiG-27K are Su-17M4 very similar to each other in respect of equipment. Better avionics then Su-25, but different enough from "T", including flying characteristics, to make it worth being present in the game. Weapon choices are either the same as on "T", or less. Avionics are the same or less. So there will be no need for additional equipment. Only additional equipment is radio guidance for a2g missiles, but I believe it could be easily added by duplicating laser guidance logic. After all, there is no laser "spot" in the game (one aircraft cannot see a laser spot produced by another source/aircraft). I know that new model and skins are needed, but I believe there are people that would like to contribute on this. I myself am not a modeler, but I could at least do some skinning or whatever is needed. It should be enough to bring any of those two to the level of MiG-29. Only serious issues, which could be resolved only by ED, are single-engines and variable sweep. Can sweep be resolved through "redirection" of arrestor hook command? Or is it already possible to use it and how? Any of these two (ah, preferably both!) would significantly boost the popularity of the game and extend its life in the same manner it was achieved with Su-25T. I like old Su-25, but retiring him in this game is needed if it will not be upgraded to Su-25KM "Scorpion". In the current form it is completely useless. Current map is not suited well for him. There is too much of open space, and too little types of units that you can "surprise". AI units react in the same timeframe, regardless of you angle, altitude and speed. As in real life, when you can choose between two aircraft as which one is best suited for a certain task, you will choose the better one. And, if enemy ground troops have (AI) air defense - Su-25T is the only choice. Original Su-25 was not built to fight the units from Lock On. Neither was SU-25T, but it is better against AI. Please, replace Su-25 with MiG-27K are Su-17M4.

Truly amazing work :thumbup: Congrats! I hope ED will consider including your work in official 1.13 patch, at least as AI aircraft

Any ideas how to use Tacview to create external pilot loogbok or to create a separate esport script that will enable such exporting?

If anybody dared to be suspicious about TorwaK's gift, here it is:

Congratulation to Boberros and motas! Bob, nice score :thumbup: I hope one of these months I'll have more time and make it more exciting for both of us. Cheers!

Hi all, I would like to ask if someone with programming skills could answer me if it is possible to export logbook to a file other then default LO logbook? LO logbook has not only a drawback that is stops to record after your death, but I can't filter out aircraft that I flew, and whether aircraft that I've shot down ate AI or human piloted. I got idea that something could be done along the line of Tacview and the way stats are done on HL servers and displayed on their web pages. For instance, on TuAF you get quite detailed stats (which could be filtered even more, but no need to push TorwaK that far). TuAF stats (and other servers, of course, but this is the one I fly most) provide more info then LO logbook, like aircraft flown, weapon used, and other. Also, default sorting of vehicles put MANPADs and such under the same group as trucks and tanks. Can something like that can be created, but to be recorded on my PC? Maybe something like plugin for Tacview? I'm looking into something that would just record the results, actual tacview recording is not necessary. Sometimes it bogs my poor PC down. Other solution like extracting such data from Tacview recording or server stats is welcomed. Another fine additions to such export (pilot logbook manager?) would be: - an option to import existing LO logbook - to export total and/or selected data into some xml (?) which could then be used in signature and squadron forums. Player will upload such file to a squadron forum, and administrator will be able to sort such data to get flying hours for squadron per aircraft, per pilot, units destroyed of certain type, other data as in LO logbook, and such. I know this data is prone to editing/cheating, but I do not care about cheaters. Server stats always provide confirmation of online results. I'm solely interested into keeping up with the progress of my buddies and other squadrons that I trust. If a player belongs to a squadron, and he uses such stats in his/hers signature, those stats in signature could be linked to a squadron forum and the squadron will guarantee the authenticity of such data. I'm also aware that Tacview recording depends on server sided settings, so a solution which does not depend on server is most preferable. Best regards Renato

Thanks for congratulations :) It was not easy, competition was very tough, namely S77thNotia10 (2nd place) and his gang and Boberros (3rd place), but me any my baby Su-25T somehow managed trough :pilotfly: TorwaK most certainly spiced thing up with his two new and very hard missions (day and night versions). Thanks TorwaK for the awesome gift and, I cannot say this enough, even more thanks for hosting two servers, providing 24/7 support and attractive stats pages. As for missions, several of us are working on new missions that I hope will be added to existing ones pretty soon. Cheers and good hunting!

Wow Mizzy, Excellent work! In word of George Constanza: "I'm speachless! I'm without speech!" Any chance for you to redo Su-25 skins? Thanks for your inspirational work. Cheers!

golfsierra2, Thanks for spotting my work and notifying the community :) I hope that gang from webring will not hold a bit OT content of the page against me. I'm currently doing some major changes on my site and preparing some new texts, but due to lack of free time, my progress with webpage and FC manual is quite slow. I've just installed Drupal, and I'm still traing to learn what goes where, and under what name :) I did encounter one problem which I'm not able to solve: In pilot log, there are no scores for Radar, SAM and Object. All radars and SAMs and sorted under Vehicle, and objects are nowhere to be found. Ships and helicopter are sorted OK. I'm not sure from where is this data pulled out. I've tryed to change few things back, but due to the same lack of free time, no luck so far. It looks like sorting for this types of targets have some top level key, which I missed somewhere. I'm playing aound with meinit editor from modman, but I'll be grateful for any help on this one. Cheers!

birdy, thanks for this valuable addition! May I ask for you permission to include you expanded encyclopedia in my translation mod?

Hi, I've submitted a request for space on sourceforge. We'll have to wait a few days until they reply. As I made a request in my name, when I receive details I'll send them to you. In mean time you will have to create your own account at sourceforge. Because I'll be the first with admin rights I will need your account details at sourceforge so I could transfer those rights to you. I suggest that everybody who is interested into working (or participating in any way) should open an account at sourceforge as well. Even if you do not need or plan to use SVN, send your sf account info to Mafia (or me). You will be added to users of project. Then you will be given info about mailing list. Subscribe to this mailing list, and when Mafia creates or modifies something within his mod, he can send simple email to this list, and you will receive instatenuous e-mail. Replying to this mail you can reply directly to the mailing list. Everybody subscribed to this list will automaticaly and promtply receive all emails. Using the mailing list on sf project will make this topic here a bit more "cleaner" and easier to read for "general public" :smilewink: Btw, I've chosen the name "Lock On Mega Mod". I beleive it can be changed later on without any trouble if you wish something else. Forgot to mention... On sf you are provided with space for two web-pages! One is general project page, and it looks just like regular sf page, but you can add some info, download links, screenshots ets. Layout posibilities are very limited. You can also create regular web-page for project with normal layout posibilities, like any other page. To upload the content (html pages) to a separate server, you have to use application named WinSCP, FTP application that works best with strict sf limitations. OK, now just a bit more patience :)

Mafia, sad to hear you are working alone, but if we cannot change that, let me at least give you something that will make your work easier... Here is some SVN tutorial: http://translatorweb.org/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1190753328 Text in above link is just a repost of my original post that I put together for CroMod community, but principles are the same. Since original post is in section of CroFC forum closed to CroMod developers, I've reposted it to a forum on my personal web-page. I use it to translate the particular forum engine that is currently running, so don't be surprised if you see anything funny. Take a look at it, and see if anything is unclear. I mean time I'll dig up passwords for SVN. Above procedure describes regular usage of SVN. But, you may take it one step further! After download (checkout) copy all content of local SVN copy (folder) into your LO folder. Before that, I recommend that you copy/paste your whole LO folder to another location on your HDD and rename it into something convenient .(At one point of time I had 6 copies of LO on my PC, one for fun and other for work, and each worked without any problems.) After overwriting "normal" files with those from SVN, you will have green check mark over your LO folder icon. Now you can work and test and there is no fear you will screw up file paths on upload. When you change any file, its icon will turn red, your SVN will recognize any changes and will offer you to upload (commit) those changes to SVN repository. Ideal for senile people like me :smilewink: Main point of putting together SVN and LO into same folder on your HDD is ability to work on any mod, and to have possibility for testers (and even end-users) to have latest version of your work without bothering to perform separate downloads and installations. In a way, it resembles to automatic updates that almost any software does. I'll have to check for correct setting for anonymous users so you could have more testers without the fear they will accidentally overwrite some files. I suggest anybody that is interested into testing of this mod or developing his own to check the link above. Cheerz!

Hi, Forgot to mention, I would be glad to help with testing, of course :) Also, I personally could supply you with Croatian ranks and medals. Regarding skins, you will have to contack Black Hawk (I'll put some pressure on him). Also, do you work alone on this mode? If it could help you, I could give you acces to our SVN repository. It is much easier to coordinate work and keep files up to date, especially when more people work on complex project, like LO/FC mod. I used it when I was doing Croatian translation and people were testing it. It was even more helpfull when we started on Croatian total mod (development stuck for various reasons). If you put files from SVN repository into your LO/FC folder, it is possible to do following: - you modify files and you test them localy - then you upload them to SVN ("Commit to Repository") - inform others (possible ways: e-mail, group e-mail to people who join developer list...) - testers also have SVN files copied into their LO folder - they update their local copy and only modified files are downloaded, preserving paths and filenames For another developer (beside you) it is only important to update his local copy before starting on any work. If one person is working on only one file, no need to zip the file, upload somwhere, no need to worry about file paths. If two or more persons are working on one file, they have to coordinate the effort (agree on timeline) so one would not overwrite the work of other. And, because SVN keeps history, for each file you can check who changed it and when, if they add comment during upload you can read that description, and you can undo any changes (revert to previos version). SVN is quite a gem (and its free), very popular among freeware developers because you can keep up with development without any fuss. Cheers!

I beleive that F-16 will be purchased no matter what. Croatian government is strongly influenced by US gov, and I beleive there will be a similiar deal as with Poland: "If you want our money for modernization of your armed forced, you will have to buy our aircraft". Currently this is postopned due to internal frictions (strugles for cut in dela) and elections, currently schedulled for the end of the year. MiG-29 does not fit into our HAS (remnants of YU Air Force), too tall and too wide. I think there are HAS for MiG-29 only in Serbia, not sure. Even with HAS in which MiG-21 could fit nicely, they were seldomly used. Most of them are to far away for RWY, which is not so much as a trouble to taxi, but in case of emergency it is very difficult to transport weapons, fuel, trucks with engine starters and "expandables" (air, oxygen, hydro...) and people. Infrastructure was non-existent, destroyed by YUAF when they pulled out. We had one truck each for starter and such, one farm tractor, and one Lada Niva. There was another starter truck which was in no condition to drive and was permanently stationed next to a/c on duty call. During all wartime period our MiG-21's were at the open. Only 1-2 a/c (on call) were inside of HAS nearest to the RWY. HAS are used mainly for storage and to grow mushrooms. I vote for any type of a/c, just to get one finally! MiG-21 is way too old and it will be a shame to vaste gifted and experinced pilots, especially when this small AF was so efficient.

Hi, I've contacted you via PM, but I would like to state my request out loud as well :) I would like if you delete Yugoslavia from the list beacause it does not exist any more. In fact it does not exist since 1990 when 4 out of 6 republics left the Federation. What was left was Serbia and Minute Montenegro. As Croatia and other repoublics (now indepentand states) were part of Yugoslavia, and helped build that name, we feel that Serbian using of name "Yugoslavia" since 1990 was like someone running away with family fortune. I hope that no one will show support to further advertising of this fraud. Not trying to start political discussion of any kind. Just to point out that Yugoslavia stopped to exist in 1990. If you have room to add Croatian Air Force, ther were pople working on Croatian mod and I'm in process of contacting them. They will be more then happy to support your work. Best regards

Hi Ezor, Thanks for working on this great utility! And here is my small contribution - update to Croatian translation for latest version :pilotfly: Cheers! hr-HR.rar