Jump to content

TEMPEST.114

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1724

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by TEMPEST.114

  1. TEMPEST.114
    As title says. If the last control point is very close to the first control point, then join them up automatically and convert into a complex polygon. The great feature of using LINE SEGMENTS is that you don't have to hold the LHMB down and you can zoom/pan the map before laying addition control points (this should be default on ALL drawing tools to be honest - it would radically improve the FREE POLYGON tool).
  2. TEMPEST.114
    As title says. When trying to create a counties border polygon, its impossible to be even remotely accurate due to the scale. You can't pan the map or zoom in/out without causing mistakes whilst holding down the draw shape left mouse button. So, instead, it can be more accurate to zoom in and draw the borders using the LINE FREE tool. However, you can only see a small part of the borders, so you still have to zoom/pan around, meaning you have to stop drawing that line. This means you end up with many un-joined lines forming the majority of the border. It would be really handy to have a feature to multi select the lines and create a complex polygon from them by the M.E adding control points between each line. Even if you only joined two lines at a time (for reducing complexities sake) then eventually when you join the last broken line back to the first, it becomes a fully enclosed complex polygon. There is just no way to create accurate borders without this or without the FREE POLYGON tool not drawing control points when the map pans and zooms...
  3. TEMPEST.114
    As title says, allow the user to add/remove control points at any point along the edge/border of a polygon shape that has already been created. In addition, locking the mouse in an X or Y direction with holding down shift (like in every drawing app) would really help reduce a large number of control points when a countries border runs outside the edge of the map. I would suggest that right clicking over a line segment between control points gives a context menu allowing you to ADD a control point at that position. Also, that right clicking over a control point gives a context menu that allows you to delete that control point.
  4. TEMPEST.114
    When editing a shape, a mouse drag on the shape makes it jump to the first 'point' that was created when creating the shape, rather than a grabbing the shape at the mouse pointer when the left mouse button when down. This has the nasty side effect of making the whole polygon jump, sometimes massively with a false drag event i.e. when trying to edit the control points at the edge of the shape. This is particularly nasty when trying to create a single polygon for an entire countries border. NOTE: When the polygon is an oval, rect or arrow, then no matter where you try and 'grab' it, the grab point jumps to it's centre of the entire shape. I would suggest this is wrong too. Notice that this doesn't happen when selecting and dragging LINES about.
  5. TEMPEST.114
    ? Well that makes no sense to me... esp as the back end fires 'Player Leave Unit' to all MP clients... Sigh...
  6. TEMPEST.114
    I understand that some maps have different borders per year, but these can be easily toggled on/off in the Mission Editor -> DRAW list. Having the map makers make a unique polygon drawing layer for each country will all mission designers to easily create triggers based on boundary crossings without having to resort to the frequently difficult to use accurately polygon drawing tool in the M.E. It will also make clear on busy maps, just where those countries borders are.
  7. TEMPEST.114
    Plenty of YouTube tutorials on exactly that. It's an overly complicated process. If you miss or screw up a step it breaks like you've seen. I hate the 'reapers' but this is pretty clear:
  8. TEMPEST.114
    That's what @Exorcet was alluding to, I believe.
  9. TEMPEST.114
    In reality, that's true, but there are too many missions that are July, CAVOK (Northern Hemisphere) and it's BORING. If the M.E. allowed it to randomise time of year and weather then replayability and how you approach the mission would change and that can only be a good thing.
  10. TEMPEST.114
    Sure, but a reload of the mission reshuffles things and you get something you can work with. And for modern aircraft, if the mission is important enough, you fly regardless. Having flown almost all my time in DCS in MP PVEVP servers, far too many people are lazy and only fly in CAVOK. These aircraft have tech that works in all times and conditions, we should be utilising that and raising the bar.
  11. TEMPEST.114
    Lose 'visual' not 'tally' - Tally is for bandits/bogeys not friendlies.
  12. TEMPEST.114
    Both in the net singleton and elsewhere we are able to the the string of the 'playerName' but nowhere can we get the playerID with the exception of iterating around net.get_player_list( ) for a playerName match. That seems inefficient. If we supply a playerName string to net, we should be able to get either the playerID back, or even use net.get_player_info(string playerName as a polymorphic alternative. Alternatively the net.get_my_player_id( ) shouldn 't always return 1 on a server, but should take a parameter of 'playerName' and return the playerID that matches that playername.
  13. TEMPEST.114
    Okay, I understand that stupid or ignorant people will resort to such things, but surely they'd be doing it to aircraft or SA10 units etc. What I don't understand is why in this specific instance, the excuse that it can promote cheating applies, because AFAIK it's just a research ship right? And even if the mission target was a cargo ship and these textures made it more clearly visible then it's not really a big deal is it? Esp not compared to say making long distance aircraft easier to spot etc. I was more asking why this specific mod, what is it about this one that breaks IC. This is the mod null
  14. TEMPEST.114
    Could you explain how this specific mod allows cheating? I’m at a loss as it’s only textures for a ship right?
  15. TEMPEST.114
    Still having IC failure on mods/tech/o_reis/textures Anyone? Is 2 years too long to wait for any help?
  16. TEMPEST.114
    Also this would kill the VR Hanger menu environment which crazily remains in memory and active even whilst you're flying, killing precious frames.
  17. TEMPEST.114
    That's 'official' is it? From on-high?
  18. TEMPEST.114
    I'm waiting to test it but I might have a workaround, due to the architecture of my Superscript. Failing that, then polling the net stuff seems like the only thing left to do... I can't believe such an important thing for scripters has been logged for over 10 years and never been fixed.
  19. TEMPEST.114
    Actually @Exorcet this new behaviour is more preferable because of the headache involved in installing mods you may no longer have, just to get at the bulk of the mission or triggers. The current implementation allows for the mission designer to 'fix' or 'replace' missing assets with others. Perhaps there could be a 'tick box' in the settings that toggles this behaviour so those who prefer the new way can keep it and those that prefer the old way can keep that too?
  20. TEMPEST.114
    Depends on speed.
  21. TEMPEST.114
    I've been using it for 2 years for my missions and my Superscript, but tbh, this kind of thing should be built into DCS.
  22. TEMPEST.114
    /FACEPALM Why do all this over-complicated obfuscated bull crap?! It's insane.
  23. TEMPEST.114
    So because of the decade old bug of S_EVENT_PLAYER_ENTER_UNIT not firing in MP games, it's impossible to use that to know when a player enters a unit and then see if that unit already has a player and therefore you know it's a backseater. I have posted another request to fix it in the bug channel; please upvote if you care about MP games.
  24. TEMPEST.114
    What are the rules?
  25. TEMPEST.114
    Hear hear. A decade of waiting for this event to be fixed.
×
×
  • Create New...