vicx

Dead on Grimes. The Tunguska missile is one of only two missiles for ground units that has an advanced flight model. In DCS the 9M311 is modeled with as much fidelity as the AMRAAMs.

You got a cite for that? Perhaps a technical review? Flickering could come from a poor implenetation of the backlighting system and that would make it less of G-sync problem and more of a hardware implementation issue. You should name the brand and model of the monitor with the problem; if you are making the claim.

Don't forget to add a helper point for the driver view. New feature in CA.

There was a guy who carried out some pretty cool tests and posted a youtube video. His testing showed a full loadout of FAB-100 did the most consistent amount of damage.

OK this would be kinda cool.

Hogg. SAM locks are coming in a future version of Tacview. It requires a new backened to make it work properly. NeilW you can upgrade to the Pro version. I have no idea how much that costs. I think Vyrt is waiting till the codebase stabalises before making it a thing.

Testing the new units in the NTTR SRTM1 terrain. Looks Jiggy. :ufo:

Zal, try and Google that problem. There are too many possibilities to guess. I would guess you run multi-monitor, or odd resolution, or have something disabled. I run a single monitor with 3D settings 'single display performance mode'. Not saying it is this. It could be ANYTHING. Suggest you google.

Shadowplay rocks does a great job with DCS and you can also record the desktop. You just fullscreen apps like Tacview and record them too.

A case of learning to walk before winning a Gold Medal in the 100m Olympic sprint finals. We do not yet have solid body physics for bombs, airplanes and the ground. Do not hold out hope for the physics of mud and grass. Of course keep dreaming - this is important.

graywo1fg, Do you think that such a feature is likely in the short term? If so that is great news. Otherwise I see a LOT of wishing for features on these forums and only a few genies appearing and granting wishes. I'm using Ian's tools at the moment and the LUA console included in DCS Witchcraft is literally a game changer. See what I did there ;) *you can change the live game via console* Another cool Podcast Dojo. You keep bringing it!

That is impressive. Now I have to register and download some SRTM files. *I just downloaded some SRTM1 data and it looks so good in Tacview. Everyone is going to love this. Frantz says post all the pics I want. Just because it was interesting to me I chose Pearl Harbour for my first SRTM1 import. I will try SRTM1 for NTTR next. Hormuz will not have SRTM1 data - there is no SRTM1 for Middle East and Caucaus regions. Shame about that. About colored outlines - I approach this idea differently to you. I seek extra visual vocabulary for it's own sake. Having more visual techniques to apply to a visualization scenario is powerful. The scenarios are changing as I learn what can be visualized and is worth visualizing. I am interested in DCS Ground and Naval units. I want to visualise the activity of ALL the sensors; not just radar but also optical, visual, infrared etc. I have used unit to unit lines but the lines can become too much for some scenarios. The unit to unit lines require improvements. At the moment they terminate at some distance from the unit. I understand this could be due to limitations in the present Tacview 3D engine.

Nick, Ian shows the correct technique for returning and displaying LUA table *in the Witchcraft LUA console*. mist.utils.tableShow(table) *As I understand it your question is more about Witchcraft LUA console than MIST but MIST provides a good solution AND DCS Witchcraft Thread is STILL not stickied so ...* In the DCS Witchcraft console you can "return" a string, number or a boolean but to return a table you need to write your own function OR use one that is already written like mist.utils.tableShow *Thanks Ian for providing a great explanation of the JSON properties that cause the behavior. I learn stuff around here.* You will use this a LOT. *Nick you should also make a new thread. This thread is for MIST announcements and support.*

Yes it is. I know this for certain and the techniques for doing this are scattered throughout this forums. Modding missiles for aircraft is not my specialty; I mod ground armament so I cannot give you advice other than find the information and carry out your own tests.

Lilkiki, Where did you source fireobject.EDM? I don't have 3DMAX either but I have previously been able to find suitable proxy objects for some experiments in the DCS set of EDM objects.

There is no EASY way but there is a POWERFUL way. Do you want ultimate scripting POWER!! aka a Live LUA console with access to the mission environment. Absolutely you want the power. So you want DCS Witchcraft ^^^ Again DCS WC thread should be STICKIED. Edit and polish the Witchcraft Thread and put it up next to MIST. Save the poor wandering souls looking for clues.

Blooze, I think you have to shoot it or blow it up. Sorry for commenting three times in this thread without actually trying this mod out but I think what I said applies.

This video is a rendering of an ACMI recording I made available in the Tacview announcement thread. The buildings in pink are exported using an export script that grabs the building hitboxes via LUA. This should show pretty well that Tacview 2.0 will not just be for dogfights (although dogfighters actually have a lot of goodies to look forward to). I will be using Tacview for Combined Arms and I think it will also be an excellent tool for ground attack replays. The question is how do you want your buildings, bridges and map objects to look? It might be actually be possible to replace many of the boxes with objects are closer to their actual appearance in the DCS. That would be up to us as players. The file format supported by Tacview is *.OBJ I think it's possible to make the objects in Sketchup and use a 'free' export chain to go from skp to obj.

Lilkiki, there MIGHT be a way and since you don't mind hacks it might be a solution. Naval units seem to have a unique damage model. A naval unit can have unique collision shells mapped to unique damage regions. Each region can have its own fire so Naval units can have burning parts without being dead. If you can object swap a naval unit then you have your solution. You will also have to hack editor LUA to be able to drop Naval units on the ground. It is not too much trouble. --- I noticed that the DCS M1A1 Tank has a pretty detailed collision model but it isn't used when it is a ground unit. So I made it a Naval unit. Details in this thread -> http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=135689

Roadrunner. I was never able to view col models with the standard modelviewer but standalone versions seem to work if you type 'showcol' in the console. Lil's fire which I got from Stonehouse's edit seems to be a 0.5m cube (invisible texture) with a 0.5m cube collision model. Sprinkle them over your terrain like little fire cubes I guess.

ADDED Option to display telemetry data in the 3D view for all aircrafts and selected objects Quite cool. ADDED Mouse-over objects to display labels or more detailed labels in the 3D view This is great. It would also be nice to have that white OUTLINE effect for mouse over too. ADDED Selected objects are now outlined (3D meshes only) Love this effect. If this affect could be also be done with colors it might have some interesting Tacview 2.0 uses. ADDED Added support for NASA SRTM1 terrain (about 30 meters resolution) Could you please make available a sample (it doesn't have to be big) of Nevada SRTM1 terrain. I could troll players who anxiously await DCS 2.0 release and do not read Tacview threads. Actually I would just like to see how good is terrain at this resolution. Do you have to fix the SRTM data from the NASA site or is it ready for use? CHANGED Objects far from the camera are now displayed with shorter labels to reduce clutter This works well. I really feel that the default is really good but I still would like a slider to fine tune the effect. If there were a slider near the trails slider I would use it to make the label shortening happen closer to the camera (in some situations). CHANGED Tweaked auto-scale to reduce clutter It is a nice default now but still I would like it be even more subtle when at a tactical level view. I would love to have a slider near the trails slider to control this. FIXED Threat dome of some destroyed SAM/AAA was still displayed in some rare cases I would like a way to modify the appearance and toggle the threat domes but I realise this is likely a Tacview 2.0 req. FIXED Ground objects which had left the area were still displayed as destroyed objects This does look fixed. I still have another scenario where I am creating ghost images of units by overwriting their ID and this causes the unit to be identified as DEAD. I was making use of a trick where in the log I +<ObjectID> an existing unit and it leaves a snapshot of that unit in the 3D view. Like a 3D bookmark. OK that is my feedback. Cool changes. The outline of the mesh objects looks so cool.

DCS is a simulator sandbox. As has been stated repeatedly by some of the more insightful commenters. Whether DCS is a WW2 simulator or a simulator from another era or a complete departure from period simulation is entirely up to the mission designer. However I would add to this and say that even with the right aircraft and the right mission the participants in the missions do have to play their part. Yes you have to play DCS like a role playing game if you want it to be a SIM. The aircraft are amazing achievements but they are just a tool to be used by the mission designers and after that by the players. If you want a a WW2 sim you need the aircraft, the mission and the mission actors to stay in character. It really becomes what you make it.

Someone brings up Arma but that is OK there are some comments which can apply here. Truth is that Arma3 engine is more than advanced in terms of separating component parts and spreading he load. It is OK to give the Arma developers credit for this without making direct comparisons to DCS development. BUT the componentisation of Arma engine has not been entirely smooth for Arma devs and Arma fans. Physx implemenetation for example has been lengthy and has not always been supported by players. Whenever you ask for features in DCS consider if YOU have the patience and the ability to SUPPORT devs while they roll out code that DOES have lots of bugs and DOES require lots of fixes over periods of time stretching out over months and perhaps years. For new engine features you have to be willing to have distruption. New stuff always breaks old stuff - seems like some kind of rule. The DCS community strikes me as being very conservative and not very forgiving of anything that doesn't work perfectly straight away. Resistant to change is OK but it means you get not many new features and you wait much longer for them.

Who wins. That is always the important part. Maybe I will watch it with ads in a few years.

Of course most people in the West a blind to the America rah rah rah in all the movies. We are desensitised to it because it is so common. If you saw a movie which was written from the other side you might kind of get it. There must be movies for example of tough Russians in Afghanistan killing John Rambos and Islamic extremist terrorists. You would watch that movie and think OMG but it is exactly the same thing as we have. I think Saving Private Ryan is a great film but I probably wouldn't watch it if I was a German.