DUSTY

Must be to activate the cyanide pill hidden in one of his teeth. A touch morbid though.

Nice work, thank you!

Can't believe the H-60 and all it's awesome variants aren't mentioned in the list. UH-60L/M MH-60K/L/S/R HH-60G/H

Nice work!

Nice work, love the electro swing!

F-35 Apparently excells at the CSAR OSC role. https://warisboring.com/a-10s-and-f-35s-working-together-to-save-downed-pilots-9efc7f7dc576#.w1rxmo329

When the F/A-18 comes out it will be 'Fixed Wing Fighter/Attack' for me.

Awesome document, many thanks to the 476th!

+1

Thanks for the update Bunyap! I'm droolin' like a fool for SoH. :bounce::bounce::bounce:

Legend! Many thanks for your help SageOT. Please let me know if I can return the favour in any way.

Also, just to clarify a point that I didn't make clear in the initial post. I'm planning on placing identical but differently named Brigades so I can set up triggers that will randomly spawn 1 of the three possible units. So in summary the mission will generate a full Soviet style Tank Brigade but there will be 27 possible different force dispositions on each load. This ought to give this mission some serious replay-ability for when it is released publicly. Although there could be some 'doubling up' of companies or platoons using this method I'll just chalk it up to the OPFORs degraded command and control ability after having their IADS and C3 nodes slammed by TLAMS in the opening strikes. :music_whistling: Now I just need to get myself a dedicated server so I can host this kind of thing and let it play out over hours. Hmmm.

Thanks SageOT! Most likely BLUFOR advance will be along highway 160 though Mountain View and up Sandy Valley. I'm thinking of implementing a recon unit including TACP which would set up on the high terrain near Mt Charleston but I think they would have to Helo insert as the terrain is pretty rough up there and the roads don't really exist on the western flank of the terrain overlooking Pahrump.

Yeah we can only hope the Hornet's MU/MDL is simulated in some form - even if it's external to the actual simulator, The lack of pre-flight mission planning in DCS is a real let down to an otherwise awesome simulator.

Sorry WC, I should've made it more clear, this is on the NTTR map. Those options are great but again for a mission that I want to put many hours into playing myself, it's going to kill the immersion a fair bit. With those kinds of randomised units, I will still know the possible locations because I placed them myself.

That would certainly be going beyond the call of duty! Please let me know if I can help you out with anything in return.

Thanks for the reply feefifofum! It's a certainly a sizable force - I appreciate any effort no matter how big or small. Hand placing the units is a drag but the end result can add an extra dimension to a mission unlike when you see a line of vehicles just whacked in the middle of an open desert! Also, apart from hand-placing them there shouldn't be any need to 'script' them? Cheers

Okay that's very helpful, thank you! Looks like I need to put MIST reading at the top of my to-do list. Just one question. During tests when using triggers to randomise unit location, I've come across a problem where AI ground vehicles drive through ground objects like buildings. It seems like they are not aware of their existence. When using zones and scripting to spawn vehicles in an urban environment, would this be an issue? Or would you need to make the zones small enough so that no buildings were within it to avoid this? If so it might seem like I'm back to square 1 - placing individual units in appropriate tactical positions. Either way, still appreciate the explanation.

Thanks EasyEB. This sounds good, if you are able to share how you're able to do that and if those practices could be applied to 'dynamically' placing a brigade sized force please let me know.

Are you very familiar with scripting? I'm only just becoming competent now in the use of triggers and scripting is next on my list to learn but I'm not sure even scripting can do away with my problem which is the lack of immersion when you have to create your own scenarios. With triggers you can build tonnes of randomisation into missions which is great but as the actual mission designer there is no getting away from actually manually placing units. If you let the computer drive them around to random locations on the map, units will end up stuck in buildings and just generally not in realistic or very tactical positions. The AI is quite limiting in this regard. If another human places the units however, then you really have no clue as to where they will be. The whole point of this thread is that I have issued a challenge to anybody and everybody to help me out and it will be really interesting to see each individuals take on how they would organise a force to fit in with the scenario that's been set out. I just hope someone will be kind enough to help me out.

Good points! I will endeavour to add that SA building comm. Again, really appreciate the feedback, thank you BD! :D

Does this help? [ame] [/ame]

Hey Matador - That's okay, not expertise required at all! Please have a go and feel free to use your imagination. Mobile units and reinforcements moving to the front lines over the course of the mission is a great idea. I would be very grateful if you would have a go.

Thanks very much for your feedback Baltic! This is something I cannot take credit for! It is just an default that comes with the base mission template made by Stuka of the 476th. Having options like the radalt tape and slightly switched up MFCDs will probably take a little while to get used to but I think they are good additions also. Noted, thanks. Initially I wanted aircrew to do their own weaponeering for each flight. Unfortunately DCS has no proper pre-flight planning/DTC/weapon selection options yet which is frustrating, I think you're right though - I will select a fitting loadout for the next versions. The AH64s are on the datacard and mentioned in the first paragraph of the mission briefing. The reason why I haven't added any comms with them is that in reality they would be working a different frequency while they operate CAS strikes in close proximity to the friendly armour. There is also a UAV that operates within the AO that is not on comms. Apparently an all too common thing on todays theaters, unmanned systems are notorious for not deconflicting with aircraft or being properly incorporated with the ATO. Please think of this as additional realism. :joystick: I agree with you there, voice-overs are being worked on and will be incorporated shortly. The idea though is that on this interdiction mission you will not have overbearing support to assist you with the targeting of the MLRS batteries. I wanted to make them illusive and challenging to find. I tried to make it fairly clear in the briefing that the MLRS batteries were the priority target and that they were in the form of BM-21 and BM-27 systems (encouraging the player to look up the threat so you can positively ID them on your own terms). Perhaps I need to make that information a bit more explicit. You're right in terms of the lack of feedback though. I had set mission success criteria in the ME but I've only subsequently found out that this doesn't really have an impact on MP missions and is used for campaigns only! :mad: In the next version I will add a trigger that alerts the player when a battery has been successfully attritted.

That screenshot doesn't show any anomalies to my eye. The screenshot alone without being able to see exactly where you are reference the NDB (F10 map) doesn't allow me to draw any conclusions. Also I don't have 1.5 installed right now otherwise I'd load up and test it myself.