Aries144

Made a mission where it does this fairly consistently. The mission involves a building between an RPG trooper and a BTR-80. The RPG troop tracks and fires at the BTR, hits the building in front of him, and the game crashes to desktop. I hope this is helpful! RPG Crash.miz

This isn't just next to a building, unfortunately. This also occurs when setting rpg troops in ambush with no buildings nearby. I can't be certain because of the crash, but I believe it is occurring when RPG soldier 1 attempts to fire past RPG solder 2, misses, and impacts the ground near RPG soldier 2. Regardless, the CTD seems fairly consistent. dcs.log-20190121-072106.zip

For some reason, I've found that putting the units into separate groups of 3 seems to increase the number of units that fire at once. And thank you very much for taking the time to look at this!

Sure. I've put together several missions. All feature an F-5 at 100ft flying directly over Batumi runway. I have six groups of 3 AAA units each along both sides of the runway. 1. ZU-23 emplacements 2. ZU-23 trucks 3. Shilkas Out of the above three, the ZU-23 emplacement is the most effective, followed by the ZU-23 truck, with the Shilka the least effective. The vulcan seems to be between the shilka and the zu-23 truck and the gepard seems to be better than the zu-23 emplacements. Mission files include duplicates of the test with Vulcan, Shilka, ZU-23 emplacement, ZU-23 truck, and Gepard, all tested against the same F-5 flying straight down the runway at 550 kts, 100ft. AAA tests Gepard Shilka ZU-23 ZU-23 Truck Vulcan.zip

Testing ongoing. Will have more tracks.

The AI has trouble leading a fast target enough when the target is close or flying more or less overhead. Faster than about 475 knots, and it rarely hits due to not enough lead. I think the shilka needs to have a longer lockon range. There may also be an issue with AAA AI logic for all units with regard to leading a moving target. AI often completely misses a non maneuvering target. When this happens, it's always because the guns aren't applying enough lead.

Artillery units spawned into a multiplayer server will not respond to commands if a user was logged into said server at the time the artillery was spawned. However, if a user disconnects and reenters the server, he can then issue commands to any artillery unit that was spawned already prior to his connecting (or reconnecting).

I just came here to post a bug report about the same thing and found this post. I was testing the ZSU-23 Shilkas and several other AAA units and found that the Shilkas and the ZU-23 units can't seem to hit targets, even if they're flying in a straight line. I found that the Shilka can't hit targets moving in a straight line if they are faster than around 480 knots. Here are track files showing an F-5 flying straight and level at steady speed over a gauntlet of Shilkas at roughly 550 knots: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5t3ika40wa6wmn3/Shilka%20bugged1.trk?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/aem2oyiczbyubo8/Shilka%20bugged2.trk?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/yxh719d07heex7h/Shilka%20bugged3.trk?dl=0

Way to tackle the problem. Quick problem solving too.

Miles, you're the best man! I can't wait until you're ready for sale, I want this!

Debolestes stuff is really good. Highly recommended. I would have gone that way if his stuff was available when I started. It'd be nice to be able to change grips. My approach was far less elegant. I removed the FFB2's grip, modified the stalk to accept the Fighterstick grip, and changed the FFB activation method from using the optical sensor to a switch that a taped to the outside of the FFB2's base. Finally, I simply used some extended wires from the CH base through the bottom of the FFB2's base and up to the CH Fighterstick grip for the switches. In DCS, the buttons are mapped using the CH Fighterstick and the axis are mapped using the Sidewinder FFB2.

Andre's seat is GLORIOUS! I use both that and the MSFFB2. IMHO, the FFB is still the best for helicopters and is really nice for the older aircraft, as you can feel the change in wind resistance on the flight surfaces in aircraft like the L-39 and can feel the roll limiter in the F-5. If you're handy, I highly recommend looking around for a cheap broken CH Fighterstick. I bought one, fixed it, then transplanted the handle onto my MSFFB2. You get a modern flight stick with all the inputs and it also extends the stick a little, since the CH stick is taller.

Just in case it's different for some aircraft (I honestly can't remember), the easiest way to figure this out for a given aircraft is to simply trim left and verify that the stick moves to the left, then trim down and verify that the stick moves forward. If any axis moves opposite what's expected, just reverse that axis in controls, axis settings, tune force feedback. It's especially nice since ED added the ability to adjust controls while flying, even in multiplayer. ETA: Confirm what AeriaGloria writes about not using any curve. That takes the stick out of alignment for purposes of trim- particularly nasty with helicopters.

No. Changes to the following files cause IC to fail: bazar/shaders/deferred/decoder.hlsl bazar/shaders/deferred/gbuffer.hlsl bazar/shaders/deferred/atmosphere.hlsl bazar/shaders/deferred/shadows.hlsl bazar/shaders/materialfactory/ils151.hlsl bazar/shaders/model/functions/glass.hlsl You still get a substantial benefit if you use the rest of his changes and simply use the original versions of the above listed files though. ;) (Thanks to Airdog for making this known)

Add me to the list. Since the update before last, translational movements (forward, backward, left, right) are laggy. Now with this latest patch, even the shader performance mod isn't enough. Frame rates now, with the shader mod, are worse than they were without the shader mod two updates ago.

I'd like to see some more video evidence. It isn't clear to me that the smoke in the Swiss demo video is coming over the canopy at 12:00 as it does in the game. Something like 11:00 and 1:00 would make much more sense, assuming this was still enough to keep the smoke out of the intakes in the anticipated airflow conditions.

WTF?! I don't want to deal with that. Screw those controlling sacks of human waste.

I love you. Very useful for I7 7700k with a 1080Ti! I still get blurring and warping, even with that setup. Kegetys, airdog, thank you!

Has there been any word from ED on implementing this in a way that doesn't break Integrity Check in multiplayer?

Oh, sorry about that. I was trying to make a joke. I've only just begun to discover French military technology and I'm finding that it's been at the forefront of military technological innovation through the entire 20th century. Everything from innovative rifle designs to excellent missiles like the Mistral, aircraft like the Mirage series, etc. The Famas rifle is astoundingly elegant, very unique, and ahead of its time. The French copy no one! Everything is an original design it seems. It's very interesting to study. Growing up, I never knew about French military designs. I mostly heard about US and Russian designs.

Ah, go take your 100 years of excellent aircraft, missiles and rifles and hold a parade in front of a Baguette shop why don't you. :D:D Thank you for the information on the Hornet. I want these aircraft to perform as close to reality as possible, compared to one another. Without the proper relative performance, the historical "what if" element that I want to explore just isn't there.

These weren't single turn fights though. Extended fights with multiple turns, turning on the deck at 120 knots, etc. If that's how the aircraft is supposed to perform, that's fine as far as I'm concerned. I thought the difference in thrust to weight between the Hornet and 2000, and the Hornet's small turn radius at low speed, would make the Hornet superior at low speed, low altitude.

Yes, human pilots.

I flew some 1 vs 1 dogfights against 5 or six other players the other night. Fights begin after the merge. 2 heat seeking missiles and guns. I flew against F-15s, Su-27s, and F-18s. I beat them all with no losses- and I'm not that good. I was able to out turn and out accelerate the F-18s at speeds as low as 110 knots, which I found strange. Is the current flight performance accurate or is there an issue?

How familiar are you with soldering? How much time are you willing to spend on fixing this?