Rolds

If you are right (and your DCS knowledge has impressed me before, I remember you provided a script that helped prove the S3B refueling rates weren't working properly), this would explain the issue I have. Search then engage in zone sometimes does appear to work, but I often set very large zones so that the edge of the zone is straighter and starts to approximate a straight border. If your information on a 50% buffer is correct, that 50% area would be very large in many of the missions I create, giving the impression that search then engage in zone isn't working at all. Fully agree, being able to adjust the buffer zone would greatly improve things.

Could their detection and performance be modified? Or their tactics?

Then why do the other DSCG display options exist? I don't care for this answer at all, I am not interested in being constrained into how you think the F4 would be used. Having a verbal command for the WSO to change the aspect mode already exists in boresight mode (obviously), so why is it so difficult to believe this communication/coordination would never occur between pilot and WSO in other situations? And your reluctance to allow this type of interaction and proposed solution omits the heading information from the DSCG. Your response is surprising and seems illogical to me, I am only asking for the ability to ask the WSO to flip a knob that I can already do when the radar is in boresight mode, that is all.

So all I am looking for here is a way to change the display on the radar so that in the pilot seat I can see information other than closure velocity. The reasons don't really matter but potential use cases include figuring out if the locked target is above or below my nose or correlating my lock with a radar controller in an intercept to confirm I have the right target in a complex environment. If I switch to the WSO seat I can move the knob and get this information to display, but if I ask Jester to do that he replies "unable". This appears to be an unnecessary limitation if not an outright bug. Is there any other way currently to change the displayed information on the radar screen from the front seat? If not, could you please allow jester to move the target aspect knob in situations other than boresight mode?

If I understand the manual correctly, especially this part about the boresight aspect knob that the WSO has, it has two functions, first to being to set the speed gates for boresight radar, and second to select which information is to be displayed on the display readout at the top of the radar display when a target is locked. Jester does not seem to be able to change this knob to other positions except when boresight mode is selected, but there doesn't appear to be anything stopping him from doing so, and I would like it if he could so I can select what information will be displayed about the locked target. I'm not posting this in bugs yet as I am still going through the F4E, can anyone tell me if I am missing something here? EDIT - after I typed this out I realized I could just hop back into the WSO seat and try this, and sure enough you can switch this knob at any time. I think this is a bug, Jester should be able to change the boresight aspect knob using the interface and direct commands (there are buttons that do this that are helpful to bind) at any time.

This problem still exists on October 26, 2024, and the advanced waypoint options idea does not stop Mig 21 (or other AI aircraft) from using flares even when they have none aboard. When people talk about fixing core game mechanics, this is exactly what they mean. @BIGNEWY How can such a basic problem last for years without being fixed?

A flock of hot air balloons lurks somewhere on the map, does that count?

As we come up on two years with no action on this simple deficiency I am left to believe that no one who works for eagle dynamics has become proficient enough at this game that issues of night refueling matter to them.

When this "Start Enroute Task" item is set for AI aircraft, the behavior I would like to see is that these aircraft will only engage other aircraft within the set zone to depict situations where fighters will not chase an enemy across the map into hostile territory. However, this is not the way this feature appears to work. The AI aircraft to appear to only engage aircraft within the zone, but once this happens they never disengage. I would like a feature that makes AI aircraft only engage enemy aircraft within a set zone (and if I could set the shape of said zone that would be even better).

I have the same problem, rockeyes appear to function a very short time after weapon release regardless of fuze option selected, makes anything other than low altitude attack inaccurate to the point of not being usable.

Rotating the windshield wiper knob on the roof panel doesn't seem to do anything and I cannot find any other controls for them, is there any way to activate them? Rainy weather landings are hard!

Could we get an option that would allow us to prevent aircraft from strafing ground targets? I have many situations in mission editing where I only want aircraft to attack ground targets with their weapons other than the gun, and removing the gun ammo doesn't always work, mostly because there are times when I want that retained for air to air combat.

I haven't been able to get it to fire, is this still not implemented? Will it ever be?

Does the F16 have access to these? I can't find them on the payload tab in the ME.

I would like this to work just like "Part of group in zone" but be able to set a moving zone around a unit. The use case I am looking for is to have a unit moving but stop when it gets close to enemy units and notify me that its way ahead is blocked (with JTAC designation via the CTLD JTAC script), and having a part of coalition inside moving trigger zone would be an efficient way to achieve this. There would be many other potential use cases like being able to flip a units ROE or alarm state easily.

I know this works, the problems are it is more labor intensive and flipping the unit to weapons free puts it back to the state where it will engage any target within its maximum range which is not what I am looking for.

I need the ability to reduce the engagement radius for ground units against all types of enemy units. A similar feature already seems to exist for radar guided SAMs. Currently ground units always engage at maximum range. This: - Exacerbates the problem of the ground units unrealistic ability to detect enemy units through trees, buildings, etc. - Ground units often engage at maximum range and use of all their ammo on low % shots - This could be the easiest way to re balance infantry shooting at helicopters with assault rifles, they currently do this at 1600 feet, I would much prefer being able to lower this to about 700 feet so that they still will shoot but will only do so if the target is much closer. There are many problems with DCS ground units and no easy fixes to many of these problems, but giving mission editors the ability to reduce engagement distances seems like a simple thing to implement given similar options already exist, and would help in many situations.

I am bumping this because the intercept range option still exists for all ground units but still has not effect. You can easily demonstrating this by placing any unit armed with a gun and setting the intercept range to a very low value or even nil and note that they still fire at air units. This should either be removed for units that it has no effect on to avoid confusion, but I think there is a better option. If this could actually reduce the intercept range for units it would be very helpful to me. I want to place infantry that will only engage helicopters at a close range of say 300feet (roughly 100m) rather than the 1600 feet (488m) which is their default engagement range. The problem with it being 1600 feet is they are firing back at a range not much closer than say an apache might engage them with its 30mm, which I think is a big part of why helicopter vs infantry engagements in current DCS feel like the infantry have an unrealistic advantage compared to videos of actual apache vs infantry engagements. I don't want to change the default value, I'd just like to have this as an option in the mission editor. If you aren't going to remove this nonfunctional item could you please make it useful? In fact, if you could make an engagement range option that could reset the distance ground units fire at any unit that would be even better as I think it would help account for the current AI's conspicuously good spotting capability and would also prevent the ai from foolishly wasting ammo on maximum range shots that have almost no chance of hitting. Having more control over these things in the ME is always helpful.

On those occasions when I have a reference point to compare the radius to where the shots land, shots still seem to often land outside the radius. Does it have any effect? Also, artillery pieces generally seem to have lousy dispersion.

Jumping into an artillery piece is an annoying experience that could be improved quite easily (which would simultaneously demonstrate that CA is actually still under development). Give us a better way to aim, right now with the mouse we can aim in degrees but only have tick marks showing 5 degree increments, which is not at all accurate enough (by the way is this magnetic or true heading?). We also can select range from a scale with tick marks in 100 meter increments, again not accurate enough. Making this even worse is that aiming has some loose momentum which makes it hard to get the barrel lined up. Also, the weapons dispersion is often too wide compared to what appears possible in real life. Back to back shots without changing the aim point can appear to land 100 meters apart. Having the ability to accurately use an artillery piece would make for fun game play between players who could call for fire and adjustments. Of course there are many, many other improvements that could be made (different types of rounds, select-able burst height, towed artillery that can actually be towed or transported by that new chinook, etc), but making these units functional via CA in first person mode would be a great start.

Hi, these look great and I would love to try them, is this site the best to download these mods? https://sites.google.com/view/admiral189dcsworldmods/home-port?authuser=0 It doesn't appear to have all mods on it, for example can't find the LCAC or San Antonio

Hi first I want to say I'm a huge fan of these asset packs. I have a question about the shahed 136 speed. After seeing this clip, of course I went to try it in DCS and I found that the drone, after its boost phase, eventually settles down to about 140 knots TAS which is 261 km/h. That's pretty quick for Mi-8 intercept, and public info about the 136 gives its top speed as 185km/h. Are we sure about the shahed's speed in DCS? Mostly I just want to do a mission where I try to kill a flock of them with the Mi-8 doorgunner, thanks!

I'm having trouble with the bal ASM launcher for KH 35U. I've tried a lot of things but can't get it to launch more than two missiles at a time, is there anyway to get a larger salvo out?

That said, pulling things like this out of the game might come across better to the many players who aren't deep into the forums, rather than leaving them in game and broken for months/years?