Madog

The one big advantage of ED is of course that they can alter thier respective engines if they want to. A2A has to work around shortcomings of FSX which is probably why ED's DCS will be way better.

A question about this addon Hey, this is a very active thread, and i have not read all 64 pages of it, so it this has already been answered, please point me to the right post. I wonder about the nature of this add on, is it a FSX like "aircraft only" add on which provides the airframe and documentation only, or is there going to be extra content.. missions, challenges, maybe even a campaign? If so, what is planned for that? If not, since most of using the P51D will probably be flying around, will there be improvements in AI airspace handling and proper ATC and procedures? Thanks in advance, Madog

Oh NO! There is GAME content in this software, HOW DARE THEY! Consider this: maybe its fun to play.

Hey, i've got a related question: whats the point of CCIP dive bomb runs, you'll loose hight, expose yourself to AAA and MANPADs, the aiming depends on your personal flying skill and aperntly (judging from this thread), they are rather hard to set up and execute properly. I just can't see the advantage over CCRP level deliveries.... Can someone enlighten me please?

Hey, i think an interesting implication of this announcement is, which new technologies will come to DCS / FC... Assuming that the Flying Legends will be a combat simulator as the brand name suggests, it could mean improved dogfight, or maybe even fixed wing AI as the dogfight is probably the heart and soul of an aircombat ww2 simulator. Also, releasing a Battlecommander addon means about the same thing for the ground unit ai.. you cant just have tanks drive towards each other and do a head to head shootout... well you could but i doubt that this is what ED would strive for. Also the improved helicopter ai in 1.1.1.0 might just be a hint that they started improving the overall ai... Thinking of graphics i think there are some updates inbout as well since especially the terrain looks rather flat up close. Of course there is EDGE, but there might be more to it. Indeed ED has already started doing this with the improved Lighting picture, the better clouds, mists and smoke effects, tree shadows, etc... What i still miss, though is an advancement to export the exact results of a mission, which could lead to external dynamic campaign engines... well, lets wait and see. Madog

Hey everybody, I tried to find an answer, but my search did not yield any results, so here it goes: I'm using a HOTAS Warthog and use my ministick for looking around inside the cockpit. The thing is, i have not yet discovered a useable way to map the ministick analog axis to a view command, but simulate the mousecursor using HOTAS programming and switching between mouse-look and mouse-cursor in game. This is rather ineffektive. Is there a way to map an axis in DCS A-10 to a view without having to hold the axis steady to produce a view displacement? I would like to press the mini to move the view and when I release the ministick, the view should stay where it is, untill i move the ministick again. Also i would like to keep the analog nature of the ministick, meaning small displacement maps to slow movement, big displayment to fast movement. Currently one has to hold the ministick in a certain position to have the view stay on the same spot, which with the short travel distance of the stick and the large viewrange in game makes it pretty hard to look around precisely with holding the ministick. Also having to hold the ministick also makes it impossible to switch it to another DirectX axis to move a cursor in the plane. Please help :)

Thank you Wags.

Hey, i think the AI targets what it has discovered. And while the AI tends to discover stuff at far distances, it by far does not instantly discover everything instantly. Which means, while you see the tank you want the AI to target, the AI does not necessarly knows about this specific target. I also think, that if you prompt the AI to attack at a certain SPI (or your, or its current position for that matter) it does not engage a search around this point but rather attacks what it already has discovered and is of the highest priority and nearest to that position. That would explain why the AI might fly into AAA or SAM enagement zones.. it may simply not yet know about it. Or why it might attack seemingly random targets. What i would like to see is a way to tell the AI about certain targets, maybe by locking them with a SPI (might as well be padlock, too) and give them the coordinates, boardcast SPI if available or simple describe the relative position from your own. Also i would like to see the AI comunicate what it is doing.. for example a voice message telling you where it found a target to engage. The actual event of finding targets is already broadcasted via radio "...mud spike", you know the message. But the current implementation does not allow you as player to identify what was found where, so you can not properly decide if the attack command you will give to the AI will be executed in the way you intend. That in itself is not a bad thing either, the game is greatly enhanced by a measure of uncertainty, i think. But i would like to see a way to minimize this by better communication options, so the right communication (means receiving and distributing information, as opposed to just giving orders) may profit your effiency. This may be extend to further status messages that may be queried from AI wingman... like "what weapons do you have left" or "what damage did you take..." or "how much fuel do you have left?" . Also it would be great to induce intention to the AI ... for example "execute stand off attack" or "stay above / below XXX ft AGL", or to get back on topic "attack targets at my SPI, not farther away than x miles" or "attack south-most tank in column....". Certain AI communication options are already great, but especially communication (mind you not only giving orders) with the AI Wingman has quite some room left for improvment. Im quite thrilled to see whats down the road for DCS in this area

Hey, AI Wingman management! Stuff like how they react to different attack commands, how to manage AI to keep it at a distance to target, what are the limitations of the current implementations... how to keep them from decending or ascending above or below a certain altitude... how to keep them alive in a high thread environment.

What camp am i in? TEAM EDWARD!!!11 no wait, that something different :)

Thats great, thanks a lot! I did not want to fix them myself because disecting a mission like that ruins immersion imo, i'm glad that you are making the effort, keep going buddy. Rep inbound. @ ED maybe you guys should look into incorporating PeteKorms versions of the missions in 1.1.0.7?

In the second mission (after completing the first with 51% since it cant be completed better since the rescue helicopter wont land) the SEAD part of the strike orbits at full afterburner which leads to them leaving early and the whole strike being ripped apard by SA 11. I think its very sad that the campaign is rather unplayable since i think it has a lot potential to be really involving and fun. Are there plans by ED to fix the missions in this campaign?

Hey, i'm unable to complete this mission. Everytime the SAR helicopter reaches the downed pilot nothing happens. I've opend the mission in the editor, and found it should give a message 2 mins after arrival. That does not happen for some reason. Please help

no, this would be a gag order.

Ok i'll start off with the explenations: There are several problems when developing a profile for DCS Warthog: First and foremost (which is actual a structial problem of the HOTAS): Someone at Thrustmaster made the fabilous to only let the software emulate ONE device... which results in too few Direct X buttons to map for every switch of the HOTAS. To circumvent this shortcomeing of the TARGET software i tried mapping as many buttons as possible with Direct X buttons favouring those switches that stick to thier postions (think EAC engage), or which have to be held in place (think china hat forward). The second problem is that there is no "map all dx buttons" like there used to be in Foxy, how could there be, since the device has more switches than dx buttons also not every function in the usual default profiles for the HOTAS Warthog is present in the default joystick file, so without edting the luas it is not possible to map some buttons in game to HOTAS switches on the Combined device like on the seperat Joystick and Throttle devices. Because there is no default mapping for the HOTAS combined device on TARGET, there is no default mapping in DCS Warthog, which means you have to make your own. Also, the in game mapping is.... well difficult ingame, after several tries i fell back to just editing the lua file (the choice to show the different profiles for different devices in a table and yet safe and load them independly almost drove me insane .. not intuitive at all). To solve, or rather circumvent the current shortcomings i have included a DCS Warthog combined default lua in the package, you need to copy it into your DCS Warthog directory, subdirectory Config\Input\Aircrafts\A-10C\joystick and, if present, delete the current profile (the filename contains a HID identifier.. something along the lines of "Thrustmaster Combined {F4D2B570-FD8D-11df-8002-444553540000}.lua" ). Also because not every function of the hotas is present in the you'll have to assign keyboard presses to certain functions in the game: LALT+s to "Landing gear warning silence" LALT+i to "Left Enging Oper Ign / Norm" RALT+i to "Right Enging Oper Ign / Norm" (i hope i have not forgot one - if something doesnt work - check if there is a keycombination assigned to the function in game) Of course you are free to map different keyboard combinations, but remember to change them in the TARGET file, also. I would have liked to map the ministick as two axis to use the "shifted" axis as view device, sadly DCS does not support this behaviour with anything but a mouse. You can edit it into the luas, but then the axis reaction will be greatly exaggerated compared to the mouse, using a curve or y-axis saturation to reduce this behaviour results in very choppy movement of the view since every single value change for the axis results in a single jump of the viewpoint. I have yet to understand why normal joystick devices in DCS are only mappable as absolute view changes (which is fine for a trackir like device but terrible for a ministick). I also tried mapping the shifted ministick as mouse emulation which works reasonably well in game (if you tune the the y-axis saturation and curve WAY down - the joystick mouse needs to move only a few pixels per second in windows to result in a controlable viewpoint movement whereas actual mouse movement seems to be interpreted differently in game - why i do not know). Buuut there is a bug in the TARGET implementation which causes the virtual mouse to jump erracticly when using MAP_RELATIVE and remapping the axis with button presses. This causes the view to jump all around the place the first time the mouse cursor moves after every press of the shift button. Anyway this is why i have mapped S4 as a shift button which toggles the ministick between slewing the cursor and viewing around via the keypad keys 2,4,6 and 8. Not perfect at all, but better than nothing. Ah and lest i forget the friction axis defaults to a zoom view axis. The profile package can be found here: http://files.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/14359/ I hope this saves you some head aches i had in the past few days (plug in and play.... as long as you dont have the crazy idea to actually use the joystick software.... :( ). Of course i am interested in any feedback you like to give. Madog

Replace those lines width = screen.width; height = screen.height; aspect = screen.aspect; with those: width = 1680; height = 1050; aspect = 1.6;

Yea, i did, or am still trying to. I'll post it tomorrow with some explenations

No, they don't work for me, i have seen hassata's original post, that's why i've tried them. Anyway the game persists in using the primary monitor as base for the x, y coordinates, as soon as i set the left monitor to primary, the menu shows up there, and the following code works as a charm: Viewports = { Center = { x = 1280; y = 0; width = 1680; height = 1050; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.6; } } LEFT_MFCD = { x = 0; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } RIGHT_MFCD = { x = 640; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } However i'd like to keep the center monitor as primary, is there no way to do this? :helpsmilie:

Thank you for the suggestions, i have set my Resolution to 2960x1050 (why do you suggest to use 2930x1050?), the problem is, DCS keeps starting to count the x value on the primary display (the one with the taskbar, where dcs spawns the menu screen). Is there a way to tell the program to start counting at the secondary display, or to make the program spawn there, without changing the primary display in windows?

2 monitor setup question Hey, with the help on this thread i have been able to install a 2 monitor setup - thanks to all participants. There is only one catch: my secondary monitor is to the left of the main screen. I have configured my display driver in windows to work with it this way, but DCS Warthog wont start up on the left screen. The setup is as follows: Left screen: 1280x1024, secondary monitor (no taskbar ;) ) Center screen: 1680x1050, main monitor (taskbar) I'm using Windows 7. I have been successful when configuring the screen from the left side to the right (without actually moving it) and using this configuration: Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = 1680; height = 1050; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.6; } } LEFT_MFCD = { x = 1680; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } RIGHT_MFCD = { x = 2320; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } What i would like to do though is to configure something like this: Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = 1680; height = 1050; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.6; } } LEFT_MFCD = { x = -1280; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } RIGHT_MFCD = { x = -640; y = 192; width = 640; height = 640; } Or get DCS to actually start counting x on the secondary monitor to the left and not on the main, center screen. Can someone help, please?

Hey, here is what i use: .tmj: MIY /I 3 Shkval_right ^ Shkval_left /O 1 40 MSX(1-) MSX(1+) MSX(0) MIX /I 3 Shkval_down ^ Shkval_up /O 1 40 MSY(1-) MSY(1+) MSY(0) .tmm: Shkval_up = /H ; REM KU-31 Shkval slew up Shkval_down = /H . REM KU-31 Shkval slew down Shkval_left = /H , REM KU-31 Shkval slew left Shkval_right = /H / REM KU-31 Shkval slew right mind you, i use the shift function to slew the shkval, "unshifted" i use the microstick to control the mouse in order to look around.

hmm, lets see, slewable, strong gun.... can not fly, but makes other things do that

Hey, since i have installed Windows 7, the nightvision works strangely inverted: Usually when there is more Ambient light in the cockpit you see less throu the night vision. For me it now works invertet, the more ligh sources i turn on, the more i see from my surroundings outside the cockpit. To speak in technical terms: it seems to me that there is a semi-transperant green sprite layed over the nightvision area on the screen. The sprite used to get more transparent the darker the cockpit was, now it gets more transparent the more illuminated the cockpit is. Its not a bad bug, since i simply leave on the lights in the cockpit to see outside, but anyways: does anyone else get this phenomenon, or even knows a solution for it? Thanks in advance, Madog

Hey, if you want, you can pm me your e-mail address, i'll mail you trk of the mission. Can't attach it here, file's to big. Hope it helps

I second this! Actually i think, the displayed illumination on the TV-display vanishes, if the illuminated area is no longer displayed anywhere on the screen. So if you look down "to much" in such a way you do not see outside of the cockpit, or if you only see not illuminated areas (through the side windows for example) the TV-Display goes to night lighting. I also think this is a bug, or at least a acknowlegable limitation of the gfx engine.