Mad_Max2

I'm gonna be honest I forgot that trigger even existed. Thanks for advice!

I came across a pretty awesome resource that has all the known FOBs/OPs/PBs/Etc. in Afghanistan during OEF. Link: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/11ea962acdac4706a172d72f5de85781/ In a perfect world I would ask for you to model the dozens of FOB's found in Afghanistan during OEF, but that might be a bit much. Perhaps a handful of the bigger more well known FOBs could get that treatment, who knows. A more reasonable request imo would be to clear out the generic neighborhood assets that obstruct many of the FOB locations (leaving the footprint that is visible on the sat image) so that mission makers can build FOBs/OPs at their actual locations on a case by case basis. Whatever the solution, a little love for the FOBs in Afghanistan during OEF would go a long way.

I like all the suggestions, but absolute text size is what brought me to this section of the forum. I'm glad I'm not the only person frustrated with text scaling with zoom. Also, I would like to suggest a "create sub-layer" type grouping system to allow grouping of drawings within a layer, that can then be shown or hidden easily with one click. For example if I have a scenario with a mix of air and ground related drawings I could group them and easily hide the air while working on the ground, or vice versa. Stuff like grouping all the phase lines, all the unit icons, route markers, poi's, etc. Basically anything that you would want to group up but still have under the same "main" layer.

A "special for joystick" 3-way keybind for Pitch AP. Similar to what was done for Roll AP.

My understanding of this post is the Stennis will be included with the package in the future. Which would lead me to believe there will be two of them. The standard one and the full fidelity one.

While we're on the topic of big labor intensive projects to throw on ED's plate how about we get some WWII carriers in the mix! No planes...I know. No maps (kinda)... I know. But hey.

Any way to re-color the hardpoints? Dug around the files a bit and cant seem to find the dds file. I'm assuming it's the "uh1_weapon" thats in the lua. Could be wrong. Any help would be appreciated!

Thanks for the reply! After some trial and error I ended up snagging someone else's "blank" roughmets like you said. Still would like to learn though so thanks for the link as well!

I'm having trouble with roundels, decals, etc. showing through on my skins even though I've taken them off of my livery. Discovered that it was showing through from the roughmet layer. Really just a novice skinner so I typically don't mess with these and just use what is already in the lua that I copy over to my livery. I feel like this is skinning 101 type stuff here lol but I just never bothered to learn :doh:, so... Any advice about how to edit/ create my own roughmet file? I see there is a ROUGH and METAL section in the F-16 template psd files, do I use those perhaps? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Awesome! Thank you for the quick response!

Does the day and night cycle affect the AI's ability to see the player or other AI units? Was looking at making some spec-ops, nighttime helo insertion type missions, but I wasn't sure how the AI would react at night so I figured I'd ask before I dive into making the missions.

I'm really liking this jet. If your not a fan of flying as China or Pakistan just wait for the template to come out. I see this jet as being a good candidate for fictional scenarios in countries that don't fly it. For example Georgia purchases some, allowing a scenario to play out without being tied to a particular coalition. Might not be realistic, but it does add some options.

Noticed there is a 3-way abstraction for the autopilot roll switch but not the autopilot pitch switch. Would be awesome to bind that bad boy to my pinky switch. :thumbup:

Thought so. Noticed the Viper does a few things differently than what I'm use to in the hog/hornet/harrier. Gonna take a little getting use to.

Is there a way to slew the tgp without switching to ccrp? Does moving the tgp around mess with your waypoints?

Idk about the B-52. I would be down for some medium bombers/attackers though. The A-20 their making the AI model for would actually be a good one that comes to mind. B-17 would also be cool.

It's also worth noting that they are getting into some of the meatier systems in the Hornet. Some of which are brand new systems to DCS. With the way DCS operates, it's crucial to get these things right, as they will likely be the foundation that is built upon for the foreseeable future.

Build a foundation of aviation knowledge. Generally the core aviation systems in any aircraft are going to have a lot of commonalities with each other. These are things like airspeed, altitude, attitude, and fuel indicators. It's just a matter of finding where and how these things are implemented in the aircraft you're trying to learn. Where are the radios? Gear and flaps? If you find and understand all the core aviation systems in the aircraft then you're just left with the aircraft specific systems to learn. This will take some reading or videos, or however you prefer to learn. The exception to this is when aircraft's have similar systems allowing you to feel your way around some things based on your experience in other aircraft. This would be like the mfd's and ufc in the hornet and harrier, very similar. I'm not sure I'm doing the greatest job explaining it, but the short of it is: Learn the basics, and how they apply to all aircraft, thus cutting out a large part of the learning process for subsequent aircraft.

Based on the training missions they are very similar in terms of quality. Both feature someone talking you through what you need to do as well as show you with boxes on screen. With the Hornet being early access the training missions will lag behind the new features, so new additions will require some self-teaching if you want to dive in right when it's released.(They have added training missions as features have been added, it's just not instantaneous) There's a little bonus with the Hornet however. In the Mission section there are tons of missions set up to practice certain things you would have learned in training, but with less hand-holding. The tomcat has a decent Mission selection as well, but they're "real missions" for the most part, for an already trained pilot.

Bunyap! Miss your tutorials man!

I had the same issue months ago. Thought it was my stick but it wasn't. I'm really trying to remember what actually solved the issue.... I'm not so sure it wasn't an update. In other words I think it may just be a bug. I'm pretty sure it was when I experienced it.

Interesting, I've been aware of the beta opt-in option on steam for quite some time, just didn't think DCS was one to use it. I got into DCS on steam back when 2.0 and the NTTR were just coming out. After learning these things were only available in OB at the time, I quickly switched over and downloaded directly from ED. Guess it didn't occur to me to opt-in to the beta using steam. Regardless, I'm still happy with going directly through ED

You can?? The modules don't release to steam until after they have been on beta for awhile, sometimes even stable branch then steam....Things could have changed so I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that steam was stable only, and usually last to get modules.

Considering how new wake turbulence is, I would definitely assume it's still wip. That being said I haven't encountered any instances that have been too egregious. I'm no expert on the physics of the matter though so there might be discrepancies that I'm just unaware of. Pretty cool though, makes dogfights a little more interesting.

I love Steam...for everything but DCS. I agree with all the financial arguments, that is a hefty chunk, but really what did it for me is the release times. You want the new stuff, you gotta be on beta... If your on beta, then you aint on Steam, simple as that.