Lithion

You won't really miss anything, because:

+1, placing custom lights in the ME would be grand

I think you're not far off that they're prob saving for a bit WW2 patch + channel map + P-47 all in one. Though as a bit of constructive feedback, as others have said: please don't show us stuff that won't make it in the game for year or so.

Welcome Jan, and TrueGrit! Good luck and really looking forward to what you guys will bring!

Assets seem to take ED an exceptionally long time to get around to. Remember the time disparety between seeing the first shots of SA-2, and HY-2 launchers, and them actually getting implemented? It's really silly. (Yes I understand there's a difference between art models and the coding behind it..)

Would love to hear more on this :) I realise it might have been shadowed by the VOIP implementation. Seems like the Ju-88 externals have been ready for about 2+ years now, but development keeps getting pushed back.. Such a shame for the modellers as well! Picked up a warbird and ww2 pack this sale, would love to create some escort missions for the '109 :)

* (Easier way for) the ability to project visual zones onto the F10 map, viewable by Coalition or globally. Aditionally, an easy tool to draw frontlines etc. on the F-10 map, same features as above. * Third, independant Coalition * Spawning a randomly generated group of civ or military units, which automatically have their own interactions with nearby roads etc. Like a certain Zeus game mode in a certain game. For easier population of areas. * Tab with recently used units/groups/areas, all mixed together, maybe orderered to type *when spawning a new area after another one, they should have the same size as the previous one

Thanks for giving ME some more love, here's my issues list: - As mentioned above, not technically a bug, but incomplete/inconsistent asset division; some units are found in REDfor only, some BLU. Sometimes a nations should have access to certain assets, but don't have them (not an issue of skins, a lot of vehicles actually don't feature nation roundels/flags) - When making heavy use of templates: Placing a template, deselecting template menu (required otherwise you place another template) and then selecting templates again, resets the selected template to the top one featured. Alternatively: If you place a REDFOR template, deselect templates, then select on of the units placed, then select templates again, the nation resets to USA but still has the previous nation's saved templates listed; this means I'm now placing US SA-2 battery.

The JSOW basically just carried another 'item', a BLU bomb for the A, and a BROACH warhed for the C. See picture below. This could mean the same limitations apply; fuze setting set on the ground. Though someone please correct me if i'm wrong.

I don't think it's related to what gets priority, I actually assumed you were targetting a stock building in town, not a self-placed item. What could be the issue is that the AGM-65 seeker can't pick up that large of a target, and instead goes for the vehicle which it can make out (somehow). I'd base this on how you have the anti-ship mode which widens the sensor FOV for a lock, and how we used to have force correlate which widened it even further.

I'll be happy if i can cue mavericks to the TGP sight on first release, I'm only expecting footage and lasers to be implemented on first release, shortly followed by gps SPI's or whatever the hornet equivelant is, and hopefully not have to wait a month or two for that to be added.

You're right, currently DCS IR modelling is basically (if placed unit) -> bright as poop on IR Though ED is currently working on improved IR modelling for the engine, which last i heard is slated for implementation with the ATFLIR for the Hornet, and probably in some form for the F-16 too.

Considering in software, a new 'major' version denotes backwards incompatibility, my guess is they would either get Dynamic Campaigns or Vulcan to work, which would break ties with the older implementations currently in use. All hypothetical, could be years down the line, I'm happy with what I have in DCS for the next few years. Stuff like Vulcan would only help themselves push the boundaries even further.

Cheers for the feedback, good point on the flat roofed buildings, I'm not too familiar with the little intricaties of the DCS ME, might get into placing things more in towns once I get a Helo module :D

You could try and place a unit inside of the building, maybe the Mav can pick it up through the building and lock on! Let me know if that workaround works, would like to know for my own ME :thumbup:

They're working on a data cartridge functionality which will take care of a lot of these suggestions

My guess would be it will just be illegal/impossible to destroy SAM systems based near a side's final airbase(s). Just switching those to immortal/quick respawn and booting those who violate the rules.

You are correct! This thread can be labeled [NOT A BUG] I guess ;)

Results: AGM-65D/H/G not picked up by Tunguska, but are targetted by TOR. Judging from the comparison with the other Maverick types, I guess AGM-65 is just not targetted by Gun systems, though Tunguska's 9m311 missiles also did not fire. *edit, missed your bit on the other mavs being targetted by Molniya or not, ill test that now **edit2: AGM-65D/G are not targetted by Molniya, guess this was all just a moo point.

Will test tonight.

SA-19 Grison // Tunguska Missiles and guns were created for countering HARMs and Cruise Missiles attacking the S-300 systems. Generally CIWS capable ship-borne variants of weapons: like Kashtan, the Sa-11 Buk system based on ships (Shtil-1) should be able to counter anti-ship missiles though I don't know if we have a Sovremenny floating around and whether or not it targets HARMS. Either way it depends on whether or not ED flicks the 'CIWS counterable' switch, which I think they forgot for the AGM-65F? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3737733#post3737733

I realise I posted this during the holidays, so I'm bumping it now :)

No sweat Cobra, it's still the most bangin' module out there atm. Love the support it has gotten throughout 2018 and I look forward to 2019!

As the title says, AGM-65F is not being targetting by CIWS, tested with FSG 1241.1MP Molniya in the attached mission. I realise the AGM-65F is a smaller missile but Mavericks are notorious for being picked up by Tunguska's and Tor missile systems, so I didn't test those/ships with Kashtan's. The reason for posting this as a Hornet bug is because the Hornet is the only plane fielding the AGM-65F and is more actively monitored/patched for bugs. Cau Ship v Ship.miz ViggenTest aircraft used to check RB-04F is being targetted, HornetTest is used to verify AGM-65F is not being targetted.

I'm not dismissing wiki, just the mere copy/pasting it as facts in these threads. As you could see I used wikipedia to explain to you why the request was based on erronous data.