fargo007

How about supporting Troops in Contact? You will probably want to change the makeup of the enemy to suit. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/286538-troops-in-contact-v10-released-now-on-github/

Honestly any medium or heavy lift helicopter is going to be celebrated like there's no tomorrow. CH-53, CH-47, UH-60, SoopaPuma, Sea King, UH-1Y. This is where the gap is. A fast, Western lift helicopter will close it.

It's not the UN/PW that is at issue here but the hardware ID.

Thanks man, was hoping you would pop in. That certainly simplifies things but brings some other considerations. Does the dedicated DCS even run on Windows Server 2019 or 2022, or does it HAVE to be Windows 10? The license fee for windows server editions makes the cost/benefit no longer worth it. Outside of Azure, I don't see hosting companies even offering Windows 10 as the native OS.

Hey yall, looking for some pointers from others who have set their squadrons up in a fashion like this. We're considering moving up from self-hosted desktop computers acting as BSD's dedicated server base to getting our own Linux server and running 3-4 DCS instances on Windows VMs there. I'm a Linux guy by trade, so I am not unfamiliar with setting up and managing that part of it. I know some have used promox for this. Is there any advantage to it over kvm? I'd prefer kvm personally as I'm very familiar with that. Aside of using virtio drivers, what are some other performance vagaries you've watched out for? If there is any other guidance, tools, or resources you can point me to I would appreciate it. Thank you!

If that were changed to match the coord format the map is already in (e.g. MGRS) it would be a platinum level improvement. But the other improvements suggested are really good too in terms of making them act like IRL. Being able to adjust bracketing rounds in, then fire for effect etc.

This is reaching to extremes in order to position a fringe, edge case as the center of gravity for mission designers. The people commenting on this here ARE mission designers and code maintainers of various projects, and are speaking in general support of what is being requested. If you read more carefully, every single static and unit from EVERY coalition appear this way. It's ABSOLUTELY TRUE that people who actually make missions do not want every friendly, neutral and enemy unit and static recorded in the internal systems of their aircraft, by DEFAULT. There is no credible use case for this. Please, let's allow the thread to get back on track.

Thank you! Is that done in the (unpacked) mission file?

This affects more than the Apache, that's just the easiest example to point out. Which aircraft do you believe benefit from having every single blue, red, and neutral static and unit consumed into their internal systems, and would be harmed by this? I cannot think of a single case. The "Default" we're speaking of here is this - assuming that a mission designer wants every friendly, enemy and neutral static to be automatically visible to internal systems unless those manual checkboxes are checked. Nobody creating missions wants this. The default behavior in this case is literally the opposite of what it should be. I trust ED to determine the best way to handle it.

To be clear, I'm asking for either the boxes to present themselves as checked when the unit is put on the map, or to have a mission level option to apply that to all. It's literally filling up the TSD's memory on the Apache with every single unit and static on the map. It can't stay this way.

This is a key reason why mooti-CRU has been far superior to a single crewed Mi-24 or AH-64D in terms of mission performance, survivability, etc. A person will always be better, but this will help a lot to close the gap. Very much looking forward to it.

Hopefully this one gets picked up!

Sadly I think the Cobra has already been hard nacked. But one can dream.

Current behavior creates a Control measure in the Apache TSD, and a point in the KA-50 ABRIS for every unit, and static on the map, even if late activated. This fills up the available entries with eight pages of garbage and prevents new points from being entered unless others are first deleted. Either make Hidden on MFD/Hidden on Planner default to checked, or offer a global override setting that permits all to be hidden on MFD and Planner. Mission designers would never want every static and every unit from every coalition populated into the aircraft's systems this way. The default behavior should follow what people are doing nearly 100% of the time, and right now that is reversed.

Right now, the default behavior is that every unit and static on the map gets represented as a control point in the AH-64D or as a point in the Ka-50's ABRIS. Statics, Units, and even late-activated units. From any coalition. Since it's obvious that almost no mission designer would ever intend every single asset to be treated this way, has anyone requested yet to: 1- Add a checkbox/feature be added to the ME that would check these options at large for all assets. 2 - Alternatively, pre-check "Hidden on MFD" and "Hidden on Planner" such that they are hidden by default. I've searched around and haven't seen this as a request yet, but this would be huge. I know it affects the Black Shark as well as the Apache, and likely others too.

What Coalition? It needs to be in the blue coalition.

Yep, they don't fire and are not indicated on the F10 map on Caucasus. They are not floating though. Bizarre.... @currenthill dcs.log sent in pm, thank you!

Can someone else check please? I've reinstalled it and same behavior.

Hope this helps with testing but I tried out the RBS 58 guy, and they are neither showing up on the F10 map nor firing. Sometimes going "airborne."

I actually prefer a separate structure, as I can pick and choose which ones our squadron wants to have.

Very much looking forward to this. They are looking awesome.

2022-10-03 18:19:29.235 ERROR NET: Failed to decode network.vault: either hardware ID or OS username are different. Saved login data will be reset. We get this error on our Azure hosted dedicated server whenever the server is started and used. It's only fired up for missions and testing, so it's not kept running all the time. The effect is that saved username/password and auto-login do not work, and a manual login must be conducted each time. Just wondering if anyone has found a way around it. Thanks y'all!

Will do. It doesn't seem to be reproducing since the last update anyhow.

This seems repeatable. Second occurrence in a row, and doesn't happen with default IFF settings. Track: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pE0PYq6h8TkuA_TFq2ecxkHPZrPCPk8x/view?usp=sharing

Squadrons that are driven by the sort of realistic SOP's and milsim environments you are looking for are going to be overwhelmingly organized as IRL squardons would. So your top three choices there are going to put you into three different squadrons (Air Force, Navy, Army). And you will be expected to "pick a horse and ride it." Even in a carrier wing based squadron, flying the F/A-18 today, and the tomcat tomorrow in missions is not going to be a thing you can do at the level of organization, and with the more serious approach you are asking about. You may be better off just picking a single airframe, committing to it, and letting that guide your choices of squadrons.