Super Wabbit

Surrexen, awesome mission! Quick question, is there a way to move or remove a Hawk battery?

I was following an AI controlled P-47 while we were cruising at 8,000 ft and ~270mph. I had no trouble keeping up with the AI but about 45min into the flight I noticed that if I went full throttle and full prop pitch I would start slow down. So much so that with MP and Prop RPM both at redline my airspeed dropped to below 150mph. Engine temps were all in the green. I think this might be related. Is it possible that with Early Access the instrument gauges aren't accurately reporting the health of the engine?

Also agree. For all warbirds. I find using the mouse wheel on the controls gets the fine adjustments I need but having to look down constantly to find the controls makes it difficult to trim based on the instruments.

Totally agree, the trim is way too coarse when bound to a HOTAS, or even to a keyboard. Using the mouse wheel on the trim controls in the cockpit works well, would be nice to have that kind of fine tune adjustments on the HOTAS.

Well I think the new carriers are wildly popular...at least I'm really liking them. The FLOLS instrument is super helpful in VR and it's making landing on this thing a dream. I think I was wrong to suggest leaving the Stennis in...

I've added a radio trigger to disable Red Cap by setting the airbases' resources to zero. This means that if the air defense system has already spawned aircraft, that aircraft will remain and will even land and respawn as long as they are not destroyed. I also have a trigger that will re-enable the Red Cap by setting the airbases' resources to nill which sets them to their mission default of infinite resources so that the defense network will spawn more aircraft. I quite like this because it still gives you something to shoot at on the way into the target but then you don't get overwhelmed at the target. If you disable cap right at the beginning of the mission, usually nothing spawns. I added this feature before Surrexen added his update in v129 that keeps aircraft from spawning on top of you within 40nm of an airbase. I think Surrexen's solution is far more elegant and more importantly to me, realistic. Given that, I think it'd be possible to set a trigger that if a bomb is dropped on a runway then you could set airbase resources to zero. You could also add a timer that would reset them to nil too. I don't know off the top of my head how to make that persistent though. Use trigger type "Do Script" and simply have it run the following commands to set resources to zero: REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Alpha", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Lengeh, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, 0 ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Beta", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Lar_Airbase, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33" }, 0 ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Gamma", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Havadarya, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, 0 ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Delta", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Abbas_Intl, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33" }, 0 ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Epsilon", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_e_Jask_airfield, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, 0 ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Tau", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Lar_Airbase, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33", "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, 0 ) Then to reset them to nil: REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Alpha", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Lengeh, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, nil ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Beta", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Lar_Airbase, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33" }, nil ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Gamma", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Havadarya, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, nil ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Delta", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Abbas_Intl, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33" }, nil ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Epsilon", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_e_Jask_airfield, { "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, nil ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Tau", AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Lar_Airbase, { "SQ RUS MiG-21Bis", "SQ RUS MiG-29A", "SQ RUS MiG-29S", "SQ RUS MiG-23MLD", "SQ RUS MiG-25PD", "SQ RUS MiG-31", "SQ RUS Su-27", "SQ RUS Su-30", "SQ RUS Su-33", "SQ IRN F-4E", "SQ IRN F-5E-3", "SQ IRN MiG-21Bis", "SQ IRN MiG-29A" }, nil )

Thanks!

See screenshot: What are these two new text fields that are only visible in VR (Valve Index)? They don't go away. The text in the upper left reads "Main:" and in the upper right "Static1"

Thanks for the info!

I'm on Steam so I haven't gotten 2.5.6 yet. What are some of the things that are broken?

Call in fighter and SEAD support to the area of the SA-10. I would use JDAMs from as high an altitude as you can manage. Don't load your Hornet down too much, maybe just two JDAMs, one on each of the internal wing pylons. Use the TPOD in conjunction with your SA page to locate the tracking radar of the SA-10 site. Thats the tall mast with the flat panel at the top. Your TPOD will render at about 42 miles. This should be enough distance to keep you away from the SA-10. It may launch on you but it'll be so far away you can just turn cold to evade the missile. Once located, get the JDAM the coordinates using TOO. If you like, you can then go cold on the site get as high and fast as you can and make a run into the target. Once the JDAM says you're in range, launch the JDAMs and go cold as the SA-10 will probably have fired on you. A single Hornet just can't carry enough JSOWs to saturate an SA-10 site. You might be able to get it to fire almost all its missiles then go in with guns to hit the track radar. Once the track radar is dead, the site is useless. Hope that helps.

We definitely appreciate all the hard work!

I tried escorting my friend while he was in an A-10 and I in an F-16. I was able to destroy 4 flights, 3 with AIM-120's and 2 with guns only :/ The fifth enemy patrol popped up before the A-10 could finish his target mission and was shot down while I ran home to reload. Tried the same thing with a Hornet and had better success, though 2 F-14's spawned and well, those Phoenix missiles are hard to avoid...

I guess that makes me feel better in that I'm actually understanding how Moose is supposed to work. Does MIST have a similar function? I haven't gotten deep enough into either Moose or MIST yet to know what works and what doesn't.

Surrexen, I've been playing around with the spawn timers and am seeing some odd behavior. Here's what I've tried: --////RED CAP SQUADRON EXECUTION REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCap( "Alpha", CAPZoneRed1, 2500, 11000, 750, 900, 800, 1200, "BARO" ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCapInterval( "Alpha", 1, 900, 1200, 1) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCap( "Beta", CAPZoneRed2, 2500, 11000, 750, 900, 800, 1200, "BARO" ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCapInterval( "Beta", 1, 900, 1200, 1) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCap( "Gamma", CAPZoneRed3, 2500, 11000, 750, 900, 800, 1200, "BARO" ) REDA2ADispatcher:SetSquadronCapInterval( "Gamma", 1, 900, 1200, 1) I've changed these settings under Multi and Single Player sections. The odd behavior is that I'm seeing cap groups spawn well before 900s has passed since that groups last death. Also, what determines the initial spawn time? I'm seeing new units pop up at the 2min mark sometimes. And finally, I see in the Moose documentation that the probability value isn't in use, do you know if that's still true? Thanks!

You can also get creative with your loadouts. The F-16 can't carry as many weapons as the F-18, but it has the option of not carrying sidewinders. So you can carry 4 to 6 AIM-120C's to keep enemies at a distance and still have the ability to carry a decent bomb load. With the F-18, I will sometimes sling 2 JDAMs on one pylon then 120C's on the rest if it looks like I'm going to need the extra missiles. The Hornet can dogfight pretty well in an asymmetric loadout, so get creative!

I guess that should be tip #1! FYI, Operation Black Spire is set in Nevada and there are a few targets that are pretty close, something that might be excellent for the A-10 with a little bit of help from the Friendly fighter support.

TL/DR: I've played through Snow Fox and Clear Field and currently working through Black Spire. This mission is really best served using a multi-role fighter like the Hornet or Viper. I think the Hornet is probably the best at it right now with its ability to carry so many A/A missiles in addition to GBU-38 and GBU-31 (those are the primary A/G weapons I use when I'm by myself). However, the viper and it's CBU-97's are great to clean up large clusters of ground targets. In single player mode, an A-10 would be very very difficult. F-14 could probably be okay, though taking out SA-10 SAMs will be difficult because the targeting pod is so low res (assuming your using the mod that allows you to use the TPOD from the pilot's seat until Heatblur add TPOD support to Jester). Here are some tips I've learned: Tip #1: Take out the major SAM sites first. Ignore the missions until you've destroyed or crippled all the major SAM sites: SA-10, SA-2, SA-3, SA-15 Tor, SA-8 9K33 Osa etc. For the fixed SAM sites, such as SA-10, SA-2, and SA-3, you only need to destroy the tracking radars to make the entire site a non-threat. They do not regenerate (don't get any ideas Surrexen). I've had great success using an F-18 and carrying no more than 2 GBU-38's to attack SA-10's, SA-15 and SA-8's (I only carry 2 so that I can fly higher). SA-3's won't shoot JSOWs, so use those. SA-2's will fire on JSOW's but a standard site can be defeated by firing 4 JSOW's at once. Tip #2: Now that you've got breathing room, engage nearby fighters prior to your ground attack. The spawn times for the enemy fighters can be a bit fast (it's a range) for single player. Be sure you not only take out any fighters over your objective, but any others in adjacent sectors. General rule of thumb is that if they are within 50nm, they're gonna come for you. Sometimes you can lure these enemy fighters out from the cover a SAM site to make it easier to engage them. Tip #3: If you call in air to air support, join up with them and make sure they are out front. Like solidGad mentioned, call in air to air support and SEAD support. SEAD aircraft are typically F-16's or F-18's so they will carry A/A missiles and will try to defend themselves. That gives you 4 friendly fighters to join you over the objective. Tip #4: Consider sending fighter support to an area adjacent to your objective to act as a fighter screen based what you see on your Hornet SA page or Viper HSD with data link. This means that you will more than likely have to engage and clean out on enemy fighter group in your objective but you will then be screened from other sectors by the friendly AI flight. For example, if your objective is in the Bandar Abbas area, that's covered by 3 overlapping fighter patrol areas, send your fighter support to Havadarya instead of Bandar Abbas. This will cover your West flank and even provide some support over the objective. You can even get creative by sending the fighters to a sector to the West of your objective and have the SEAD flight go East of your objective to give you cover from two sides. Tip #5: Consider carrying less A/G weapons in favor of as many A/A missiles as possible. In single player, especially if you aren't calling in support, you'll need as many missiles as you can carry. Honestly, F-18 does this the best right now. If a mission only calls to destroy 2 tanks, well, put two GBU-28's a single pylon, then load up 8 more AIM-120's and 2 AIM-9X. Also consider making two or more trips to complete an objective. Whether that's because you can't carry enough A/G ordnance or you had to run away in the middle of the attack. Tip #6: Don't be afraid to run away. Pressing a bad situation that gets you shot down can cost you more time compared to breaking off an attack and engaging enemy fighters, or simply running away and re-positioning to get a better attack. Tip #7: If a particular mission is causing a lot of headache, just skip it. There's no penalty for that and it will eventually come up again. Sometimes, with the slight randomness of the spawn times and patrol routes, your luck is just against you for a particular session. I've flown missions that I could not catch a break and other times, missions in the same area were no trouble at all. Tip #8: Don't ignore AWACs calles, especially when they say HOT. Keep an eye on your SA page and consider centering the view on your aircraft so nothing sneaks up behind you. Pseudo Tip: JSOW Spam. I've not tried this just yet. But an F-18 can carry 8 JSOW. I don't think that's enough to take out an SA-10 but every thing else should be overwhelmed. If you're lucky enough to get a mission that calls for destroying a SAM site, you won't need the TPOD to find the target, you could simply enter in the precise coordinates, get up to 40,000 feet and let them all fly then run away. You should be able to 40+ miles of range and that's enough distance to be able to stay away from SAMs and enemy fighters. I've been playing these missions almost nightly since Surrexen first created them. So far they are some of the best times I've had in DCS so far. The replay-ability is very high and there is enough randomness that nothing feels like it's on rails. Simply adding one human wingman goes a long way and opens up a lot more options on how to complete a mission.

That being said....if it seems like the majority of people have it... All your missions can be run without the carrier too, which is cool btw, so even if you did include the super carrier, it's not required. I appreciate that, I end up skipping a lot of missions that require mods.

I think leave the default Stennis for now. Unless the new carrier is wildly popular and the majority of people are actually using it, then having the Stennis in so that everyone can use it makes the most sense to me. My worry is that players who don't have the super carrier may skip trying these missions and you'd be splitting your player base. Leave it as default and everyone plays. I'm curious to see what the super carrier brings to the table. When your running these missions, you don't spend a lot of time at the carrier so I'm not sure it's entirely worth it or required to make the sim even more immersive than it already is. You're just not spending that much time interacting with it. So...having not seen the super carrier at all, I feel like it's going to be more of a nice to have than something that'll be over the top cool.

This would be a great game mechanic!

It should not. In fact I did this just that last night and it worked just fine. It's my understanding that after a mission target is destroyed it'll pick another random target from a list of unfinished targets - ie targets that are still alive.

I fly in VR and anything that helps performance is welcomed but I honestly don't know that removing the destroyed static objects would noticeably increase performance. But also in VR, we wouldn't really care if we saw the smoke of destroyed static objects. So.... Option 1, while not as visually interesting, would be far easier to implement and maintain than doing all the testing to verify how many little explosions it takes to destroy a static object. Especially considering the same type of static object took differing amounts of damage based on terrain. Having to test each and every static object. We've completed Clear Field and Snow Fox and through the many hours of playing this mission, the most common problem has been an issue with static targets. Thanks again for all the hard work and enjoy your holiday!

Surrexen, tl:dr - the explosion command in the "Snowfox Persistent World.lua" script is not sufficient enough to kill Shelter Structures. I think this is only an issue with the three static objects that are listed as Shelters under the mission editor's Structures category: "Bandar Lengeh - Boat Bunker" "Bandar Abbas - Missile Bunker 1" "Bandar Abbas - Missile Bunker 2" I see your comment in the Persistent lua,"not exact science :/" - lol. It really isn't! So I tested what explosion value needs to be set in the "Snowfox Persistent World.lua" script. For the boat bunker, a value of 3000 destroyed it but this left the two missile bunkers alive. I found that I had to set the explosion value to at least 3200 to get the missile bunkers to also be destroyed. I can understand not wanting to increase the explosion for fear of taking out units nearby, so I wondered if a double explosion on the Shelters would work. I edited your lua script by adding "coord:Explosion(1700)" right after the original explosion command: for i = 1, StaticIntermentTableLength do local SnowfoxStatic = STATIC:FindByName(SnowfoxStaticInterment[i]) local coord = SnowfoxStatic:GetCoordinate() coord:Explosion(1500) --works for Workshop size statics, may hit other things, not exact science :/ coord:Explosion(1700) --added by Super Wabbit to destroy missile bunkers coord:BigSmokeMedium(0.25) SEFDeletedStaticCount = SEFDeletedStaticCount + 1 end BTW: "Abu Musa - Bunker 1" and "Abu Musa - Bunker 2", which are actually listed as "Bunker 1" in the mission editor's Structures list, are taken out by the original explosion from the Persistent lua. Also, I don't see this as an issue with the other static objects, like the processing plants, comms towers, hangars, etc. I'm assuming that DCS has some type of health/hit value for static objects and that Shelters have a larger value as they seem to require larger bombs to destroy compared to other static objects. Just curious, was this similar to the issue with the outpost static object bug you noted in the past?

It could have been something I had done. The behavior I was seeing was that the mission was not writing to the files even though I de-sanitize 'lfs' and 'io'. I don't think it was anything with the mission and it was a few versions back.