2GvSAP_Dart

If I were a real Ka-50 pilot (and therefore Russian), I'd be reading those labels in Russian as fluently as I do the English ones. But I'm not a real Ka-50 pilot; I just play one on my computer. I wouldn't begrudge the A-10 cockpit having the option of Russian players who are far more comfortable in cyrrilic, after all.

I'm probably way behind the rest of you, but I figured out how to solve the difficulty curve in multi-player maps. The problem: The map I had was really hard for one, required two to work together, and with three or four was a cake walk (there are only four of us flying BS in my squadron right now). The solution: Each target area has a trigger area that extends pretty far away from it, and each pilot (by number) activates a group that reinforces or bulks up the defense. To avoid the Magic Fairy Armored Column effect, things are either placed in the hangar object (and drive out) or are placed sufficiently far away (or tucked behind a ridge) so that they enter the area from "stage left," as it were. The triggers are also tied to the object that determines whether or not an objective goal has been met. For example, one of the targets is a FARP to be destroyed. The additional groups are tied to the command bunker being "alive." That way an overflight by a newly arriving player of an achieved target doesn't make it a "do over." So let's say I start the server and decide to take on the FARP. The defenses are tough, right on the border of "I can't." My squaddie finally shows up, and he joins me to help take it down. More defenses activate, and a reinforcement column shows up. Three and four arrive, and when we all go to walk onto the bad guys (who are, admittedly, softened up), it's tougher. If all four of us go after the target that's fresh, it'll be stiffly defended in a layered defense, and we'll have to work together. Of course the problem is that if one hops from pilot position to pilot position they'll load the map right on up and get shot down mercilessly. But the patch/upgrade is rumored to contain a "deactivate group" trigger command, which would solve that.

I think part of it is what each side thinks the helicopter replaces in classical warfare. For the US, it's easy - it replaces the light horse. Attack helicopters punch (or slip) through the gaps and exploit the rear areas. It's completely telegraphed and written about in those terms. For the Russians, it's more like grenadiers making the hole and exploiting it - or giving extra punch to the defenders, if I'm reading how they employed the IL-2 in the GPW.

First, great app - thanks! Second, a bit of a note for Vista 32 (at least how I have it set up): the app wouldn't set the affinity to both cores the first time around. However, running DCSMax "as administrator" sorted this right out. Bear in mind that, yeah, I'm set up as an administrator on my own box and yeah, Vista is kind of overprotective. Unfortunately, it's apples and oranges between the two. TIR software monitors one's computer, looking for specific .exe's or .dll to load and then executes a profile that is uniquely named within the TIR software. To make things even more complicated for the programmers, the flight sim itself has to have a native .dll that talks to the TIR software. That's why I had to update my TIR software when I got BS - it wouldn't work without that named "hook" that looked for Black Shark that was developed concurrently with the sim. To do this for the X52 would be a whole different app, as it would have to dig right into the Saitek profiler code. I'm not saying it can't be done. But it sure would be a PITA to code and worthy of it's own "all bow down" thread on the Saitek (and other) sites in its own right.

The funny thing is that I use the manual for "where's that switch" and "why'd that happen?" questions more than for procedure, but have no problem looking at a picture in Russian and a cockpit in English (I'm with the guy that thinks that a real Ka-50 pilot would read labels as fluently in Russian as I do in English - so it's a realism "wash."). Since I learn things by where they are placed, I rarely read labels beyond first comprehension. The switch for HE rounds to AP is second from the right on the panel below the munitions counter; the rate of missile release is second from the left. I've used printed single pages while looking at the simulation and found it to be quite apparent which switch was what by Russian label picture to English label screen - the actual switch is rendered the same, regardless of label. Reading the manual while away from the computer is for learning concepts and procedural reasoning, IMHO, not cockpit familiarization. The notion that the new customer - one that is also new to simulations - that hasn't flown the simulation will be plunking down an extra thirty or so bucks for a manual is interesting. I have never known such a person that had the sudden inspiration to delve into our niche hobby so completely as to at once buy a simulation and instantaneously double their investment with a manual that (in the main) is already contained within the software package. I would imagine such a person would also be the sort to either be an instant zealot that would fly with Russian labels for the "realism" of it (and thereby have a perfect match), or write it off as part of the mystique of hardcore flight simdom. For the greatly offended it would be a simple matter to make screenshots of their English labeled cockpits that are matches to the ones in the manual, place them in the appropriate place in the purchased one, and either affix them directly to the page or onto a transparent plastic overlay that is then sewn into the wire ring that binds the manual. This would be both very inexpensive and a great tool of instruction, as one would be forced to learn each panel in detail to make things match.

As much as it pains me to say it, this approach has saved me hours and hours and hours of frustration. [edit] The Shkval only locks on properly lit targets, being a daytime system only.

Um, the manual that came with the English download has the cockpit in Russian as well. This is the printed version of that same manual, with a few extras thrown in. We asked for a printed version of the .pdf, as printing locally is far more expensive than a mass produced version, and got it. Good gravy, I won't ever get into making flight sims - there is no pleasing people.

What, no AH-1 option?

Um, without looking at 60 pages, can we get some objects that generate a light source? You know, maybe a hand held strobe or a flashlight or a runway light or something? I'd really be happy to get that blinking light from the top of light houses placeable. Oh, and trigger-able. I need civilians and a "neutral" country option. And an ambulance. A military and a civilian one. And a cop car. And a taxi.

Thank you for making the mission editor as functional as it is. The ability to put pictures with the briefing alone is worth the price of admission.

Both, depending on which example you're referring to. Hey, my missions are working fine, so if you don't want any help....

The real Ka-50 doesn't need it, as the stick remains in the position it was in when trim was engaged. So if one has the stick forward thirty degrees when the trim is engaged, the stick stays thirty degrees forward. No guessing where it's placed within trim. Ditto the rudder. If the Ka-50's stick and rudder had a set of springs that had it leap back to center when not given positive force (or was a pressure stick), they'd put it a trim reset. Saying that a "serious simmer" doesn't use trim reset is like saying real pilots should just hit escape to pause their flight, get out of the chair, and go to the kitchen when they want a hot cup of coffee. It's nonsensical. On topic: Beware the katywhompus trim nightmare that can lead to self-rotor strikes at even the mildest of manuevers. One of the easiest things to do is compensate for an off center cyclic with rudder input, even though you're solving one problem by creating another. It can get pretty wild, with the controls fighting each other to keep things smooth and straight. From in the cockpit, without the stick/rudder little red window square thingie, everything seems okay (if maybe a little slow to respond), but the flight controls are locked in positions that disagree with each other. Compounding the problem, natrually, is that the sim displays the stick and rudders where the controller is, not their trimmed positions, so just looking down won't help.

Pretty weird. I certainly have managed to have multiple sound files play at once in SP (especially when triggers overlap), but that was me goofing up. Is it just that one mission or all of them? Oh, it does matter how sounds are triggered! For example, if one sets a sound trigger for "New Vehicle Group 03 Dead," it'll play the sound if they're dead. When a new player enters, the map will check the player against triggers, and play sounds for all conditions met; since the group is dead, he gets the sound. Add a few more and they all try to play at once. Try to keep triggers restricted to "Unit in zone" and whatever else. That way the player has to be in the trigger radius where whatever causes the sound to happen to hear it.

Do they appear on the same spots as the first group once they've taken off, or in different spots on delay?

Um, actually, you can adjust them to position and orientation - if one doesn't have them run. However, one can put them in cone (wedge) formation. In the editor, after you place the first guy and click to make his group 8 Joes, zoom in and click each one and move them and change their orientation. When they pop they'll be just like one placed them in the editor. Your way sounds very fun, though, and probably looks super cool.

Quick questions: 1) Are others joining after the hosting player has already triggered the sounds? 2) Does the mission have the sounds built with a unique trigger for each aircraft (pilot) ID, or is it just one trigger built for each sound with a fat list of "plane in zone?" 3) Are sounds tied to units/groups destroyed or by Unit in Zone?

I guess I don't understand what the question is. In a single player, stand alone mission "success" is usually A) getting the primary objective and B) making it home. However, if it's feedback one is looking for, that's easy enough to do through triggers. From a "Great Job! Mission Success!" message to a mission that scales depending on how one approaches it (with multiple objectives). The goals points system is the way of linking single missions together so that what happens in one mission counts in the next to give continuity.

Artillery guns don't give one the option for that, unfortunately. Unless I'm missing something.

Well, you can't make the helicopter land, but you can make it do a nice flair, pause at the halt, and continue on. The AI won't go lower than about 100m, no matter what you put in a waypoint (other than land, which will whip to the nearest airfield). You can also make it just hover in one spot, but that's unrealistic. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=38255

If I were a Ka-50 pilot, I'd be Russian and able to read the cockpit writing and understand everything said in Russian on the radio. So IMHO it's entirely unrealistic to have the cockpit in any other language but English, which I read, and the voices in English, which I speak. They comprehend what the text reads - why shouldn't I? To force unreadable text and incomprenhesable speech on a player is as unrealistic as forcing it onto the real pilots. There's the search for "literal realism" and then there's the search for "realistic simulation." And yeah, I'll get the manual.

I'm on mission 10 of 26, but four of them are mirrors of each other, depending on which way the player decides to go at the branch, and numer 11 (which I briefed above) is a re-run with the plan going slightly awry in execution. The problem with sound files is that they take up a lot of disk space. I don't want the campaign to be a two gig download!

Well, it was solved a bit like in that Simpson's episode. The Artillery is keyed by the player killing his display targets, so they fire, destroying some trucks, which spawns some bad guys with RPG's that destroy the battery, which in turn spawns a bunch of paratroopers to kill the guys with RPG's. And that triggers fire trucks to come out of the town to try and keep the forest from burning down. This mission has more moving parts than the Space Shuttle: It's your typical dog-and-pony fire demonstration display for VIP's. First you come popping over a ridge, flare, hover, spin for them, then move to a mark and blow up four vehicles. Oooohhhh, says the Mayor and the assembled VIP's. Then Artillery opens up, tearing up a stand of trees (and the nice fuel trucks hidden in there). Aaaahhhh, the resort owner says, looking through BC glasses they've set up for them. Targets "march" down the ridge, where four BMP's launch their missiles at once at the furthest ones. The tanks join in on the next two sets. And then, 300 meters off, the Infantry pop-up targets are engaged and it's mad crossing tracers for forty seconds. All the while the player is on his mark in the hover "helping out." End of mission, return to base. And that's just the rehearsal. Interesting things happen on show day. Oh, and one is getting instructions via radio the whole time. The player's Ops Officer warns the guy has a Georgian accent and to not be suprised. Of course it's a North American Georgian accent. Timing for all the pop up targets past the artillery is done by a BTR-80 driving through triggers up the map and out of sight - and he's triggered by the destruction of the Artillery.

Okay, I know how to get the fire mission going using a trigger with a target point and all the nice howitzers making big booms - how do I make them stop? I swear I'm going to magic beam some tanks on top of them to make them stop the hard way.

I used this as a way to simulate pop-up targets on a range!

...and then found a home with special operations. You gotta admire the Russians on this one. I guess the USA equivalent would be the AH-6, which we have very few of (and do special ops stuff), but it's awfully expensive to keep a small number (under 30 Ka-50's, IIRC) of unique birds operational. Parts for the Ka-50 have got to be rediculously expensive, as there isn't a regular production run for them. The crew chiefs and mechanics are probably the some of the most inventive, creative guys in the aviation world and no strangers to a machine shop. Chances are in the USA they would long ago have been chopped up for scrap (except one for a museum). I'd also hazard to guess that the pilots don't hotdog with the Ka-50. Fly it like it must be flown in a mission, yes, but otherwise safe and easy is most likely the name of the game. I seriously doubt they would perform a ferry mission if there was any way to avoid it, preferring to stick it on a truck, train, ship or plane.