wowbagger

Ya, thanks man. It's probably something on my end. There's always 'something' with dcs. I will just skip it for now. Your missions are too good to not eventually finish the campaign. Thank you again for this one, and I look forward to whatever you're cooking up next. Cheers

Thanks for the reply and the idea. I have tried every combination of radio settings. I can get as far as the Spetnaz say they are loading - but there is no further message and the soldier models never move from their position kneeling in front of the parking space. Sometimes the jeep will actually just drive right past and never even un-load the soldiers at the parking spot. I guess it's just another reminder of why, every 6 months or so, I boot up dcs once more, try a mission or two, realize it's still riddled with bugs, old and new, and then I put away the joystick and go back to sim-racing for another half year. And of why I stopped buying anything new a couple of years ago. "Szatan Arba" campaign is simply fantastic stuff - easily payware quality. But for me, dcs becomes ever more not worth the time & effort to try to make things work.

I'm having the same issue. The jeep pulls up, troops get out, radio them to embark, but they stay kneeling by the road. Is this working for others? Cheers

Just wanted to say bardzo dziękuję for this wonderful campaign. It's well thought out, the missions are very engaging (and work exceptionally well on an incongruent map), and the quality is of the highest calibre. The most fun I have had in the Hind. Many, many thanks for this.

If this mission gets any tweaks in the future, could you also perhaps look at giving sandman 5-1 a little stronger prescription ? The "I'm blind" call still activates at a pretty low altitude, and doesn't seem to coordinate as well with the weather as perhaps it once did. Loving the immersion and atmosphere of the campaign! Cheers

Just played the prologue - so very good! Thanks for making this available. This is the campaign I am most eagerly anticipating. (I dearly hope the Harrier doesn't become obsolete within the next year.) But man, that south Atlantic weather is going to murder me.

Congratulations! Extremely nice layout. I dropped dcs for about a year, but have just started getting things working again specifically to fly Kerman and Weasels, so the new website is very well timed.

Yes, I know there's lots of opportunities for good campaigns with maps we have and what's incoming. But all of those depend on some 3rd party campaign maker choosing to do so. I just meant that any included default campaigns have to be (according to precedence) set on a free map, which thus far has meant Black Sea north shore. I would totally support the default campaign being in Syria/Sinai/PG, or even waiting to have it released so it could be on Kola. But I guess I'm in a minority on that, and it would never happen. I guess I'm just super tired of the Caucasus, and especially flying aircraft there which would never have been in the area. It makes everything feel so bleh.

Ya, this is one of the most unfortunate things about the DCS business model. The F-14 was kinda doable because it's carrier based. However, I know my ability to suspend disbelief simply isn't good enough to enjoy an F-4 campaign in the Georgian republic. It was the same for the Viggen. I'd actually prefer something in the Marianas ... somehow ... maybe a training campaign ...

Ya, don't really understand the point of this. If it was explicit that switching tech is necessary to get acceptable performance, then that would be a no-brainer. If it's just a question of aesthetics, I think many would say just put all the resources into fixing the performance and leave the tech as is. This business of redoing everything after you're 60-80% of the way through development makes no sense and is a turn off to (some) users. Don't like it with the modules, don't want it with the map.

Ya, well it was just a joke.

That bad eh?

Not to mention the Mosquito! (which doesn't mostly work)

It does, just not one modeled on a real life aircraft system.

Thank you. I appreciate the changes that you have been making to your campaigns.

This. Good choice. Always go with the one you'd have a poster of on your wall (like Psylocke). But don't forget you can try the others for 2 weeks.

Tried. Like so many things here it went nowhere.

The Huey and the Mi-8 are the best choppery choppers in the game, with the flight model of the Hip just edging out the Bell (in my opinion). The Hind is the least helicoptery chopper - it's more of a Tomcat with a rotor on top. The Blackshark flies itself so it won't teach you much. The Gazelle is extremely light and doesn't quite give the sense of momentum and having to think ahead that the others require. The Apache is actually a pretty good place to start, if you already own it anyway.

The thing is that if the mission designer doesn't set this stuff it will just take the user's preferences. So people who like to play with it all off anyway, will have it off. They don't need the mission to do it for them. Of course if there is a good mission-breaking-for-all reason to turn something off, that's understandable. I get that mission designers have a vision of the way their creations should be played. But at the end of the day it's a product, so customers are going to give feedback about what they like, what they don't like, and what could be improved in their view. And whether they will purchase again. I'm delighted to hear that the external and weapons views are unlocked already! And I totally agree that discussion about this stuff is very valuable. There was recently a question asked about why people aren't buying more DCS campaigns. Reasons were given. Then the reply came back about why those reasons didn't match with how the mission designers want to make missions. Which made me feel ... I don't know. At the end of the day we all want campaign designers to prosper and thrive. I've bought more campaigns than I could possibly play in the next couple of years. But if the campaigns are increasingly not matching with the requirements that life throws at us or one's preferences for what is actually enjoyable... it stops being sustainable. For me the middle ground is making things as open and accessible to as many people as possible. Which means concessions from everyone involved. Don't lock out things just to please a small group of vocal people, when they are perfectly capable of changing that stuff themselves. And on the flip side, players shouldn't whine if there's a mission or two with refueling, or night missions. Maybe no one is perfectly happy, but everyone gets enough to enjoy and the system is sustainable. In any event, congrats on Weasels release!

Ya, I still don't get it. Players can always turn these things off, no override needed. What they can't do is turn them on. It makes no sense to needlessly limit the audience ... but whatever. It's a dead horse at this point.

But where/why to report a bug? It appears as if no one representing Razbam has posted in the MiG-19 Bug Reports forum for about 2.5 years. Which seems ... negligent?

If they have waypoints on both sides of the bridge there is (almost) no problem. But if they are north of the bridge and you tell them to go to a point south of the bridge, they get stuck. Here are two tracks which have nothing else in the mission besides the three-vehicle convoy. Path 1 - they get stuck: Path 2: they drive across the bridge (but the lead vehicle falls through half-way across). path1.trk path2.trk

This isn't a scripting issue.

Here's a track which shows a small convoy moving from A-to-B with a bridge in between. The convoy just stops at the bridge unable to find its way across. The mission is a multiplayer scripted mission, however the convoy is not scripted. I wanted to recreate the environments in which the AI needs to be able to cross a bridge. There are two tracks: one with waypoints set as onroad, and the same with waypoints set as offroad. The result is the same. EDIT: onroad track re-uploaded - original wasn't working at all ... for whatever reason. server-20230922-102706(offroad).trk onroad.trk

Agreed, the topic of this thread is the adaptive brightness thing which has never worked as intended, or perhaps as 'wanted' by many players. It really needs to be made optional through some method.