SNAFU

Ok thx, once upon a time I installed Ricardo´s blue Shark-pit, might this be the reason, well anyhow... Yesterday there were on both sides the same type of planes airborne, as far as I remember. How do the other Hog or Shark pilots IFF in this situations?

Since 1.2.3 I am able to join the 104th server again (before I always had the "connection interrupted" issue). I just wondered how everyone is usually figuring out which spike on RWR is friendly, which is not, since both sides fly the same type of planes? Is there a trick, or just hoping on AWACS and good luck?

To simulate a bombing range with targets consisting of destroyed containers, tanks, concrete structures etc. I placed static units on the map, checked "Dead" and placed the structure unit "Land mine" on top of the dead unit, to be able to detect a hit. This work-around helped me to detect hits on the target structures with triggers, without using actually living units, which would break a lilttle the immersion for me. If the trigger "Bombs in zone" would also react on bullets or rockets (landmines do) this would make this workaround easier.

From what I have experienced with 1.2.2 is, that 99% of my game crashes are related to the mission design (some faultie AI action, trigger, counter or flag). So more complex the mission gets, the more problem I have with finding the reason for a crash, which might appear later on, but related to an ME object or trigger. On simple missions I never experienced a problem -but flying for 4hrs in a row was my longest session.

Any hints here to achieve this without a "mod"?

Leider kann ich dir aus Zeitmangel und eigenen Projekten nicht helfen, aber zusätzlich solltest du noch definieren, welches Format du brauchst, aufnahme Frequenz bereich (max. 22,5kHz, mono nehme ich an), Verstärkung mit Mirkoklicks und Athmosphärerauschen oder ohne etc. Ein Kumpel und ich stecken gerade in dem gleichen Problem. Auch wenn es lustig ist, ist es auch nicht einfach, schließlich ist mit einfachem Ablesen ja auch nicht getan, sondern verlangt schon "Sprecher"Talente... macht aber Spaß und ist eine Herausforderung... ;)

They don´t need 50 guys buying it, but more likely some 50.000 to break even and then they could think about how to get a few %s in return... and the % return is all that matters.

Well, we have keep in mind that they want to stay in business. And no company can stay in business depending on the few hard-core sim-fans, who are likely to buy the product anyway, even if it is not fully their "hardcore" style. To attract more consumers they have to compete with all kinds of entertainment products for the consumers spare-time. If the average consumer has only limited spare-time he will choose most likely the entertainment, which is easiest to access. But 777 and ED must get the consumer to spent their time on their product, to establish a relationship with their brand and to keep them buying their product, even though they might not necessarily need it. They cannot ignore entertainment products like World of Tanks, Warplanes of Thunder (or whatever it is called), even Mario Carts or SitComsTV to a certain degree... They can´t stay in business selling their product only to some old simulation fans, who grew up, with simulations and now are getting old and caught by real-life demands, but always demanding more "realism, more immersion, more and more" for the same money, just because it seems technically possible. I think that`s why ED also shifted their attention back to games like FC3 and CA, which are easier accessible for the casual gamer, with thousands of things competing to entertain him. ;)

Rise of Flight offers a good offline campaign for free, is also easy to handle and has auto-updater. If he likes it, it also nice and easy to extend his plane collection by buying additional airplanes as a gift in the 777 online shop. In every man, there is a kid - That kid wants to play - so it is always nice to try a new toy from time to time, without reading through 600 pages technical manuals. If his feedback indicates he likes Simulations, you can go for DCS and real Study-Sims. DCS World has an auto-updater and the P-51 should be interesting for him. Unfortunatly DCS is rather and Sandbox-Game - to get the most out of it, you need to download missions from the DCS page or help yourself in the mission editor, or go multiplayer - so the given P-51 campaing could become boring sooner or later.

Öffentliche Betas schaden mehr, als sie nutzen (meine Meinung). Und das ED sowenig wie möglich öffentlich sagt, kann ich nur nachvollziehen.

Hi, Thought about getting a GF GTX 660 Ti - 2 GB But I have no clue about that configurations. Is that a single GPU card? (Using an ATI 6950 2GB for almost 2 years now, is the upgrade to the GFX worth 300€ if you are focusing mainly on DCS, Arrma2, RoF?)

Every new update in DCS changes something to some degree and every change might break a mission, which was doing well in previous versions. To update and check an old mission with the latest patch is a constant struggle and time consuming. (in case you have never done this, but to build small, good coop mission, with a few flags, triggers, random elements, correct brevity, briefing, voice and concept easily eats up most of spare time for 1-3 months, updating, testing, reworking them does take almost the same amount of time, if you did not document all your triggers, logics and events very well - you will not remember why trigger X did in combination with flag Y, action Z) Some times DCS evolves faster then mission designer can rework their missions and some were at some point just fed up, with going through the old stuff again and again, trying to figure out, what broke what, and why (at least I was). I guess we should be lucky for every mission you can find, which was reworked to be up to date. And dedicating your spare time to a project, which is probably obsolete, before you even get close to a finish is something stupid only few are willing take. ;)

OT: You could force certain planes to wait x minutes after spawning (other wise engine breaks or explodes or whatever) and let certain parameters only be activated by these certain planes. Would be a simple solution to keep the player-in-a-hurry off certain assets. Squad flights usually take long to get started anyway, due to briefing and other flight internal preperations. Well, just an idea for a workaround... BTW: Case, did your server switch to DCSW now that FC3 is available? Would be a reason to go online with DCS/FC3 again... :joystick:

I don´t think it is about the start-up time, Mower is about. I rather it is the difference in mindset of common DCS simmer and the common FC2/3 simmer. For the hardcore-role-playing approach, which is more common in DCS it can be an immersion killer if another player is just not acting according to his role... (f.e. doing a single-ship sortie deep into hostile areas, ignoring traffic pattern etc.) The common FC3 simmer is rather seldom looking for the realism-role-playing approach, rather for the action or the e-peen (scoreboard&stats) and does not get the his thrill from studying real-life procedures, but rather from general tactics and execution of them and not the details and whys. These two mindsets simply just fit together to a limited degree, what is wrong about that? It was the same in the old Il2-1946. Even though all players might use the same planes and the same realism settings, there was a mindset of flying strictly coops in closed rooms (because they seeked the immersion in the role-playing approach) and the other mindset (more common) of players only enjoying the Dogfight-Servers. These two different mindsets didn´t fit well together either, eventhough they shared 100% the same game to the same planes and often same tactics.

Isn´t it quite simple? DCS aims for realism and so do many players and members of the community. Puplic multiplayer experience is simply contradicting the realism approach on too many ways, so the guys providing the server, which are looking for realism just keep them locked. Simple, where is the problem? The procedures, the enviroment and all what is ongoing on a public server just kills any immersion, if you are looking for the "realism-immersion" kind of experience. I don´t think is a problem of the software or the mission editor (besides the missing dedicated server issue). From all the mission editors I used, the editor of ED is still the easiest one to use (if there would only be a 3d map for placing of units...) besides the old Il2 1946 edior, if you are not experienced in programming, what you need for ArmaII, CloD etc.

I see. In the A-10 the laser would have to measure the distance constantly, but distance and coordinates are computed by angles of the TGP and position and attitude of the plane only in relation to a 2d map. The position of the SPI doesn´t consider the terrain (is acutally on 2d) unless u fire the laser, right? At this point the actual height of the SPI is calculated by the distance and the SPI gets 3D. But the F-16 has the radar, which would make it easier to compute the relative closure, distance and vektor and not only relate the planes attitude and position to a fixed coordinate.

Sure, but I wondered about the CCRP mode for moving targets. Actually I think it should work fine, as long as the closure rate is constantly measured by the system, which is the case afaik (doesn´t the CC stand for that?). What defines the realease point of the Mk82 is the closure reate and the relative vektor of closure and height. So this values don´t care if the target moves or not and the CCRP should well work for lead-drops of dumb bombs on moving targets or not? As long as the target doesn´t change speed and direction after release of the bomb of course.

If you haven´t already read it, then it is a must: "To War in a Stringbag" Ch. Lamb I have got meters of WWII aviation books in my bookshelf, but this one is definitely the most astonishing WWII book I came across.

Here I come again with Keith Rosenkranz (F-16) stories of locking movers in GMT radar and hitting them in CCRP mode with Mk82. I thought about the same thing while reading the book. Was standard procedure for the F-16 dropping from 15k ft or even higher.

Will try and report back, when I get some time. I am trying to set a flag for every avtive player in a plane and want to deactivate that flag, when player plane crashed or player left game. At the same time a flag value should always refer to the number of active players-planes. Trying to realize this by a zone around the spawn-place with a trigger: Once – on take control -> Unit inside zone/Unit alive X /Flag A false -> Set Flag A true/ Increase flag B value 1 and Switched condition -> Unit X dead/Flag A true -> Set Flag A false/ Decrease flag B value 1 guess if this on take control activates the trigger everytime any player takes control/ spawns, I could spare that “inside zone” condition?

Is the trigger "Once - on take control" activated when any player in mulitplayer joins a plane/heli or is this only acitvated in SP?

Kommt darauf an, wieviel Zeit du hast und wie hoch deine Ansprüche sind. In der Realen Fliegerei sind die Piloten auch nicht jeden Tag 8h im Cockpit, in der D-Luftwaffe wären die Piloten wohl froh, wenn sie einmal in der Woche ne Platzrunde drehen dürften. (Ist aber nur eine Vermutung...) Um mit beiden Geräten deinen Spaß zu haben, braucht man garnicht soviel Zeit. Aber um eins 100% bis ins Letzte Detail (ist das möglich?) zu beherrschen, sollte man sich wohl wirklich nur auf das eine konzentrieren.

Huh, i guess truthful and war doesn´t fit well together... ;)

I remember that Rosenkranz wrote about alignment time for the INS, not about other start-up related procedures. I guess the DCS: Blackshark INU alignment is not simulated or at least I never waited for the Ka-50 INU to aligne? OT: While the Smallwood books are more collection of anecdotes and a good summary of the aircrafts A-10A/F-15E operations during Desert Shield/Storm, the other ones in Cookie`s list are more of personal experience. Might be good to start with Smallwood and then move to the more detailed and personal stories, like a "Vipers in the Storm". If you want to know more about what it was like to be a PoW in Iraq 1991 I would recomment "Bravo Two-Zero". For OEF or ISAF accounts "Nightmare`s preyer" is a must. "Apache" from Ed Macy is not that depressing, more entertaining and easy going, but nice to read concerning helicopter anti-insurgency operations.

Yes, and the F-16 already had the GPS update available and updates every 2 seconds afaik, the pilots still kept lookout for good INS update opportunities on landmarks. So the extra time Keith Rosenkranz describes in his book is more a safety factor, but doesn´t provide additional accuracy? @USMC_Trev: First Gulf War was Iran-Iraq from 1980-88, often forgotten, but the main cause for "Desert Shield-/Storm".