KosPilot

The Fog of War option does not promote fair game play when used in player vs player maps. The artificial enhancement of situational awareness give superior weapon platforms and systems an artificial advantage. Just imagine what a MiG-21Bis, let alone ANY air superiority fighter, will do to you A-10C simmers. Fog of War is good for CA and should be kept as an option, but please reinstate the view option "Allies Only" for the F10 map.

Hi Druid, that's a good idea :) Thanks!

I guess because I have no DCS A-10C module installed (only BS & CA), I cannot edit UHF/VHF for A-10C flights in Mission Editor. It does not make sense to have different attributes to the Mission Editor depending on what modules are installed!? How can I contribute evenly to the community if that is the case :cry: The Ka-50 module may or may not be installed on the server.

Hi Grimes, I think the crash only happens with clients. If it doesn't crash locally with you, that is most likely the case. The server crashes only when blue Ka-50 contacts blue FARP ATC. Thank you for your advise :) I will fix up the A-10C client frequencies, but that may still not fix the Ka-50 comms issue.

This map is only partially complete, so I'll post gain when all the bugs are weeded out :D When running this map on our TOG MP server, any attempt to communicate from BLUE Ka-50 to BLUE FARP ATC is crashing the MP server. EVERY TIME, NO EXCEPTIONS. Rearm, refuel and repair = OK. Ka-50 to airports ATC works fine. RED Ka-50 to RED FARPs ATC works fine. When I am running the map locally (MP but not online, I have not figured out my router) for testing EVERYTHING works just fine. The person who is running the server and another simmer college wrote that they got an error message when opening the map and then saving it again in their Mission Editor: "Kos, I tried to open the map in mission editor and save it as you discussed, but when I do it generates an error along the lines of 'invalid frequencies' and lists a bunch of radio frequencies that all look to be set to the same value." I have installed DCS:W on my laptop. This is a fresh install with no previous DCS products ever installed. I then downloaded the mission from our forum, unpacked it and ran/saved it through Mission Editor without getting any error messages or problems. Can any of you guys please have a look and tell me what is going on here?! Assault on MnV 1.2.0 - b0.4.zip

I would very much like to see BlackShark in communication with JTAC by using the R-828 radio. Getting a general direction and distance to target in relation to bulls-eye is enough. Comms with AWACS; you should be able to get a situation report during any stage of operations. If the A-10C has it, why should this service not extend to Ka-50?!

Moving a group of MLRS is a bit painful. Any unit in the group will frequently stop and start. New Track.trk

Deleted

Awesome! Dragon and Druid, you are truly of great help :thumbup: Even when reading the manual, it is of monumental importance to get to know the bugs.

I am struggling a bit getting hold of the whole concept of JTAC, it may seem. Would anyone please give me a rundown of how to add reliable AI/CA JTAC to a mission? I have questions like; 1. What units may be set to JTAC? 2. Do they need LOS, and what is the maximum range? 3. How do you assign call-sign and frequency to a JTAC unit, and are there any other requirements? 4. Is there any difference in performance for AI JTAC with "See all" and "Fog-of-War" in F10 map options? 5. When assigning a Predator for JTAC, would you use the same method as for a ground unit? I am only flying the BlackShark, so obviously I cannot test JTAC on the MP maps I make. That is the reason I need a method for adding JTAC. Yeah, I know; I should get into the A-10C, but I am a rotor addict. -Can't help myself! :D

NO! Your main visual guide aide is on the outside of your window. Eyes on the horizon. There are so many ways to fly this bird, you just have to do what is right for you. Personally, I don't use trim or stability augmentation unless entering auto-hover, and not ever ever FD. My method; I know all the instabillities of this crazy biatch, so I just give her small micro-nudges in any direction that I want her to go. Big cyclic and collective inputs are big no-noes until you have cultivated full spine reaction. You are there when the chopper does what you want it to do, and you know what it can do.

-and you may have to invert the axis input curve if using pedals.

I hope there is an option in DCS:CA to put up some barbed wire and signs stating "DANGER, MINES" with a skull painted on it :D It would be another sad war story if wandering into you own mine field!

Thanks for that guys :) Until the option is there I will continue to apply enough waypoints to keep a unit occupied for 24 hours. It's a lot of clicking and a pain in the extreme lower neck though. My maps never last for that long anyways; the bright heads of this excellent simmers community always find ways of defeating my obstacles with far greater efficiency than what I anticipate :D

Is there any way to make ground units do patrol circuits? What I would like is to have a ground unit (say BDRM) to move from the last WP and start again via the first WP. Can it be scripted?

At this point in time, no. The interaction with the civilian world in means of navigation aids and ATC is currently not at the necessary fidelity. Besides, if included in a war scenario, civilian traffic would be subject to target practice. I don't think a "Civilian" pilot would come back for more. I do however think if ED took on competing with X-Plane and such like in the "commercial" market, ED could come out on top.

The Pantsir-S1 would make an interesting target/opponent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1

AH-1W SuperCobra all the way. Z = Viper. If not; AH-64A Apache, Because it's a beast. Mi-24 Hind, because of versatility. AH-6 Littlebird, because it can be operated single seat. Ka-52 Alligator, because the rotor system is already modelled. -But for gods sake give us FLIR, air-to-air capabillity and a friggin' RWR!

Spot on! Another issue not discussed in this thread is how to present all the warring units in a dynamic campaign. When making a normal mission, I have found that there doesn't take that many AI units to pull down the framerate to the point where the sim becomes unflyable. For this reason I also find it challenging to make a realistic mission where the main goal can't be achieved by simply omitting the linear setup of events or the need to spawn units in an unrealistic manner. As an example, Enemy Engaged had/has about 1500 units on each side in their dynamic campaign. For that to happen in DCS, I believe the changes would be so major that we would look at a paid upgrade similar to what happened for BS2.

I would like the AC-130 Spectre, ramp mounted 105mm howitzer and all. Imagine taking on crew and blasting away at the enemy from a slight left circuit.

Follow up on 1; The Ka-50 never get the chance to attack the Paladin units during this track. In DCS:BS, I always thought it was a bit strange that the Paladin could not resist 1 (one) 30mm HE shell from close up. In DCS:W however, it does. In fact the Paladin is totally impervious to 30mm HE fired by the Ka-50 ( as a tank should ). The bug is that the AI Ka-50 does not (like in never ever) change to 30mm AP when trying to kill a Paladin. It rather spends all its 30mm HE trying to crack it, and then scurry off towards home... Follow up on 3; Ref the track; The two surviving Blue choppers are set to fly to enemy FARP. During the engagement from 12:35 and onward, they seem to set up for attack but break off and then again and again and again and again and again and again..... Maybe I haven't set up the way-points "correctly", but that's still awfully buggy behavior.

That's good info. As you say the aim may be a bit off when firing like that. To follow up on my question 4, here is a snippet of Wikipedia: The BMP-3..., fitted with a low-velocity 2A70 100mm rifled gun, which can fire conventional shells or ATGMs 9M117 (AT-10 Stabber)... With conventional ammunition, such as the HE-Frag shell 3OF32, the 2A70 gun has a range of 4,000 meters. In DCS:World they are consistently shelling targets 8km away, you can take my word for it. Edit: Added screenshot, besides that shell is way too big to fit into the turret :D

I would like to have these SAMs added to the Norwegian forces in DCS: Ground-Launched AMRAAM. The AIM-120 missile is used in some ground-launched applications. Norway uses the NASAMS (Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System), which employs the AMRAAM missile from a six-round box launcher. NASAMS became operational in 1995.

Eddie, thank you for the info. You have given me something to read about :D

Attachment to follow; I just have to jot this down before I forget ( again :noexpression: ). This is more a note of weird behavior than a bug with DCS:World 1.1.2.1. To me, it seems like the surface-to-air missile vectoring (at least for some of the missile systems) is over-simplified. This is especially apparent with the Sea Sparrow missile. It will start turning hard as to intercept the target already from 7-10km out from the target and gives more the impression of mimicking the target vector than actually homing. The Roland is a bit the same. If timed adequately, you may with relative ease make the missile crash just by entering a prolonged dive; the missile tend to over-vector towards the ground and crash half way between you and the launcher. I am no weapons expert (or rocket scientist), but to me it would seem like the vertical vectoring during the first 3/4 of the distance to the target is exaggerated.