Pikey

Release MOOSE v2.5.1, which includes numerous updates, fixes and new classes including the new Syria map. If you already use the latest master branch version, there is no need to update. DOWNLOAD https://github.com/FlightControl-Master/MOOSE/releases/tag/v2.5.1 Highlights AI_FORMATION - Performance improvements. COORDINATE - New functions to get sunrise and sunset times at any position of the map. - Misc. RADIO - Updated beacon systems and types. SET - New functions like :CountAlive() - Fixed bug in SET_STATIC SPAWNSTATIC - Reworked class. - Added link to unit feature. TIMER https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS/Documentation/Core.Timer.html - NEW class. Little sister of SCHEDULER class. ATIS - Updates and options for more realistic output. - Included Syria Map. Needs new sound files!https://github.com/FlightControl-Master/MOOSE_SOUND/releases/tag/v1.2 AIRBOSS - Added Super Carrier parameters. PROFILER https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS/Documentation/Utilities.PROFILER.html - NEW class. Let's you profile the CPU usage in your mission. AIRBASE - Added Syria map airbase name enumerators. - Improved runway data function. - Misc. MARKER https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS/Documentation/Wrapper.Marker.html - NEW class. Handling F10 markers. Updates to Syria sound: https://github.com/FlightControl-Master/MOOSE_SOUND/releases/tag/v1.2

Manuals give the step by step. Its peoples refusal to read that is generating millions of revenue in advertising on videos that condense the processes into a short time span. If peolle read there would be less confusion.

Sadly also the most accurate answer short of active pause. If its not been logged as A feature years ago id be v surprised. Its wanted along with time control api in general.

-=42VFG=- The Red Kites We have been flying since 2015 and are open for new entrants. Who we are, what we do and when we do it: - European time zone, Wednesday and Sunday evenings 1900GMT (English language) and throughout the week - Fly bespoke missions and train together - Dedicated servers with scripting training tools, SRS and LotATC - Vast document library collected (and written) over many years - Multi module enabled members - concentrating on modern non FC3 Jets, 100% of the group use VR and HOTAS. What we would like: - New players that have already invested into DCS and thrive in smaller groups and want some organised training. - More experienced players looking for next level up in authenticity and realism. Maybe you realised you skipped basic aviation skills or maybe you want to dive into procedures you found online and are curious but had no one to try them with. - Old hands just looking for folks to fly with, maybe some more authentic missions, maybe you want to do some aggressor roles, try something out but are useless with the mission editor. Why 42VFG? 42VFG have been flying since 2015 and are a slightly older group whose basic goal is to try anything in DCS, with a leaning towards authentic flying without a huge amount of milsim 'paperwork'. We like to 'beat the game'. We have forsaken formalities and as a small friendship group we are agile and can try anything at a moments notice. Our main interests are "anything that is new". Contact me directly via PM if you want to talk about flying with us in any way.

Hi Gumi, They cannot answer this as it doesnt give the correct image of the product. Radar is not emulated as a "emmission and return", it's simulated as a possible return based on filters. Those filters are: - the direction the radar is looking in, it's gimbal limits, including it's scan pattern - It's strength - look down and doppler limitations - RCS values of the item at the end of the scan - Terrain blocks to line of sight NOTHING come sout of the end of an aircraft to check air contacts. NOTHING. This has been discussed many times and people are still confused on the topic. Ground and surface radar are abstractions of imagery on the terrain, put these to one side for now. ECM was a client side abstraction of the radar return. It's not simualted at all, it was very basic and has never changed. in FC3, at exactly 23nm you get burn through, the rest are artefacts caused by the client knowing there is ECM. Quigon writes it up well enough for an answer. So that is that im afraid all the answers are there.

Yeah the UK has one its a little bit more story telling than the US version but amounts to the same sort of thing. Its quite cute though, check the style out! https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-forces-air-strikes-in-iraq-monthly-list/raf-air-strikes-in-iraq-and-syria-july-2017

Never in SP. Literally any time ive seen this is MP and a server under stress.

Seems to be still a good idea in 2020 :)

Hey man, So I commented out the connector code after a couple of tries at 11pm the night before. What I aimed for was a more exact usage, that the GCI response area would be smaller than the SAM coverage, so that the IADS would cover the main parts of the borders, but an area inside that would catch anything that had somehow gotten through. It's a bit tailored, but that was what I was heading for.

All the templates I provided are .STM and they go in the \SavedGames\DCS.openbeta\StaticTemplate\ directory @uri_ba thats fascinating stuff dude! So we can see they have super old 1970's launchers from satellite if they are the two rail ones, right? Always love some armchair analysis, anythign you want to share I will find fascinating about this! If you have more on site configs and how the sites operated, where they reloaded from and such it woudl be really cool, I think ED want to create realistic templates of these.

Thanks all for your kind words, sharing was the easiest part :) Some comments. SA-6 3 TEL or 4 TEL. I'll accept that we see 4 launchers more often than 3. However, standardising is not a simple matter. Mostly these sites are garaged/bunkered with nothing visible on satellite so most guesses are in play. SA-3 (4-tel). Well this I want to semi disagree with because you can see it on the satellite imagery. Sometimes. I attached a picture of a SA-3 in a Hex configuration with two missile per tel. The comments allude to a "SA-2 configuration" and 4 launchers. This is how I dated his analysis at 2012 because it was 4 TEL's from 2008-2017 and subsequently from 2017 all 6 TEL's were added. Whats the point? None really, standardisation isn't huge. This seemed to be an SA-2 site originally anyway! We can conclude that accuracy isnt really too important, the important part is getting the locations pretty close for what we can see so that people can attempt to thread through the sites and see the real cover available. The rest of it they can change with a delete button! Second comment. Isn't it a shame you cannot en-masse add a launcher or delete all the SR's or basically do bulk jobs on changing these groups? So for example to edit all the SA6 to add a launch vehicle you need to filter these by name in the unit list and pick the group, select a launcher type, add a unit (which adds a launcher), then move it. About 36 times iirc. I know because I did it and its painful. But got to be easier than redoing it from scratch, right? :) Case in point... I accidentally had an SA3 launcher in an SA2 template and spent 45 minutes placing them before I noticed... @Walder - you betcha. Your IADS is performant (I even profiled it^^) and to me saves frames overall. The concept of the template and this many installations goes hand in hand with the IADS concept. I'm sure Grimes' would have worked also, but I was testing yours at the same time and could only invest the time in one and yours should be more supportable. @Sierra99 :)

Look in the mission editor under Country Russia and object type "Ships".

The mission environment has no knowledge of spectator role and limited control on Artillery commander, Game master etc. The first time in the mission environment that a player is handled is after he made a unit appear via the BIRTH event and his name then appears in the event. What you are looking for is the net API for which Moose provides no help for. Look through the API directory in your game install for a list of available commands. Sucks I know.

the first times you run something new the shaders are compiled, so just sit and let it do its thing. You will notice this in the logs. Turning textures down and view distance down massively helps VR rather than magic tricks. ALso if you are a SteamVR and not Oculus you can turn PD down to 0.7 and Steam super sampling up to 140% for good effect. But mainly this is about textures building.

The problem isn't that this is not modelled, the problem is it WONT be, because the customers expect to target tanks in open fields from 50 kilometres ever since 2008. I dare the first developer to bring inaccuracy and visibility into the code... double dare them and see the backlash ;) The A-10C legacy lives on. When ED do soemthing to PvP'rs about a2a missiles, you get vociferous complaints. When they nerf visibility, the old aged single players vote with their wallets.

there's a part in my bonus content of my Syrian sam template in the north east of Aleppo. It's not great but it will get you started.

Folks, attached is a zip with a series of helpful templates to get you moving for the Syria terrain out today. TEMPLATES of fixed site SAMs 1.SyADF2012northEast.stm - Importable static template of the North and East SAMs 2. SyADFsouth.stm - the Damascus and Quneitra regions 3. SyADFWest.stm - The West Coast - Tartus and Latakia 4. SyADF2012.stm - All three combined In total these are about 900 units you can drop in in whole or part. MISSIONS 1. SyADF2012 is the miz of the full template with all the 900 units 2. SyADFGCI+bonus.miz is all that added into the Skynet IADS script from walder https://github.com/walder/Skynet-IADS MOOSE scripted GCI network https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/AI.AI_A2A_Dispatcher.html , with the appropriate squadrons and locations and trimmed down to fit a year into the civil war. The bonus part is some spawns and aciton at Aleppo and some down at the Golan heights. OK... I don't understand, what is the detailed explanation? This is from the Google Earth samsites.kmz that goes around the internet from some guy that moved on after that to work for Janes. However theres no import directly, I've had to eyeball the satellite data from Google Earth myself then make some accommodations. Oddly, you can get very accurate but it's worth explaining the limitations. Syria didnt have half of this during the cvil war! Indeed. These are all the fixed site SA6, SA3, SA2 and SA5 (swapped for SA10). I've seen various dates, they've moved a bit so does not represent a single point in time, it's probably no later than 2012. You can remove the sites that were captured to fit your time scale. Deleting is your luxury here :) Where are all the point defence? Nope. Adding kinetic and IR to this would be insane and melt the computer. You can add and customise how you want. It's missing SA10 and SA11 purchased upgrades from 2008 through to current day and upgraded this in part. I presume this would have occurred in the central region over SA-6 locations first and the West Coast near the Russian enclave, these two being th emost sensitive and secure locaitons in the country. There aren't any SA8 batteries included, any kintetic at all, manpads or such. Just fixed sites from satellite photos. We also do not have SA-22 and SA-5 in game (yet) What other substitutions or unreal items are there? All fixed emplacements have a Search radar as the first unit. This is due to a limitation with Walders skynet IADS script where it is required. Normally IADS has its launchers and tracking raders away from it's search radar network. So each Group in DCS has its own search radar which would never happen. Also there is likely way less launchers in some of the battalisions with multiple emplacements and 25+ visible. SA6 are generally three launcher vehicles and 1 tracking/SR radar combo that have a site where they roll out of cover. The DCS version are in the open where there is no cover. SA3 format is 1 P-19, 1 TR, 6 TEL's in a Hex and a DCS resupply vehicle SA2 format is exactly the same as above. Some locations are just not flat enough or a bit wonky. I've done my best, almost all 900 vehicles were hand placed so it took considerable time. But its not perfect. When you see the coverage on the little hills you see how the SAM would have been placed with good thought. Also I have come to learn that the Syrians like placing Sam's at the lee side of hills. Kindda nasty, right? Finally, this is a pre civil war picture that likely never existed as a fully functional compelte complement IADS. Maybe it did but if you want to model the civil war, you need to reduce the sam sites north and east and the south extremes. How is the FPS with 900 sams? This is why IADS saves you frames. All the tracking and individual search radars are switched off so you only see the EWR network. Sure, its a 900 template mission and that would make it sit in the complex and large category. You will lose frames but I lose more looking into the terrain distance. Again... please make liberal use of the delete button, its easier than placing these. Is IADS hard? Yes. The SAM won't switch on until you are in the missiles kill zone, I've wound it down to the 80% threat range. No more kinematic defeating of these missiles, you have the tracking time to make good your escape. It's about time people got shot down by SAM's, we've had it easy. What about the "bonus stuff"? I took my own template, assumed 2014-2017, removed sams close to any rebel or ISIS/ Al Nusra control so it was not as broad. That included Aleppo's latitude. Then i randomly delete 20% of all of them to thin them out. I added a polygon zone that covers the core region of Syria - Damascus, north up the West coast, examined which of the Syrian airbases had which squadron of aircraft and setup a GCI scramble of which Russia is included. This should provide a very robust defense network. I'm sure with enough HARM's and luck and coordination it should take folks a few days to get through it. I made some spawns of vehicles up near Aleppo, it was late last night, this isn't my finest hour, but there's Syrian aircraft mixing with US aircraft doing CAS up there. Down south I have Merkava's defending some T-72's coming south from the Golan heights and some Syrian Hinds and Gazelles in support. This should play out infinitely so I'd recommend a restart after a few hours. Oh and I added Clients everywhere. They broadly make sense. But it's DCS... and a game, so, it's a hybrid reality :P I hope you enjoy, some of it took a very long time and other parts I rushed through, So I'm not intending to support it, what you see is what you get. It should be enough to tide you over until your've written your own scenarios. SyADF2012.zip

Mr Grey got a chance to speak uninterupted! Someone else needs to learn from that... in a thread not too far from here. The most important things through this interview is that Nick understands the issues with the sim, right from the top to a detailed level (AI choosing it's execution from a choice of templates, not just a single execution). We often never got this feedback loop, certainly not two years ago. There's two steps to resolving the gaps caused by the age of the issues. First admitting they exist, then telling us its being worked on. Of course there are massive limitations. Where you have leaders who can eloquently explain what the problems are, then you know at least you stand a chance to do the second on the list... fixing them. I think there wasn't anything completely new for me, but I was pleased to hear that ED aren't trying to artifically balance any of the sim anymore, it's pure simulation best effort. They never admitted that directly before, it was always assumed back then. I find it immensely reassuring to have the leadership of ED talk and for them to never once say anything even slightly that I can disagree with, that they are aligned with how I want to product to go. That's pretty cool.

Now that GR speaks for all of us, then can we have them also be held accountable when they do not represent what majorioty/individuals want? Or can we park this self inflated "We speak for everyone nonsense" and have it picked up by ED as specifically damaging where comments made are suggested to be authoratitive? I was happy to ignore Grim Reaper videos up until they began to say, "I think I speak for everyone when i say..." From that moment forward, I have to append a personal statement, "You DO NOT speak for me and I DO NOT agree with you," everywhere they are quoted and I beleive everyone shoud stand up for their identity in expressing when and where someone speaks "on your behalf". Thank you.

+1

actually that IS a super cool idea. Dont forget this!

I do it, and have done, for many years. But I don't expect thanks. I'm fully aware of how it works and what you dont get told about. I've seen my stuff ignored. I've seen it reach hotfixes, I've seen it reach production after years of wishing. The truth is, you won't get much, if any, feedback, for reporting bugs. But, you do get it read. And sometimes it's seen as important enough to fix and sometimes it isn't, no matter what you feel like. The sooner you can be at peace with this, the easier it comes. What you cannot do, is be frustrated. Your bugs are not yours, this game is not yours. Either do, or do not, emotion/frustration is wasted.

Hello folks of ED. Second post, this is the data from MOOSE's Github on what people are looking at specifically when they look for scripts to copy https://github.com/FlightControl-Master/MOOSE_MISSIONS/graphs/traffic . I can only get last months data, but it broadly fits with how I see the traffic and questions incoming: Views/unique visitors Class Description 39/14 AI_A2A_Dispatcher: This class provides an automated AI CAP and GCI combined response (on one or both coalitions). Just like legacy GCICAP scripts 36/16 RAT: Random Air Traffic (does what you would expect) 27/15 Airboss: Airboss does ATC for carriers, manages carrier movement, scoring etc. 23/15 Spawn: This class manages spawning and repeat spawning and randomisaiton of AI objects entering the game 23/8 Event: Events are just the Games Event Handlers, not very different. I would have guessed the top one, it seems to occupy peoples constant requests. Having Aircraft spawning automatically and heading for a CAP station or a scrambled fighter based on a radar detection is one of the scripting staples for many years. RAT, slightly surprised me. It's always been popular and is fairly mature now. People use it for filling the skies, especially with CAM and MAM modifications which are very popular. It really only serves to decorate empty skies, but has been more popular than I expected. Airboss is slightly newer but still over a year old. It's quite an immense project that manages a multiplayer carrier, turns it into the wind during specified recovery windows, handles a pseudo-ATC with voice acting from LSO and Marshall, gives both coaching and scoring and saves to disk. People have even got this running right into their Discord to announce their traps using community features (Hypeman) Both SPAWN and EVENT classes are staples of scripting and SPAWN is an interesting class, unlike the MIST methods and direct SSE methods, all you need is one short line and a late activated group in the mission. This did away with long complex tables and is probably the single most needed element of most scripting - making something 'appear'. The bread and butter example would be: Tank 'dead' event --> spawn tank again. Respawn and scheduled spawning are also popular. If I had to pick other popular classes we have seen a lot of usage from the fairly new "ATIS" class which provides tunable talking weather reports (in various different accents!), RANGE which counts bullets on a target and scores bombing and strafing and from then on it gets more complex. Hope that helps. If anyone wants a more detailed list of functionality without reaidng the MOOSE online documentation https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/index.html I'd be delighted to talk abotu what we see people use it for. Again, I also use Mist for CTLD and Ciribobs slot blocker, absolutely cannot live without those, but I know more about Moose.

You missed that it's now monthly. The answer to the OP is to choose OB because multiplayer chooses to exist there and ED have decided to honour that by increasing the testing on OB and increasing the tester pool for OB. All the changes to the cadence of releases happened fairly recently, so the previous posts vary in accuracy - the last two monthly patches have been larger changes with less upset, anything else is fake news.

This thread is built on the wrong premise. Let me fix it. First your map is 400km, it should be 450nm, over twice as large, so you could have US airbases and Iranian ones, probably Bagdad, the "secret" nuclear research and manufacturing at Natanz, Bandar Bushehr in the bottom right. Plus the area in the south of Iraq is less interesting than the surface of the planet Mars (and probably less hospitable) Half the map is unoccuppied, but the dense stuff is the Euphrates valley from the sea to Bagdad. This nets you: Iran: Dezful Airbase just a pixel off your original square in the top right corner - major contributor in Iran-Iraq war, Kermanshah, kindda level with Bagdad. I know less about this one. Saudi Arabia: RAS Mishab, Al Qaisumah, King Khalid MC and enough flat areas for FARPs and ofc the "floating airbases". The reason not to include this region is because too many players cannot AAR, according to that thread where they need it automatically done for them. Plus, the distances for combat missions were huge. Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc). War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.