Swson

Always similar problem from years and after many updates it is still here

Waow! Looks great ! Could you share your design ? I’m interested, I was just thinking actuators are much better than motors and gearboxes Which software do you use? How do you manage openXR VR motion cancellation ?

Personally I stopped using my Ultraleap for the reasons you quote. Controllers use is not good because in VR you need to ret them in order to take physical controls. so best solution I found is the trackball. Only one place to find, very accurate and fast even if it is a bit less immersive it is usable with a motioned cockpit while controllers are not.

What about the fact that a central stick will not move with V3? Did some of you evaluate the NLR motion plus and traction plus ?

Not able to update to 2.8.6 for me then if I launch the previous version I’m also unable to grant authorization using my purchased modules…..we have to wait this night …I’m going to go back reading the Raven One book (LOL) not to be out of the matter ….

@Ala13_ManOWar Thîs is a gentlemen forum, you fully have right not being same opinion as I about content of my messages but no need to be so agressive Did you at least checked my facts on the map yourself ? @McVittees Thank you for your comment about London, I fully agree with it, I have exactly the same feeling for the Paris area and that was I intended expressing in precedent exchanges. being not natively English speaking perhaps my words were badly understood Whatsoever, this map add an interesting playground to recreate Battle of Britain and Paris libération but as you say, it could not be used for CA campaign mixed with air assets for example.

Just spending some more time in this map using a Huey to better view the terrain. I feel a bit disappointed by at least the rendering of the Paris area, as I explained in another message. In addition to the elevation of some places I feel not accurate, the building generation looks very much like cut and paste task. Particularly this great number of brown towers everywhere, similar factories and chimneys also everywhere, same kinds of trees and many houses placed on railways or roads. Of course I admit the price of this small extension is very low for those that own the channel and the old Normandy maps and that main known monuments are present except the Mount Valerien fortification…but it is disappointing that the technology like the one used in MSFS 2020 was globally not taken into account in newly introduced maps particularly for the quite high price requested for new owners. We really begin to feel the ancientness of the geographic environment of DCS ….If this is not very disturbing for high or medium altitude assets, it is more concerning for ground and helo operations….Comparatively I felt Syria, Marianne and Gulf maps much better rendered

In fact I think it is my fault, when you enter a coordinate in the computer as a steerpoint, if you are far from the entered position, you can be at another grid location. For example 37S. If the coordinate you enter is beginning by 38S, you must also change this value at the right place in the computer display using the button and the keyboard in addition to the coordinate like LNxxxyyy. Otherwise the entered WP point in a wrong position. This can be verified on the map. However, very often, campaign makers provides only the last part of the coordinate assuming you are close of this position. I had the same problem in the AH64 campaign from another maker.

Right now it is not done I agree ….being unable to be done and will not be done is your sole opinion sorry about that …we must always trust in the future….The Normandy 2 is only an extension of Normandy map as illustrated by the « you already have licence for this product » message when you buy it, so I consider there is only one forum or sub forum for this map.

Frankly speaking I must have been always allocated very rookies or dumb or deaf wingmen (LOL) because even with simple order like engage air defense I’ve never received an acknowledgement nor seen a fulfillment of the request….I can add that wingmen crash alone if I fly at VLA and that without wingmen the completion of missions is much more unrealistic….bad luck. I guess it is not your fault but à a general ED failure….

I don’t agree, make the same trip over Paris inside MSFS map and let say flying at 110kts 400ft in a Cessna and fly at same height in DCS and you will see the differences. Elevation of Mt Valerien has not changed between 44 and now. Also you can take a Huey or an AH 64 and fly NOE or even land and observe the height from ground and you will see it is globally not well respected. I wander even if there is not a bug because the Altitude auto pilot of the A10 looks not effective in this map. Second point : I don’t agree at all about your view, having two different companies making two different maps is not an issue to merge them if business or market is valuable for that. Companies can merge or establish a punctual commercial agreement except if there is a strong technical reason not to do so which I doubt knowing quite well the techno used. So let’s continue to push for that.

AI can launch harpoon even flying under 2500ft, is it correct ?

As I’m living in Paris I found the terrain around the city very flat. Particularly, the elevation of the Trocadéro palace and sacré cœur is badly rendered and almost the mont Valérien which is the highest point of the Paris area with the fort build at the top as well as Bois de Meudon and Domaine de Saint Cloud where were installed many air defense flak canon are not at all geographically pertinent even if of course I didn’t observe the landscape in 1944, the elevation did not change. Also I find the design of all the factories with the same kind of chimneys very recurrent. So globally speaking I’m a bit deceived. Another point is that it would have been really interesting fusionning this map with the Channel map. I Hope this could be done in a near future to get only one map for this area and time.

I confirm the problem with VHF of Arc 210. The only thing I can add because I’ve discovered it in another A10CII campaign from another maker is that if you didn’t succeed getting the com with somebody while being on the right frequency you must manually change the frequency on the ARC210 then redo the correct value. In some occasion this helped me getting answer from the ATC but it was in another campaign. In this one, as an example, when I programmed 142,3MHz on Arc 210 in mission 6 because I was asked to do it then push space bar to contact echo 1/2/3 I obtained no answer. Idem when on the return path I would logically have to be contacted by echo 2 for support. I know that because I’ve already bought and played the enemy within first version with the former radio configuration without the ARC210 but another VHF. So I bought also the 3.0 version because it was told many missions have been rewritten. Frankly speaking at least until mission 6, I would not say fully rewritten but moreover cleaned and enhanced ….I admit however this must have generated quite a lot of work but with the introduction of the ARC210, many problems seems to appear with com in this 3.0 campaign making it not usable while the first version is also fully unusable with A10CII while having been bought few time before it was cancelled from the purchase list. of course it can also be a wrong frequency value between the one in the kneeboard, the doc and the good one in the game…..

I confirm ARC 210 is not supported by the campaign so as it is the only VHF mean available it is thus impossible to fulfill missions…..it is urgent changing that….for exemple in mission 6 it is impossible contacting echo 1/2/3 post

In mission 5 Overlord provided coordinates of LN162 343 while I was between WP3 and 4, in fact moreover distant of around 20NM of the track between WP3 and WP4. Entering this as steer point 9 with label TAR in the computer and pointing to it on the HUD provided a distance of more than 300NM !!!! I entered 2 times the value to be sure with same results. Only when I decided to join the WP4 and came back to around 30NM to it, then entering the given values in place of those of WP4 I obtained a valid location of enemy. At this time, once arrived above target, I used the F10 ro declare my arrival but I obtained no answer so I could not continue other mission’ steps after having eliminated all ennemies. I followed the other waypoints and came back to land at Kobuletin but obtained a 50 unsuccessful value for the mission. I guess a trigger has not been started I don’t now why because all radio where correctly trimmed and the F10 Other menu was present in the COM list with the F1 answer available….I made the mission 2 times so nearly 3 hours of flight….It’s a bit painful….

Could you explain why the wingman didn’t shoot a single weapon nor help me during the missions? He does not obey to orders using standard AI commands and only delivers information about mud spikes makes some chat and eject if I drive him at low alt in a risky area…. Better making the missions alone….

This is a summary of what I noticed after around 10 hours of flight in this campaign with the last update of DCS beta MT played in VR. Many things are probably not the fault of the designer but of ED common: in all mission SA9 and SA13 that are purely IR missiles SAM with optical tracking (no radar like Dog Ear associated in missions) shoot aircraft in the clouds very curious same for AAA but more correct with a radar tracking like in ZSU Gun Dish Wingwoman change of voice between voice over and AI announcements is not good for immersion….. Wingman never acknowledge orders nor accomplish them she makes no attacks nor obey, just announcing threats and being shot down in this case no need to use a wingman/woman No jammer on board in day 1/2/3/4 missions this is fully unrealistic in this context , no EW, no fly read Kosovo war debrief Day 2 : rearming only accepted with battery on but not APU on, perhaps correct? Day2/ 3/4/5 the announces of ATC are truncated to only the word Pig …with no full sentence but written fully on the screen weapon load initial is never announced in briefing ————————- Intro: wingman does not go trail and crash by landing with me day 1: weather layer is too low taking account the relief to make the mission pleasant and ease somehow the targeting and use of weapons day 2: debrief makes appear improbable things like kill of Maverick by SA9, 152mm shells and MLRS as well as ZSU …..very low probability or impossible to achieve that (probably ED fault in scripting) kill of all F18 from the very beginning of the mission, they never use long range weapons so better using Apache…..in fact the helos take off but what are they doing ?? day 3: ok but difficult finding the pictured threats in the field, we find mostly tanks…. day 4: I took off, shot down a SU-34, land in Batumi (slightly damaged) and got a 50 ….(I admit not having roll to the parking I think there is a mistake in a voice over speaking of MiG in place of SU34 (not sure) day 5: the weight with the basic load is over the max weight (49 vs 46), need to go to rearm and remove fuel to lower it At take off I missed first the taxiway and so 1.2 rolled in front of me and stopped at the beginning of the runway preventing me to access it….I was obliged rolling on grass to go to the runway hopefully not staying in mud In kneeboard, the waypoint numbers does not come with the ones of the pilot data sheet that cope well with the CDU zsu etc are at WP 24,25 while it is egress etc… on the data sheet. During my flight all targets have been destroyed by other aircraft so nothing for me and 1 hour of night flight for nothing except jettisoning ….. Thats all folks for now, probably most of these remarks will be corrected in the 2.0 but if I can help…… Thanks to John and good night

I always update to the last version of the beta and I play with the MT version in VR

Yes I will be very pleased to check the version 2.0. It is your honor making this version free for owner of the previous one because other campaign makers are not doing this, I speak about the enemy within I bought 2 times with the 3.0 version…..Just to add one more thing, my remarks about the weather making the mission difficult was about the mission 2 not the 3. I just made the mission 3 that is easier however, and I know it is not your fault, as radios count on the built in AI, my female wingwoman made a quick transgender shift while rolling and announcing that with a male voice to speak then again with a female voice about her fiancé (LOL)…also in this mission it is impossible to command her so she was immediately shot down without any communication between us. The supporting F-18 were also shot down by the SA9 immediately which is very surprising and not realistic at all I will not explain why….it would be too long….personally after killing 3 ZSU 2 MLRS and 1 SA9, I was also it by an SA9 but managed to land at Senaki. As it looks like my gear tyres were damaged during the mission I was unable to reach the parking even having landed safely and so to be repaired and rearmed so I got only 50, but the mission pleased me and I will redo it with pleasure to check my GBU38 on the bridge and my BLU97 on the arty. Keep going ….

Well John, I admit being a bit rude, (boring was not appropriate at all but I’m not a native English language and I often don’t use the good terms, I’m sorry about that), in my last message and I apologize a lot for that, it is usually not in my habits. Anyway I thank you for your answer that illustrates you take user’s comments into account. I was just shot down in the mission for the third time after more than one hour of VR flight and I must admit I was a little upset . Making myself extensive use of ME (very time consuming particularly when you hit DCS AI limitations….). I know what amount of effort you must have devoted to this creation and you can be proud of it. In fact I play simultaneously (i mean switching often one by one of course) 4 or 5 campaigns with different modules: Agile spear, Persian freedom, raven one and raven one dominant fury, MAD AH-64 and M2000 red flight campaign….I guess so I have elements for comparison that is perhaps driving (too much?) my judgement. More precisely what I wanted to underline is that for me ( but also it seems for you), a campaign must address generally (or at least it must be very much quoted In the description) a large panel of users from let’s say rookie, but not full beginners, to experts. Saying that, the progression of difficulties of missions is, according me once more, essential to give time to player to accustomed with the environment (not the module but the theater or the module in the theater) and almost all to reward him and give him really desire to switch to the next one. This would not at all imply simplified or too easy things but only a more progressive approach. I’ve agreed about the fact your missions are probably representatives of the real weather environment and that the terrain is challenging but the part chosen introducing an additional difficulty dimension from the very first mission where you discover the theater and have so many threats or targets is not a good idea specially because you lack the level of intelligence you necessarily have in the real life to conduct such a mission and would allow you to well prepare it on a map before flying. In fact in real life you will never send 2 A-10 alone, just arrived, against such numbers of opponents, in the relief and covered by AD….A coordinated approach with first SEAD or DEAD mission would have been made and the bridge destruction could be managed by JDAM from quite safe range of geographical coordinates are available etc…etc…The player has not really the means to brief the mission seriously before take off…But I don’t want entering in the realism debate which can be seen differently but only staying on the game level. The Caucasus is surely a nice terrain and I see you appreciate it as I do, but the part and weather you selected for first missions is surely not for beginners. I can just bring my comparison with other campaîgns whose first missions are much more progressives and rewarding for players even if they are longer. For me these missions are for trained while veteran pilots. For good things the fact that you can change your weapons at the beginning of missions is nice and I appreciate that. It allows knowing better the effects of every weapons and allows to repeat the same mission to find the good one. The fact that you cannot communicate with your wingwoman and that she is not taking your orders is definetely bad but perhaps inherent at DCS AI limits. I suppose voicing over and management of radios via F10 must be very much costly in the process of the development but it is really what bring the immersion in other campaign In place of using built in commands. It is not a spell to copy what is done elsewhere but just my feeling don’t take badly my sentences. Well anyway I’m going to restart your campaign and tried this time to find the good weapons and flight path and of course continue the whole story …have a nice we Jean-Philippe

I had similar problem in this mission my wingwoman tried to land in same time as I and crashed I encountered several time this kind of behavior in other campaign so I take care landing on a side of the runway to let enough space but this time it was not sufficient. I guess it is a failure of DCS AI

I’ve played only 3 missions but this campaign is already boring. The Caucasus map is already very difficult with hills and hidden spots so why having complicated from the very beginning the action making a weather full of fog from angle 11 or 12 so in the middle of mountains?? in addition the whole terrain is made gloomy by this fog and you loose the pleasure flying over those beautiful forest. Then the density of threat is impossible to manage whatever the weapons used because if you climb you are in the clouds and so no TGP and lasers and if you go down you loose the target due to the relief….So yes this is probably realistic but after being shot down 3 times I stopped. if you add that your wingwoman does not respond to your order and is useless except to speak about her wedding…and that you need going through the ATC which is horrible in place having a real radio interface…..for example .in mission 2 if you follow the flight plan to reach the bridges you overflight a full column of armored vehicle with AAA impossible to survive. I tried other road through the valley but it is impossible to change the waypoints on a map. I finally launched a JDAM hopping it will aim on the waypoint SPI and effectively I blow up a bridge before being shot down. But the debriefing considered I had destroyed both bridge and gave me 70/100 ??? So globally for now I’m very very deceived I hope next missions will be more interesting because I’ve bought campaign mulch more good like those of Baltic dragon…

In mission 6 info about altitude of bogey suspected being the IL76 is not correct 24500 in place of 34000…. Or the group indicated is not the IL76 and so it is quite impossible to find it…as it comes from the very limits of the map. interception vector is not indicated or wrong. I made the mission twice without success until I watched the Tacwiz file to understand the problem. Also it is not very clear that if position lignts are not on nothing happens. Finally I got the idea about the light but while in formation with the bogey, no communication came from Knight neither order to shoot some rounds nor other action to take. Hopefully after a while the bogey start a dive to acrotiri (and not Beirut as explained in the mission 6). But I had no info about RTB and decided by myself contacting the AI Marshall for a push time. While respecting the stack and the whole CAT III procedure I got only a 55 result of the mission which is not well m’aide for 1:30 hour behind my VR helmet….

Yes thanks, I suppressed the clickable FC cockpit mod and solved the problem !!!!!