Jump to content

al531246

Members
  • Posts

    471
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by al531246

  1. This is nothing new, half the map is non-destructible. I've lost count of how many times key parts of the map have been reported as being indestructible. It's obviously quite a serious issue in a combat flight sim, unfortunately Ugra doesn't seem to agree or care.
  2. My RAM is fine, it's DCS' desire for evermore memory. I have 16GB Corsair RAM and had a 16GB pagefile on my C drive which was an NVME (M2) drive with Windows. Apparent solution I've set the pagefile on my C drive to 'System Managed' and put a page file on my 2TB SSD that's 2.5x time my RAM (so 40GB). That's seems to have solved the issue. Played for about 40 mins with no crashes. I read elsewhere on the internet that at minimum a pagefile should be 1.5x your RAM, for best stability 4x your RAM.
  3. To be honest this game crashes so often I can't tell one crash from the other! I just experienced a new game crash today that was so hard it crashed my entire operating system! Not sure if it's related to the IC fail of the Gazelle (vanilla files, now uninstalled) or something else. dcs.log
  4. I believe this is the cause of my spontaneous game crash when flying the Su-25T online. It's about 4 lines from the end. Question is, what is the fix? 2021-09-27 18:40:37.471 DEBUG LuaGUI: Input: Profile[Su-25T] key command[Clickable mouse cockpit mode On/Off] for device[Mouse] has different name from command[Force cursor to show on/off] for device[Mouse] 2021-09-27 18:40:37.472 DEBUG LuaGUI: Input: Profile[Su-25T] key command[Clickable mouse cockpit mode On/Off] for device[T.Flight Hotas X {C9257440-2FE6-11ea-8001-444553540000}] has different name from command[Force cursor to show on/off] for device[Mouse] 2021-09-27 18:40:37.474 DEBUG LuaGUI: Input: Profile[Su-25T] key command[Clickable mouse cockpit mode On/Off] for device[Keyboard] has different name from command[Force cursor to show on/off] for device[T.Flight Hotas X {C9257440-2FE6-11ea-8001-444553540000}, Mouse] dcs.log
  5. v81, to answer your question. A lua was modified in a SATAL tournament giving the JF-17 better performance, I believe it was a radar tweak. The issue was reported to Deka and Deka patched by hardcoding the modified parameter into a compiled .dll. Deka patched the issue. ED's modification to the IC system was not requested. When players requested in mass that the change be reverted ED deleted all the comments and closed the thread. They also banned heaps of people from the ED discord for the same thing. You know this is the Eagle Dynamics forum? You can literally ask your players right here BEFORE making a change.
  6. Welcome to the bugs section for the Syria map. I see you're already familiar with how things operate!
  7. The hangars highlighted in red are not accessible for aircraft parking in the Mission Editor. I think this is a missing feature. Also there are parking spots between the hangars (white aircraft in image). This is incorrect. The aircraft should only be parked in the hangars. Cheers!
  8. This has been a meme in DCS for at least as long I've been playing the game. To DCS pilots the sea is lava!
  9. The 'prevent cheating' angle is a cover story. Nobody's buying that. It's to stop people going into the lua's and fixing DCS patch after patch. Some of the best updates to DCS have come from modders, not ED. Encrypting files hastens the demise of DCS.
  10. EW is super simplified in game, it bears little resemblance to real life. The Hornet's jammer is a defensive jammer, if a radar threat is guiding on you flick your jammer on.
  11. Are these new models destructible?
  12. All this comes down is DCS' radar guidance cone is too wide / the RWR's are too sensitive. Your issue isn't exclusive to the F-16's RWR, it's all the modules. As others have said the best solution we have right now is to look out the window - utilize the optical sensor God gave you; the Mk1 Eyeball.
  13. This is a highly classified structure in Eastern Syria, no idea how Ugra found out about it.
  14. This thermal power station complex in Syria is completely invincible! I've tried all the explosives in the book to no avail! I also tried using a trigger zone and setting max scenery destruction level. The smaller buildings around the main complex can be destroyed but not the actual power station itself.
  15. al531246

    RWR update

    Big doubt on there being no difference in tone between tracking and guidance signals. That's been a fundamental feature of every RWR, the APR-25/27 was doing this back in 'Nam! Also the Tornado IDS and GR4 use exactly the same radars. They actually have 2 radars; The Ground Mapping RADAR (ARI 23274) and the Terrain Following RADAR (ARI 23273). They both appear as a T on contemporary RWR displays.
  16. What with so many add on textures going around and many covering squadrons that are included by default it would nice if ED could add the prefix "ED_<livery name>" to the folders that contain the vanilla liveries. This change would have no affect on game code as the class / reference name of a livery in defined in the livery folder's description.lua For an example of the issue take at look at my livery folder for the F/A-18C, it's a headache trying to figure out which are vanilla and which are add-ons.
  17. Yep, that's a bug. Should be the center of the pipper.
  18. The SC's assets are a core module, they're on your computer regardless of whether you own the DLC. My argument was RIO's shouldn't need to buy the DLC to be the RIO as it has no affect on their gameplay.
  19. Even as a WSO? The WSO cannot use any functionality of the supercarrier so what difference does it make?
  20. As the title says one cannot join another player's aircraft that's based off the supercarrier if you do not own the supercarrier. In the screenshot these players own the Supercarrier however I do not. As one can see I'm unable to join as WSO.
  21. I've just updated my CF to the latest version and noticed the new pricing. I can only echo the remarks of those prior - the price is unreasonably high. For a program which I use maybe once or twice a month to make high quality missions I cannot justify paying $50 (or $40 reduced). I believe most others use the program with similar frequency. Unless I win the lottery I will not be buying this product. A far more reasonable price would be in the region of $20 to $30. I would much more inclined to purchase it even if just to support the creator. I should think others would feel the same way.
×
×
  • Create New...