Jump to content

funkyfranky

ED Closed Beta Testers Team
  • Posts

    2523
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by funkyfranky

  1. Great stuff! So far I had to use the runway spawn points to get the directions. But with multiple runways the order of the spawn points was a bit random so it always required a bit adjustment by hand to get it all right. Now what would be the icing on the cake would be an entry in the returned table that tells us, which runway is the active one
  2. The origin of the problem is the ejected pilot static objects are buggy and we had to work around that in MOOSE. Unfortunately, that workaround caused problems in other classes like the OP described. We improved the workaround and this issue should be solved now. Check out the MOOSE branches for a recent version. PS: I created a new threat for the root cause problem
  3. When a pilot ejects, a static object is created at the position where the parachute goes down. This static object can be retrieved by the initiator of the rather new S_EVENT_LANDING_AFTER_EJECTION event. However, important scripting engine functions like :getName() or :getCoalition() fail when applied to the static object representing the pilot. 2021-05-01 20:13:21.291 INFO SCRIPTING: Trying to get the name via Event.initiator:getName() 2021-05-01 20:13:21.291 ERROR SCRIPTING: Mission script error: [string "C:\Users\frank\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS.openbeta\/~mis00003FEF.lua"]:38: Unit doesn't exist The :getName() function is important for identification and for house keeping. The :getCoalition() function is obviously important to know who would send a rescue team to simulate a SAR mission. Other functions like getPosition() and :destroy() work like expected. Simple example mission attached. Setup is a Hornet with zero fuel so the pilot ejects right after mission start and the track file is kept short. EjectedPilot.trk Hope this helps. PS: I would prefer a normal unit as ejected pilot (not a static object). This would allow to pick up the guy with a helo. EjectedPilot.miz
  4. Thanks, good catch mate @Desert Fox! When I have time, I will correct that.
  5. A group of four MLRSs is rearming as shown in the pic. However, only three of the four units get new rockets. The reason is probably that the fourth unit is too far away and not in the valid "rearming range". The group got a waypoint very close to the rearming truck. But as we cannot control individual units of a group, it can easily become impossible to rearm a whole group. Needless to say that the issue becomes more likely with increasing group size!
  6. The problem now (compared to five years ago) is that we now have aircraft (like the Hornet), which sometimes require multiple clients to be in the same group (so they show up as a wingman in the SA). Yet sounds and radio menus can still only be created on a group level.
  7. local flight=FLIGHTGROUP:New("Group Name") local nshells=flight:GetAmmoTot().Guns Requires MOOSE develop branch version.
  8. Okay, so basically all inputs are the same for all variants? Then this is no factor of course. Thanks for the explanation!
  9. Hell, no! Please don't tell me that Heatblur puts button assignments for all Tomcat versions under one category? That means an unnecessary waste of controller inputs on our side. For example, any button you assign to the "Mid Compression Bypass CB Pull" for the A-model will not be usable in the B-variant. Please make this a clean solution and differentiate between the models.
  10. No, MOOSE does not make any difference between SP and MP. It does not even know if the mission runs on a server or locally. So every difference is a DCS MP quirk usually. However, schedulers run fine in MP missions. So that is a bit strange.
  11. You can simply add yak:SetDestination({"RAT Zone North"}) and remove yak:DestinationZone("RAT Zone North") That line is only useful if you specify airbases as destination but only want them to fly there and not land.
  12. I really like the new feature of the historical list of units. However, I noticed that this is a "global" setting, i.e. once turned on or off it will be that for every mission I load. I would prefer this setting to be "per mission", i.e. off by default if a new mission is created. And once activated or deactivated it would only apply to that very mission and not to all missions I load. In other words, the setting would be saved in the miz file. Hope that makes sense. Thanks!
  13. As the title says. The new S_EVENT_UNIT_LOST event does not fire for (some?) warbirds. At least I do not get it for the Dora for example. You only get pilot dead and crash events but the unit lost event should also fire. To reproduce, have a warbird killed in action and check the Event column in the debrief. Thanks.
  14. That error is probably because you did not put two equal signs in the if clause. if assignments.engage == true then do something
  15. Correct, CVN-75 has been added to the master and development branches of MOOSE but is not in the latest release v2.5.1 included.
  16. Sound like this bug https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=288405 But there is a fix coming according to BN.
  17. Okay, no problem. Which static object do you want to spawn exactly? I'm not sure if the category returned is the one, that is required as input for the static template. I even think there is no way to extract that via scripting. I usually get that by looking in the mission file that is located inside the miz. But it is definitely possible to spawn all statics without any template in the mission.
  18. Not sure what went wrong there. If you used exactly that script, there is a "=" missing in the category line. Anyway, if you have a static which you want to "clone", you can spawn it even simpler local crate_static=SPAWNSTATIC:NewFromStatic("Crate"):SpawnFromZone(ZONE:New('Crate Zone')) crate_static:SmokeRed()
  19. Oh, I surely hope it's not an easy fix. Otherwise six years would really be a long time ;) And I am very grateful that you did that again. This is not to blame the messenger and all in good faith. Similar to Grimes, I had already given up on this ever being fixed. It's something we can work around, but the workaround is not working rigorously due to another DCS bug affecting multicrew aircraft. So for those, we are currently in a situation where even the workaround of the bug is broken. And that is the point where working around stuff is simply getting "a bit" too much.
  20. Thank, BN. I hope you will be more successful then the last couple of times you said that. But don't worry, this is just one of the most important (MP) events in the game. Fortunately, there is a workaround otherwise it would simply not be possible to create player specific stuff like F10 menus and the like. Sorry, if I sound a bit sarcastic. But we have been begging on our knees for this to be finally fixed and all we ever got was "I will ask about it", "it takes time".
  21. It's a tricky one to reproduce but it's certainly still there. I have seen it again for infantry but did not record a track. But it does not seem to be restricted to infantry. Here is what I captured for an MLRS group. Infantry looks similar. Maybe it happens when to units of a group collide by accident.
×
×
  • Create New...