Swordsman422

Scooter time! Having a blast with the Blasters Roadrunners raining on someone's parade A ruined Rampart Raider runs home

Do you have the Nato Fighters mod installed? I really recommend extracting insignia006 and 007 from the cats and dropping them in the decals folder to see if this will solve it.

Here's a quick test. Try them with another national insignia. If those are wonky too, then it may be the scale of the decal on the decal layout, which you can edit easily. If not, then there is a problem with the canvas size of the .tga. Easiest thing to do in the latter case is extract the original again and drop it into the decal folder in your mods directory. Hope this helps.

First, Wrench let me issue you a public thank you very much for the boats. Meanwhile, that is awesome that you already got some of the river paths worked out. That looks great! 2 things. I am not experiencing the no primary target bug with A/S missions, not that this helps anyone who does. What I am experiencing is that in my merged install is that A/S missions fail at 40% load on maps where navalmap=true. 80% is the load point for ground objects. 40% load fail usually occurred for me when there is an AI aircraft being assigned a role that it does not have a load-out for. I discovered this when trying to create intercept missions dated before aircraft that had the cruise_missile mission type and loadout. I cannot explain why it is happening now except that maybe on navalmap=true the aircraft performing the anti-ship mission must also have the cruise_missile mission role and loadout even if there are no cruise missiles loaded. I'm going to test this theory momentarily to see if it works for me. Edit: No luck. Still getting crashes at 40% Double edit: D'oh. the terrain must have cruise_missile as a possible mission type. It works now. Here's another nutty idea I had. During the war, Vietnamese peasants would randomly fire any weapons, be it modern assault rifles to elderly bolt-action pieces, into the sky at night if they ever heard aircraft noise. It supposedly gave them the feeling that they had a stake in the war and were contributing to it. I know there are dozens of small hamlets and villages, but placing a man with a rifle as a non-targetable AAA piece in some of these villages could replicate that. Aircraft won't take much damage from 7.62 or 30-06 but it would add to the atmosphere. I know, nuts.

Good idea St0rm. I need to go ahead and convert the sampans over for use ans transport objects. Now, I'm not totally secure on how A/S missions work post-NA. If I just color the waterways on the water.bmp, will the sampans show up as A/S targets without me having to add them as groups into the campaign? I've never added shipping lanes before, and while I can easily figure out how to, I definately don't want the 'pans straying too far from shore and into the fierce naval firepower I have in the GoT. Thought of something else, too. The NVA had groups of torpedo boats that frequently patrolled the shore. I'll see what I can do about adding those as well.

With the GWE at least yes, there are. Most of them are between the cities in NV or across the border in Laos and Cambodia. Usually I'm running across canvas covered trucks or Viet Cong bicycle convoys. I wish there was a way to set up the rivers and near shores as anti-ship routes. A lot of early A-1 Skyraider operations were focused on night interdiction of sampans, including one infamous mission in which VA-115 lost 4 aircraft in one night sampan hunting.

Okay, here's the data set from Rolling Thunder for VF96. Edit away. [AirUnit091] AircraftType=F-4B Squadron=VF96 ForceID=1 Nation=USN DefaultTexture=PACUSNVF96 64 StartDate=03/02/1965 StartNumber=4 CarrierBased=TRUE NavalUnitID=11 ShipID=1 BaseMoveChance=0 Rebase[01].Date=6/1965 Rebase[01].CarrierBased=TRUE Rebase[01].NavalUnitID=15 Rebase[01].ShipID=1 Rebase[01].Type=F-4B_65 Rebase[01].Texture=PACUSNVF96 RandomChance=100 MaxAircraft=12 StartAircraft=12 MaxPilots=19 StartPilots=19 Experience=100 Morale=100 Supply=100 MissionChance[sWEEP]=90 MissionChance[CAP]=0 MissionChance[iNTERCEPT]=0 MissionChance[ESCORT]=90 MissionChance=40 MissionChance[CAS]=10 MissionChance[sEAD]=10 MissionChance[ARMED_RECON]=25 MissionChance[ANTI_SHIP]=0 MissionChance[RECON]=0 UpgradeType=FIXED Upgrade[01].Date=6/1965 Upgrade[01].Type=F-4B_65 Upgrade[01].Texture=PACUSNVF96 Upgrade[02].Date=6/1967 Upgrade[02].Type=F-4B_67 Upgrade[02].Texture=PACUSNVF96

Sweet! I'me already getting some use out of this sucker in NA, but it's nice to have a professional do the conversion. Thanks!

One thing about releasing. All of my Navy F-4 squadrons and some of my A-1, A-4, A-6, A-7 and Marine F-4 squadrons all call out to custom skins. For the F-4s it's Mytai's stuff because for the most part few have been as quality-driven and none have been so profuse. So anyone taking my campaign_data.ini will have all sorts of mess ups with modex numbers and such. The rebase input does not work with carrier-based aircraft (or at least I have not figured out how to get it to). I have been trying to get air wings match up with their historically accurate carriers. CVW-9, for example, was on the Ranger through May 6, 1965 and returned in October that same year on Enterprise. Meanwhile, Ranger was redeployed in December with CVW-14, but in April of 1967 this same air wing deployed on Constellation and remained there through the end of Rolling Thunder. When CVW-14 left it, Ranger redeployed in 1967 with CVW-2, which had previously been attached to USS Midway. Anyway, this jumble of carriers and air wings is something I've been trying to replicate for a very, very long time and have been unable to do so successfully. I can post a data entry for one of the squadrons when I get home to see if you guys have any ideas. I'm also not having a whole lotta luck with upgrades. I have VF-96 upgrading from the F-4B to the F-4B_65 in June of 1965 after their 1st tour ends. They will neither upgrade aircraft nor change carriers, but like I said, I will upload a data entry for them when I get home so that it can get picked over. There are people who know a LOT more about this than I do who can probably figure it out. More as it happens. I'll only upload these campaign files if I get permission from the GWE team to do so or if it is requested as part of a GWE upgrade. I won't do so in any case until I have finished the overhaul to an acceptable point where it would make a real difference in the experience for anyone who plays it. But still, seeing 10 carriers and their escorting destroyers plying the waters of the GoT during the height of the Rolling Thunder ops is an impressive if maybe a bit excessive sight to behold.

Modex numbers are the most tedious part of any navy skin. I might be plugging here, but if you want to see a kind-of how it's done on Navy skins, check out MyTai's phantom skins, my skins for the TMF Tomcat, EricJ or Siddog's superhornets or Wrench's Skyhawks skins. Any of those will get you familiar with what it can take. A reminder: in the LV period, Navy modex numbers for tactical jets skipped 8 and 9 in any position. It had to do in part with the maintenance sheets only having 8 slots in a row. So usually unless you can find pictures to prove to yourself otherwise, skip any modex using those numbers and rename accordingly.

After a VERY long time (years) trying to figure out how not to start a campaign as an ensign and end up a commander 30 missions later, I have FINALLY figured out the code that determines point values of each rank. I was poking around in the missioncontrol.ini in the flight folder modifying altitude levels and maxpilots for single missions when I stumbled upon the PR data block. On a hunch, I multiplied all the numbers by 10, something I could easily correct if it broke something. I am pleased to report that I have been flying Operation Rolling Thunder now for 32 missions, about 45 days on the line, and have earned just over 35000 points. I have yet to be promoted. If you want to get a more realistic rate of promotion, copy the data block below into your missioncontrol.ini [PR] SR001=0 SR002=50000 SR003=120000 SR004=250000 SR005=400000 SR006=750000 SR007=1200000 SR008=1600000 SR009=2400000 SR010=3600000 MR001=0 MR002=5 MR003=10 MR004=20 MR005=30 MR006=50 MR007=70 MR008=90 MR009=120 MR010=150 I don't know what the MR data lines do and I have left those unmodified. My next order of business is to figure out how to allow a JO to select aircraft numbers in campaigns. But at least I have FINALLY made progress here.

Right on, Eraser. Maybe it was people whining about the lack of lockable ground radars. It couldn't have been a licensing thing which is why the Lockheed F-104 got removed from flyable. Grumman for the last decade has been begging people to use their aircraft in games, which is a big change from the late 80's and early 90's when they were producers of the hottest carrier-based planes. When the Tomcat was king, Grumman was pretty fascist about licensing it. Part of the reason there weren't many A-6 and F-14 sims in that decade was because Grumman charged pretty heavy. Now, they're willing to give it away practically. Alas, there aren't too many pit builders around and even though the A-6 is a popular airplane, they have other projects. I'm patient, though. I think we'll still by flying Strike Fighters long after TK is making tablet games.

I've always just been able to add USN to the friendly nations and had it work fine that I could fly from carriers. Hell, on my modded Madagascar map, USN is, like, 5th and I get carrier missions with carrier based A/C every time. add Navalmap=true to your terrain.ini add USN or any other carrier-driving nation into your terrain_nations.ini add splotches of green into the red zones on your terrain_water.bmp Best program to use for this is photoshop just because you can select to edit ONLY the areas with red color. The water map areas in the GermayCE terrain are quite claustrophobic. I don't like to fly Navy on that map. Not without more space between me and dirt. Lol. But I haven't yet run into the problem of carriers driving over land just yet. Tell you what, post your 1st data block in your terrain.ini and your complete terran_nations.ini and let us have a look at them.

I'm surprised someone hasn't built a new one already. It's a favorite aircraft to be made flyable. There's a lot of advances that a new A-6 pit could take advantage of. The new VDI screen in the TW F-14 looks cosmetically like a DIANE display if not in functionality. Heck, since animated switches are possible, the BN could be modeled as a giant mode switch and when bombs are selected, he could lean over and put his head against the attack scope. Then we wouldn't have the issue of copywritten material.

So, reading this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17692429 About officials in an uproar because they may have found a sunken submarine of unknown origin in Lough Foyle in Ireland. They are starting an investigation trying to figure out how it got there and when. I wiki Lough Foyle and find a link to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Deadlight The U-Boat fleet was assembled at Lough Foyle after World War II to be scuttled. Gee, wonder how and when that sub got there and who it belongs to...

Y'know, There was a time when I knew what it was like to have plenty of space on my hard drive. I started this computer with a ter of memory. 1 TB to fill up. Sheesh, you guys need to stop maiking awesome things. I'm half used up!

To avoid the conflict issue mentioned by Skatezilla, I renamed ALL of my MF F-14 folders and aircraft.inis by block number. F-14A-75-GR, F-14A-110-GR, F-14B-155-GR and so on. I don't get any conflicting anything now. Best you delete the MF cats, extract the .inis for the TW ones again, re-d/l and rename the MF cats, and you should not have any issues. A recommendation in the future for any skinners of TW F-14s; skins with specific decal folders use the names TWF-14A and TWF-14A_77 for the aircraft folders in the decals folder. Since it's the new kid on the block and the MF Tomcat has been around long enough to have LOTS of skins using the F-14A decal folder, this would make the most sense for the least work. Edit: getting fed up with a game because it breaks when you don't mod it smart are like getting mad at the manufacturer of your appliance because you didn't read the instructions. The issue here isn't with NA. It's with what you did to it. You have to take precautions that what you do doesn't cause conflicts and break things.

Batter up!

Hey guys, Just bought this DLC jet from Thirdwire. I'm loving it now that Ark Royal is out. But I want to change the engine sounds to something more accurate. Anyone know what cat file the dlc is stored in so I can get at the .ini. I've been looking through all 27 and I can't find it. Thanks.

Tomcats are sex on wings and sex sells.

I get these same crashes, but except for a couple of terrains it seems to happen only at random. And I DO get them on stock map single missions once in a great while. I don't think it has to do with the ships, because I've been getting random crashes for pretty much ever since I got the SF2 series and started modding it. I think on my end it has to do with old or conflicting ground objects, specifically AAA pieces, which are randomly chosen for each mission. Here's the weird thing. I can fly campaigns on these terrains with no trouble. It's the single missions where I get the 80% dump. I'd fix it, but I ain't annoyed with it enough to break my lazy over it.

Yeah, Skate's AWACS comms edit is awesome! He got it so that it wasn't painfully obvious that the controller was recorded many years after the other voices and using a different set-up. I don't mind some variation in my radio chatter, but then there's ridiculous. Well, I didn't get NA for the radio chatter. But if you don't have this file yet, get it.

Go into the F-8A_data.ini and add the following to the bottom of the [missiondata] block. MinBaseSize=SMALL CarrierBased=TRUE Be sure that you replace the existing minbasesize with that one or else you'll never get to fly from SCB-125s.

TK's response from day 1 to any whiner who bitches about how his attempts to mod the game have broken it should have been something like this: You shoulda backed up your files before screwing around with them. What you do on your computer is your own fault. Go reinstall and try again. @Stary: except for your terrain and effects mods, I'd have believed him until the Mirage Factory started pumping out some just awesome jets. But then, I expect the developer to shoot for the middle ground and modders to make the stuff that taxes your RAM anyway. Thirdwire aircraft models are still some of the best looking in any flight sime I've ever flown. Even the MiGs, which are getting long in the tooth, still hold up pretty well (until missiles, that is). The terrain and ground objects are kinda meh, and the thirdwire water has always been mediocre at best. But if there's no room for improvements then there wouldn't be a community that does it. He needs to go ahead and unlock the effects files for modding, unlock the .out files for skinners, or give us some kind of guide or information neccesary for our applications. I can wait for those. He just got done with months of zero sleep and probably doesn't want to so much as think about airplanes for a while, so I'm gonna give him a few months to get that info to us before I get impatient. I'm going to hang on until he quits or gives me a reason to quit.

Whiteboysamurai, they all have decallevel=0 assigned to them. I took the lead skin from each of your cruisers and replaced the decal line with USNCV and set decal level to 2. They work just fine now. Considering that TK hasn't broken anything I really use that much, I'll keep buying from him until he does something to really piss me off. If NA was dumped out and not supported, then I'd be pretty pissed, but I'm patient enough to wait it out and hope it gets taken care of. Be;ieve me, I've been in just such a situation before and it's not fun. I remember when Jetfighter IV promised a lot of things I wanted but when it was released not only did it not deliver, but the developer dusted shortly after release. And that game was totally incomplete. SO long as I don't have that eperience again, I'll be okay. I don't thunk I'm gonna have it here. Does TK need to get his beta testers back? Yes. Does TK need to acknowledge that what really makes the games successful is the open architecture he put in and what we can do and have done with it? Absolutely! Should he be willing to accept our unconditional and unpaid assistance to help the series we all love soar? Yes, so long as it's unconditional and we don't expect anything more than a line in the credits that no one will ever read. So far, I'm happy with things. Do I want more? Could I be happier? Couldn't we all? Yeah, but Strike FIghters is the only sim that comes close to what I'm looking for and I'ma stick it out until I'm alienated too.