eburger68

Folks: Attached to this post is a mini-update package for the SF2V Expansion Pack. You must have the Sept. 2013 Cumulative Update package installed in order to use this update, which consists mainly of minor fixes and updates to various aircraft. This update also includes deck lighting (courtesy of Fubar512 & MiGBuster) for all aircraft carriers. A ReadMe with install instructions is included. Eric Howes SF2V_X-P_Mini-Update.rar

Emp_Palpatine: No, that's not normal. You're supposed to start with 10 to the squadron. I'm looking into this right now, but so far I cannot figure out why the game is doing what it's doing. All the data is properly laid out in every involved file, yet the game assigns only the player to the squadron. If and when I have fix, I'll post it here. UPDATE 1: still not able to track down the cause of this bug. One observation, though: the game will assign the proper number of aircraft to the squadron if the squadron is an AI squadron. It's only when the player selects the squadron that this bug manifests itself. UPDATE 2: the bug becomes stranger. It now appears that the game does assign 10 pilots & aircraft to the Avenger player squadron, but only displays the player on the roster list for the first mission. After completion of the first mission, the roster is properly filled out with the expected number of pilots, and multiple aircraft are assigned to missions. I've never seen this particular behavior. The closest I've seen is a start time/date mismatch in campaign files. Eric Howes

Emp_Palpatine: They might have released updated models, which I don't have access to. You could try renaming either the LODs themselves to match the INI or the INI to match the LODs, but I can't guarantee that the current DATA.INIs and skins will work with new models. Worth a shot, though. Eric Howes

Emp_Palpatine: I assume you're talking about the TMF F-8E FN Crusader (and not the DLC version). Looks like I did indeed forget to include that effect, Unpack the ZIP file from the following post into the \Effects directory of your Mods folder. That should fix the problem. http://combatace.com/topic/82037-sf2na-expansion-pack-missing-effects-files/ Eric Howes

Folks: Looks like I forgot to include the afterburner effect for the TMF version of the F-8E FN Crusader. Unpack the attached ZIP file into the \Effects directory of your Mods folder. That should fix the problem. Eric Howes F8AfterburnerEmitter.zip

Paul: It appears the VVSNum decal TGAs are missing from the file uploaded here. Are those decals included in any of your other uploads? Thanks, Eric Howes

deanklef: These are the stated requirements from the ReadMe: In other words, you can install SF2E, Sf2V, and SF2NA if you have them, because the mod is constructed to make use of items from those games if they are present. The only things absolutely required are SF2I plus Expansion Pack 1. Eric Howes

JuanchoGomez: If this weapon upload is intended for Strike Fighters 2 (and the data files inside confirm that it is), why is it being uploaded to the SF1 download section? You've done the same with several other weapons uploaded over the past week or so. Perhaps they should be moved to the SF2 section, because Sf1 users are going to find it difficult to make any use of these without some conversion work. Eric Howes

jeanba: Yes, there's a custom HUDDATA.INI and MAPENEMYICON.TGA in the \Flight folder. Take those out and the enemy planes will again be visible. Eric Howes

Piecemeal: I looked myself when I was putting together OpDarius, but couldn't find any. I ended up using a Hawk launcher married to a modified version of the SeaCat missile. For the radar van I used the Hawk HIPIR model. Definitely not ideal, but it was the best I could muster. You can find all the necessary items in both OpDarius and the Falklands '82 Redux release. Eric Howes

dtmdragon: Don't delete anything before installing the mod and the updates. After you're finished with installation, you can remove inappropriate aircraft (.e.g., Israeli or Egyptian aircraft in your target install included SF2I), but save that for later. Eric Howes

Folks: I've noticed that many users of the SF2V Expansion Pack have opted to replace the enhanced Green Hell 2.0 tile set included in the Expansion Pack with Stary's new Green Hell 3.5 replacement tile set. While this new tile set is by far the best yet for the VietnamSEA terrain (though perhaps a bit brown-ish for my eyes), I thought it could use a few tweaks to work optimally with the SF2V Expansion Pack. So I've put together an enhancement package to address the main issues as I see them. Attached to this post is an enhancement package for GH 3.5 when used in conjunction with the SF2V Expansion Pack. It makes the following enhancements: 1. Replaces the main air base tile with a new one designed to better blend into the surrounding terrain -- i.e., no more expansive green lawns surrounding all the air bases. The "jungle" air base tile is unchanged. 2. Replaces the ground TGAs used for many barracks areas in the lower Route Packs of North Vietnam with new TGAs that allow the barracks areas to more naturally blend in with the surrounding terrain. 3. Replaces the bright, baby blue water tiles of GH 3.5 with a darker, greyer set of water tiles, which (at least to my eyes) look more natural. 4. Replaces the default WaterNormal.BMP used in GH 3.5 with a new WaterNormal that produces more pronounced wave effects. I am uploading this here (as opposed to the Download section) in order to gauge user reaction to these enhancements. So, please do let me know what you think. A special thanks to Stary for the outstanding new tile set. Eric Howes GH35_Enhancement_Pack.7z

Stary: Sure, post what you have and I'll take a look. Eric Howes

Folks: Actually, there's no need to edit the Options.ini SingleMission StartYear/EndYear lines. You only need to do that when a mod needs to run outside the default year spread, which is 1948-1982. (The terrain .INIs for the Vietnam terrain are limited to 1964-1975.) Eric Howes

Jarhead0331: The most recent patch levels of the SF2 games are supposed to allow installation of the individual games in any order, if I'm not mistaken. So, I doubt that was the problem. If the base game worked, the modded game should also work. In your case, it seemed that the game simply did not see the mod package where you had it installed. Eric Howes

Jarhead0331: If the mod is not showing up in when you run the game, then the mod isn't installed in the place where the game expects mods to be. Two possibilities come to mind: 1) The Expansion Pack is installed to a mod folder that the executable you're running isn't using. 2) The Expansion Pack is installed to the correct mod folder, but is in some kind of sub-folder or set of nested folders within that mod folder, the effect of which is to hide the mod from the game. As I can't see what your mod folder looks like, I can't tell what the problem. Bottom line, though, is that the mod is not properly installed. One other note: if you're running at the July 2013 patch level, then you need the Sept 2013 Update for the Expansion Pack. Without that update, you're going to see lots of problems. So that means I would strongly recommend that you get SF2, then install the Sept. 2013 Update. Eric Howes

slick_cowboy: Yep, that is a typo. Good catch. This will be corrected in the next refresh of the update package. Eric Howes

Russouk2004: It works. I've actually used this very method on a number of DLCs. The .DLC files reside in a separate directory from the .CAT files. This isn't speculation. I've done it. I am currently running at the Jul2012 patch level. I never bothered installing any of later 2013 updates. And I have every DLC through DLC #29 installed at the Jul2012 patch level using the process described. Eric Howes

Folks: There's no need to keep a parallel install of the latest patch level in order to grab the .DLC files for use at an earlier patch level. That's far too complicated and completely unnecessary. All you need is a 7zip install -- right click on the installer that you download from 3rdWire, Extract with 7zip to a folder, find the DLC file in the unpacked folder, then copy it over. Eric Howes

slick_cowboy: You modded the mod. And we don't even know the extent of the changes you made to it. So, at the very least this post really ought to be moved (or re-posted) to the campaign mods forum, because the situation you're discussing is not a straightforward request for help with this mod. Perhaps someone there would be willing to work through it with you. Eric Howes

cangas: The fix for the water/hull problem is included in the cumulative update package: http://combatace.com/files/file/10466-sf2v-air-ground-war-expansion-pack-v20-sep-2013-update/ Specifically the fix is in the terrain DATA.INIs that are included in the update folder for the Mar2012 patch level. Eric Howes

fallenphoenizx1986: OK, that would explain the loadout and tank problems. The original four install packages were released back in early 2010 -- before the several changes to the A-6A model that TK introduced in later patch levels. The update package includes a ton of updates and fixes -- for the A-6s and a lot of other things to boot -- so it would be a good idea to get SF2, install it, then install the cumulative update package. Eric Howes

Iffy350: The Expansion Packs and DLC releases are not required for the Sept. 2013 Update. This update does add support for the DLC F-104Cs for those that have that particular DLC, but they aren't required -- an alternate F-104C is installed by default. It also adds support for several aircraft that use models from the Expansion Packs, but those are optional aircraft -- they aren't required. SF2NA is also supported -- again, if you have it, but it is not required. The only thing that changed is the requirement to have SF2 (w/ the Desert terrain) and SF2E. Eric Howes

fallenphoenix1086: If you're seeing permanent wing tanks on the A-6, the my best guess is that one or both of the following is true (because others have made the same mistakes): 1. You didn't load the latest cumulative update pack, which includes fixes for the A-6 drop tanks in later patch levels: http://combatace.com/files/file/10466-sf2v-air-ground-war-expansion-pack-v20-sep-2013-update/ 2. When you installed the cockpit files from the FOTI A-6A, you copied all of the files from that download into your Expansion Pack install, not just the cockpit files, thereby overwriting the newer SF2 files with older Gen 1 INI files. When installed correctly, the A-6s do not have loadout problems or permanent wing tanks in the 2010 and later patch levels. Eric Howes

Typhoid: But they weren't "finally cut by closing the ports and the rail lines from China." Significantly reduced and impeded, yes -- but not "finally cut." The NV always managed to find a way to keep supplies moving -- by truck, train, bicycle, human pack mules, etc. One way or the other they always managed to keep some amount flowing -- enough to keep their war efforts viable. The more important thing to recognize, though, is that pronouncements that LBII demonstrates that we could have won the Vietnam had we just mustered the necessary amount of "political will" (or that proposals to send a large American ground force into Laos to roll up the Ho Chi Minh Trail could have accomplished the same) are sheer speculation based on the unspoken and untested assumption that the NV would not have found still more ways to adapt to and counter a new American strategy -- something they had demonstrated quite a bit of talent for doing over the preceding decade -- or that the Soviets and Chinese would have stood idly by while Washington continued to pound the NV heartland indefinitely with B-52 raids. Despite the diplomatic falling out between the Peking and Hanoi following the death of Ho Chi Minh in 1969 (to say nothing of the historical enmity between the Chinese and Vietnamese peoples), despite Nixon's skillful policy of diplomatic "triangulation" vis-a-vis Peking and Moscow, and despite the great amount of suspicion the NV always maintained for the Soviets and their in-country advisors, it would have been extremely dangerous to assume that the Soviets and Chinese would grant Washington a free hand to pursue that kind of sustained bombing campaign against a communist ally -- esp. one on China's doorstep -- over any great period of time. I doubt even the "mad man" Nixon would have been willing to take that risk. Yes, that's quite a bit of speculation there -- but no less than the idea that LBII demonstrated that we could have finally won the Vietnam War had we simply pressed on with more of the same. And that's why I said at the outset of this whole discussion that when discussing LBII it is important to recognize the extremely limited goals of LBII -- what it was actually being used to pressure the NV to do -- and not make the assumption that one eleven day bombing campaign demonstrated any greater potential achievement. Eric Howes