malibu43

Sorry, so would this go in the movement.ini or the campaign_data.ini file now with the new patch?

I tired it with the new movement.ini and my old one, and got the same result both times. However, I also tried this again on my old install, and found the same thing! I guess I never noticed it before. But anyway, now that I realize what's going on, I want to fix it. I think delaying the ground offensive might do the trick. We'll see, though.

Thanks. That makes sense. What's the best way to deal with this? Here's what I'm thinking: 1. Maybe change the start ground offensive time so that it's after all the flyable squadrons start their campaigns...? 2. Change the start date for all the enemy units so that it's after flyable squadrons start dates....? The only thing about these is that some squadrons don't start until 1967, so some of the squadrons that start in 1965 will probably never get any CAS missions before the campaign ends... What did you do to fix it in you campaign? PS - Is the startgroundoffensive= value in days or offensive missions? In other words, if I want to the ground offensive to be delayed a year, would I put 360 (days) or 2 (mission rate = 180, x2 would be 360 days)...?

Hi guys. This is all post the Sept 2008 patch. Previously, I was using this VietnamSEA_targets.ini created by TeTeT for his steel tiger campaign. I never noticed any problems with it before. VIETNAMSEA_TARGETS.TXT And as a result, I'm getting a frontline that looks like this: I also have modified the Rolling Thunder Campaign data to have a ground war: WOVCAMPRT_DATA.txt Like I said, these targets or modified campaign data never caused any issues with the previous patch. It doesn't look this way every time I start a campaign, and I also don't get the issue in LBI or LBII, which are using the same targets.ini and have similar changes made in the campaign. However, I sometimes get tasked to strike friendly air bases. I'm sure the problem is just an issue with the location and start/end date of an enemy target area or unit and it's screwing up the frontline, however, I'm not good at interpreting the targets.ini file at all and have no idea where to look for the issue. Can anyone help me out? Thanks!!!!

You guys are driving me crazy. I've been traveling for work all week and haven't got to set up my new installs with the new patch yet!!!!

check this: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=32300

The data is all there in the knowledgebase, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense for a few people to go through the exercise the first time and then just post the files so people don't have to keep repeating something that someone else has done. Plus, bunyaps weps pack came with the fixed data and loadout files, so if anything, we're just getting ourselves back to where we were before the patch... Like I said in another thread, I'm more than willing to work with a group of people to create the post patch, weps pack compatible data and loadout files for all the WOE/WOV aircraft and post them for download. Let me know if interested...

Thanks!

Well, that's what I have right now - a custom weps pack and install - it's just that it's all built around bunyap weps pack and the data and loadout files that came with it. So, like I said, it's a matter of either re-doing all bunyap's data.ini edits, or rebuilding my weps pack using the stock or MF as a starting point. Either way, it'll be a bit of work. However, after looking at it, I think I am better off starting with a MF pack. Thanks for the suggestions guys.

Yeah, that's a good idea as well. Depending on how much you need form Bunyap's and or which aircraft you're using, it could be less work. If you use a lot of third party aircraft that require the weps pack, you have to go in and edit their data instead (ie - skyraiders don't have nato listed under attachment types, i think...). I could go either way. If some people are interested, I'm still down to try and update the data.ini's for bunyaps. If not, then maybe I'll give the MF approach a try. Thanks Dave.

Editor, I sent you a PM. Would anyone be interested in working together to re-create the data.ini and loadout.ini files that come with Bunyaps weps packing using the most recent .ini's from the patch? With three or four people, it wouldn't really be that much work... maybe just split up USN, USAF, UK, and Soviet (make it even, if possible) do some testing and release it? Let me know if anyone's interested...

So, for all of those using Bunyaps pack, what are you guys doing? Extracting all the data.ini files and changing manually?

I have a question for those using bunyaps weps pack. The installer also drops the appropriate updated data.ini and loadout.ini files in each aircraft's folder. Have you left these in, or are you extracting the new (if they are new) data.ini's and applying the weps pack changes to those? Anyone notice any aircraft issues after installing the weps pack?

I would think you'd need to change the A-6 to use the 70's avionics ddl as well.

I was referring to Green Hell 2. However, it looks like there are some mixed results with it...

Since you didn't mentiona either of CA's tree mods (unless those were included in "CA's Stary's effects"), does that mean that there are problems with 'em, or did I misunderstand?

What's up with Green Hell? That is an absolute must for me...

I don't care what graphics enhancements there are or if there are any... I'll dial some non critical things down (stuff you don't really notice from the cockpit - object texture, object detail, terrain textures, etc...) just for the chance to finally have some Armed recon missions in my Skyraider campaigns. That is assuming skyraiders still fly right with the new patch... Anyone flown razbams 'raiders with the new patch? Do they work?

It's like an orange on a toothpick...

Oh... simmer down... as in "everybody simmer down, now"... I was think along the lines of "piper down! piper down!", only instead of a bagpipe playing falling over, it was some dude at his computer that hyperventilated after excitement due to new patches...

I had originally heard that WOI user were getting better frame rates at the same detail level, however, the last few posts have led me to believe that the opposit may be the case. What impact are you guys seeing on frame rates?

I like this idea.

Anyone know if the campaigns and/or modded campaigns from the last patch work with the new patch? Are there any new campaign_data.ini entries?

Ahh... thanks. PS - Are prop planes handling OK w/ the new patch? Reasone for edit - IIIII'mmmmmmmmm dumb.

I think he was refering to a tutorial that had instructions for patching a modded install w/o ruining mods. It basically talked about patching a fresh install, and then copying all the .cat and .ddl (or .dll or whatever they are) files from the patched fresh install and dropping them into the modded install. I was also actually thinking about this, just because my install is so heavily modded, but it sounds like that's probably not the way to go. On a related (and I think very helpful) note, does anyone know or can anyone tell what files other than .cat and ddl (or .dll or whatever they are) files are updated by the patch(other than the ones specifically mentioned in the readme)? Knowing this might help answer people's questions about whether or not certain aspects of modded installs would be corrupted. Not trying to kick a dead horse... just thought the info might be helpful/enlightening...