Would someone who has had success at an MC conversion of 4.35 to 4.36 .tac files be kind enough to share with me the resulting contents of your “MC/Conv/Korea” directory?
I’ve tried everything in this thread, and still no joy…
I just get a succession of these error dialogs, then the dreaded Exception:
Thanks much, Sloth
@DrJester Oh, wait, they started already, in the several replies above. We’ve successfully hijacked this thread! There go my reputation points…
OK, this has got to be on me. If everyone were having this issue, our BMS forum would be saturated with threads about it…
I’ve RTFM’d myself to death and tried every trick I can think of in the 2D UI, but I cannot figure out how to assign my GPS-guided weapon targets to a “spare” STPT in 4.36. (Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t mean ‘wpntarget_XX’ STPTs, I mean ‘target_XX’ STPTs.)
The changes in the recon UI seem to be essentially undocumented. The User Manual says “You have therefore 2 choices: either you use the steerpoints not assigned to your INS flight plan (11 to 24), or you use the newly implemented target steerpoints (81 to 99).”
I have always used STPTs 15-24 for this task. But now, when I open the BMS Recon dialog, the associated TARGET LIST UI (which pops up along with it) is very different in its behavior. It only allows me to view my actual target site(s) when I select the ‘Strike’ target STPT. (It used to show all nearby locations and allow you to select any of them and assign it to a “spare” STPT.) But now, attempting to click through to STPT 15 takes me to whatever remote site that was left over in my “.ini” file (I presume).
I’m sure I could work out a way to gimmick the system: e.g., save extra STPTs, copy the resulting subset into my desired “spare” STPTs in the “.ini” file I will actually fly with, but this can’t be the answer. There’s just something I’m overlooking in my addled state.
Please, someone, tell me what I’m missing!
Thanks to all,
Slothrop
@Logic I experienced the same problem when using MC to convert BMS 4.34 missions to BMS 4.35.
(See the ugly history of that “dialogue” , if you wish, but it may not be enlightening…)
What this boils down to, per Falcas, is the presence of the proper “Conv*.txt” files in your MC/ Conv/Korea’ directory. Falcas quickly provided an update, and after that the “automatically replace” option worked smoothly.
However, as far as I can see, the very latest release of MC is 0.5.19.667, (which, although it dates to 25 Jan 2022), when installed and run once in the “Convert Mission” mode, seems to leave an empty “ConvTF.txt” file in the above Conv directory. (Well, empty except for its header line.)
When I attempt to use MC to convert a 4.35 mission, it produces an endless series of Caution dialogs (of “Could not find objective…” type).
The “TranslateObj.txt” file is dated 1/28/2021.
I could be completely off the mark (and I’ve been upbraided for that before), but I’m not convinced that Falcas has completed the updates needed to the conversion files…
Best I can see, a PM to [Falcas] is likely to get a very timely fix! He has always been incredibly responisve to problem reports on all of his splendid BMS tools!
@DrJester Thanks a ton, friend. I’ll soon re-install ReShade and I’ll give your settings a try.
Hopefully, I was wrong about the FPS cost: I’ll keep a close eye on it. But I can afford a 15-20% hit in most situations (though I haven’t started a campaign yet). Even with the glory that is 4.36’s improved graphics, it’s hard to fly with the washed out look for long.
If I may be so bold: you should post this as a new topic in “Community Mods & Tools”. I’d bet there are a lot of users like us, who would really enjoy a conversation about installing ReShade and tweaking the various shader settings.
Then the flame wars about realism can begin! (Maybe we can start them by trading revised settings back and forth, arguing which sky blue is best. 
)
@eddropper - I love what you’ve done with that map! By any chance, do you have a similar transformation for the default KTO map? If so, would you spare me a copy?
Thanks,
Sloth
<p>@sheref I hate to impose, but, would you consider naming your files so they bear a clear relation to one another? (Like, say, <em>“BMS 4.35.7z”</em> and <em>“BMS 4.35.HotFix.7z”</em>?)<br /><br />I keep my downloads in a single sub-folder, so with <em>“hot fix.7z”</em> the only way I can discern the connection is to sort by date/time. It gets messy real quick.<br /><br />I apologize for the imposition, because I haven’t yet installed/tested it, but I promise I’ll give feedback as soon as I do…<br /><br />Thanks and respect, Slothrop</p>
@eddropper - I love what you’ve done with that map! By any chance, do you have a similar transformation for the default KTO map? If so, would you spare me a copy?
Thanks,
Sloth
@airtex2019, @Atlas - Thank you both for the help. I’ve managed to get comfortable with the key controls except for landings. Managing a proper descent speed and AOA is way more difficult without a throttle.
@spooky - I don’t consider the problem solved. It’s still a problem, but a new throttle will solve it for me. Even so, I’d be interested to hear others experiences with this…
It would be a nice upgrade in a future version to add a configuration option to specify fuel flow, in PPM, per key press. Won’t be used often, of course, but would be a lifesaver for those like me, stuck with a keyboard controller for a while.
Hi all. Thanks for any help you may have.
My Warthog throttle bricked some months ago and I’ve had to fly with keyboard throttle controls since then (‘Throttle Step Up’ / ‘Throttle Step Down’ and ‘Throttle Forward’ / ‘Throttle Back’). The problem is that the step up/down commands seem to adjust about 2-3 times more than I’d expect a “step” to be. (The forward/back commands are giant, but I only use those for takeoff.)
Does anyone know of a way to configure the amount (PPM) per key press with these commands? I’ve RTFM’d and searched the forum, but have found nothing, so I suspect this feature doesn’t exist…
Also, does anyone else have experience using keyboard throttle control and have any advice? For example, it seems that making two or three steps up and then one less back gives a sort of fine-tuning to the final setting, but its terribly hit or miss.
@go-roto13b Thanks, mate!
That helped a great deal. (How did you “stumble across” this, perchance?)
I’d also like to see this returned to its 4.35.U3 state…
For others who trail after go-roto13b here, note that the BMS Technical Manual, page 27, says “g_bUseDeprRetAsBrake only works with g_bUseVirtualRudder (lets you use the left and right toe brake axis mappings to simulate rudder input) set to 1 (true).” Also, be sure to map your clutch and accelerator as rudder pedals (clutch as right, yes manual says it seems backward), then brake pedal as brake…
@Falcas - Thank you so much! Version 686 worked perfectly in converting my 4.35U3 TEs (with the expected few choices as to what replaces what).
As you said: It will come with a suggestion which is mostly correct. However not always!!!
Exactly my experience. And as I progressed, the choices dwindled from few to zero. So, perfect…
I really appreciate your patience in dealing with us impatient users. You got this fix out quickly and now we can resume enjoying all that 4.36 offers, with our old TEs, to boot.
Without your tool set, BMS would be far less wonderful!
Dear @Falcas : I haven’t tested it yet, but have great hopes that it solves my and others TE conversion problems.
One minor issue though: your title for MC on that site still shows “(25 Jan 2022)”. One then must look closely at the revision number to be sure one is downloading the desired new revision. If you could update that to “(1 May 2022)” it would fix some confusion…
@Frederf No disrespect, but I’m afraid I don’t understand. When one’s accelerator/brake pedals are set to combined, that’s only one input to a sim, as I understand it.
Perhaps you mean that BMS expects independent right/left rudder inputs? But doesn’t it then combine them into a single rudder/wheel axis? (Most/all flight sims expect the latter…)
(If I combine my pedals and watch the effect in BMS’s Controllers UI, I see that the rudder takes one input–the right pedal–and then stays stuck at maximum. Doesn’t matter which pedal I press, BMS goes from the middle to the top on the RUDDER axis and locks there.)
Maybe it takes deeper code modifications than are reasonable, but it would please more than a few of us, I’m sure, if this could be included in the 4.36U1 release. Please, please, please? 
We can then easily map the clutch pedal as the third input (right toe brake). Yes, it’s counter-intuitive for our feet, but if it conserves fuel we’ll adapt.
PS - When I get a little free time, I’ll try your vJoy suggestion. If that works I’ll be a very happy camper.
After comparing my 4.35 and 4.36 configs, I realized that I experienced the same problem in 4.35, just not nearly to the same extent.
I assume this is a consequence of the improved F-16 braking in 4.36. If so, well done devs, and I’ll happily accept the consequences.
The downside, of course, is that this burns up excessive fuel just at the start of your mission.
@go-roto13b I’ve found that my best work-around is to build up a slight excess of taxi speed just before I need to make a right turn. When I apply the right rudder/toe brake pedal, that speed bleeds off quickly. However, if I press hard and only hold for a brief moment I make a sharp turn and lose less speed.
It’s a hack, but probably the best we can do at the moment.
@DrJester Oh, wait, they started already, in the several replies above. We’ve successfully hijacked this thread! There go my reputation points…