Leaderboard

Additional new mission editor features in 2.8 Additional new ground units for 2.8

We are sorry to disappoint you about pricing, but our aircraft is not in early access state so the launch discount are not applicable. The price is in line with the other two trainer competitors (today's price not applicable due to sales). Furthermore, it is not possible to compare the nice sim version with the DCS one. The nice sim version is like the free mod with the working navigation system. This now DCS version is full of features that ED listed in their newsletter yesterday. It is not the re-textured mod, but it is a completely new aircraft. In terms of development, the nice sim version was made in three months, the DCS one was made in three years. We invested a lot of time in the DCS version, we think that this is the right price considering the aircraft category. If the problem is the price due to your world region, I would suggest to wait until the sale. Unfortunately we cannot offer different prices to anyone, it could be hard to manage and it is not fair to those who have paid full price for it. Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

Sa-2 Transporter PR-11 3d model was pressent on DCS World directories from some time and the ZIL-131 transport head has present into DCS. If start to appears on DCS World videos, ED will be enable the trailer towing technology. Other tracktor heads presents has (TZ-22 refueler, ATZ-22 refueler).

Not a good patch from my side: 1. Vaicom Pro rendered unusable; 2. Raven One Dominant Fury triggers broken; 3. Night carrier launch crews are messed up (their wands float in space); 4. Issues with shadows; 5. (Ongoing issues) Promised performance improvements not materializing, bad AI, etc... I'm losing faith. It might be time to take a break from DCS. I've been trying to work through Raven One, but the constant crashes due (we think) to the AI F14 bug rendered it unplayable. Now that bug (might) be fixed, but the mission won't progress due to trigger issues. Maybe I'll return when (if) 3.0 arrives, but I just find myself fighting frustration every time I try to get something going in this game lately. It's too bad, I've been playing this game since... 2014? Edit: so before people start coming aboard me for this, note I’m not throwing stones or being belligerent in any way. I do care about this software and this community, so I feel it important the devs know why they are losing a customer, and that I do hope to return one day. But the simple fact is the current state of the game has fallen below the standard I believe is reasonable considering the… $1000 or so I’ve invested in the company?

I reverted to Stable 2.7.18... Very disappointing to say the least. Dear ED, please share with the community what is going on. I was expecting VR improvements as stated in GS`s great preview of 2.8 on YouTube ( https://youtu.be/GVlRcYaQMZ4) but instead we got serious dip in FPS. It would be much easier to swallow if you shared some of the challenges/problems/issues you faced before posting the update. In keeping and fostering collaboration, sharing information and transparency will only help. When information is missing, people make it up and most of the time it will be negative. Please help us understand.

2.8 new and update 3d models (incomplete, require review with 2.7).... remarks, great quantity of Soviet / Russian Air to ground missiles, drop tanks, boms and rails update (Mig-29? incoming), some new missiles to USN Ship (RIM-156A SM-2ER Block IV) and MBB-339 objects. Another modules has been 3d models updated. Sorry by the "trash"...

UPDATED TO V19 for DCS 2.8 10/29/2022 Updated for compatibility.

Update required the 'Microsoft Visual C++ 2015-2022 Redistributable' package to be present. If you PC didn't have it, it was installed for you hence the reboot.

Screenshot from 'DCS Halloween Sale 2022' of SA-2 Transporter. Now available in DCS?

Thank you for releasing the first model for DCS, I'm also waiting for G.91 :). Congratulations!

AFAIK, there are a bunch of really good A-3 models "out there." It is a relatively famous and popular airframe that gets a lot of attention. I suspect that someone will acquire a model and port it to DCS at some point. Hopefully, your post will inspire someone to do it sooner than later. as for me, I've stated before that I mod as an educational hobby to develop new skills and I usually focus on subject matter that nobody else is doing (no point in wasted effort if someone else is already doing it, and probably doing it better than I can do). Usually that means I choose subject matter that I think is lacking in DCS, is less mainstream but also that I want for my own personal use. It also means I start from scratch, and it takes a long time and much effort to make a single mod. This is my long-winded way of saying I doubt that I will personally take on the A3. I do agree that it would be nice to have, but it probably won't be me doing it. Here is my current project as an example to illustrate what I said above: This is what it looked like 3 weeks ago (first shaping of the fuselage in Blender) This is what it looks like today after 3 weeks of effort but still less than 50% complete (in game check to find problems in the UV texture map) BTW, in case anybody is wondering, it's supposed to be a "Mullet"

WAAA, I WANT FREE CANDY!

So, some more testing this morning. Shadows to Flat, OFF or Default make zero difference to me. I’ve gone from 86FPS when looking straight out through the HUD in Hornet ready on the ramp Caucasus to 60 ish. No MODS other than Open composite and OXRTK. No other in game settings changed. And it is ALL CPU frametime. My CPU FT pre 2.8 in the same scenario was 9, it's now 16. Something is very, very wrong. Specs are in my sig. @BIGNEWY happy to provide more info if it helps track down the culprit. Update: rolled back and performance is back to where it was

Our apologies, but we really do not. Currently there is a bug in the repo which triplicates the Top Gun livery for some reason, which we need to clean out, but the rest is as intended. It is also not true, I just checked: all other liveries combined are 33.5 GB (rounded) vs 12GB in the Tomcat. Disc space is incredibly cheap nowadays, and having a module within 15Gb is nothing unusual, in fact between 10 and 15 GB is normal industry standard in flight sims (DCS is actually really on the lower end of the spectrum, but not the norm). We cannot throttle development or lower quality or offer less choice for "GPUs that are lacking VRAM". If you really think that liveries are causing crashes, then you can always delete them from the coremods folder except one for the A and B, albeit you will have to do it after each update.

Was hoping to get back into DCS after about 2 months away, but not sure where I'll go now. There was (and is) nowhere else that played the same, had the same level of challenge for the Cold War jets, or attracted the same level of play. I'm going to really miss the Combined Arms cat-and-mouse, even with the CA bugs, and the cheeky SAM sites. Thanks for running the server for so long through thick and thin and sorry I couldn't be around more lately - would've been nice to see it out with a bang instead. It looks like DCS Cold War is going to be really something in a couple years, and the little one might be a little less labour intensive, so if you decide to kick things back off you know I'll be there.

Well, so much for "happy to be proven wrong" … clearly there is no point on debating with you, will have to ignore you from now on.

Hi all, we do have an issue with shadows that may be affecting FPS If the shadows for terrain objects is set to "off" the issue occurs. It doesn't happen with either "flat" or "standard" shadows on. Please try adjusting shadows settings to see if you notice a difference. We will of course patch a fix as soon as we have collected enough data for what needs to be tweaked. thank you

Oh no... not AGAIN!

Thank you for understanding [emoji120] Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

It's tough not to feel a bit bad about it. But anyone who is in business is going to encounter people who are priced out, so to speak. It's one of the costs of doing business. On the plus side, you're not offering an essential service, like food or heat, so you're not watching someone go cold and hungry. Also, the base game is actually free, there are alternatives to your product, there are free trials, and there are sales. You did your work, we have choices, so in all truth everything is okay.

Cannot even image of flying such a great simulator and approach to the carrier while hitting F keys to send messages to marshal or LSO. It would completely spoil immersion.... I don't think it would be too difficult to fix VAICOM source code (it's a program written in C# .Net Framework). The problem is the UDP communication interface between VAICOM and DCS because they don't dialogate any more. The rest of the code is not probably affected by the chages in 2.8 like it was not affected at the time of 2.7 ED could byy the licence from Hollywood and amend the interface or could preserve 2.7 inferface within 2.8 for addon backward compatibility. In any case we must make a strong petition all togheter to ED for a quick ATC solution maybe in the form of an immediate Early Access release with a minimal bunch of functionalites with the intent to progress in the future months. Surely I'm not going to buy any other modules from them until they don'f fix this issue. To tell the truth, I'm fed up with countinuous relaeses of new aircrafts and scenarios. I'd rather have them pay more attention and effort to safaguard the flight and combat immersion. Let's hope so.

I strongly disagree with this statement. Not only are we extremely grateful and lucky to have such talented skin makers give their free time to us, but we also think their skins are a) very accurate and b) very well done and beautiful. We stand 100% behind them, without even the slightest whiff of doubt. There is really no need to be so derogative, even if you don't like them, for whatever reason. That's just your opinion, and while you are absolutely entitled to that, it is only one opinion among many and can also be said in a much nicer way. Those folks who make these skins for us really don't deserve that.

Awesome, thanks for the fast reply. Really glad to know it is on the cards for the future! From a personal perspective I would rather deal with a broken VA profile every few updates than not have that functionality for months, but I do understand the devs decision (and of course don’t know the full situation)! Thanks again.

Trying to prevail on a server with a duckton of SAM activity makes you fly low through the valleys and popping up over those hnggnnfh ridges...

Also: Clouds now look like something from Microprose anno 1982, and JTAC does not answer the call. So far it looks like pure sabotage.

Did not measure, but a VERY disappointing drop in framerate on Oculus Quest 2; ah64 on my (former) smooth test mission, Caucasus. My new, brake-my-bank-account PC rig has held up so far, except for Marianas. But that mission was cream! I'm going to bed and now to have a taste of depression, because this runs like my old PC.

Alpenwolf is not leaving us. We left him. He created a server where teamwork and communication were required for success. It was always a challenge and flying alone and silent was rewarded with failure. As soon as there was a carbon copy setup that did not require teamwork, which, in fact directly rewards lone wolfing, the best server DCS has ever seen became a ghost town. We did this to ourselves because we don’t want teamwork and a challenge for challenge sake. We want easy kills and ego boosting public stats and kill messages. So while DCS Cold War will be getting plenty of new modules, it won’t be “something” and it certainly will not entice Alpenwolf back.

It's a real shame that clicking on that arrow doesn't show frame times. Even in expanded mode, those graphs are not really helpful. Why not pt it in numbers like fpsVR, for example? Also, the info screen - 2nd ctrl-break - is still bugged with 0.00Gb VRAM showing at all times.

At the moment there is an intense communication on the Discord about this issue and someone said there are plenty of third party modules affected by the 2.8 update. He said also that maybe they found a solution for the Vaicom Pro to make it work again. If this will be true, I´ll post the solution here. But it´s just a dream at the moment. I find this frustrating, because to me the Vaicom Pro plugin was the main reason why I started to fly the F-14 and found out later, that it adds so much immersion to the game, that I don´t want to leave this behind. I can only hope, that someone will take over this gap on the market after the Vaicom Pro was abandoned due to any reason. Maybe this could be a good idea for the ED team to start working on something similar, at least they´ve got the codes they need

Foreword: Sending my deepest thanks to Aplenwolf, for some of the most memorable times in DCS world. I send this with a whole in my heart and will miss our battles with combined arms. You (Alpenwolf) have tirelessly given so much to our community, making missions complex, interesting and most of all fun. History: I for one, wouldn't of met such a fantastic bunch of guy's helping each other to learn how to fly, use DCS in many new ways, with enjoyment along the way. The cold war 1947 - 1991 server was a meeting place for many players, and even though it was full on battle mode, many pilots came for the challenge. Over 9 years of helping pilots learn their craft over the skies on the Persian Gulf, Syria, and the Caucasus's. My last computer was from the same era, that's how long ago it was. Future of the cold war: Well, as far as we know, it's not to return. Using the missions on a regular server is no more. We have asked to use them, but Alpenwolf has asked that we don't use them. We respect that, he put hours of his own time and it's his choice to share them. Can we have them in similar missions of the future, sure, we have the missions, but it will not be the same full mission, as we only have part of the mission files. Dedicated server: Making a dedicated server in the short term is not possible, but the future will be something that we can make. I've been working on missions over the last year, learning and hosting missions for the small group cold war players. This I think will accelerate my efforts to finally create worthy missions for our cold war community. Closure: In my final words about the cold war 1947 - 1991, in the ashes of the old, grow a-new. We will return.... Thank you Alpenwolf!! Deepest Regards, Mark (Mike-Delta)

The small arrow is at the LEFT from the counter at the top row (the header of the counter window). Actually there're two different windows: one for the counter and graph and the other with the detailed info (if you clicked CTRL+Break two times), both can be minimized. Note however that that triangles can be clicked ONLY with DOT CURSOR in VR, and the blue cross will not switch to dot automatically if you hover it on the window. So the easiest way is to switch to the menu (to stop the game), then the dot cursor can be used to collapse the counter, then go back to game.

Here you go. Upon further investigation it looks like the classification of the contact on NCTR is based on its coalition. While flying a blue F-16 and interrogating a red target, the contact showed up red. While flying a red F-16 and interrogating a blue target, the contact showed up green. While flying a red F-16 and interrogating a red target the contact showed up yellow, which I can only presume is the result of a conflicting "two factor" classification based on friendly IFF and "hostile" (red) NCTR print. AIFF response being correlated to track classification is in itself incorrect behaviour according to the MLU manuals. F-16 IFF Test - Red F-16 vs. Blue.trk F-16 IFF Test - Red F-16 vs. Red.trk F-16 IFF Test - Blue F-16 vs. Red.trk

For anyone making custom kneeboards, here are the folders: MB-339A: "C:\Users\<username>\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Kneeboard\MB-339A" MB-339A/PAN: "C:\Users\<username>\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Kneeboard\MB-339APAN"

Curtain Falls: This is it, friends. It's been almost 9 years of hosting Cold War servers, running events, special editions and tournaments. Throughout the years the Cold War community became incredibly dedicated and very disciplined when it came to working together with each player understanding his role in every single mission. The intensity in so many sessions was really second to none, and I only quote the so many posts by you and the shared feedback in that regard. That really kept me going and pushed me to design more and more missions. At times, I even enjoyed designing missions more than playing them, believe it or not. I pushed you many times and never stopped doing that urging you all to use comms and work in teams to get the most out of the missions, and that you did often enough. I even kicked and sometimes banned players for the lack of that and surely upset some of you, but I knew I had to do so to maintain the server on the high level it was known for. I considered that necessary on a public server open for everyone, so please believe me when I say in was never personal. The server's population has been very low as of late and getting new players interested in the stuff we have here, considering the learning curve regarding the server in general and each mission individually, has been rather repellent to newcomers. Many times I've had suggestions by you to maybe run just one mission/campaign with easier settings and more flexibility regarding the distribution of modules, etc., however, I'm simply not into that. It's just not my cup of tea. I don't know if I'll ever host a Cold War server again, or maybe something else, be it WWll or modern jets. All I know is that's for the unforeseeable future. I'll still be around in DCS though should private life ever permit it again, and I'll remain available here on the forums. As to the recently announced Close Air Support - Dynamic Campaign, I'll have to shut it down too. It requires quite some tuning and I'm currently not able to do so. I've made a lot of beautiful friends and surely some haters. The two simply come naturally hand in hand in one package, and that's very okay. It's been a ride, folks, and for the most part very enjoyable. Thank you all for the wonderful times and as I always say: God bless you all and godspeed, ED! Sincerely yours Alpenwolf

Please provide stateful button mappings for all functions, especially flight controls, master arm etc. So separate functions for switching something on and off. For example, only having a toggle for the speed brake is a big no-no.

After going back to stable release and deleting the Viacom assets : from mod folder and scripts folder in settings, it works. I will stay on stable until 2.8 is in better shape, 2.7.18 runs better for VR.

One thing I don't care for on the MB-339 is the use of left clicks for many cockpit interactions, while the norm across DCS is right clicks. Not a deal breaker but it is odd when you're used to the opposite.

Missile loft is improved. Level shot, no loft assisting, missile climbed up to 75k. Unfortunately it's still extremely susceptible to notching and does this unusual pull up maneuver, almost as if to avoid impact instead of maintaining a trajectory that would give it a chance to re-acquire a pitbull.

I guess that's no bug, but a correction. Those flames should have never been visible during daylight in the first place.

It's not a question of the type of aircraft, it's a question of quality; is it well made? If it is well made and it's fun, then that is where the value lies. Also, it's not at the top tier of pricing. The top shelf stuff like the Tomcat and Viper sell for $100+Cdn. The Mb-339 is $77 Cdn. We'll round it out to 3/4 the price of the really hot modules. I don't think that's unreasonable. Besides, no one comes to DCS because it's particularly affordable. We come here because it's fun. Half my DCS stuff was bought on sale. Nothing wrong with that. The sale is for those who perhaps can't afford it or just aren't sure they want it enough to buy it at full price.

Hi, the price tag is in line with the other 2 jet trainers competitors on this plaform, the L-39 and the C-101.

Snow is back in 2.8! Thank you all!

Public places(airplanes for example) can have rules about what you allowed to carry and what you not. Similar, there is an option for server owners. They, not ED, can decide if players allowed to modify cockpit scripts. Discussion would be more constructive if we knew exactly what changes are "illegal". Obviously, It is not about CMS programs, which I used to keep modified.

As someone who has color blindness, I would retexture some colors in cockpits to make them easier for me to read/see. This required editing of the many cockpit script files. Now I cannot do that AND be allowed to fly on MP servers. That also being said I understand how some of the files in there could have been used to 'cheat' but I seem to think, couldn't there have been another way to solve this. IE maybe grep all the files for certain strings that are associated with cheating and IC just those files as they tend not to be associated with custom cockpit textures, rather than the entire directory? This truly saddens me that this happened and was part of the alure of being able to play DCS in the first place.

I dont see that arrow in VR

I think a better solution is asking ED for a livery manager. The idea has been floating around for a while now and there are posts about it in the wishlist section. Add to them and let's see if we can ED to add this since it would help everyone.

I think 45 down to 22-24 isn't EXAGERATED.

I cant go into the back seat hitting the "2" key. any clue ? found it. Unckeck solo flight in mission editor proprties. last tab ...

It seems in new beta 2.8 model of hangars changed, so now it looks like texture missing . Will it be hangar textures bug fix for your mod version of 2021 ? (i use caucasus redone 2021 cause i think its more balanced in textures colors than 2022 ). Thanks !

The thing is, it does not even look different or better. Why do we have that fps drop.