Jump to content

Dangerzone

Members
  • Posts

    648
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dangerzone

  • Birthday 05/01/2020

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I get where you're coming from. And personally I would have liked to see a bit more realism in it as well. However - 50% realism would change things significantly for who? You and I yes - but definitely not all the audience members. Just the few % that actually have a greater understanding of aircraft. Investment vs return is what it's about. As my wife says "the secret to a happy marriage is to lower your expectations". Ouch - what does that say about me? But at the same time - realistic. So - instead of being disappointed at the things they got wrong. I was excited about the things they got right. Wow - they got the laser control codes right. Strewth - there's the slew on the throttle. Wow - there's the same leaver I use in DCS to control the wing sweep in the F14. 1688!!!! Look at that... it's laser code 1688!!!! (Rest of audience - what the hell are you on about?!?) Oh wow - that's a real stick and not a Logitech X56. Plus, I can tell you, the rest of my family didn't care about chaff, or stuff. It was adrenalin pumping sound, flashes, and music - and they found it very enjoyable. I appreciated the extra effort Hollywood went into to give me just those things in itself. Even in saying that I thought they did hit 50% realism Listening to that youtube video that posted showed me that there was more to it than I even realised. And in the end - while I as a DCS nerd would have liked to have had it a little more realistic as well, I realise when real fighter pilots look at it and go 'who cares about the rest of the unrealistic stuff- it was enjoyable, and I give it a 9/9.5/10 out of 10 - maybe it's OK for me to be OK with it too. I've learned to appreciate it when Hollywood actually put a bit of realism into a movie and accept they can only do so much. It's the glass half full/empty thing again I guess. But for me - the absolute best part of the movie though which was unexpected is that they took the 30 year old approach of making an exciting movie. They kept all the newer agenda's, politics, ideologies, obvious marketing placements, etc out of it (at least from what I observed) and just made a solid movie reachable to a wider audience globally.
  2. Given that this is OT, I'd suggest posting this in the VAICOM thread instead. I stumbled my way through the config - not sure what I did, all I know is that it works so there's probably better people that can give you a clear answer immediately over there. I don't have a ground crew option - I just use one of the radio's and it still seems to work if that's of any help though.
  3. Thanks Mike. Yeah - I've found that I only get so many clicks before I accidently move the mouse and have to start again. I was trying to follow borders on Syria, but gave up in the end - became too difficult to achieve, so now I have ugly looking 'rough boxes of borders' to work with instead. Those new feature ideas would be greatly appreciated!
  4. As a software developer myself I know how easily we can be distracted from our work by something new and cool. I can see what's happening at ED HQ right now... Manager: Hey! What are you guys working on? Dev's: Oh - putting in a hidden base into each map so that it'll be there (but hidden) on the next update Manager: No - you're not supposed to be doing that. You're supposed to be working on xxxxx Dev's: Oh OK.... 1 hour later... Manager: Hey! Why are you back in the map designer?!? When we see less new features added in the next few updates, we'll all have this thread to blame.
  5. I find different people's expectations and reactions very interesting. I went with low expectations (well - expectations I have for any modern Hollywood movie these days) and was pleasantly surprised. I liked how they took certain scenes down a notch too to allow younger audiences the ability to watch. I also love how they kept politics, ideologies and agenda's out of it and just made a good ol' fashioned interesting storyline. I went back and watched it again with my child after seeing how 'family friendly' the movie was. Very smart move, and very much appreciated! I also find it interesting how I can listen to real navy pilots comment on how much they enjoyed the movie and then hear enthusiasts virtual pilots complain about the reality. 95% or more of viewers wouldn't have flown a military sim, let alone a real aircraft - nor have any idea - and the movie is predominantly made for fictional enjoyment. The amount of accuracy they actually did include was a bonus. I don't know - maybe that's a half glass full vs half glass empty mindset? The rest that's unrealistic - well, that's the movie industry. To expect any different I think is unrealistic. I think it's true of any movie. As a lawyer about lawyer movies. Marksman about guns in movies. Doctor about medical stuff in movies. Police about police movies. People involved in the space program about space movies. The list goes on. The more you know about reality in a particular field - the more you see how far away even the good movies are from reality. The trick to enjoying a movie is to have low expectations on reality - appreciate it when there is some reality and enjoy a fictional work. To make a movie 100% realistic would probably turn off a lot of the viewers, in the same way making a military game 100% realistic would turn off almost all of it's target audience. "Yeah - I bought this realistic first person shooter. I've been sitting in this one spot with a sniper rifle for 6hrs - and seen nothing yet. I'm so glad I bought this 'realistic' game".
  6. I'm lost by what you mean by 'package'? I'm also confused by what you mean that your HOTAS works with the FA/18, but with the AH64 it was "not working"? Are you saying you bound the same axis/buttons to the AH64 that you had bound on the FA/18 but DCS did not recognise them? That sounds quite weird. DCS should pick up your controller if you have it bound to an action regardless of what airframe you are using. Or are you saying that you can't figure out how to configure your peripherals in DCS in a way that allows you to fly out of the box? I for one would be against ED taking time and resources away from other development to do a whole bunch of user control settings for all the different kinds of HOTAS that are out there, and then still get complaints that they should do it a different way, etc. That's a task much better suited for the user community to help out (and there is help available in the user community - see below). The problem with this (for starters), the X52 & X56 are generic controllers. I don't think there's a single official way to configure these that would suit everyone. Because it's not an exact replica of the actual cockpit controls for the aircraft different people are going to configure them different way for the style of flying and fighting that most suits them. Some want them mapped as close as possible to realism, others want them mapped to be similar across airframes. Which would ED do? For instance - I have a generic HOTAS and I have mine configured so that the same controls do similar functions across airframes - even though in the real aircraft these controls would do something else. One of my friends I fly with prefer to have their controls setup to match realism - so buttons will be vastly different. This is user preference, something that no one can do a pre-configuration for that suits everyone. Another problem is that it's not just a matter of binding HOTAS and expecting to be able to use the aircraft's systems. You still need to learn each individual system and how to use weapons - so even getting a preconfigured HOTAS doesn't help. However if what you're asking for is for someone to just setup your controls in 'any way' that will work and then have a manual or youtube video that will show you what does what - I think there's plenty of user files around already where that will work that you can just import. However I think the better approach is for you to get an understanding of what needs to be bound to perform a certain task, and then learn that task. Grim Reapers do a good job of training video's for beginners where they first show the binding required for a particular task, , and then next how to use them. Since they show the binding configuration - you can use any HOTAS and decide which buttons you prefer - which works well because different people have different controllers. IIRC I think Grim Reapers also have a 1 on 1 help option available for training and setting up which you can pay for as well, so if you're willing to pay for help - it might be worth contacting them as I reckon they could get you started if you're finding difficulty yourself. One word of advise though. Once you get your configurations setup the way you want - export and make a backup of your settings - I've had DCS overwrite or 'lose' the settings on more than one occasion (thankfully not recently), but still - once you get them setup it's very handy to have a backup you can restore back from.
  7. Do you have any thing that can tell where the bottle neck is. Especially with multiplayer servers - I find I have issues with CPU bottlenecking. I'm only running a 2080S, so I would expect the GPU to be the bottlenext, but it's the CPU. I've found this will vary - depending on a number of factors including: - How many players are online at that time - How many AI units are active, and how many of those are routing / on the move or doing other calculations (SAM Sites) - What LUA scripts may be triggered behind the scenes on the server This means that the same thing on one server can give different FPS's at different times due to other factors that are different at that particular time with the server's scenario. I used to blame my GPU until I had software that would show me live what was happening with both GPU and CPU and discovered it was a CPU issue. This has been gradually getting worse (Thank goodness for OpenXR that allows for smooth VR rendering at lower FPS's, or I'd be screwed in MP by now). I switch back to single player - and frames improve immensely. I don't know if it's getting worse as DCS do more updates and have 'more' processing in their base code, whether it's the servers that are having more activity, or as scripts are getting more complicated, or a combination of all. The situation has been discussed to death multiple times on this forum - and the general consensus is an expectation that it will only continue to get worse until multithreading / Vulkan is implemented. Until then - we need to make compromises, or find workarounds - whether that be overclocking, using OpenXR for smoother frames at lower FPS's, etc and find the 'things' that are causing the increase in usage (someone mentioned that multiple sound outputs may be a contributing factor to CPU for instance) - and dial down all the things that can add to CPU overhead.
  8. Hi mate, OK - so it recognised 'commencing' to be required for a supercarrier unit. Were you on the right frequency (and the right radio) when you said that? I'm no VAICOM expert - but I have 3 buttons bound for VAICOM. One is just a general command such as 'REARM', etc. The other two are for radio coms. I know that in order for this to work I have to hit the VAICOM button that's bound to the same radio that is tuned into the supercarrier. To make sure it's working correctly you should be able to hit one of the radio buttons and say "Select Washington" - which should automatically tune that radio in the hornet to the washington frequency. Then you'll know it's set right and should be able to do the inbound, commencing, etc.
  9. Do you have VAICOM configured so you actually say "Hornet Ball" on a PTT button assigned to VAICOM and it will 'call the ball' for you on the carrier frequency (if you're tuned in)? If so - do exactly the same thing, but instead of saying "Hornet Ball", say "Platform" and see what happens. For me if I do this say at 15 miles out, at 8 miles I get the 'final radar contact' call. I also get the 'needles' call, etc as well.
  10. Not sure we're talking the same thing then... I'd be extremely surprised if they've been released on ebay and nothing official announced. Sounds like maybe some scammers trying to get in on the name?
  11. Which you can force a change of - if you're able to transmit the 'Established', 'Commencing', 'Platform' radio commands. As mentioned - Vaicom allows users to do this in CAVOK conditions - so unless it's a restricted API call (not sure whether VAICOM uses SDK commands or just open ones) - it should also be possible to add using a LUA script.
  12. Here I am... having done so much so far with LUA and multiplayer missions, and never knew. Thanks so much for this - learning every day!
  13. For anyone who may come across this post and wonder on an answer - I took the plunge and this is my experience so far: I'm quite impressed with how customizable monster tech is. It's not 100% customizable, but there's enough options available to change things around and small things such as adjusting the height by an inch or two can make a big difference as to how it feels. Having the joystick to the right side has taken a little bit of getting used to after having it in front of me for... well - most of my life. It didn't affect my flying capabilities to a level that I've noticed but after too many hours flying with it in another location - it wasn't a quick "aah - that feels like a natural position). However it has certainly changed my posture. My shoulders don't roll forward like they used to - they're normally back in the chair - which I think has been quite a good thing for me. (Old age sucks). My adjustable arm rests on the chair can also be altered and come in handy for me to rest my arms and hold both the HOTAS and joystick. The keyboard swivel is completely different to the quick release. It comes with it's own swivel which is dedicated to the keyboard's horizontal arm in front, allowing the keyboard to be rotated 90 degrees away (out in front). One issue I faced is that I want my keyboard closer for general PC stuff - but I can't move it closer because of where the HOTAS throttle is mounted. I think I'm going to be able to easily overcome this with a 4080 extrusion I've purchased separately that replaces the extrusion that holds the keyboard plate to make it a tad longer. The other issue I face is I need to be careful when leaning back in my chair - the keyboard tray can continue to swivel 'through' towards me and make contact with the HOTAS. I've heard some people say that monster tech is expensive and that because it's mostly aluminum extrusion they could make something up themselves. I can't comment for others - but I think I saved money. I reckon I would have gone through 2 to 3 times the amount of supplies to 'get it right' after making a lot of mistakes, and probably still wouldn't have worked out as well as monster tech's design. I figure the extra price between the price of the equipment RAW and sourced from there goes towards the engineering they've put into this - and for me - it is a price that I think was worth it. Others with a good engineering mindset, and the right tools to start with may have a different approach, and may get more enjoyment working things out themselves - but I'm happy for someone else to do the brain work. The main gripe I have would be the MKG Gunfighter mount. The mount you see in the photo's has 2 rings cut out - almost all around - with just 4 points at 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees to hold the metal together. The MCG mount I have doesn't have this. It has 4 holes with a 'little' curve in them for small adjustments. I would have liked to be able to angle my grip a little more but couldn't. If the mount was the same as the one in the pic - it would have given me more versatility.
  14. I doubt it would be a problem. Quite possible to do in civilian aircraft as well. Only problem is cell tower range as previously mentioned. If I have to have my hands on the controls when flying - I'm doing it wrong. Shouldn't need autopilot - just good trimming is normally suitable in good conditions. Plus pilots have to look down a lot more than you'd think. Working out fuel calculations enroute every 10 minutes, drawing on maps and charts, replotting flight paths and doing angle calculations, writing down stuff and referring back to it on the kneeboard. Looking up airport information in enroute reference books - a lot of these could take up more time than a text message. Don't consider it like driving a car - it's completely different.
  15. Cfrag's approach is the one I would go for (but I already use SSB for other tasks). One day ED may give us the ability to enable/disable spawn slots with a simple trigger/setting. Another option would be just to allow all aircraft to be spawnable but setup triggers that after 2 seconds of being spawned into - they blow up unless a flag is set to use that particular aircraft. It's not the most elegant solution - but could be done within the .MIZ file without requiring the use of server side scripts such as simple slot block, or needing to desanitize the client, and could then also allow missions to be self-sufficient in a .miz file so thus distributable. Moving forward - maybe the new 'password' feature on slots could be utilised. Apparently those slots don't show up except for people using passwords. I don't think it works with single player - but who knows - moving forward we may be able to set passwords dynamically on the fly - and that would be a great way to enable/disable slots.
×
×
  • Create New...