Jump to content

Dangerzone

Members
  • Posts

    667
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dangerzone

  1. My first preference is for Viacom to succeed.. Personally I don't see ED picking this up, not at least for a long time. They have more than enough to do already that would be considered higher priority, but then again - they did decide to have a go at radio coms even though we had SRS, so who knows. My personal favorite would be for the developer of VAICOM to release the source code if they're not going to be maintaining it and allow the community to continue it's development, or otherwise have a new mod that is open source / community created.
  2. What a brilliant suggestion. I wonder if it's possible to do the same for helicopters - and if it would also have a positive impact on performance not being rendered in. Just to have it hidden after certain RPM's would be great.
  3. Nifty. I get the idea. Thanks CFrag!
  4. Hi Tank, Just wondering if you ever managed to accomplish this, and if so - would you mind sharing the finished result? Cheers DZ
  5. Just wondering if someone can please point me in the right direction. I'm wanting to create a MP mission where one or more of the players can act as a AFAC from a helicopter such as the Gazelle or Huey to smoke or laze targets using the F10 menu. (ie, not have a AI JTAC in the area, but actually use the player as the AFAC) I'm aware that the Apache could do this natively with it's lazing (although no smoke) - but I specifically want it for older helicopters. I'm assuming I'll be needing MOOSE for this, but wasn't sure if there are demo missions available that already have this incorporated, or user mission files that are available to see this in action. (I did a search, but my googlefu must be weak).
  6. Oh - I believe you. I had a similar thing a few years ago after driving home from the airport after one trip away... car started drifting to the left and for a short moment I applied more 'right foot' to get it back to the center.
  7. I'm not stating that it's not the software at all. DCS is primarily single thread so doesn't use the advantage of the newer multi-thread chipsets. As such - DCS will bottleneck either at a CPU level or a GPU level depending on the settings, on the missions / scripts running, etc regardless of how good your hardware is. I find that I am bound by CPU bottlenecking instead of GPU and I'm only running a 2080S. However I can change this and be GPU bottlenecked if I up my graphic settings. With this information I have been able to make modifications to get acceptable performance on my HP reverb. The fact that you upgraded a graphics card and saw no performance improvements at all is an indication that it is quite plausible you could be CPU bound by something (with the current settings and/or scripts that are running, etc). I would suggest monitoring both the GPU and CPU to see whether there is a single thread that is running at capacity (100%) that is causing the lack of performance improvements you are expecting. Unfortunately due to the current way DCS is implemented (single thread bound excluding audio) - you can get the highest performing PC and still have a poor experience if you do not optimize your system and DCS correctly. The first point of detecting where the problem lies comes down to determining what is getting maxed out on your system. CPU or GPU. If it's CPU you can play with GPU settings all you want and you won't see improvements to performance. Once you have positively confirmed where the restriction is causing performance then you can narrow down where to search for the issue. There are plenty of threads in here on the issues and what you can search for depending on where the bottleneck is occurring. As for the 3 years with no improvements - I do believe I saw somewhere (or maybe on hoggit) 9line let something slip that we can expect multithreading sometime this year all going well. If so - this could be a game changer (excuse the pun) if the issue is CPU related.
  8. Have you done tests to find out where your bottle neck is occurring? If flying VR is using more CPU and you are bound by your CPU, then obtaining a higher performance GPU won't do anything unfortunately. As for improvements, have you checked out OpenXR? I run a HP Reverb and the difference between running via SteamVR vs OpenXR is night and day. I'm not sure whether this is an option for the Quest or not but in my situation, while my frames did not improve with OpenXR, detail and more important smoothness did. My system looks smoother with 30FPS in OpenXR than 45FPS in SteamVR.
  9. Are you hovering or is the plume of fuel following you?
  10. So would I, but unfortunately I don't believe that is possible. I think the nozzle needs to be completely rearward in order to fire weapons?
  11. My apologies. I thought the OP was talking about joining units together as in players / client slots. You're correct - if we're talking AI units - then it's definitely possible to dynamically spawn those with scripts, or as PravusJSB mentioned - destroy existing units and recreate them as a group.
  12. I don't believe so. We don't have dynamic spawning options available to us - everything is set in the mission editor at launch and can't be changed afterwards, so I would imagine that this is also fixed.
  13. Can this also load in data like waypoints, coordinates for strikes, etc from a cartridge / datafile, or have I misunderstood the purpose of a data cartridge?
  14. SRS Text To Speech info can be found here: https://github.com/ciribob/DCS-SimpleTextToSpeech On the same page you'll find info on how to play MP3 files as well, such as: STTS.PlayMP3("C:\\Users\\Ciaran\\Downloads\\PR-Music.ogg","255,31","AM,FM","0.5","Multiple",0) Hope this helps...
  15. None of it is working for me. I can't download the individual 32/64 bit files, nor the system wide launcher. Looks like whomever is hosting it is having some serious issues atm. Been this way for over 24hrs for me so far...
  16. I have no idea if this is possible or not - but is it possible to have 2 separate installs of DCS - where you can launch both at the same time, or will the 'singlewritedir' error come up / is based on the processID and not the actual executable. I admit, having 2 separate installs and instances of DCS running just to do this is also a PITA, but since no separate mission editor exists at the moment- if there is a way to hack/fool DCS into allowing 2 separate run instances on the same processor that could be a workaround? Edit; And just as I post this, I realise not only is HDD space an issue - but it may not like running with the same account at the same time - so unless you were doing a free map - you'd have to buy 2 copies of each map - which now makes my suggestion sound idiotic.
  17. Brilliant advise! Even so - there are too many systems, and too many modules to be fully competent in all. What I've done is a bit of a compromise... I think with DCS the best approach is: To be a jack of all trades, a master of one. (or maybe two if you get real excited) So, for me, I've try and learn the hornet inside out - everything about it. Navigation, waypoints, all weapon systems, you name it. Next I have other aircraft that I know enough about in some systems to make myself competent for certain mission types only, but not for everything. (Often this will be in areas that it performs better than the hornet. Think F16 HARMS, or anti-armour GBU's), or F14 intercepting (A/A only, etc)... I may 'tinker' with other systems/weapons, but my goal for these secondary aircraft is just to know enough about it to use it effectively in one or two scenario's. And last I have some aircraft that I just want to learn the flight model / characteristics of (and manage to A/A in them) and I'm happy. In amongst all this there are some models that I fly and learn a lot about, but then after 'having my time in it' I will end up letting them go and not remain current in them to make time and brain room for other modules. (Such as migrating from the KA50 which I've flown for years, to the Apache now). Each person flies for different reasons, so this model that works for me may not work for others, but I do find there is something satisfying about being able to fly all aircraft I own, be proficient in one area of each aircraft well, and yet have one or two aircraft I know inside out. To try and do more I think would end up compromising my skills in other areas.
  18. I agree... If there's an option to show IHADDS in both eyes, then it would need to support alignment (and functionalities) that a single eye would do as well. Going OT: As for the flickering itself - just curious as to your headset you're using and the refresh rate. I only use it in one eye - and I have no problems with flickering at all. (HP Reverb, 90hz), so while I agree that if this is a bug it needs to be addressed and not ignored - if there is a workaround available to stop the flickering - I think it'd be worth pursuing as well.
  19. For me - I find what's helpful is to fly with others online in discord. Trying to remember all the systems of all the aircraft is a full time job - and I don't have that time in DCS. To be in an aircraft that I've flown in the past, but then have a 'brain empty' moment of forgetting how to do something or 'why isn't it working' with the system and being able to ask another pilot as I'm flying (or help someone else out - vise versa) helps us to be able to fly a wider range of aircraft that I own and still be able to use the systems. What a position to be in though - to have too much. More than we can handle. The times we live in!
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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!
  23. 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.
  24. 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".
  25. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...