Dangerzone

I have played multi-player persistent campaigns that have lasted up to a whole year to complete. I can't speak for those who only play 3-8 hour missions, but there's a whole wide world of different persistent scenario's out there on various multiplayer servers where the ability to have dynamic FARPS would be a huge benefit.

This is encouraging to hear. It sounds like the Pimax is the only VR headset (I'm aware of) that's actually really gunning for the sim community at the moment. WMR is going the way of the dodo, Varjo Aero is all but sold out, and their new headset appears to be designed for something else (both with features and price tag), and I don't think I could consider a headset that doesn't support DFR for futureproofing moving forward. It's good to hear that DFP should give me similar performance to the G2. I just know that YMMV is very real in the VR scenario. Hardware, machine specs, and personal tolerances all play a role that seem to make experiences very different from one person to the next. I read numerous people are dropping the resolution for VR below the native resolution (such as DP to 0.8 in DCS) - but when I do that, I can't stand the image. Others find motion reprojection woeful, but I found it great (until about 6-12 months ago where something changed for me and now it's horrible and I don't know why). I'd prefer to run at 90hz - but honestly, if 72hz is really that much better than 60 - I could be tempted to either use that as a fallback if needed, or otherwise to bump up some extra nice graphics in DCS. But at $2000USD - I'm wanting to cross all my i's and dot all my t's before I make this big decision and know that it's definitely going to work for me, and be the best option moving forward.

Thanks to all who have replied... With the 120Hz/60fps - are you using motion reprojection? Last night I had the idea of experimenting by moving DCS's slider to 45FPS with my HP Reverb set to 90Hz to see what it would be like. I did notice the staggering for objects that were closer or moving much faster. It was very noticeable when doing a roll in the FA18 on 'free flight' in Georgia. What I'm not sure about though, is whether that's just 45FPS itself, or whether that's a condition of 45FPS being used with a 90Hz display. it made sense (in my mind) that halving the FPS should avoid staggering - just obviously having less frames - but I can't help but think that what I see on my monitor, and in VR are two very different results. Motion reprojection used to work brilliantly for me. 45fps (at 90hz) was a dream, and I could even get down to 30fps with a good experience. But something has changed in the last year now and motion reprojection is horrible. I don't know what it is, but I'm grateful I can now achieve 90fps in 99% of cases, but I'm always on the look for contingency options should they be needed.

You're definitely not alone. I believe the FM has changed significantly. You can get some decent AoA now in the hornet too - a lot of fun (but warning - you can lose a lot of energy very quickly too now doing so ). I also suspect that drag has been reduced in some configurations as well. (The after burner definitely seems to have more effect than before). The change is deliberate. I don't believe we'll be going back to the way it was - but in the same time - there's nothing saying that it won't be continually tweaked to be more realistic again sometime in the future if the SME's/Dev's believe it's not quite there yet. As for the perceived delay - I'm a massive survey of one person - so others may have a different experience, or I may not be as observant.

At the moment this function already exists, but just for the Vigen, so it seems that it doesn't have to apply to other units - it comes down to what the dev's decide. None of us really know what decisions are made or the reasons for them behind closed doors. Anyway - time will tell whether these features are released with the CH-47 or not.

HP Reverb with a 4090 and DLSS is fantastic. Allows me to hit 90fps continuously. Text is slightly softer with it on vs off, but I don't get the blurry that others seem to be reporting. It's surprising to see such a wide variety of results with some people getting what sounds to be unreadable/unusuable, but others having little problem. I wonder what the different factors are causing this.

Not sure where the paranoia is. It would make marketing sense to exclude something that could be included in a release of a module to encourage sales. I'm not saying that's what they're doing - but I'm not saying that it's not a possibility. If anything, I'm being optimistic - not paranoid - because I'd be delighted if we end up with these features with the CH-47 and C-130. That would be far better than the alternative that you're suggesting - that it's not worth the effort for them, and we'd never see it.

I'm hoping that the release of the CH-47 and C130 is going to bring us a lot more in DCS when it comes to troops, logistics and mission progression in general. In particular I would love to see: Animation of actual troop embarking and disembarking Revisit to sling loading and hopefully fixing issues with physics that cause slingshotting. Introduction of the COW (mobile FARP) for refueling/rearming/repairing of other units. Dynamic Spawn point creation on the map / the ability to create new client/player spawn slots in real time. There is so much more potential for things other than combat that can be done in DCS. MOOSE, a variety of different script writers, server owners and mission designers have managed to graft in some of these abilities with some hacking - but for it to be fully functional and native to DCS would just be a dream. The ability to bring in non-combat players who fly 'the other civilian flight simulator' into an environment where they can contribute to a progressive multiplayer campaign without having to worry about combat operations - but where their flight has real impact on other people and not just flying virtual cargo on a MP server has the potential to reach out to a lot more people than combat alone does.

I have no idea, but I do have one suggestion for you to try for debugging. In your user\saved games directory you will find a DCS (or DCS.BETA) folder. Can you please try renaming that to DCS.OLD (to make a backup) on both computers. Then perform a DCS Repair on the main install. Once done, please start up DCS and see if the problem persists. If this has fixed it: This will confirm that it's either a setting or a MOD, or similar that is causing the issue. You can reverse your changes (see below) to get your original settings back and try and debug further knowing that it's a setting or a mod issue, or otherwise just reconfigure the new settings to your liking noting the changes you make until either the problem occurs again (thus telling you what the issue is), or until you get DCS configured to how you want it again without the issue, in which case - fixed. If it doesn't help: Close DCS. You will find that DCS created a new DCS (or DCS.BETA) directory there. Rename it to DCS.DELME. Then rename DCS.OLD back to DCS (or DCS.BETA - whichever it was originally). This will return your settings back to what you had. Once you confirm you're back to what you had originally you can delete the DCS.DELME directory (as this is just the new one DCS automatically created). Important Note: Renaming the DCS folder to DCS.OLD will remove your key bindings. You will need to rebind the basics back to do your testing (or after starting DCS, you can close, and copy the controller INPUT directory across from DCS.OLD to the new DCS directory to copy your conrol bindings only). Hope this helps. I'm unsure of what the issue may be, but since you didn't get any other replies, maybe this may help to diagnose.

Do you find locking to 45fps eliminates stuttering for you as it's exactly half of your refresh rate? (Or by saying you lock fps at 45, are you saying that you use motion reprojection)?

Sounds like a silly question, but my only experience in VR is the HP Reverb, which has 60hz and 90hz. 60FPS/hz might be OK with frames, but the fluorescent light like flickering isn't ideal, and I'm suspicious could be a contributing cause to headaches I sometimes get if I use it. 90FPS seems sweet. I was wondering if someone who has experienced 60hz, 72hz and 90hz could please comment. In particular, did you notice any flickering with 72hz (like at 60hz), or is 72 fast enough to smoothen it out? Also - is there any real perceivable difference when you're running at 72hz/72fps vs 90hz/90fps, or does one look as smooth as the other? I'm looking at the Pimax crystal. My concern is that I can hit 90fps at the moment with the HP Reverb, but not sure if I'll be able to hit it with the Pimax and was wondering if 72hz is a suitable fallback, or if it's going to have the same issues I currently face if i switch to 60hz?

I'm unable to test at the moment, but this does interest me. Do you have easy coms turned on or off? Also - what do you have your radio's transmitter turned to. (ie:) Does it behave differently if set to PVT / Int / 2 / etc?

What stick are you using? I'm not noticing any lag in the controls myself. The pitch is definitely more sensitive, but I'm able to AAR with little issue and without using AP . (The trick for me is fine movement of the stick - I literally only hold it with my thumb and index finger to make small movements), although I am running good hardware (VKB Gunfighter MCG). I personally am enjoying the increased challenge with AAR. It brings back that feeling of satisfaction all over again when able to nail it, although I realize that for many, the original AAR was difficult enough - and this new mode only makes it difficult. But there is good news in the way of a virtual assist as mentioned in the post above yours: If you're finding the movements too sensitive - try turning on autopilot. (But do not engage HDG or BALT modes! Only use ATTH at the very most). This will dampen the movement of the stick and you may find it helps, however I have not needed to do this, provided I use very fine adjustments and counter each movement after making the movement. You may have perceived lag, in that you make a movement, wait for it to react, and then countermove. In this case, you will always be behind the aircraft, and this will lead to PIO (among other issues). The idea is any correctional movement normally needs an anticipated counter-movement shortly after - and normally well before you even see the full reaction to the initial movement. This applies to throttle as well as stick and rudder. Do not mistake this as computer or application lag - I believe this is simulating real lag that we experience when flying. Hope this helps.

Well, we have evidence IRL that Apache's at least have had mobile repair available to them at non-airport / non-FARP locations. In this case, it seems a black hawk was all that was needed to fly in for repair of the helicopter. It may be that ED doesn't want to include general units being able to rearm/refuel/repair aircraft outside of FARP's due to marketing reasons. (ie - they may be planning on having this feature exclusive to the CH-47 to encourage more sales), although this would only really work in MP environments, and the general consensus is that MP is only a fraction of DCS sales, so who knows.

And confirming - that was the trick! Thanks again!

You replied exactly what I was thinking. Thanks. As mentioned in the OP - this is a low priority suggestion, but given that ED sometimes have a few spare resources for a bit of the more 'fun' stuff (like the halloween mods) - I figure it can't hurt putting these suggestions up to see if some of them gain traction. I'm just also now thinking of some of the high quality cinematics that are made with DCS, and the kids of stuff that could be done with emergency vehicles at the airfield too now.

+1 - Brilliant suggestion!

Aaah - that should do it, as I've got a custom livery. I'll give that a try when I'm back home on my gaming rig. Thank you!

Absolutely - it would also be immersive for SP. That's why I mentioned that it could be used by campaign creators as well as having an option for it to come out automatically. From the MP side - people in CA don't have to sit around for hours waiting. The beauty about combined arms is that you can control many different vehicles, so someone such as a game master can be controlling enemy units - but also control emergency vehicles to add to that immersion. Even a player in an aircraft has the ability to control units whilst in the aircraft from the F10 map - so even a wingman (if they had CA) could get the trucks to move on their buddy. We've had a lot of fun in MP using combined arms 'on each other' to add to the immersion. There are a bunch of different options available for it's utilization - so there's no need for someone to sit around in a simulated fire engine for hours hoping someone declares an emergency for it to be effective with CA. I just understand that automation adds a whole new area of workload, so if it's too difficult to do the automation side of things, even just starting off with having these vehicles available and controllable by triggers and CA would be a great start.

Well, it's looking like it'll be the only option from Varjo. Aero's appear to be sold out at the moment, so I guess Pimax is the only one playing in this arena until the XR-4 comes out (and who knows what the price will be).

Hi @BIGNEWY, The problem is that these need to be placed in the mission editor before the mission is ran. I think what the OP is asking is that being able to refuel and rearm from trucks means that you could have dynamic FARPS during the actual mission, and not rely on the mission editor putting them in set places. You just drive them to where they're needed at that time. @Lau - FYI - using MOOSE it would be possible to spawn in new FARP locations dynamically. There would be a bit of coding involved in doing ths (and you'd need to also place in the 4 unit types required along with that FARP). This wouldn't operate as you're wanting (ie, be able to move the FARP from one location to another), but it could be a work-around depending on what you are wanting to do. I've seen this used before to progress the front line. It doesn't allow for dynamic spawn points - but it is possible with some work. I also don't know - but there may be a "COW" coming (mobile FARP) in the form of a Chinook when it's released. (I don't know, but I'm kinda hoping).

Really a low priority request, but if you're ever working on any of the units for an update, it would be great to have emergency vehicles/fire trucks and follow me vehicles with flashing lights as part of core DCS. If you do this, please make them so they can be controlled via Combined Arms (turn on/off flashing lights, and even spray water). I think it would make for a more immersive experience on MP if someone declares an emergency, and after landing is greeted by vehicles, along with getting water poured over them, not to mention that campaign creators could utilise this. Maybe this could also be considered if you're working on the new ATC - if the units could come out automatically if an emergency landing is declared? Obviously this isn't a high priority one, but if you're tinkering around with ground units... just adding it for consideration.

Almost too late to the party... deadline is 3 days away and I've just noticed this thread now while searching for discussions on the crystal. I have some questions I was hoping you may be able to assist with: Dynamic Foveated Rendering If I purchase one of these, I'll be coming from a HP Reverb to the Pimax Crystal. I notice that DFR should help free up resources on my GPU, but at the same time, the Crystal's headset is 5760x2880, whereas the Reverb is 4320 x 2160 - meaning that the HP reverb only has 56% of the pixels compared to the Pimax (or the pimax res is nearly twice as large). Will the DFR provide better performance than I'm seeing on the HP Reverb, or will the resolution of the headset offset any potential performance increases, and/or actually demand more from my GPU? Refresh Rate I've been doing some searches, and I'm seeing a reference to a "Pimax Crystal Sim" headset - which apparently supports 72hz - whereas other specs I'm seeing on the Pimax Crystal seem to show from 90hz upwards. Is the "Sim" headset just a firmware update, and do all Pimax Crystals support 72hz, or would I need to purchase a 'sim' version to reduce down to 72hz? Discount Code / International Ordering Is it OK for me (living in Australia) to purchase one of these direct from the link above, or do I need to go through local suppliers for an Australian purchase? (And if I go locally, would that mean I miss out on the discount code)? Steam Games I've looked at some games on Steam, that say that they support steam headsets, and (the soon to be defunct) WMR headset. Can I play steam games on the Pimax Crystal, or only certain games like DCS? Thanks... DZ

While I agree with you that a full 180 snap may not be necessary, it's worth taking the following consideration with your calculations: First, VR headsets with 130° views are not measurements of the left-right view, but diagonal range- which is a combination of horizontal plus vertical views. (In the same way that an 80 inch TV isn't 80 inches horizontal - but less), so additional allowance needs to be made for this. Additionally, some (most?) VR headsets are not crisp but blurry when viewing the far edges due to the lenses, etc - which would need to also have consideration and allow for the view to rotate a little further to get objects into a more clear part of the view. So, while 180° may not be necessary, I think the best option is allowing the user to configure what that range would be. Each person's situation will be different. (Mobility, horizontal view, and blur, plus maybe other factors we haven't even considered). That way it works for all who need it, regardless of what limitations they may or may not have.