Dangerzone

Yes - you can. in order to get the deck to pitch, you need the swell up. In order to increase swell, you will need to increase the wind (significantly). Unfortunately DCS doesn't cater for the concept that swells aren't necessarily caused by local conditions, (IRL they can be developed by conditions thousands of kms away where they can build up), so at present in DCS - the amount of swell (hence deck pitch) you have will be directly proportional to the amount of surface wind that you have in DCS. Turn up the wind significantly (at the surface) to the max and you should see a bit of pitch on the bow. Then adjust back until you get your desired result.

I've been asleep for a few months, and missed it. Where's the news about the German map coming this month please!??!

Hi Bignewy, Did ED ever get back to you since Dec about this? Just getting a little worried that we've heard nothing since. I appreciate that ED have a lot to do, but just a bone thrown our way so we have an idea of what the future looks like for the possibility with our mission making would be very welcome. Cheers DZ

Hmm... I could have sworn it was in the file of at least one config somewhere, but I could be wrong. I'm not with my DCS computer at the moment, but my guess is maybe it has to do with modifier buttons, and if you're not using those, then it may not be a factor for you. Also thanks for the solution vote. You'd be surprised how many people don't... (or how many actually vote their own post saying thanks )

Good news: You won't have to remap each one. Bad news: Your game devices will have a new ID after a new install of windows. You'll need to find out what the new ID is (simplest way is to make a change to one aircraft you don't use - such as the free one), and then inspect the file that's created. You'll see it's a different ID to all your old/backed up ones. Then you'll need to search and replace for this ID in both the filename and the contents of each file in the config folder to update them to use the new device ID.

Just wondering if anyone can tell me what are the differences/benefits between using this vs DSMC or other existing save scripts such as Ciribobs save scripts? Is this designed to be an official implementation of existing 3rd party functionality (like the VOIP system seemed to be for SRS - another way of achieving the same thing but simpler for general users and official?), or does it bring something new and not seen before?

It's my understanding this has only occurred since DCS went to 2.9.10 (double digits in the subversion). Skatezilla is aware of this, and I believe it will be fixed when he releases the next update. However at present he hasn't been able to donate a lot of his personal time into the development of late due to other life matters - but watch this space. In the mean time, it falsely reporting an update available isn't going to cause any issues, as long as you're aware of it, just ignore it for now.

I'm wondering if ED are making a rod for their own back here when they try and make it 'backwards compatible' for all the missions, and whether it would be better to treat it like Normandy, and have Caucasus 2 released, with the original still being available. Users can choose which one they want to play on, and leave it to the mission makers to update their missions to be compatible on v2 if they want to support those missions with the new map? I imagine this would be far less work for ED, and give them more flexibility to improve with less restrictions, and give an opportunity for updates to be released far earlier. Don't get me wrong - I think the desire to keep it backwards compatible to minimize the workload to mission designers to upgrade is an admirable one... I just wonder though if it's more trouble than it's worth long term if the same thing could be achieved by having a v1 and v2 version of the terrain?

Thing is... when they did it with DLSS, they had no issues with disclosing some video footage was done with DLSS. Nothing has been said here, so if anything it probably points to DLSS being further away than what DLSS was when they did the 2024 and beyond one? Obviously this is all complete speculation - with nothing being said we don't know. Wags did mention in his video though that community communication was one of the focus areas they were going to be putting more attention to - so hopefully we might get some sort of official statement regarding whether it was used here at some stage.

Thank you ED for developing a save game feature in DCS. I know this is still in development, but while it is - can I please put forward a request to ensure the the save game (and load/restore feature) available to access via API/Scripting environments (for both the save and the restore functions) so that those who have custom missions and are running multiplayer server environments can automate the save and restore feature where necessary. I don't know if this was part of the initial consideration, or if it's being designed for more manual control (such as SP save/restore features, or for a server admin to save and restore via the server web page) - but PLEASE ensure that both these functions can be called via script/lua - as I believe it's going to be vital to many to be able to configure the save and restore via script as well please.

If the F35 paves the way for other classified aircraft to be released in a 'best guess' scenario without needing declassification - such as an AC-130, SU-57, or FA-18E/F ... I'm all for it! I was always under the impression classified aircraft weren't going to be an option because this was a simulator and there wasn't going to be any 'guessing' involved, but if there's new rules coming out now that allow 'best guesses from airshow demonstrations' and other limited release information with the rest of the blanks filled in, I'm OK with that.

I believe MAXsenna is right. The files are cached. The only part of the download that is discarded to my knowledge is files that are partially download and not completed. (There seems to be a lot of individual files downloaded and cached). So if the first file was a large file, and it was partially through - then maybe that could cause it to start again from scratch with the same amount of time, but TBH - I'd be looking at MB remaining to download, and not the time (nor the other MB remaining which includes MB cached locally yet to be unpacked which is done at the very end).

I didn't see anything wrong with the video. Good content, some nice new reveals, excellent graphics, etc - and the DCE teaser too is a very welcome inclusion. (I was wondering if they were going to have that, and how they could pull that off and still have the same type of 'beyond' video as in the past. I think they did well). That said, I think I know where you're coming from though. Trailers, reveals, and announcements no longer spark the same excitement for me as they used to either. Even though there's some upcoming modules I will no doubt buy when released, I too no longer experience that 'kid at Christmas' enthusiasm when watching these that I did a few years ago. I recognize for me though, that's not trailer or content creators fault. I’ve just simply adjusted my expectations. Still, I'm grateful for the video, and thought they did a terrify job. But while new features are often impressive in trailers and teasers, my experience has been that many releases seem to arrive in a partially developed state (which of course is understandable for EA). But the lack of follow-up or clarity on further updates and the time that passes sometimes has left me in no mans land as to final expectations vs initial impressions. ie: Dynamic Spawns - which is a fantastic tool I use and appreciate. But its potential could have been so much more just with the simple ability to dynamically create FARPs in-game as new spawn points. (A cry that's been sounding for years, and something we were hoping for with the D.S - but was an opportunity missed and now we know nothing of what to expect future wise). Similarly, the CH-47 brought exciting new possibilities for mission designers like myself - like serving as a logistics hub. The trailer showed the Humvee for instance in the back which I was hoping to be able to drive out and use with combined arms, talk of a mllk cow, etc. Will this happen? If so - how many years will we need to wait? The FA-18, which is now out of early access after many years - still lacking the DTC functionality is something that comes into calculating probabilities for those answers, as it's more realistic to expect these new features will follow the same release path as previous features. That doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to them, but I know that there's a difference between what the teasers imply and what we'll get. This isn’t to downplay the incredible work ED has accomplished. The game has seen some fantastic improvements over the past year that deserves recognition. But rather, to ask you to question whether the lack of enthusiasm you're experience isn't is really related to the quality of the video , or whether your statement that "ED can do better" with a video may be misdirected towards the content creators and rather could be an unrealized change in your own mindset and expectation? Segwaying - I was grateful to see DCE featured so much in the video. I know I'm in good company knowing it's greatly needed and waiting and hoping. The visuals shown in the video looks incredibly engaging, with epic ground battles that make me think "I hope this is truly reflective of what we can expect with a DCE". I'm not sure what more they could have done. But past experience have curbed my enthusiasm towards more of a 'that's nice', and 'will believe it when I see it' attitude. (Again, not that there's doubt it's coming, but more questions about how far away, plus what features the actual release and end product will really contain and what features will be 'remaining to be done' and how many years will pass between the initial release and full completion).

I would suggest an integer value. Seconds for repair., Setting from 0 to whatever the mission designer decides. This way, if they want a 5 minute repair... make it 300 seconds, instead of 150. Keep 150 as the default, but let the mission designer / server owner have the choice. If this was considered, I'd ask for a couple of other options to be thrown in at the same time. Refueling rate, and rearm rate - so you can increase or decrease the delays of these as well. Multiple birds with the one stone?

I'd appreciate it. I've got a number of guys I fly with that keep questioning me about recommendations with the headset. I don't want to recommend them based on my experience alone but want as many stores (good or bad) from other 'real life' users as to how their experience has gone so they can make a more informed decision themselves. Threads like this help because either way - they get to see what the support is like.

Please let us know how you go with your return/refund.

Yup. This ^^^. This discourages me off the 5xxx series. I can’t understand how anyone in marketing thinks it's a good idea to use this kind of spin or distortion, knowing it is opens them up expose them as misrepresenting - or being so cavalier with the truth. It leaves me me wondering—if they’re willing to misrepresent something so blatant, what might they be hiding in areas that are harder to verify? That said, maybe I’m out of touch with what truly affects multi-national corporations. Perhaps credibility doesn’t hold the same weight or have the same impact for them as it does for the smaller businesses I'm more familiar with directly - where credibility is a significant factor. Maybe this approach works better for their bottom line, and I’m just in the minority with how it turns me off.

Interesting... another thread with recollection, but no actual confirmation. Maybe it's implemented for all aircraft, but bugged and hasn't been addressed which is where the uncertainty comes from? I guess this is going to be one of those DCS mysteries where we can only guess, but not know for certain?

There’s have been rare unexpected damage done at low altitudes that have been put down to bird strike, both with myself, and others who I fly with in FF modules, so I thought it was functional. This makes me wonder if that’s not the case now and if there were other factors.

Bird strike only affects FC planes? Where did you get that information from? I thought it affected the high fidelity aircraft too?

it's my (limited) understanding that task switching out can do a couple of things: Firstly, certain input peripherals (keyboard, mouse, etc) may no longer be tracked by DCS during this time as the 'focus' has gone elsewhere. This may be freeing up some CPU resources in DCS (in which CPU bottlenecking can be a larger player when it comes to frames than even GPU. I was myself CPU bound with dips down to 15fps the other night in DCS with a 4090 running it in 2D while only in the mission editor - not flying - so there's definitely something going on there). The second thing is that I've been told (not sure how accurate) - that when you switch to another program, windows can free unused memory/buffer in the GPU's memory (and who knows - probably CPU as well?) - which may be making room for DCS to use more of these resources. There's a mountain of things that could be causing this, and it may be a different cause from one user to the next - even if the symptoms are similar. Given as NGreenaway has stated - it is a widespread (and long time) problem - my hope is that it's resolved with Vulkan when it's released. Until then - I'm afraid we're left to find a way to manage it ourselves.

I know that the size of DCS is one of those things that some have issues with, but honestly - I'd far prefer to have the maps downloaded locally than go that 'stream off internet' based solution another company has opted towards, even if that means I need additional storage to support it. Another alternative option is to install a copy of DCS on a NAS, external HDD, etc - and keep that version of DCS updated, and use the dcs_local_source.txt file function on your installed version of DCS to point to the NAS for the updating. This allows people to uninstall some maps from their local SSD if they need more room, and when they want to swap to another map, simply uninstall another map, and choose to install the map they want to use. The dcs_local_source.txt file if setup in the DCS Install directory with the path to the 'cached' install of DCS will simply copy the files across off the NAS/External HDD instead of having to download them all over again. Obviously having a 4TB SSD is the ultimate solution, but for those who are more financially restricted at the moment and still want to buy and use numerous maps but don't have the room to have them all installed at the same time - it's a good alternative to having to wait a looong time on slow internet connections to re-download a previously downloaded map.

Not sure if this would help me. I seem to be CPU bound, never GPU bound. Just this week I had the FPS dipping as low as 20 and all over the place, being CPU bound. 4090, and I was only in the mission editor - not even flying. Strangely, haven't had an issue so far when actually flying - so no idea what DCS was getting all bound up about (excuse the pun).

For bug replication and reporting there's no need to uninstall any mods at all - to have a mod-free version to test on. Instead you can simply: Rename the DCS folder in the saved games directory to DCS.OLD Launch DCS. (It will create a new vanilla configuration of DCS with no mods installed). Optional: Close DCS, and then copy the config\input directory from DCS.OLD to the new DCS folder so there's no rebinding of controls required. Re-RUN DCS and replicate the problem. Optional: Once done - close DCS - delete the DCS directory and rename DCS.OLD back to DCS to restore your previous setting. This makes it dead simple to have a clean setup of DCS with no mods, etc. It also helps with narrowing down the issue, because if the bug is caused by a bad configuration setting / mod / corrupt file or anything else that can exist in the config directory - it narrows this down almost immediately and allows you to re-setup DCS until you find the issue yourself. By having the configuration in the saved games directory (and not a bunch of windows registries all over the place) - ED really has made multiple configs, and debugging easy in this regards.

Especially if they never hang around to give an update on the situation - such as if it was resolved amicably in the end or not. Almost as handy as the "5 Star!! Fantastic product, great quality, real happy with it, even though I haven't had a chance to unpack it or use it yet" reviews I see left on various products too. I'm also very interested in the "plenty of other more serious and reputable brands", because I don't know of plenty in this sector at all - and if that has been exaggerated, then why would I trust the rest of the post. And +1 on the 'drive by review' quote - very appropriate.