BHawthorne

IMHO, it's well worth $40. It's about as detailed as a sim can get. I also bought mine a while back for $40. I just picked up 2 copies tonight to gift to friends though.

Just saw that DCS A-10C is on sale for the next 9 hours for $9.99. Get it while it's cheap if any of you have been on the fence. The key works fine with DCS World's A-10C module. The clock is ticking... http://store.steampowered.com/app/61010/

To clarify, the Steam key works with DCS: World. Don't install using Steam, just use the Steam key on the Eagle Dynamics DCS World A-10C module. All the installers are located on this site. Only the key is needed from Steam. The Steam DCS A-10C install is incompatible with DCS World. They key is compatible though. ALSO NOTE: DCS: A-10C is currently on sale for the next 9 hours at $9.99 on Steam as the Community's Choice pick.

Ah, knew there had to be some reasoning. I was working under the assumption that the old format had functional tools and didn't require tons of manual manipulation and guru level knowledge. Wishful thinking on my part. :) I just hope edge will allow input of GeoTIFFs for elevation and orthoimagery for data entry. Seems common for GIS and a lot of public domain data is out there. From there we could use a pen tool and just draw in vector format things like airports and building placement and terrain types. I can wish I guess.

Then there is no real impediment to doing old style maps other than people just want to use the latest tools and engine? IMHO, there is merit using the old theater format right now just to give diversity of options to people. The rules for the game changed significantly when ED opened to third party development. I see no real reason to mess with edge format when the old can work and it'll get more content out via third parties in the near term. Third party devs waiting on edge to emerge is an impediment to the DCS engine right now. Since it is, I see no reason to wait on edge. Just make a theater in the old format as a proof of concept. I'm all for working on one myself if I can find the tools. To me, edge is some nebulous thing. I prefer to work in knowns and the old format is known and exists right now. I just don't understand why other people don't see it that way and are in limbo.

Does that mean the old map will no longer be able to be used or just that DCS World will have two different terrain engines built in? The question while tedious might mean once answered that some people might start making maps even if it is the old format.

Unless they're going to re-do the old map in edge, it'll have to be. I've heard rather emphatically that they're not going to re-do the old map. :) I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here. If the old map tools are available, there is zero eta on edge, why not just make a new map using old tools when people will be flying the old map too anyways and are used to it's fidelity? If the tools are in fact available, I see no issue in a third party making something new in the old format?

No, you need public domain content such as USGS national map data. Don't mess with FSX scenery files. Well, you could do USGS geoTIFF -> FSX -> DCS World, but that seems convoluted to me, especially if the tool doesn't exist. I already know how to do USGS GeoTIFF -> FSX. USGS provides both elevation data and orthoimagery in the public domain. I thought people said tools exist for the old format? USGS has all the elevation and imagery we'd need to make the terrain minus buildings. THen the hard work would come with airport CAD and building placement. But if the tools exist, it's just time to burn. It blows my mind that considering the amount of time put into the Nevada forum thread alone we could have a theater terrain data converted over to something useful in the old format and on the way to adding in the required airports and building and other necessary tie-ins. It's almost as though everyone wants someone else to do it for them instead of expending the time on it themselves. SOmeone point me to the old tools and I'll see if I can get started on a theater I have in mind for Smoky Hill ANG Range.

It's a simple question to ask. Will the old format still be backwards compatible on edge? Simple question. Ask the question, get the answer then proceed on with something new. Heck, I'm willing to do an example map project if the tools are there. :smilewink:

Slightly different topic than my last post... What is really holding anyone up from making a continental US, or European map in the old engine? THere was mention that the tools exist already. Even if it's not edge format, do you think people wouldn't use or buy it? Looking from a different angle. My assumption with edge is that the engine is the hold up, not the map SDK. Is there anything preventing people from asking Wags about edge map SDK tools even though the engine isn't ready, or are the tools still in flux because the engine is? If edge has no solid release date, I'm almost of the mindset just to get 5-6 of us DCS users together and use USGS national map data orthoimagery and elevation geoTIFFs to make a few theaters (that aren't Nevada) using the old format.

Ok, now that is funny. It also best describes FSX in a concise manner. FPS? What is that at ground level and FSX? :megalol: Heck PMDG could make a KC-135, C-130 and KC-10 that is functional. Some of the big birds. If PMDG is at the AVSIM convention at the Kansas Aviation Museum in May Justin and I can give them full access to the museum KC-135 for reference. It was gifted from the state of Kansas to the museum, so it's not under the same restrictions the USAF lend aircraft are.

Three Optoma GT720. They're the older version of what Flim just bought for his setup. I've been using them pretty consistently in my gaming setup since 2010.

The trick to that is the wife always needs a crazier hobby than you have. :megalol:

3 camera + panel doesn't look bad. 36 fps is bearable.

Yep, the thing about flight sims is when you start using multi-display your fps tanks. That is the advantage of actually using 720p over 1080p. To many that's backward logic, but for me I've witnessed the difference. I'm all for GT750's. I love my GT720's even if they're nowhere as crisp as 1080p is. For me short-throw big picture FPS trumps resolution. I'm really interested in seeing Flim's setup with flat walls, because I've always done curved. It's a new thing for me and I like learning new things. :) I'm curious on the camera views, are you spanning 90 FOV on each with the left-front-right doing 270? I'm wanting to do 120 FOV spans on three to do 360 rear projection

A lot of that is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of KS. I'm not talking a $2 million pledge. I'm talking a small infusion of cash to "kickstart" things. A lot of people have lost sight at just what Kickstarter is for, it's not for big bucks. It targets specialized small audiences with reasonable fund raising goals. These big funds lately are out of whack from what KS is really about.

I'm all for third party DCS kickstarters. Maybe even doing a kickstarter for Nevada just to get the new terrain engine done and funded.

I suggest no greater than 120 degree FOV per camera. Any more and you get the typical odd triplehead distortion effect on the sides.

$12 to buy into an Alpha? Sounds like The War Z. :megalol:

An i7 3ghz with two 5970 was a decent system in 2009-2010 timeframe. 2013 it's old tech. At issue is you've got an i7 but only 3ghz? Also 5970 are 2 GPU cards so you have 4 GPUs but as Crossfire doesn't work with DCS, 3 of the GPUs are dead weight. 10GB of ram is an aweful odd number. You running something like 2x4GB and 2x1GB? Which socket type? Back then a lot of i7's were 1366 socket and used triple channel memory configuration. That doubly makes 10GB make no sense. As far as smooth, I've yet to see Quadfire work smooth on anything. It's a benchmark gimmick setup. That being said, every custom camera view you add halves performance. So, you run 3 cameras and a panel you're 1/4th the performance of single camera view.

This isn't flying Los Angeles to Tokyo with a widebody passenger jet, this is theater operations. I see little advantage to huge maps and many downsides. I'd rather have quality over quantity when it comes to map detail. Something large map flight sims have never gotten right is terrain scaling. Photoreal scenery still can look like crap at 30cm in FSX with pop-ins and tile loading lag. It's horrid for world sized scenery engines.

Ya, that'll never happen. :smilewink:

IF you do it natively within the NVIDIA driver SoftTH is redundant for that purpose.

On the NVIDIA side of the fence this is possible. Set for 1650x1050 native then go into custom resolution setup. Make one for 1920x1080 then set your scaling to full screen in the NVIDIA control panel. The NVIDIA driver will driver scaler up to a 1920x1080 virtual resolution using your 1650x1050 native. This is something AMD doesn't have readily available in it's driver hince those that know AMD might say that it's not possible. This is one of the perks on the NVIDIA side of the fence. Be mindful that this is a scaler thing and not native so text legibility might be affected. You can fake higher resolution but your display only has so many pixels and that is a fixed native resolution. I've used this to do 2560x1440 on 1080p screens. I wanted to test my system capabilities to see if it was worth upgrading to those new 27" 1440p panels. You can fake it for testing this way. This is a little known function NVIDIA can do. Almost no one is aware of the NVIDIA driver level scaler engine. It's not something they market or do PR on.

The sim centers I've assisted with in Colorado and Kansas all use a $1-2/minute pricing. If you can't fall within that price range and make it cost effective for both you and the customer you're not going to have a consumer base. Be mindful that you should do things in 15-20 incremental bookings with 5 minute control briefing and 10-15 flights. The price of admission needs to be within the disposable income of anyone that might drop in on impulse. The customer is welcome to buy as much seat time as they want as long as there is space for them for booking beforehand. This works well at airshows (if you've got the inside track on how to be a part of the airshow circuit) and the seat times book up rather fast. Most people don't want a flight school. They want a birthday or work party where people can hop into several cockpits and dogfight each other in sim-lite mode. You need throughput on customers -- quantity, not fidelity. Even in large million+ population cities, you're going to have a hard time keeping seats filled if you go the study sim route. FC3 might be a good option or Falcon BMS in arcade mode. You will have pilots show up and want high fidelity stick time, but they're 1:50 or 1:100 customers. Account for both but optimize for throughput. They tend to be the big spenders, but big spender is a relative term. Expect them to book for an hour seat time and probably no more than $150 price. Those are often sold as high fidelity gift certificate seat times with full flight instructor assistance the length of the flight over comms. Often given to pilots as presents. Never expect $600 or $1200 from anyone unless it's a fully booked party. The sim setup should be high durability, medium fidelity simpits and have projection visuals. It's more important that the simpit be durable and last than to be high fidelity. Customers will tare up high fidelity simpits through regular use. Either single front facing projector or a dual or triple surround system. I've installed all three types into sim centers. The simpits need to be installed in even pairs. 2, 4, 6, 8, etc... This is strictly to address the multi-player dogfighting aspect of the sim center. Start out with 2 and build up your business every 6 months with larger shop lease and more sims as needed to best balance your income and what the market in your area will yield. This is the "secret" business formula most use. If you can't make that work cash positive, don't try it.