peachmonkey

I'd scale the expectations down a bit. We still haven't gotten the delayed fusing for this bird so we could attempt to recreate the very missions this plane got its fame for. The lack of wwii release consistency or an indication of even a slightest hint to a 'roadmap' that ED operates by all of the "wants" raised by the community members turn wwii2 forum section in to a simple gossip soup. Do I want all of these ideas come to fruition? Absolutely. Will they actually happen? 100% nope.

anything is possible at this point it'd be nice if ED introduced a procedure check, i.e. report with "negative" when requesting the conflicting/overlapping tasks.

@grafspee @VIKBELL thank you, guys, I guess i'll just stick to what's working..

In a thread about K4's tendency to pitch up at all times/tail heavy behavior I saw yo-yo's response how he didn't see a problem in operation since they're using the FFB system (he didn't state the manufacturer) without the pesky springed return-to-center 'conventional' joysticks. Not sure if it translates to ED's using FFB for the actual AC testing though...

hi, all, is anyone having an issue with P47 when requesting the ground electric power it only gets turned on if there are no other requests being processed? Example of it not working: 1) press \ 2) request ground electric power to ON 3) get a 'copy' back 4) request refueling 5) get a 'copy' back 6) refuel completes, get "fueling completed" 7) electric power never gets turned ON Above is one of the examples. Another is rearming, or essentially with any command that gets a 'copy' after I request electric power the power never gets delivered. The only way to successfully request/receive electric power is when the procedure never overlaps with any other requests, i.e.: 1) request electric power 2) get a copy back 3) wait for it to get delivered and only after that start with other procedures, such refueling/rearming..etc... I understand that compared to the real life such servicing procedures are sequential, however if in-game we can request refueling/rearming in a single take why is electric power is so different?

please tell me ED will release it soon, as in like.. soon soon.. Since the teaser video that's literally the ONLY thing I've been waiting for pretty please!

I tried the destruction levels as triggers on the Channel Map and even though the visuals were really fascinating the performance hit to my VR was extreme, the fps dropped to 10fps or less, this was about 6-8 months ago, not sure if there were any improvements done to optimize the destroyed scenery.

it was a one click before

hi, Andre, I have a question about the Engine Beat in A8 using the Sound Module: - when on the ground, just started the engine there's some serious variations in sound intensity that seem to go in and out when the engine is on idle, and it's not repeating in any standard pattern, it may happen every 10 seconds, or every 30 seconds, or less frequent. It's very difficult to describe. I'm not sure if you'd have any insight into that.. can they tied be to some sort of engine resonance ? Is there any debug options to see what DCS is outputing to your app so I can capture the moment when it's happening? (not sure if it'd help with anything). I've been trying to figure this out for quite some time as it's been pretty annoying. I want to have the engine beat at a maximum so I know the bird is alive, but these huge fluctuations are rather aggressive...

navigating to the subforums is a pain in the ass. Why such a drastic change, was it hurting something/someone? Imagine a noob trying to find anything now..

can't find Virtual Reality forum anymore... wth did it go...

too bad Reshade doesn't work with OpenXR. ED needs to fix this <profanity> for ALL users regardless of their VR gear/environment.

I'm with @grafspee on this "issue", even though it's not an issue at all... unless it's about some VERY specific engine settings someone tries to achieve in DCS. otherwise as long as I stick to the points below I never had any engine problems: - keep the oil temps in the blue zone during ANY engine load - keep the carb temps in the blue zone during ANY engine load - don't use turbo on deck in normal flight situations - use turbo only above 6k ft - keep engine RPM's in green (2600) - keep manifold at around 46" - full MAX power with max turbo+2700+max manifold + WATER = will get you ~10 mins of WEP. This is achieved at any alt. I had a failure ONCE where I was climbing at 2600 and ~50" manifold.. but don't remember if it was the temps or the fact the manifold was in RED >50". Will test this out and see..

sure, that'd be ideal but how long would that take? I feel that ED is hesitant to introduce 'weak' damage modeling due to the possible negative PR in the form of "hey, look, I can destroy a cruiser with a single 500kg bomb, soo realistic lol.." vs. the current model of "u want to kill a ship? Tough <profanity> bro!", which is in my opinion anti-consumer (lol, for me personally), because I WANT to destroy them but I simply can't.

you have a VERY clean set up. Grats! I'm too ashamed to post the picture of my complete setup that is full of wires, more wires.. and yet more wires .. It looks like I've built some electrical powered bird nest around my chair ..

my pet peeve with the current naval assets is: - no damage modeling - extremely difficult/impossible to destroy/inflict any damage whatsoever Because of it I completely ignore them in any mission hosted on any server. There's no gratification whatsoever in fighting them. They are simply static undestructable objects and any mission objectives against them are completely pointless. My simple ask was to introduce a "game" damage model for them at least for now. Add a modifiable "hardness" or "ruggedness" or "strength to them so the mission maker can include them in the achievable objectives, etc. DCS is a sandbox. Give us this sandboxness in the naval warfare as well.

heck, I'm so in love with the Anton that I built this 30 momentaryOn-neutral-MomentaryOn toggle (60 button) deck so I can start the bird up as quickly as possible.. in VR... hah.. Difficult? totally.. Practical? maybe.. Fun? 100% YES

going in to the weeds here... I feel I will lose some of you here.. like any computer game out there it is to stimulate your imagination. The older you get the whole fantasy machine in your head changes the requirements for its operation. Those "requirements" are in this case known to you only and it is you who consciously and subliminally sets them based on your life long experience sprinkled with the expectations of dopamine generation during the whole "fun" portion of the interaction with the game. And on top of it, just like in the real world interactions with objects/light, your brain is really good at filling in the gaps within the presented simulated "reality" in order to deliver the immersion that you desperately seek. During this trade-off/filling the gaps game you can make conscious adjustments, i.e. force yourself to accept the obvious discrepancies within the presented simulation. Sometimes it's very easy, and sometimes it's very hard and/or impossible. But the main key here is that extremely subjective and it is YOU who are fully in charge of it. Hence the questions you raised are addressed to you for the most part. Personally, ever since I got in to computer gaming in the late 80's and with the advent of the cockpit based flight simulators I longed for the full scope interactivity with the buttons presented on the screen as it was one of the most important immersion factors necessary for me to experience the elusive immersion of the powered unadulterated hard-core flight (I'm in to WWII stuff up to my eyeballs). IL2 offered enough for it to be my focus for 5 years, but not anymore. Now it's either DCS warbirds or go home.

hheh.. obviously a royal capital VR is much better than just a mere peasant vr .. noted! glad you got it working, @Darpa!

this was the topic I was referring:

there was a topic where Bignewy was commenting, it was about the very issue Darpa is experiencing.. looking, need to find it

short of reinstalling everything, see if you can get DCS running with OpenXR instead of OpenVR. My suggestion here is not fixing your current problem, but rather reconfigure the current corrupted config to try OpenXR. Check this topic out, it's a pretty simple config, however it needs a 3rd party build of the openVR 'interceptor' to funnel it in to OpenXR framework.

you can run the dedicated server on the same machine where you play. In some instances it offers an increased performance since the CPU load is split between 2 or more cores, i.e. core1 for server and core2 for client, vs. a single core processing everything in SP. Give it a try, it's definitely a plus.

I'm not ridiculing anyone specific here, Don. I'm ridiculing the whole topic because all it has is how everybody 'feels'. I feel great today. I'm sure you do too. If this is a technical correction/configuration/modification etc, then there must be a way to show the Before and After state of the matter. Until someone produces the visual evidence this topic will continue be met with some hefty dose of skepticism. Everyone's dying to get to the bottom of this. It's that serious.

and here's the religious talk I've talked about..