dlder

still valid for 2.9.17.11733

Thanks!

still valid for 2.9.16.10973.1

DCS 2.9.16 no update to missile lua -> mod is still current

DCS now provides us with the current DLSS version (310.2.1.0), so no more swapping needed. It's also possible to force the new preset "K" via autoexec.cfg DLSS_Preset = "K" (thanks to Tallymouse for that one!) Is there a way to also force OverrideAutoExposure = true ? Could should help with blurriness / washing out...

DCS 2.9.15.9408 missile lua not changed, so 1.09 is still compatible

Sounds awesome! I thought Flaming Cliffs jets can communicate "with everyone", because they don't have tuneable and multiple radios? I never specified any frequencies when playing around in the ME. But I hear you: it's not so easy as to just "exchange the jet" and "set the loadout" in the ME. That would take like 5 min per mission

When I buy the campaign: is it unencrypted maybe, so that I can change the plane myself?

Would love to buy and play this campaign; could you please add the Flaming Cliffs versions of these planes as well? Or is the campaign unencrypted and I can do that myself? Cheers!

Sweet, ty!! Btw.: I've posted my Tacview here; what you can't see is the wingman 3 getting destroyed when taxiing out of the hangar, as I've already corrected that. But you can see that even with ARM missiles, the A-4E don't attack the SAMs and get shot down. But another issue presented itself while viewing the Tacview file: the enemy MiG-21 didn't attack us -> they just returned to their respective airports!? I've attacked one of the MiGs escorting the A-50, and I thought it very weird that it didn't move or defend while I closed the distance. I had my radar on, so it should've seen me and react. Cheers mate!

Well, even equipped with ARM the A-4E didn't manage to shoot even missile, destroy even 1 SAM... Yep, that's the one... Should I upload a track file or wouldn't the mission file be better in this case? Scheibenkleister... is this the forum for the Full Fidelity F-5E? 'cause I'm using the "FC4" ("F-5E_FC" or "F-5E-3_FC") DCSWorld\Mods\aircraft\F-5E_FC\Missions\Single\F-5E FC Caucasus - AWACS.miz

I've played the mission and in flight a message popped up saying the SEAD flight was unable to knock out the SAMs and I should return to base. In TacView I saw that they didn't fire any missiles... Loading the mission in the ME revealed, that both SEAD flights had no ARMs loaded. Problem #2 my 3rd Wingman was positioned in the hangar of the static F-4 and pretty much destroyed itself trying to Taxi out of the hangar. Repositioning the jet to a "free" hangar resolves that problem.

DCS 2.9.14 I don't need to update my mod, because the missile lua hasn't changed. Which is weird, because apparently ED made some changes to the Aim-120 ? There shouldn't be any other place for missile specific data, so I do wonder if it wasn't pushed in this update and coming may at a later date?

Well, you can use DLSS 4 - meaning the new DLL. True. But as soon as you use the new Transformer model you will loose performance. That's not only my finding, but also from tech review sites (trustworthy ones, not Youtuber clickbait shills). Why would that be any different in DCS? And about the better quality: at least FlightSimGuy cannot comment on that. If you play on downgraded graphic settings, you cannot say anything definitive at all. Then again: I made no claim, that the quality doesn't change. Me personally haven't seen any difference to a newer DLSS 3 dll then the one supplied by DCS + changing the Preset from the default C to F. As far as FG goes: as long as ED doesn't implement it, you can force it however you like. FG or MFG have to be supported in-engine! And that is currently not the case. ED is looking into it, but again: this feature is only usable on FPS > 60 and MFG will need refresh rates > 120Hz. Or else [M]FG will make the game look and feel way worse. So, if you're like me and maxing graphical quality, and you barely reach 60 FPS, then I'm doubtful FG will help...

Yeah, I've seen his videos. And although I really like his content, he's quite honestly a bit "overenthusiastic", if you know what I mean^^ Also, he doesn't show any comparison, just says "it's game changing and amazing" and what not. Well... it's not. At least not yet. At least not at that performance level. You can read any review: the new transformer model DOES cost performance vs. the older GN model and although it can be better at times (reducing flickering), a lot of times you just can't tell (like in blind tests). And it can also introduce graphical errors (with shadows for instance). All that is to say: it's not so clear as "VR Flight Sim Guy" makes it out to be! -> also: yes, you can lower your VR (pixel density) and graphics settings, but what's the point, really? Why have a good-looking SIM and a high-resolution HMD (Crystal, not the Quest3, lol) and then play with <profanity>ty graphics? (as a side note: this video didn't cover J vs. K preset and also, you don't need to use "MT" folder any longer. It's always multi-threaded now and there is no special MT folder / branch anymore. It's deprecated and will be removed soon (I was told).