Bosun

I don't see that as terribly unrealistic, per se. I think the human eye is highly capable of detecting things at long ranges, and you would naturally have a wider field of view the entire time you were looking, than the computer screen can represent. My only issue is the difference in advantage you get from playing at low resolutions. You could make it more difficult to see things in 1080 - or make it easier to seem them 4k - but one of those should happen, as it's quite silly to have a game that touts a beautiful experience, only to negate the incentive to experience it by having the advantages be so favorable to lower-end graphics settings for spotting.

I've been experimenting lately, after being frustrated at online scenarios where I cannot see other contacts, with playing at various resolutions. I was aware that lowering the resolution resulted in better spotting - but the difference is actually quite staggering. At 1080p, I could be competitive and aware. At 2k, I start to loose that edge. At 4k, I may as well have a blindfold on. In fact, I actually got behind someone by accident and didn't realize it until they popped above the horizon line once. It was the only kill I got that night. I'd love to see ED take in to consideration the scaling of physical pixels, with the LOD and pixelspace those LODs take up. I've got a 4090, with a 32inch monitor, and I still have to play the game at 1080p. While it looks beautiful at 4k in single player, in multi-player, it's just too severe a handicap to be worth it. The challenge of spotting in an online world is still limited by field of view, level of detail, and adaptive focus/dynamic range that the human eye has, and until we reach a much higher fidelity in those aspects, I think contact scaling is still necessary, even for high-resolution rigs. In short - I think that the same physical size of a contact pixel at 1080p, should be replicated at 4k by however many pixels that ends up being, so that we're all seeing the same way, with the contacts taking up the same amount of physical screen space at a distance, as much as technology can allow. I'd love to see contact scaling for higher resolutions be an option that is enabled on the System screen for high resolution systems. I want to play the pretty game, while also being able to play multiplayer.

Do you play multi? If so - Currently, there is no flight sim on the market that takes scaling with 4k resolution properly. That means that contacts that were once visible at 10k due to LOD bias, do not render. Contacts that were a fairly sizable pixel at 5k, are now a miniscule pixel, and impossible to see. And contacts that you could track against ground clutter will all blend and disappear. The same pixel information is present for 4k as for 1080p, but the pixels on your 4k set up are miniscule compared to the same pixel on the 1080p, and it becomes a physical hardware scaling problem - the pixels, physically in the real world, are simply larger and easier to see, and the LOD bias that comes into play with limited pixels able to render details at 1080, means that the aircraft also stand out from their surroundings much, much better. The difference is staggering. I'm truly hoping that ED is taking in to consideration the huge imbalance in game play between folks at 1080p and those at higher resolutions, in their new graphics engine, but until that engine is released, there's a massive disadvantage to playing at 4k, and the only reason I would advocate doing so is for making movies and playing single player for the 'pretty' factor. If you play online, do not play 4k. You'll never see another contact again.* *Unless, of course, you're playing on a massive 55inch or larger screen

No cockpit mods - and no, I've not deleted the FXO or Metashader2. I'll try that next. Are you folks running 4k resolution, without seeing that? Cause if so - perhaps this is a weird glitch. I did find Taz's mod, which is wonderful, though I do like the immersion of cockpit glass detail, just, not like this. So I'd like to have it back in a more reasonable form, if there's a glitch or something to sort out.

Been enjoying this one - I've noticed a few calls (Nails, 6'oclock for one) that were perhaps missed? Is there an update to fill those out that's being planned? Though, split-personality Jester is also fun. Major Jester and Mr. Hyde, perhaps

nullFor reference, this is what I am referring too. This is a non-plane-specific effect, I realize now. Is there anything you can change in the skinning of the craft files? Has anyone done a mod to reduce this? Or, could Heatblur perhaps work with ED to minimize these a little? The level of scratches feels excessively tiled, and excessively deep, more akin to shattered glass than scuffing. Tracking targets through it at certain angles of light is extremely difficult.null

Here are another few shots. Trying to acquire targets above me, looking for fainter dots, is impossible against the clutter of the tiling. In low light, in the last photo - see if you can find the tanker near my reticle. It was hard to track him through those textures.

nullSee the attached photos. In brighter lighting, such as the two bottom photos, the effect isn't as intrusive - however - if you're flying dawn/dusk missions, the effect becomes very intrusive to tracking targets, and the first photo, out the 11oclock of the tomcat, I've lost fighters and ships I track among the clutter of the scratches, which I feel are a bit over-highlighted due to the dense texturing/tiling. I'm entirely open that some cockpits are this scratched, but I feel there's adjustments that could still be made here to make them feel more like scratches, and less like shattered glass.

This request is similar to a comment I had about a year ago on the new clouds. They look amazing in their detail, but their structures and formations (within a system-wide layout) are tiled and do not reflect actual frontal systemic formulation. The clouds in IL-2 lack the detail of these clouds, but they attempt better mimicry of the actual frontal formations of dynamic weather that occur. They have striated cumulus, cumulonimbus towers, etc, that make various weather feel more immersive. The clouds then look great from most any angle, even if not as detailed. The clouds here will look great, usually, from only a couple of angles, and once you're above them, or in them, you can see how the magic was made in the layering and the illusion is somewhat lost. This brings in to sharper focus the difficulties facing a development team these days - the closer we get to technology that allows us a high fidelity of real life, the more difficult and arduous the task is of creating full immersion, because the player is using less and less of their imagination to suspend disbelief.

I had posted this in the F14 module forum, but I now realize it is every plane: At 4k resolution, the cockpit glass scratches textures are so densely packed, and so tiled and repetitive, that is impossible to see out of the glass at certain angles of light. Is there a way to adjust this texture mapping, somewhere? The other issue, is even when you cannot see the scratches, they leave artifacts in the glass at various angles that cause the blue sky above you, to look like a starry night, making spotting contacts impossible, even in clear skies. They also look like hard cracks in the glass, like it's been shattered, and not like the glass has been marred by helmets rubbing against it, or gloves, or what ever else. Is there a way to soften the textures as well so they resemble scratches, instead of breaks? If there isn't a way to modify this - I'd like to make a request that these textures and code be revisited in for an upcoming patch, so that it's more playable, and matches the fidelity of the rest of the simulation, which right now, just seems like an oversight that it does not.

Playing around with skinning and changing small things - is there a way to adjust the scratch-map on the cockpit glass? Currently, I play at 4k, and the scratches are so dense, and tiled, that I cannot see out of the cockpit in certain lighting, at all, not for the light, but because the scratches look more like a manufactured net of spider web, than they do random cockpit scratches. Is this mapping able to be changed in skinning tools, or is this more hard-coded into the DCS world rendering? If it's hard coded, I would recommend that Heatblur chat with ED about adjusting it for the Tomcat, for players at 4k. It looks terrible. Love this module, and I'd like to see the cockpit glass reflect the high level of fidelity present in the rest of the cockpit.

Thanks all - sounds like this is more an ED issue. Has this gotten worse? I remember the F16 having a decently accurate track a while back, but I assume this is now worse across the board?

When your opinion is proven to be false, and you proudly state that you will hang on to it regardless - that is a core issue that speaks to something that has nothing at all to do with the game. No development team, bug with a game, or fix that could come out is going to address the underlying unrest inherent in that statement, nor is it the responsibility of any person other than that individual, to address that kind of deeper emotional/maturity dissonance.

Hi all, I'm still getting the issue where (yes, even in multiplayer servers) I cannot get saved flight tracks to properly recreate the flight trajectory of the aircraft. I cannot reply my tracks, nor record them, except for what I capture from 3rd party software. This means if I want to build video off of a sortie with differing points of view, it is currently impossible. Are there any ideas as to what is causing this issue, and are there any plans in the works for fixing it? Also - if data here is needed, what kind? I'd be happy to see if I can get that for devs if they need it.

Still no luck in getting clouds generated with the Dynamic Weather tab for missions. I've even copied over some LUA files from other people's postings, prior to the update. Has anyone successfully created clouds using the Dynamic Weather tab since the 2.8 update?

I think the dynamic weather tab needs to be tinkered with then - because as stated above, I've followed every tutorial I have seen and mimicked their weather, and have not gotten a single cloud in the sky at all.

Is there a good tutorial that isn't 3 years old, regarding the intricacies of the dynamic weather engine in the mission editor? I've looked all over and cannot find one. The tutorials I did see from Youtube, all 2.5 and earlier, I followed steps from and mimicked their placement, sizing, etc..., but could not achieve any patterns that resulted in anything except wind on an clear sky. Even mashing systems up and creating conditions for wind in excess of hurricane forces, still netted no clouds in the sky, at all, anywhere on the maps. I'd like to use dynamic weather in missions, so any help is appreciated!

And in the multiplayer arena, this has led to almost every pilot 'locking' their gunner stations so people cannot join them, because 1. The AI can many times be more accurate and thus save the pilot on a more reliable basis 2. The players that quickly jump in, will immediately start firing around, giving the position away, and generally not calling out, or not being on voice comms, making them almost more detrimental than helpful.

Will the new clouds feature more realistic formations? By that, I mean the structure of formations in the vertical. The clouds here are very detailed, and the modelling is impressive. I'm hoping that the 'layering' will be such that vertical cloud stacks are more able to be their own entity, instead of being very clear, distinct 'layers' that simply abut one another. The thunderheads in the game, and other vertical stacks, will often seem to resemble a heaped scone, stacked atop another scone, rather than a billowing vertical formation. They look great from certain angles, but flying at altitude with them can reveal the stacking/tiling. So my question is wondering if that effect will be lessened due to the dynamic nature now? Clouds have come such a long way since the days of Aces over the Pacific!

It would be beneficial to have a 'Zoom to gunsight' view mode, that locks the view through the gunsight, and allows the view to pan and pitch with the movement of the mouse aim. This is a bit of an oversight, or incomplete module, without that, as you cannot use waist gunners if you use Track IR, as there's truly no way to aim the weapon. I know this module is old, do they ever update it anymore, or is this fairly moot point?

Any word on the track playback fidelity not correctly translating plane movement? Unfortunately, the 'multiplayer' server side-step doesn't work for me, either. Thanks for the updates!

I would love to see a merger of style. Take IL2-Stalingrad's cloud formations, and combine them with DCS's cloud detail and lighting. IL2's cloud formations have wonderful adherence to actual cloud patterning, and how cells and pressure fronts will actually form clouds. They're not just layers with textures. They're not just a configuration of shapes. They resemble a real, changing and dynamic pressure difference in how they stack and dissipate. The issue is - they're soft on lighting and detail, so they can also resemble something out of a cartoon or rendering. The variance, and the realistic shaping and stacking is there, however. DCS's clouds have amazing detail and lighting. They've got the shadows and the depths correct. They've got the detailed look of real clouds when you zoom in to them. They properly cast/deflect light below them and their coloring in twilight is spot on. Their issue is they're formulaic, flat, patterned and even when they're made to 'stack', it's not a 'formation', it's simply one fat layer approaching another, so you never truly have a thunderhead cumulonimbus, you never get true mackerel skies, with their spotting and also their lines and waves. You get a fatter layer of stratus that piles up like a big leaf pile right below another strata, and formations don't really look like that. That's my wish. I think if you took the formations of IL2-Stalingrad's clouds, and skinned those formations with DCS texturing and modeling, and DCS lighting, you'd have one helluva sky.

Any word on track playback fidelity?

I went back and tried this with significantly reduced curves, and finally successfully paired up with the basket. I'm going back and reducing my curves for all the craft I have capable of mid-air refueling now. Originally, I had followed the suggestion to put curves in for allowing softer correction on aiming, but it appears that doesn't work well with mid-air refueling. I also engaged autopilot controls and as long as I engaged them within tolerance of my velocity needed, I could micro adjust within it to a very helpful degree, and was able to hold much better course. Thanks for the suggestions, I think lowering the curves instead of increasing them, and the autopilot made the largest difference.

Out of curiousity, what do other folks have your pitch and yaw axis curves set too? I had mine at 25, but I do not have fine-enough control to allow for corrections on input that are not over-exaggerated. I've currently got them set to 36 now, and having *better* results. Are there any settings for FLCS or flaps or spoilers that I may be missing here?