JCTherik

Totally. I could see how some assists would perhaps even be acceptable, like overlay for the tanker lights cause some people can't see them. Although if ED fixed the light visibility, that would be better, it's really not that big of a deal. Or a custom mission with some cheat indication of where to move your stick, etc. Or better representation of G forces to "feel" your movement. But lot of people are asking for [AAR autopilot] or [magnetic basket] or [wireless fuel transfer], those are just straight up skipping parts of the gameplay for the sake of participation trophies.

You can still play the game. But if you don't put the time and effort into achieving proficiency required to do a hard task in the game, then you shouldn't be able to do the hard task in the game. That's not implemented yet but a lot of people are asking for it all the time. Hmm, you're right, perhaps the shortcuts should get removed then. And basket turbulence should be a thing and wake turbulence should be always on behind tankers. The "we already have this, why can't we have more" is not an argument. It's just a result of lot of people crying instead of searching through the chuck's guides and so those shortcuts exist now, and everyone relies on F10 map and people often don't do any navigation, but that doesn't mean that that justifies making even more shortcuts. The line has to be drawn somewhere. If those shortcuts get removed, I'd be quite happy. It's really not hard to twist a knob to set a radio frequency manually, or use tacan, steerpoints and a kneeboard map. If you want to fly a plane, you have to learn to fly a plane.

I know lot of people get hyped up over Moar Featurez, but I just want to say that if absolutely nothing changes in DCS for 6 months, but instead the game runs smoother, crashes less, takes less memory, has less glitchy netcode, use more cores or has less of those bugs that have been swept under the carpet for years, I'd be a very happy guy.

1. go to aerobatics servers 2. follow people 3. have fun 4. get a little closer when you feel comfortable 5. go back to step 3. month or two later, voila... you can now refuel with your right hand while typing a message with your left hand. If ED adds some crutches that compensate for the DCS-isms which make it hard, such as better representation of G-forces to "feel" the acceleration, pitch-up, etc, or gives you some rough indicator of how far the thing you're looking at is to compensate for lack of depth perception, I would quite welcome it, but any "cheat mode" refuel just waters down the realism that's already being watered down everywhere. I don't want another warthunder or IL2. But AAR isn't some magic, it's like driving. After a while, you just know how much to turn the steering wheel or how much to step on the gas and how long to wait for a response from the car. Obviously, it does take tens of hours, and if you don't do it for a while, you become a little rusty, although not completely. Coming behind a tanker and wobbling 100 meters in every direction is completely normal in the beginning. So much time gets wasted on those endless discussions, just imagine how many more people could refuel if all those hours were invested in some formation flying instead.

For spotting to get anywhere near realistic, we have to get a consistent size of the dots across different resolutions, and add some flicker reflections based on sun and sky angles at longer distances.

Same bug in both airplanes.

The headwind component of airspeed seems to be calculated incorrectly when near the ground, or on the ground. Strong wind will show it the best, in all the screenshots, there's ~90kn of headwind pretty much nose on, yet the huds of 16 and 18 show 175kn. That's almost double. All airplanes are parked on the ground. The airplane still behaves consistently with 90kn airspeed, ie. cannot rotate, but when forced to rotate by other means, can just barely hold nosewheel off the ground. After takeoff, few hundred feet above the ground the airspeed seems correct, but the closer to the ground the more off it is. The wind on the ground seems lower than the wind just barely few hundred feet up, and my guess is the HUD just calculates the airspeed with the wind value that's few hundred feet above, ignoring the fact that next to the ground, the airspeed is lower. Having a correct airspeed indicated is absolutely crucial for flying, especially on takeoff and landing in strong winds. Sure, 90kn wind is not realistic, but it seems to be off even at lower speeds. Following are screenshots of HUDs with screenshots of F2 views, which seems to report correct values. Tomcat shows correct airspeed, included for reference. EDIT, sorry for crap screenshots, i'll remake them wrong-ias.trk

just lean on the chair

G2 User here. I had to tweak the mod for bigger dots, since G2 natively renders in 3k resolution but the actual displays are only 2k. If I drop the resolution in openXR by 30% to in DCS without this mod and disable antialiasing, I see EVERYTHING tens of miles away, but the game looks real crap. If I keep full 3k resolution and antialiasing on the same headset, I lose targets 2 miles away, the few moving pixels just blend in a sea of flickering and blurry aliasing trees. With this mod without tweaking it, I see almost no improvement, I still see basically nothing. With a minor tweak to the mod to bump the size of the dot by 30%, I can see well. This is going to be a real can of worms, because VR resolutions usually get rescaled multiple times by nvidia, openXR, VR settings and DCS, and in the end the resolution being rendered has nothing to do with the actual hardware resolution, due to fresnel lenses issues and various sweet spots, color separations and distortions.

Guys, just make a clunk sound, some image twitch, and then blur the view a bit when sticking your head through the glass. A blury view in VR won't remove tracking, it won't make people dizzy and it won't be nearly as immersion breaking as stopped tracking or completely black screen. But it will also prevent me from sticking my head through the canopy to look under the plane.

I also wish this was better represented. Perhaps as an exaggerated head bob at low Gs and some faint screen effects, maybe the pilot eyebrows being pushed down from the top of the screen at high G or something like that. Currently, it's not really possible to judge a 0.2G up/down/forward/backward/left/right difference when on final.

I don't like the idea of assists, but it highly depends on what kind. Automatic flying following the tanker? - Please don't. Magically filling the tanks when next to a tanker? - HELL NO. More forgiving basket box? - I really dislike the idea. Visual overlays showing "go up" "go down" "go forward" etc? - Maybe. Automatically reducing the stick range to gain more precision after being cleared for contact? - Sure, would help with wobbly sticks. Visual cues and screen overlays about depth perception, distance and closing speed? - Sure, would help on pancake. Boom tanker lights overlay? - Sure. Would help with wonky resolution screens, but it could also be fixed by finally fixing the light bloom graphics - same as the meatball. A one off custom made training mission where you can enable any sort of extra help on top of that? - In SP, do whatever you want. Basically, if you and YOU ALONE still fly the airplane, but you need any sort of visual cues or custom adjustment of your stick curves in order to refuel, I think that's going to be much more acceptable in the community than a "refueling autopilot".

That may be possible to do with joystick gremlin. Is this the virpil encoders by any chance? Because in my experience, the virpil encoders are a hot garbage, they straight up skip inputs when scrolling them too fast, sometimes they skip an input even when going slow. I tried to raise that issue ages ago somewhere, and got downvoted and flamed into oblivion, cause ofc. "virpil is da best". They may be da best in their axes and sliders, but their hats are kinda meh and their encoders really suck. It seemed like a hardware limitation to me, as in, the knobs physically not being able to register fast movements. Mouse scroll wheels tend to have optical sensors, so any humanly achievable scroll speed can be measured, the virpil ones may just be metal contacts in my guess, which would mean at higher speed, the metal springs in them would just skip the dents and not make contact at all.

Agree, that little halo of bright light around the meatball makes the meatball look like an orange UFO, regardless of where in the glideslope i am

Tomcat burble is always on?!?

Howbout: 1. Loud clunk 2. Short but sharp visual twitch effect simulating a head bump 3. View gets gradually blurry after crossing the canopy boundaries 4. Head tracking won't get disturbed, but poking your head out of the canopy would be pretty useless due to the blur 5. When part of your head is outside of canopy, it's a little blurry 6. When your whole head is outside of canopy, it's very blurry 7. Only the canopy boundaries and outer fuselage boundaries being considered, in order to prevent this triggering when bending over backwards to see an obscure gauge. 8. If you stick your head into the wind IRL, you'd see blurry too.

I want pilot body, especially in VR, but I can't click switches underneath the arms.

That's what I have, --force_enable_VR --force_OpenXR So, I'm doing more testing, and what you're saying is interesting. I can't change resolution settings in the openxr because any setting change just basically crashes the game on startup. I have to run openxr in safe mode. Same is now happening in the ST build too - if the openxr ingame menu isn't on default resolution, i get what looks like a segfault. I can't change NIX scaling - hard crash. I can enable motion reprojection on locked 30fps in single player but it looks like an acid trip in helicopters, the top half of the screen looks like it's is basically made of liquid due to the rotor. If i keep the same settings everywhere, the MT does technically have slightly better performance on paper, but it's extremely inconsistent, it seems like every odd frame takes much longer than the even ones. In ST, the fps chart is fairly straight. In MT, it looks like a seismograph during an earthquake. Even if i drop pixel density to the point that I'm getting 60fps in MT, it still looks more choppy than ST in 35 fps. I also get big flashing "CPU BOUND" that's flickering between red and orange. Also, during loading, the entire game flickers between bright and dark for several seconds, somehow it may be related. It's very disappointing cause everyone's having fun and i spent like 10 hours this weekend trying every which way to run this but all i get is crashes and stutters.

So, an update. I think i was running single threaded version with OpenXR upscaling, whereas the MT has default settings, which would explain the lackluster increase in performance - it's rendering more pixels. On the same note, I also discovered that changing some settings in the in-game openxr menu likes to crash the game, and openxr safe mode and resetting settings tends to be required.

38 fps in ST, 41 in MT, but quite a bit more inconsistent in MT, making it effectively worse. ST and MT logs and tracks, plus DxDiag in attachment. DCS-MT-perf.zip

I get why it doesn't fall down, my question is, why doesn't it yaw or roll out of control? In a regular coordinated flight, even if the airplane is properly trimmed, if you let go of the controls for long enough, a little bit of roll will creep in, which would slowly make your bank creep up until you spiral into the ground. But the tomcat in this regime does the opposite - it self-corrects any roll/yaw inputs, and in fact very strongly. It takes about 5-10 seconds for it to go from 90 degree bank back to more or less straight flight, with zero input from the pilot.

Situation: ~80kn full flaps down, wings auto throttle to maintain altitude gear up speed brake and DLC irrelevant trim full nose up, stick full nose up stick lateral centre rudder centre As it is now, when pulling more and more AOA, way above 15 units, the plane eventually gets itself into a bit of a roll oscilation. But if one resists the urge to add lateral stick in the transition, increases AOA further and just rides it out, on average it flies perfectly straight. Even when disturbing the flight with momentary asymetric thrust, the cat quickly returns to the wobbly, but very straight flight when returning to symetric thrust. Lateral stick or rudder doesn't have any effect in this AOA, which is unsurprising, since the stabs are at full deflection anyway and there isn't really any air hitting the spoilers or rudders. Still, I disabled all SAS channels just to be sure, and still, stable cat. I'm not saying this is wrong, but it just seems suspiciously easy to fly high alpha pass with no electronic help, well, practically even hands off. I even ejected and the plane continues to do high alpha pass, with a bit of a roll wobble. Why doesn't it depart? What's causing it to return into nose-away-from-ground position even after putting it into 90 degree bank via asymetric thrust? Is this working as intended? Attaching trackfile. tomcat-aoa-pass.trk

I'm talking about the shake that you get from G forces. It's implemented in the viper in VR and it's not unpleasant at all, it would be great if it was in the tomcat too, but more sensitive, so we could sense throttle settings in the groove.

Yes and it does work in the F16, but not in the tomcat.

Hello, can we get a head movement in VR for up/down/left/right/forward/backwards? There doesn't seem to be any. I don't know if there is or isn't any head movement in pancake, that's why I'm only asking about VR. It would be great to get that as a substitution for seat of the pants. I don't necessarily care about high G maneuvers throwing my view all over the place, but if we got small head deflection from small G changes, maybe we could move the camera forward/backward to "sense" the thrust changes from wiggling the throttle when on-speed, followed by up/down movement from resulting lift changes.