shagrat

The major improvement is likely related to the immense increase in fps through the introduction of MultiThreading. Now, what has fps to do with the flight model? Nothing, but it impacts the visual feedback loop between corrective movement of the cyclic stick (joystick) in your hand and noticable reaction on the screen. Say we had 40 fps before and now stable 80 fps. For subconscious corrections you typically do with the cyclic to stabilize the helicopter it takes now half the time (actually time between frame changes, but let's simply say "time") to get a visual recognizable feedback on the screen. The movement seen on the screen is smoother and way more granular. 1/40th of a second vs. 1/80th of a second. As for us sim-pilots there is no feedback from our inner ears movement sensor, but only the very limited 70-90° visual feedback of the screen, without peripheral vision, this "feels" now like the inputs are more controllable/smooth and responsive. ...and of course the fact we now fly the Apache for quite some time and training and muscle memory getting better. From my personal experience now my confidence will increase, I get a bit too cocky until I mess up more regular, again and increase my experience in addition to a good muscle memory and instinct, which let's me omit precarious situations before I am required to test my confidence and muscle memory in the first place.

Actually they did... As per changelog (...)"Fixed: Attitude Hold "enable" conditions"(...)

Is this only on the exported screen or does the home plate drift outside the in-game MPCD? If it is something showing on the exported screen, but NOT the in-game cockpit, check the exports scripts for HELIOS and/or investigate with the HELIOS team, as at first glance it looks like there is no masking applied, to confine the homeplate symbol to the area of the MPCD screen.

This is a pretty cool idea. In the future, when George hopefully learns to search for targets on his own, this can be a kind of master mode, like the current "consent to fire ( button press )" and "free fire (George engages targets on his own)". In principle this would be a "monitor this spot" command.

Planned doesn't really help. This was the killer for Voice Chat in our group. No way to know, if you receive a transmission, if the transmission ended, etc. We need a simple Soundfile that plays when PTT is pressed and when it's released. Without this little auditory feedback it is almost unusable. I can wait for the radio effects and other fancy stuff, but this one is essential.

Zum Zeitpunkt meines Posts lag er entsprechend. Siehe auch dein erstes Beispiel den Preisverlauf. Der Preis im Handel ist auch absolut irrelevant, für die Preisvorstellung des Verkäufers, wie ich bereits erläutert hatte. In einem Monat gibt es die Karte vielleicht schon für unter 600 EUR oder als Beigabe zum Fischbrötchen... Zum Angebotszeitpunkt war der Preis absolut angemessen... Solange man sie nicht mit "ähnlichen" Karten vergleicht. Und warum man evtl. lieber genau DIESE kaufen möchte, statt einer "günstigeren" hatte ich ja auch bereits erklärt.

Was auch funktioniert ist: Engine 1 Starter switch, sobald es anläuft Throttle OFF > IDLE. Auf der Engine Page das ON in weiss beobachten, sobald das ON verschwindet (dauert einen Moment), Engine 2 Starter Switch und bei Anlaufen Throttle von OFF > IDLE. Jetzt sollten beide(!) Triebwerke anlaufen und man kann sie wie beschrieben nach absinken des Öl-Drucks auf unter 70 PSI, langsam auf FLY bringen... Bei mir stirbt Engine 2 nur dann beim Start, wenn ich zwischen den Engine Starts zu lange warte.

Guess, there's a reason the M230 on the AH-64 is named "Area Weapon System" and uses the 30 mm M789 High Explosive Dual Purpose (HEDP) ammo...

^this ...and someone that needs to be dragged and coaxed into "trying it" won't likely stay for long, no matter if there is one or five more free full fidelity aircraft.

Ich bin mir sicher auch im Osten hat man mit Flugkarten gearbeitet die Berge und ander Erhebungen/Hindernisse in "Höhe über dem Meeresspiegel" eingetragen haben. Ebenso sicher nehme ich an nutzt(e) man dafür QNH um im IFR zu wissen ob und wie hoch man über dem Hindernis ist, oder um zwei Flugzeuge in der Höhe zu dekonflikten. Wenn einem der ATC den aktuellen QFE mitteilt für eine Landung auf dem Platz, macht QFE durchaus Sinn. Aber zur Navigation über Land (längere Strecke) ist es, sagen wir mal nicht unbedingt optimal.

That's very likely because they expected something like World of Warplane and are hit with a ultra realism study sim. I am 99% sure, someone that is a potential DCS customer, for real, does research what he's getting into - not just the game, where to get it, what details are modeled, but also what hardware (controllers, HOTAS etc.) he likely needs to have or invest in to enjoy it. I've seen multiple friends I got into DCS (with modules like the Huey, Hornet, A-10C) and investing into a HOTAS and head tracking, still back out after a couple months, because it was "not enough quick action". They didn't need free trials or free modules and still figured it isn't for them, so why on earth should a bored steam player that stumbled upon a DCS ad on the steam store suddenly be interested in a full fidelity study sim, if he never cared about it before? And if he did, he sure is the type to inform himself and yes, click on links to more information.

So you have a good ROI calculation backing that statement? That is a considerable investment you need to make, so it better pays off.

There are to blocking points in that statement: ED needs to issue a contract and the team needs to apply for, secure and pay (!) a license agreement from the company owning the intellectual property to the T-45C, likely Boeing. That isn't really cheap either... Edit: and likely verify and proof they have written permission, agreements to every part of the model, from textures, to 3D-Models if they didn't create those from scratch by themselves. Or they need to redo these without violating property rights.

Actually, they don't, that's why there are Chuck's Guides lots of checklists and a multitude of YouTube channels that focus on DCS tutorials. But we made our points, I am sure if ED sees the need for new and innovative ways to approach customers, they will revisit the free-to-play option or in the meantime Valve may adapt the Steam Store to allow for time bombed limited trial installs.

Hmmm, so you want something it's ok, just because you don't like the Su-25T? If you can find a developer studio that is willing to invest ressources into the development of a "free modern Jet with sparse avionics, minimal weapon load, but a HUD" for advertising DCS and write the investment off as loss, your welcome. I doubt you will find one, as the investment is considerable.

Yeah, sounds like typical study sim customer that would have a blast with a DCS full fidelity module and the learning curve...

So how do none steam users get to know about the trials I wonder? Google "DCS" or "digital combat simulator" or click on a link on a website like for example the steam store page where it says "visit website" ? And just as a sidenote how is the TF-51D not a "true" demo aircraft. I am sure it is very deliberately chosen, because you cannot get your fix of quick Air-Quake and if you so desire need to decide on buying a full module. Same for the Su-25T as a "not too attractive" FC3 model. If someone on Steam is interested in DCS in the first place he will sure manage to click a link to the products web page to get more info about the product... And if not, well, he can still google DCS mods and install a T-45C or A-4E Skyhawk community mod totally for free...

Steam Users can simply install DCS World from www.digitalcombatsimulator.com like anyone else. There is nothing preventing them from installing, other than mindset. Similar to a free give away, that requires you to drive a 20 minute detour. Guess Steam Users would complain to their local Palmart, that the other shop has a free give away and the Palmart don't...

They simply need to install DCS World for free and trial any aircraft they are interested in and simply deinstall it afterwards.

Plus a lawsuit, if you got caught without a license, that can cost your job/business, because the price is considerable higher. Entertainment products are typically way less expensive, especially on a sale and customers are expected to make a decision to buy in less than half a year. The free aircraft were a means for customers to work out if their hardware can handle the game, the TF-51D as a way to check, if they get to grips with the concept of clickable cockpits and the Su-25T, as a showcase for FC3 planes (as a less complex alternative). With the 14-day-trials there is an easy way to test a specific ride, see if it runs fine on your rig, your controls setup capable of handling it and you are interested enough to buy it immediately, wait for the next sale, or if it's not for you, yet. Again, the question remains, what would be the target audience for even more free stuff? P.S.: we now even have another free map (Marianas) to test performance on a demanding map, with latest map technology.

Not necessarily, because from what I've seen, a lot of people either started with DCS when there wasn't a "free" plane available with the original DCS: Black Shark, FC2 and A-10C Warthog, or they were hooked by a specific plane modeled like the F-14 Tomcat, the F-16C, the F/A-18C or the AH-64D Longbow and bought the modules right away, or through the free trials... A "free" complex, full fidelity aircraft, would attract what supposed customer base? The study sim fans, will go directly for a two week trial and if they enjoy the study level learning curve they stay and thus buy it. The people not enjoying study sims of the typical DCS fidelity and looking for some quick "Air Combat Action" won't be happy and not stay for long. Maybe consider an FC3 aircraft and occasionally hop on public servers, either using the free trials or buy an FC3 jet on a sale...

I would rather see more of the extremely brilliant mods integrated into the DCS core, wherever possible. I am aware copyright and intellectual property is a pain, but there's plenty of stuff that has been created from scratch and would enhance the core assets tremendously. The main advantage of a consistent core is that everyone can simply join a mission, without lengthy installs and downloads. Something like the A-4E Skyhawk mod with a bunch of liveries integrated can quickly take 15-20 minutes to download and install on a lower end connection. If that means all people joining the mission may have to wait for that one buddy in the flight of 4 that needs to download, it becomes a deterrence, quickly. The idea with a simple list to help identify missing mods may be helpful, but ultimately if a mission requires the download of an additional 2GB of mods, I personally don't think I would even try it.

...dann recherchierst du die Maße und den Verbrauch der 3090 und 4080 und checkst dein Gehäuse und Netzteil und stellst fest, du müsstest beides neu kaufen (400-500 EUR die nicht im Budget geplant waren), falls du das Big Tower-Gehäuse überhaupt so stellen kannst, dass es vernünftig Luft zum kühlen bekommt. Bleibt die 7900XT (nehme mal die im Thread verlinkte bei Mindfactory, als Anhalt), welche z.B. für ein Setup mit Multi-Monitor direkt rausfällt, da sie nur 2xDP, 1xHDMI und 1xUSB-C hat... oder noch mehr neue Hardware, mindestens wackelige Adapter. Mehr Apfel, statt Birne, wäre die Sapphire Nitro+ 7900XT. Die hätte zumindest 2x DP und 2xHDMI und unterstützt auch, wie die angebotene Sapphire 6900XT, 4 Monitore. Aber bei der 7900XT müssen auch die Maße passen, einen Tick größer ist sie schon. Ne gebrauchte Sapphire Nitro+ 6900XT SE für unter 900 EUR, statt einer neuen für 1.400-1.500 EUR ist jetzt für mich nicht Mondpreis. Wer aus Gründen, wie oben aufgeführt eben genau eine Sapphire Nitro+ 6900XT SE sucht, spart gut 30% gegenüber Neukauf. Klingt für mich nach einer fairen VB.

Korrekt, wenn der Verkäufer etwas anbietet und den Preis offen lässt, aber die Käufer in Scharen 150k EUR für die letzten Benziner Golfs bieten, wird es schwer den Verkäufer zu überzeugen, dein Angebot von 20k EUR anzunehmen, weil du im Internet was günstigeres gesehen hast. Umgekehrt, wenn dutzende Verkäufer denselben Golf mit einer Preisvorstellung (was der Verkäufer als Verhandlungsbasis kalkuliert) von 20k EUR anbieten oder nach Verhandlung vielleicht sogar für 15k EUR verkaufen, wird der Verkäufer mit einer Preisvorstellung von 150k es schwierig haben Käufer zu finden, die ihm auch nur 100k EUR oder mehr anbieten. Aber es ist trotzdem die Entscheidung des Verkäufers, wie seine Preisvorstellung ist, zu erklären warum sie so ist, und ob ihm ein Käufer ein Angebot macht, das er annehmen möchte. Es ist durchaus üblich, etwas, bspw. eine GraKa, daß man vor kurzem für 1.000 EUR erworben hat, mit einer Preisvorstellung, von 20% Verlust anzubieten (800 EUR) und wenn jemand, mit Verweis auf "aber der Neupreis ist jetzt bei bei 900 EUR" nur 700 EUR anbietet stumpf zu sagen "Nein, dann behalte ich die lieber für einen PC für die Familie, oder als Reserve, falls was abraucht". Absolut! Teilweise klang es aber eher so, als werfe man dem Anbieter vor, daß er eine andere Preisvorstellung hat und gefälligst den Preis senken soll, damit jemand sein "Schnäppchen" bekommt. Auch finde ich persönlich es merkwürdig, wenn Äpfel mit Birnen (GraKa unterschiedlichster Hersteller) verglichen werden... Aber wie gesagt, letztlich nimmt der Verkäufer das Angebot des Käufers an, oder eben nicht. Kleine Anekdote am Rande: Auf eBay kaufen seit Jahrzehnten Industrie-Unternehmen alte Mainboards mit z.B. ISA/EISA Slots, kompatible CPUs und RAM etc. zu Höchstpreisen, um Ersatzteile für Steuer-PCs an Anlagen und Maschinen zu haben, weil das seeeehr viel günstiger ist, als eine neue Anlage oder Maschine zu kaufen...

Können wir uns darauf einigen, daß nicht die "Männlichkeit" toxisch ist, sondern das Verhalten einiger Menschen, gegenüber Frauen? Das würde mir persönlich, extrem helfen mich weniger stigmatisiert zu fühlen.