diego999

From early access to abandonware in less than a year. This is sad.

Here it is. It only appears when you set the planes to "take off from ramp" (cold start). As @Raisuli says, static stuff has a different (and sometimes weird) damage model compared to live units. So, for destruction purposes in a 'real' mission is better to set them to 'uncontrolled' rather than static. In this case, as you're just training, it doesn't matter. But keep that in mind if you start designing more serious missions in the future.

Try setting the 109's group to "uncontrolled". It's one of the main options in the right panel when you select them. Another thing you can do is put a static plane instead of a "live" one. For that you have the "add or modify static object" on the left icon column.

Have you tried these? Viper Quick Practice & Proficiency Missions - v. 3.0; Current mission count: 76; Last updated: 12/3/2023. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3328191/

Exactly that. Yes. It's as stupid as it sounds. A friend of mine just tested the mission, his conclusion was the same as yours: it doesn't make any sense. Time to rethink my approach I guess. Thank you for the illumination

Easter claimed many victims around here as well . Yes, exactly that. I think picking up the actual pilot is not possible, but he can be replaced by a generic infantry unit and that it what the helo would pick up. "Pick up" as in "despawn when the helo lands near, spawn it again when the helo lands in a base". I know unit's coordinates on the map can be passed around with scripting, but it's way out of my habilities. That is precisely the difficult part. Landing the helicopter near enough the downed pilot. I can't figure it out. The failure I want to simulate is not a catastrophic explosion in the air at a precise point, but a hidraulic failure where, depending on the altitude, you continue flying for a minute or so until forced to eject. That makes the landing zone pretty big.

I wanted to set up a mission where the player's plane suffers a failure at some point, ejects and has to be rescued by an AI helicopter. Tried the Moose CSAR module and, while I could make it work, it has many variables I didn't know how to configure as my scripting skills are very limited. Reading the DML CSAR documentation I realize the groundwork is already there, so I was wondering if you could make it work for AI rescue helicopters. I know it's kinda stupid, but it's an old itch I have.

SSAO off SSLR off Clouds to high SSS off Visib range to high Textures to medium I'd test those, in that order, one at a time, to see how much improvement do you get.

You can transfer your modules from Steam to standalone but not the other way around afaik.

Is there a way for the CSAR mission to be carried by an ai helicopter? Or human-piloted only?

With a Quest 2 I can't tell between medium and high textures. Low is unreadable for me. I use link cable as well. Enconding bitrate and all those settings I leave at default. I use OpenXR Toolkit as well. With Turbo Mode and foveated rendering activated.

You should be getting way more than 30 fps with a 3060ti, provided you find the right settings. Try these: I have reduced FoV, that's the great GPU saver at least in my case (I also have a 3060ti with a Quest 2). You have a very good CPU, so Quad Views could be a very nice option for you. With the settings posted above I'm able to mantain 72fps most of the time in VR, except when on the ground in crowded bases or flying above a big city.

If you can enter the game, do this: -open DCS -in main menu, go to the store (the top menu, not the carrousel at the bottom) -click to "buy" something -your browser will open with your account logged in -go to your profile and disable 2FA If you can't even enter the game, you will have to ask support for help.

If your game is crashing in 2D mode then it got nothing to do with the Oculus V63 issue. Is your new card using the latest drivers? Are temperatures normal? Is it getting enough juice from the PSU?

Are you using Open XR Toolkit or QuadViews?

Which version of the Oculus desktop app are you running?

Couple of weeks I think. You'd have to ask ED

It updates on itself, but you can block it. The issue will be solved by the next DCS patch.

If you're absolutely in the lower end of the spectrum and on the edge of playability, it might have some impact. I tested this extensively and it didn't make a difference. No change in frametimes with a modest PC. There was a thread some time ago from a guy who reduced the desktop resolution and gained some performance. You might want to check it out for some ideas. Does the Reverb have a way to reduce the mirror resolution in your monitor while playing in VR? That way you could test it yourself before making the upgrade.

Oh no. When I started the VR journey I literally didn't know what I was doing, and I tried to play with settings way to optimistic for my PC. I didn't know what motion reprojection was, so I left it off. I played with real fps between 20-40 and it was, as you can imagine, terrible. But what I did notice was, when the FPS went above 30, it was tolerable. Awful, but tolerable. Anything less than 30 was vomit inducing though. No, I never had a G2 and I don't know about that particular flickering. DLSS doesn't help with that? For me it was a great improvement, at the cost of some ghosting. Absolutely.

A Quest 3 is better in every sense and I think the best improvement are the lenses. You have clarity all across the screen. Resolution is higher but not by a lot. A trick to save GPU power would be foveated rendering. This technique renders the center of the image at full resolution and the borders at lower resolution. For us with fresnel lenses it's great, as everything outside the sweet spot is blurry anyways. If you're going for a Quest headset, be aware of this issue at the moment: What @Qcumber says is a good option too.

It depends on the person really. Some can play at 36fps (I'm one of those), others will vomit with anything less than 90. I have a Quest 2, so 72, 90 and 120Hz. 120 was like a dream but totally out of reach for my pc. Tried 90 for a while but it was achievable only when flying high and alone, so most of the time I was locked at 45 with reprojection (totally playable for me by the way). But at the end I settled for native 72. That's a goal I can reach. When it goes down to 36 with reprojection (while flying over cities or in crowded missions) I see some artifacts but not that flickering you mention. Maybe because Quest's motion reprojection is better than other headsets? I don't know. Yes. There is a very perceivable difference between 72 and 90. 72 is not bad, but you can tell without looking at the counter because you 'feel' it much smoother.

Quest 3 and Pico 4 are the newest "cheap" headsets. Both around the $500 mark. Quest 2 is an older model and it has fresnel lenses, which means good clarity on the center, blurry everywhere else. It's cheap. G2 is discontinued and about to lose official support. It has fresnel lenses too, but is somewhat better than the Quest 2 in image clarity (it has other problems). Owners seem to love it. It's cheap too. I don't know about the other HTC models. They don't seem to be very popular around here. Another thing to consider is how powerful your rig is. Buying a better headset only to find your pc doesn't have enough muscle to fill all those pixels at a reasonable refresh rate would be a waste of money. I'd go for a Quest 3, but my opinion isn't unbiased as I have a Quest 2.

Oh I've seen worse. WAY worse Good to hear you resolved it.

95° is well within range of thermal throttling. Your card might be lowering frequencies to avoid damage, and thus performance is awful. Download GPU-Z, go into the 'sensors' tab and watch what happens when you run the benchmark again.