stormrider

Sorry if it wasnt fun for you. It was still very informative. Twice.

Agree, that's why I said wouldn't mind a simplification. They fanboy nerds wont use it so wont notice it while people who want or need it can have the functionality even if very simplified.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=McDonnell+Douglas+F-15E+Strike+Eagle+Pilot%27s+Flight+Operating+Instructions&pp=1

I have seen LGBs "collide" in flight, mid course, and they just clip and overlap each other; no explosion of course. This is something else.

Vulkan was designed from ground up for multi-core, multi-thread platforms and allows the generation of graphics commands in parallel to the commands execution while previous APIs don't. Another benefit is parallel buffer generation which makes better use of all CPU cores. But of course, Vulkan is great on a CPU-bound setting, but still most graphics demanding applications are still GPU-bound, so the performance improvement is limited, although necessary for what it does is to allow a better or full use of the GPU capacity.

https://developer.nvidia.com/sites/default/files/akamai/gameworks/blog/munich/mschott_vulkan_multi_threading.pdf

Not only to him unfortunately. If you look elsewhere in the this forums you will find several other gamers with the exact same Myopia.

During the past few updates, there has been several issues with LGB guidance.

You're making fun out of yourself here, mate.

Or perhaps you are the one who fails at that. A military simulation has several different aspects and to have all in the same package is usually not viable. A simulator then could focus more on the strategical or tactical aspects of combat. Or, as DCS, more in the Cockpit simulation itself. It could take the Logistics into consideration then perhaps the intricacies of the cockpit would be of no use while still being "ultra-realistic". Me, speaking for myself, I'm less interested in the cockpit simulation of things and more on the combat itself. The tactics, the weapons employment and how different systems interact with or against each other, so to waste so much time and effort on an ultra realistic AAR or ultra realistic start-up sequence makes no sense. Also, DCS is video game like everything else you find on steam or wherever; meant to entertain, or do you think you make use of DCS to train your skills for...?! :doh:

Agreed. Who needs new customers these days anyways? And if one is not willing to spend a few hundreds on top gear, then well, close the door after you leave, right? :thumbup:

Except on a sustained high intensity battlefield when fixing the RAM every time might not be an option.

Is it possible to mod or make an auto-start script?

+1

:cry:

Don't give them the idea, they'll definitely try to sell us this as well, possibly as an unfinished early access with development frozen for months right after release!

Still no F-14.

I don't. 1x 512Gb SSD here only.

:mad:

Can you properly trim the F-16?! For me, one little click right the plan rolls right, I click left to correct, the planes then rolls left. Impossible to neutral.

They just became even worse in VR. I noticed the other day that while looking around that some clouds rotate around their center axis when you rotate your view, like 2d sprites of the old.

Thinking this way, you're right. Thank you. Perhaps this thread should now be moved to Controllers & Input Bugs.

https://www.mudspike.com/wp-content/uploads/guides/DCS%20F-16C%20Viper%20Guide.pdf

Who cares. It's frozen.

Depending only on how it's done. I wouldn't mind a simplistic approach that would include all modules, for the sake of accessibility.