lanmancz

It worked well enough for me :( Until a "perfect" solution is found I would happily be flying with the models slightly enlarged and enjoy myself.

@SharpeXB: I really don't see what is your problem. You still speak about multiplayer and about how it gives players advantage, etc. but even you (as well as other people including me in the very first post) mentioned it should be able to be disabled on server for multiplayer balance. That's fine by me. So then there is really no problem for you and I don't understand why you think that nobody should be allowed to use it, even offline. As I mentioned for people with bad eyesight it helps to be able to enhance the model visibility in our offline flying which makes the sim more enjoyable for us. Obviously judging by the response I'm not the only one thinking that. I really see this as a better alternative to labels. So my original request still stands - please bring back the options to enhance the model visibility.

So what's the problem then? I'm sure "all the servers" have labels disabled as cheat as well but personally I find the model visibility option much better than labels which flat out break the game immersion. And in the end it's nobody's business how I do my offline flying.

Hello, some time ago there used to be an option in DCS to adjust model visibility - essentially making the models bigger and thus more visible on our screens. I really don't understand why this options was removed. I used to fly with it all the time. Now we're back to hunting single pixels on our screen which is a nightmare for people like me with slight color blindness (deuteranomaly). If it was removed because of fear of multiplayer balance then make it server side option, personally I don't care about that since I don't fly in multiplayer.

Also while I'm at it - it would be nice to be able to easily select and manipulate multiple objects at once. Yes you can select more objects with shift but why not a simple mouse drag selection box ? Also be able to move all selected objects, delete them, set some common property like rotation, etc would also be very useful.

Yeah but that would require to create the footprint art for each object and that would probably be a big job. On the other hand a simple box would suffice and should be pretty simple to implement. Honestly I don't understand how come in-house mission designers did not ask about this years ago because it would be so useful. Especially in situation when you want to put for example 5 buildings in a row it's super fiddly to do it in the editor because each building ends up off by a meter and it looks awful.

I've read somewhere that 3D editor is in development but since I expect it will be a pretty long time until it arrives can we please have just a simple footprint box under the icon for every object ? It does not have to be anything fancy, literally just a box of X meters wide and Y meters tall of a semi-transparent color (red/blue) that would indicate the objects dimensions and rotation on the map. This should be fairly easy to implement. The thing is that when you're making missions in ME the icons don't really give you any idea of how the object is going to look in the environment, especially in relation to other objects which means a designer has to constantly be switching in and out of the mission to see how it looks. Having a simple box that would visually indicate the objects dimensions and rotation in the map and in relation to other objects would make it much more simple to create "nice" looking missions.

Well Falcon 4 was able to make it 20 years ago. :music_whistling:

+1000 DC has been floating around the wishlist for years and years. For me it is my number 1 wishlist item. Seriously I would pay $100 for a well made DC module. A well made DC module would give us near limitless replayability with any aircraft which is my biggest problem with DCS - the aircraft are nice but there are 1 or 2 official campaigns per plane but then unless you fly multiplayer you're pretty much stuck with creating missions for yourself in ME - this is one of the reasons I left DCS few years ago because I spent 10x more time in ME than in cockpit. So yes please - DC absolutely gets my vote for next DCS module.

Can't wait! Yay! Already got my copy reserved :-) Fingers crossed hoping that all goes smoothly and we will see it sooner than expected :-)

I don't think it's as easy as you think. The issue is that the way mouse pointer works is essentially a laser pointer projected from your camera viewport into infinity and whatever is in the way gets "clicked". Simply recording the X,Y angles off the viewport would not work because if you move your head you'd also move the anchor point (so your pointer would move with your head along the movement axes but not rotation axes, that would be weird). There is no way to anchor that pointer "to the cockpit" - like how do you mean ? It would be totally messed up if for example this was anchored to some arbitrary "cockpit center point" - the farther you moved your head from that center point the more nonsensical would the pointer movement become and if you for example wanted to move your head back and down to reach some buttons behind the throttle in A10C that would not work at all. I think far easier thing to do would be to make the pointer to "stick" to whatever control it's hovered over that would require some extra movement to "unstick" it (which I think is what BMS is using) but that can lead to issues with selecting controls that are close together when viewed from low angles. Personally I don't really have much of an issue with this as I have my TIR view pretty stable - try increasing your smoothness filter in the TIR software if you have shaky view. I don't think there is an easy solution for this in-sim, although the mouse pointer stickiness to controls seems like it could work as an option.

Keep in mind that "30% overall usage" means that the OS is switching the DCS threads between cores automatically unless you lock it to a single core (bad idea). You will never see a single/double thread process to fully utilize the CPU (it can't as it would need at least 4 threads to do that) and as the OS switches the threads around the result is this kind of utilization. But for a single/dual thread process like DCS this pretty much means 100% utilization as this averages out as ~30% utilization of each core over the 1s measurement interval as it's being switched around by the OS. AFAIK (unless something changed) DCS uses 2 threads - one for everything except sound and the other for sound (probably not as demanding). This will probably not change until they implement DX12 or Vulkan (probably that according to rumors) which can utilize multiple cores for rendering as currently all rendering is done in a single thread (no way around that). So my guess is that you're CPU limited (single thread performance limit) to fully utilize that 1080 of yours, especially if not OC'd. DCS is way more CPU intensive than the other game you tested probably because it has to wait for the physics computations to be done before rendering (in the single thread), hence the longer frame rendering time -> lower FPS. That would explain it. I guess you could crank up some GPU options like anti-aliasing etc. that don't need to wait for CPU to utilize the card more. You will not see any more FPS increase with options that require CPU (object density etc.) as you're already CPU limited.

Hello, I got one general question pls - I was out of DCS for 2 years (I thought back then I'd wait for unified version for couple of months and come back lol) but I remember when EDGE first came out there was this option to enhance the model visibility. I don't see it anywhere anymore, was it removed pls ? I quite liked it for my offline flying, better than using labels. Currently I'm flying in Nevada and the visibility is not that bad because the tanks with their forest camo in the desert stick out like a sore thumb but I guess when the new caucasus map comes it will be back to the old problem of spotting single pixels on a screen. PS: I'm asking about DCS 2.2.

Hello, I came back to DCS:W after a long time (~2 years) and for some reason I cannot activate the MIG-21 module in DCS 2.2 (did not try in 1.5). I'm getting this strange issue : Unable to run the application due to integrity fault of the Activation Key. Re-enter a valid Activation Key or re-activate the application. I can't even deactivate the license because of the same issue. Any ideas pls ? edit: Fixed by deleting the registry entries using the reg files from here : https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/564/#1780273

No worries m8, I didn't take it seriously anyway. Somehow forum posts always come across more serious than people mean them. I just used it as an opportunity to poke the DC a little :lol: Anyway, back to the topic. I guess we'll wait and see. I understand that they are not just converting the old map to new format but actually updating it to more modern standards which sounds nice (that's why it takes longer). btw did they mention if trees are going to be collidable in the updated version ?

Sorry, I didn't realize posting a single message in chitchat section after I've been out of these forums for pretty much a year (with a couple of exceptions) is considered crying. If there was one thing I'd be crying about it would be dynamic campaign because that one has been floating around the wishlist section for about 5 years now :-D Anyway, from what I understand the big unification is currently waiting for the default map update which I reckon will now become more prioritized after Normandy release so hopefully we will get nice single release before Hornet comes out. Needles to say that when Hornet comes out I will fly it day one no matter which version it needs :joystick:

I just wish the various versions get finally recombined into a single installation. Having multiple separate installation for each map is just a pita. When this started 1.5 years ago a left DCS for a while I thought, until it gets sorted out but since then it just got worse apparently with another version for Normandy. That's a bit mad. Meanwhile I've been flying Xplane and waiting for the Hornet to come out at which point I will come back to DCS. :pilotfly:

Well not everyone is happy that this "mission creep" caused a delay in the reunification. This whole Caucasus rebuild thing that is delaying the unification is an example of that, it just came out of nowhere a couple months back. Personally I would much rather have them working on something that most people want like dynamic campaign instead of reworking the Caucasus map which I don't think anyone asked for (besides those "bring Crimea back" threads).

I am not very happy with the progress. No 2.5 and no hornet this year, the only 2 things I was looking forward in DCS world this whole year. Also DCS world has been in this 1.5/2.0 limbo for a year already which I do not like, having to have 2 installs of DCS depending on which map I want to fly. Well, I guess I will check back in 6 months.

+1 Great ideas - either the snap-to or cockpit-relative cursor modes (or both!) would be great. I too have quite hard time clicking the right buttons sometimes when using headtracking, not even using VR yet (but I sure like to when it becomes cheaper!).

I've been running it at 4.2 for 3 years (air cooled). Now with WC I can afford to go to the limit which now seems to be 4.6 but the temperatures are not the limit in my case as it runs at 4.6@1.30V with <80C during max heat stress testing in prime95. Mine is not stable at 4.8 even with 1.4V, just booting generated WHEA errors, not even running any benchmarks. It's a bit disappointing but I will try it later. Btw did you have to change any other voltages other than vcore ? I read that at high OCs it sometimes needs to add the pll to 1.8V. Strangely that is actually where my mainboard puts it by default so I did not want to push it any higher. The worst thing is that I've seen some screenshots of a guy running (apparently) stable 5 GHz at 1.39V, lucky bastard :-)

So I got the WC and OCed my 3570k to 4.6 GHz. Now I'm getting 2549 score in the test. I wanted to go for 5 GHz but I'm just unable to get it stable past 4.7 GHz. At 4.7 it's stable with 1.44V which is quite high, at 4.8 it generates WHEA errors and higher it doesn't even post. When I get it down to 4.6 GHz I get it stable at 1.30V. Unfortunately this seems to be the limit of my CPU :-( The temperatures are beautiful - 77-79C in the 8K prime95 test, overall about 10C lower during the other tests. Unfortunately I fear that pushing it harder would result in frying my CPU. I read that voltages past 1.4V are not good for the 3570k :-( Congrats on your nice chip BitMaster :-)

This is sweet! I just yesterday ordered 1070 and a 3rd monitor :-)

Nice results, thanks for sharing!

I have also 16GB RAM and I never had this problem. I would recommend re-enabling your page file so that background processes can be swapped away when DCS starts to demand more RAM. The thing you describe is really a non-issue today as GeorgeLKMT says. Current SSDs can happily work for many years without any negative effects. In fact they are built with additional memory chips to automatically replace any worn out sectors - this is all done automatically by the drive firmware. I wouldn't worry about it. In fact I just checked my OS SSD SMART data and after 16000 hours in operation (3+ years in use) I got only 2 relocated sectors so far.