rob10

That's because DCS itself has NVidia stuff embedded into it for DLSS. You might not be able to use it with AMD graphics card, but I presume there is some sort of requirement to have that splash screen in the licensing agreement for it.

And see if either of these threads help. 1st one may help with the not reversing, 2nd was someone with a similar problem.

Have you tried clearing the calibration on you WH? Try doing that in the Windows game controller. I know way back when it was always recommended to use the TM software to calibrate it and if you used the Windows tools you could mess things up. IIRC this is not an issue anymore, but worth clearing the calibration and redoing it one way or the other.

As an FYI, pretty sure that Nineline (or at least someone official from ED) has said at this point that ED does not have the F-15 source code. Rest of your post is completely valid points, just wanted to mention this.

Actually the OH-58 accidentally received an unfinished and partial update (which likely broke more than it fixed or added since it was not supposed to be included). Polychop has already posted this in a few places.

Check the Thrustmaster subforum in the PC Hardware and other devices/Inputs section. Pretty sure I've seen someone have this issue in past, but I can't remember what the final conclusion on it was.

Fair point, I should have re-read that to see exactly what the wrong word was.

Realize that the big difference in the more recent updates is that the recent ones have had a lot of map updates, and map updates tend to be MUCH bigger than just core/aircraft modules. I'll be very happy to get back to smaller updates (my internet sucks so these patches are a 24 hour download for me) but I really like what the map updates have done, so I won't say stop doing them.

Any ideas what this is (from patch notes): Weapons: Added the ability to restrict proximity fuze functioning to negative closure rates only. What practically is this used for? What missiles (I'm assuming missiles) does it apply to? Where would you do it (cockpit, ground crew only)? It was in the general section so not really obvious.

I wonder if that's an avoiding copyright issue like the "Halton" Hotel (or something similar) in Sinai.

In fairness to the "risk of new problems", Polychop have said NONE of their stuff was supposed to be in this update. That's a very atypical situation to have happen.

I presume you're likely on STEAM? There is no pre-purchase possible on Steam currently. You'll have to wait and see if ED comes up with a workaround like Afghanistan (a short sale either at or shortly after release to give equivalent discount).

Skip the screenshot and save the track file when you close the mission (it's an option on the bottom of the debrief screen -- ideally make it as short as possible) and post it. That will allow people to actually reproduce what you're doing rather than one specific point in time on your screen.

If I have my terminology correct (which I won't guarantee ) one is primarily concerned with air targets, the other with ground targets. If I'm wrong, someone will no doubt correct me shortly

The unfortunate reality is that DCS is niche market of a niche market. It just doesn't have the numbers of users that a FPS type game has, which is where multiple game releases happen. It also has a lot more complexity in what its doing. Most of this type of game are actually a "side hustle" of the actual military side of the business (DCS and a certain tank simulator are good examples) or we likely wouldn't have them at all. I'm actually amazed we get what we do for the price do considering the numbers. The good news is that BIG features tend to get baked in the background with little fanfare or information to spring (maybe not quite) fully formed out of the blue some day. MT was a great example. There were a vocal number of people who were convinced ED had abandoned it, it was never coming etc, then suddenly it was announced as coming in the next update. Sure somethings go by the wayside (i.e. the mid-level FC replacement), but mostly stuff they have talked about eventually does get done.

Since it would likely be the AI team working on this, all kinds of AI enemy (and even wingman) behaviours. As razo+r said, it's also not as easy as just moving someone from fixing a radar to this. Those would take two completely different skillsets and the radar guy might decide to move on if you suddenly want them to make AI (assuming it wouldn't take them an extended period go get up to speed on doing that). Coming from years of MSFS before DCS and having done BMS I can fully appreciate the value of a better ATC. I'd love to have it. But it's 10 min or less at the start and end of the mission. For SP I miss it, for MP it would be a challenge to work around it, those are the reasons why it's not my highest priority. Better AIC or GCI I could get more excited about, but I don't really lump them in with ATC

It's still got an active Discord. I can't imagine there's a lot to say as you get close to the end and are finishing/polishing things. And they've already said they have an internal release target date set, so I'd be shocked if we don't see it before spring.

ATC complete re-write is a long term project that is being worked on as previously stated by ED. What priority level it has/how far along it is is unknown. Lots of people would like to see it improved, but there are lots of people who would also argue there are a lot of higher priority items.

Wow, just wow. How do you know more people = done faster? If they're optimizing objects that are used all across the map there are only a limited number of people that can work on any given thing without being in each others way. If it's hand placing specific objects in specific places on the map maybe there is an advantage to more people, but I doubt there's a lot of that going on currently. Same with a "... rather large application codebase...". There are likely lots of different semi-independent systems within that application. There probably aren't that many in a DCS map.

Ya totally forgot visible before activation option as mentioned by @Weta43. That's your simple option for a late activatable unit.

Depending what it is, you may be able to make it uncontrolled or else set it in the Advanced Waypoint Actions as HOLD with a trigger to stop that condition in that WP action for when you're as close as you want. Note that you want that trigger in the actual advanced waypoint, not as a regular trigger (or set a flag in the regular triggers and use it in the advanced waypoints STOP CONDITION).

1st thing I'd try is removing your mods (I see at least the Bronco).

Just realize that that blurb in the changelog is strictly referring to changes how the calculations are done, not any actual change to what the actual basis of the calculations themselves are, so I don't think you can expect to see any change in AI seeing through things based on those changes. The next sentence after what you highlight explicitly says the change was moving parts of the calculations to a different thread.

That's likely a case of your anti-virus getting too horny and blocking or interfering with it. Recently a transport.dll started causing some people issues and excluding DCS from AV solved it.

Are the BTR's an uncontrolled unit rather than a static? If so, this is a known and reported bug (and from the description it sounds like this bug).