rob10

ST is not fully unsupported yet, but it is being phased out (ED has indicated this for >6 months now) so support is more limited. Honestly I think ED were planning to have it gone by now but they're having issues with some newer systems choking on MT so they haven't fully depreciated ST yet while they continue to work on that issue. Unfortunately I doubt there is anything you can do to fix it on your end short of running MT (this is a known and reported issue in ST). Otherwise your hoping for ED to decide it's worth the effort to fix it in ST.

While the rest of your points may hold, it clearly was intentional to remove it currently. To quote directly from ORT's post: "Yes, this part of the map was removed from the build intentionally."

Just to point out that NineLine has clarified that it was SPECULATION on his behalf that this was the reason for removal. So don't use that post in your consideration of why. If it was Urga, then a pox on them along with ORT and Urga should announce that fact it they weren't involved because they're getting mud on their reputation by default currently. Since ORT didn't name or imply who the 3rd party was, it's possible (as was suggested by another poster) that this is a licensing issue with ORT and wherever they got their base data from. Either way doesn't matter because ORT is deservedly taking a hit for the way they've handled this, but I'm holding off judgement on Urga until we know the details.

In fairness, we don't know Urga has anything to do with this. NineLine speculated that it was about stepping on a third parties toes (i.e. Urga), but the ORT post doesn't imply that. As another poster suggested, this could be about licensing with wherever ORT got their base data from. That's very plausible since the chopped area follows a major lat/long grid line (logical spot for licensing to stop) and apparently doesn't really match up with where Syria goes to. Either way, the end result looks bad on ORT and more so that it wasn't announced ahead of time or even in the changelog.

When I finally got done downloading the update I did get the prompt to restart system or cancel.

Check your anti-virus. High likelihood that it has quarantined a file or two from the F-15.

No, but yes on needing to enable . It is default now, but depends what shortcuts you're using (and if you're in Steam that's a whole different complication). Easiest thing is check that is says Multithread preview before version name on the main screen. If it does you're good to go. Otherwise you might need to update your shortcuts. If you were installing from scratch it would set them up default as MT. If you previously were using MT you should be good. If you previously had been using ST you'll likely need to update. And Steam you're more likely to need to change things (I don't use it, so I can't give you good directions on it).

First off: I really liked the Sinai map we've had for the last year and it's been one of my favs despite the fact that it has some issues. And while it was annoying, I was willing to accept the really long wait for the update because I had faith that there would be a lot of updates/fixes included. Unfortunately, it seems they have taken that time to build new objects/eyecandy etc (which is great, no one is going to complain they exist), but haven't bothered to spend time fixing the basic items that make so much more difference to actually flying (i.e. navaids, bridges) and would have improved the map much more than the new objects/airports. Given the time that was being taken, it was my expectation that this polishing was what was going on, but apparently I was wrong in that assumption. I don't know the reasons for pulling part of the detailed Isreal area (a dispute with Urga or licensing issue with another outside party on base data are both plausible) but ORT has seriously damaged it's reputation by taking a year to put out a patch which was mostly added eye candy with very little fixing AND THEN not informing your customers you were removing part of the map (more so if ORT was already planning that this was only going to be a temporary removal). I might not have liked it, but it wouldn't have hurt your reputation with me if you'd been up front. I'm willing to see things from both sides and understand what I want might not be what's going to happen for legitimate reasons, but in this case you've moved me from a "promoter" and "defender" of this map to an unhappy customer. I no longer have faith that ORT is going to fix/improve the little things that have so much more impact day to day than "fancy new eye candy".

No. At some point ED will likely clean things up in a patch, but it will work fine under the old Open Beta structure until then.

Seriously? This was a really poor decision to remove part of the map (whoever was responsible) but to claim "hiding threads through merging to avoid bad publicity" is a bit much. ED regularly merges threads so stuff stays together rather than having a responses spread everywhere. Controversial subject or not. It makes sense to do so.

Since the patch notes have this in the "KNOWN ISSUES" section I would say yes: "Known issue: Performance drop in some populated multiplayer servers when the “Select Role” window is displayed. We’ve determined several optimization steps we are working on currently."

Shouldn't happen, but this doesn't seem to be majority of users that are losing settings. Not sure what causes you to have the issue (and it sucks that you do), but since it's not a common issue it's going to be challenging to fix it.

I'm still hours away from download finishing, and it's good that they did mention that in the changelog, but from the posts it sounds like it DIDN'T prompt (just restarted) and while I tend to be pretty good at reading things (OK, maybe I overestimate how much I just skim ) I totally missed that. It really should actually PROMPT if it doesn't.

I'm actually going to say my comments in my 1st post still stand. I am running the full 3 WinWing MIP screen set up and run SimAppPro and I've NEVER had it want to restart from changing any F-18 controls. There are definitely some display settings that do require restart, but I can't remember having many issues with that and WinWing MIP's either. I won't argue against having an option, but I can see why it would be a low priority to add it.

This is probably a good starting thread to look at:

Sorry, but if this was strictly a DCS bug you'd be seeing posts all over about it. There aren't many. Typically if it's crashing you to a full system restart you should be checking your hardware to start.

Was fixed in a recent patch.

Thanks to all the creators that keep updating things as DCS changes! Appreciate your work!! I wish you didn't have to do it, but I'm not sure how you get around continually updating/(hopefully) improving DCS without ending up with things broken in previous missions . It's an unfortunate tradeoff.

Off the top, you should expand your pagefile to at least 32 GB. You only have 16 GB physical RAM and currently you only have 5 GB pagefile. That's not enough to run DCS. You really should aim for minimum of 32 GB physical if possible. From your logfile: System RAM: 16305 MB, Pagefile: 5120 MB

Yes, but not necessarily ones that DCS has in it (i.e. Canada)

Likely yes (NOTE: only likely). BigNewy or Nineline indicated it was in testing but wasn't going to make the previously released patch but hopefully would make the next one. So as long as they don't find any significant bugs that need fixing I would expect to see it in the next update.

Not sure why your DCS is restarting with changes to controller bindings in the main menu. What setting/which aircraft/window? I can change settings and it doesn't cause a restart whether done from menu or in game. Usually it's display settings that cause a restart. I'd RE-NAME (so you can get your settings back if it doesn't help) your DCS Saved Games file and see if it's still doing it. Sounds like a config file is corrupted somewhere.

I have no issue with this being added (I don't use VR so it really doesn't effect me one way or the other). But I'd just like to point out that a) VR is not a majority of DCS users (likely). b) don't assume that everything "simple" is actually easy/fast to program. c) EVERY OPTION no matter how simple is going to have have a performance hit. It may be negligible on it's own, but when you add a bunch of them it's eventually going to add up and matter. So while this seems simple and easy and no cost and something everyone wants, reality is it may not be easy, no impact and something that benefits a large part of the user base (in fact as pointed out above, not all VR users want it). So just because THIS particular wish hasn't been implemented since 2018 doesn't mean that ED doesn't do things that users request (they have), and isn't evidence that DCS is a pyramid scheme.

Reported bug from a a while ago: