Teriander
-
Posts
255 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Teriander
-
-
It would be great if we can have a mouse only option to move the mouse cursor. Right now if you move your VR headset, it will move the mouse cursor. This is problematic because the slightest movement of your head moves the cursor. Even a mm move and the cursor follows.
I know you can disable the mouse. But you should also have an option to disable the VR headset from moving the mouse as well and only use the mouse.
-
5
-
-
In real life, pilots have very dark visors that block out a lot of the sun and still allow them to read HUD and HMD information. This would be a better solution and one that I've requested for many years.
But I'm glad to see someone else like you is smart enough to notice this problem/lack of feature.You get my support!
-
1
-
-
Solved.. 2.2 is the legacy version. I need to purchase 3.0.
-
I am not using Steam DCS. But I just noticed I only have "The Enemy Within 2.2 DLC". Is the "3.0" version something that has to get purchased again even if you own 2.2?
-
Hello,
I can see this campaign in my A-10C list, but not in my A-10C II list. Am I missing something? I do own both A-10C and II.
-
2 hours ago, Max Mak said:
Yes, it should be a problem, I'm just waiting their upcoming patch to see if it was fixed. It's difficult to get the passion back to F/A-18C currently with the bugs. Just every updates I'm waiting for a fix, once I saw it was fixed I was excited and I immediately test it again and found that it didn't fixed. Then, I reported once again, not acknowledged and post merged to the original post, that's it. Okay, I go for a new thread to do several tests exactly the same again to show it didn't fixed. Therefore, I know your feeling well, sometimes we have to put more efforts to make things work, just be patient and don't give up, once it is a bug, it always a bug. Keep reporting until it was eventually fixed.
You're 100% exactly right. I'm starting to suspect someone in ED wants to sign it off as a complete asset so bugs like this are being written off as correct. I've reached the point where I no longer will submit bug reports. Oh well...
-
4
-
-
Reminds me when I reported ghost contacts and was told it was, "Correct as is.." When it clearly isn't.
Good luck getting this addressed.
-
Further research indicates this is issue currently under development by ED. So I wouldn't change much in your design. Though mission 8 might need some lovely touch of placement on some vehicles. But feel free to test on your end as well.
Again, lovely Campaign design.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, silverdevil said:
@Teriander i believe this is the post i mentioned. look at page 2 specifically
Yeah, the last picture you posted on the other thread looked awesome. I hope the rest of the vehicles are done soon. Right now the Campaign Im playing, just isn't playable as the vehicles I need to search for all look like grass temperature. Thanks for sharing that thread.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, silverdevil said:
i read in another post that each vehicle has texture files for IR sigs and that some were not completed. sorry i do not remember which post. so perhaps BTR/BMP is in the not complete group.
That actually makes sense. Thanks for sharing this info!
-
4 hours ago, Flappie said:
Look, this sim is HUGE. As new features and modules keep being added, more bugs appear, as in every software. AFAIK, some units are not FLIR-compatible yet. Since I cannot identify the units used in your screenshots, I don't know where to start, which is why I'm asking for a track.
Furthermore, providing tracks when reporting a bug help us, testers, save time (a lot). And the less free time we have, the less bug reports we deal with.
TL;DR More tracks = more time to test = less bugs in DCS.
But hey, if you dont want to provide a track, it's OK. NineLine said it's WIP, so I'll just move along and check other bug reports. And before you start calling ED names because of my answer, know that I'm not an ED employee: I'm just a player like you.
I think you're over reacting a bit much. First, I'd never "call ED names", not even sure what that's suppose to mean. Second, the track system is very buggy. Hence the reason I've submitted a bug report in the past, but BIGNEWY said he couldn't play it as it was too long or something. But you really don't need a track to reproduce the issue. You definitely do not need to get upset either.
It's really simple to reproduce the steps that I've listed above. Select a Russia BMP. I'll add that in there. It's not hard to reproduce.
-
Attack a track? Seriously? Just open up the program, fly the A-10C in the Persian Golf Map, turn on the TGP set to WHOT, look at a vehicle.
You really don't need a track to get identical results.
-
1
-
-
I've just noticed after watching a video on on this mission, the issue appears to be a new problem with a 2022 patch. The issue doesn't exist in the 2021 video.
-
Too add to this, it appears it was a bit more accurate in 2021. Here is a comparison on a campaign from 2021 and today. If I didn't already know where the target was, sitting there with its engine running, I would have NEVER spotted it.
-
First, great campaign. I love everything about it so far. But I have two issues I'd like to share.
First, one of the issues is something you can't really address because it's a DCS engine failure. That is the inaccuracy with running vehicle temperatures viewed through a TGP. Attached is a screenshot below of a real world comparison. As you can see, in the real world, running vehicles are very white. But in DCS, vehicles are the same temperature as grass and dirt. But you could work around this issue by not having vehicles in bushes or trees where their lack of visibility in the TGP is highly unrealistic.
Second, on mission eight.....
SpoilerMy second objective is to escort British tanks who are ambushed by T-72s that are about 5,000ft away, but the convoy give me a 9-nine approach to start 10 miles away (from the TV Mast) with minimum detail on the location of the T-72s. I can not review the 9-nine again (could on previous 9-nine callouts), nor could I request additional information on the enemy's position.
This is highly unrealistic, because if friendly tanks are being surgically eradicated, the last thing they would do is send an A-10 10 miles away as a starting position, and the first thing they'd do give as much detail on the enemy's position as possible. Even detailing what the type of trees the enemy tanks are hiding behind, their distance from a road or building, anything that could give them an exact location. I felt this part of the mission was lacking communication options.
Other than that, so far this is a great campaign!
-
This has been a problem in the A-10C for both I and II. I've seen it for 10 years now...
Vehicles with running engines in DCS are practically the same temperature as the ground, even in desert environments. This is highly unrealistic. I posted a screenshot of a DCS BMP and a real-world TGP from an A-10, both in WHOT and the real-world TGP shows the vehicle as almost pure white. Where the DCS vehicle is the same temp as the ground (Persian Golf Map). Both terrain environments are very similar.
If you guys sign this off as, "Correct-as-is" then it's clear you just don't want to fix it.
-
BUG:
Mission 1 - When landing on the carrier, if the LSO waves you off, but you still successfully landed, the LSO thinks you're still flying and says, "We'll catch you next time." Resulting in a mission failure even if you're parked on the deck. Unless you take off again and land just to please the LSO.
There should definitely be a variable to know if you've landed successfully and only a penalty if you were told to wave off. An LSO expecting you to take off again just to please him, isn't right.
-
I have also had a hard time locking onto targets with the LHAQ WELL within 40nm and well within the gimbal limit. Literally had targets on my nose from 20-15nm and still had a hard time locking it.
Personally I think this should be investigated further. Especially considering others have had similar experience.
-
This happens to me ALL the time on the GS server. I've reported it as a bug and included the track. But apparently ED can't open tracks from Multiplayer files, despite the fact I'm able to open the same track file without any problems. Perhaps ED needs to report the track files failing to open on their machines as a bug?
I've also provided a video recording, but apparently ED doesn't understand what's going on in the video.... Basically you can't win reporting this bug. All my F-18 friends have experienced this bug, but ED can't reproduce it or considers it "Correct as is".
Link to my similar report on this issue.
-
7 minutes ago, MARLAN_ said:
I watched the video, it seems to me there are a handful of bugs/issues at work here.
Bug 1) The Lock/Shoot Light Assembly Lock Indication should display a green light when the radar is in track (STT) and not track memory, it appears after testing that this light illuminates with only a L&S designation.
Bug 2) The track appears to "ghost" and continue flying despite being destroyed, there is another bug report about this (trying to find it, I'll edit in later)
Not a Bug) A L&S can be set on any track file, including offboard, and does not require radar contribution. While this MSI feature has not been fully realized in DCS yet, this particular part is not a bug. You could certainly have an L&S behind you if so designated although currently in DCS you require radar contribution so the track will drop after your aging expires (a different topic in of itself)
I agree with bug 1 and bug 2. Question on your third comment...
It is true the the radar contribution will provide updated positioning of a target, but if the target is masked behind a mountain, even with "aging", it is displayed as a broken box only if the radar can see it. A solid box is only if the target is within line-of-sight. I'm clearly behind a mountain with a solid box targeted. Even if the target is behind me, well passed the expired "age" of the tracking remembrance. Is that accurate?
For example, if I were to cycle targets that are behind on my SA page. My radar isn't going to give me a box at my 6 O'CLock. Is that correct?
But this video and the track I provided is more than enough proof something is going on. This shouldn't be a "Correct-as-is" conclusion.
-
4 or 8 seconds, nothing higher. And when a target is masked by a mountain, it should be a broken box, not a solid one. This is solid the entire time. It's clearly a bug.
-
But this is from the same track I attached in my original post. For some reason I can play the track fine, but you're unable to...
Basically if you watch my target box after the kill, it stays tracking a target, even when Im flying away from the target. That never happened in the past. My canopy clearly says "LOCK" on a target that is at my 6 O'Clock. Even flying over 20 miles out and below the mountains. I wish I could help you further but if you're able to resolve the issue of the track loading on your end, it will help show what's going on....
-
I created a video of what's happening. This never happened prior to the patch. But you're saying this is normal behavior? Even the the word "Lock" is on in the top right text of my canopy. On a target that is 180 degrees behind me...
-
That's right, my radar can maintain locking targets behind me or through mountains. This was reported before and dismissed as "Unable to Reproduce." But I now have a track view to prove it. I hope this helps!
Here is also a screenshot. Notice the yellow Star target is behind me. That is what my radar has locked on. I was also able to see the lock on through my HMD by turning my head 180 degrees and looking at the locked target through the backseat of my headrest. Should not happen.
Link to the track - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V3mgYbB8HaEsc9j_Z2QTR4iEIUWVMfRT/view?usp=sharing
Issue starts around in game clock - 09:43.
VR Head Set Stop Moving My Cursor
in DCS Core Wish List
Posted
Goto your game options, I think it's under the VR Options tab.