Biggus

I'd really appreciate if they could collaborate on an all-in-one install. Right now I'm using HDS but I'd also love to use the other mod on my server, and while I don't have too many problems modifying files to make it all work, I will have problems when I try to guide others joining my server through the process.

As @edmuss says, while you can't do it through the BIOS, you can with those tools. Hopefully AMD will consider opening up the BIOS a little to allow it one day. The very different experiences people seem to have with temperature control in my opinion simply comes down to the internal layout of the cooler block and the compromises many seem to make to accommodate a wide variety of socket designs.

We're getting a little off topic, but I found that some 240mm AIOs weren't up to the task of keeping my 5800X at a reasonable temp, even at idle. 3600XT was quite easy to keep cool, as are the 5600Xs I've played with. There's a large amount of current running through a very small area, and the actual CPU interface of some coolers apparently struggle to pull the heat away efficiently. Spending time to set up some negative curves in PBO is well worthwhile, although it can be a little bit frustrating to perfect. This has been a really good thread so far. I'm still undecided on whether it's worthwhile to go from the 5800X to the 5800X3D just for VR, but it's been very informative.

Looks very much like an ED problem to me.

On a slight tangent, ED-developed modules (Hornet, Viper, Warthog and probably others) are still getting active-off-the-rail RWR warnings for 54s fired in TWS, at least from AI. I haven't been able to test with player piloted Tomcats yet. I'd be genuinely surprised if it wasn't true for players and probably explains a bit of the mixed results that people seem to be having in PvP. I've reported it and it's being investigated, but worth being aware of in the meantime.

I'm going to go against the grain and say that yes, hardware can matter. The caveat is that you need to have reached a point where the resolution of the hardware is holding you back, rather than a lack of hours spent building experience. You should be able to hold a reasonable formation with pretty low-end hardware, though. I went from a Warthog base where I was able to connect but unable to stay connected for more than 2,000lb at a time, and then I switched to a WarBRD. Instantly was able to go from fumes to full on a single connection. But I'd had thousands of hours in DCS on the Warthog (several hundred just in the Tomcat alone) and I suspect that I'm probably an edge case. I know there are plenty of people out there managing just fine with low-end peripherals, but this is just my experience.

This cannot be overemphasized. If you send a salvo of four -54s at a flight of four bandits now, they'll all defend as soon as the first missile goes active. You might hit the first one, but the rest will probably escape. The days of wholesale slaughter from six-phoenix volleys are over.

The track has a single AI F-14B against a flight of four hornets. Four AIM-54s are fired, each tracking a separate target. On some occasions I do see an apparent swapping of locks with one or two of those missiles, but it's clear that the missiles are tracking different targets.

This is apparently no longer true.

You are incorrect. This is no longer true. To test this, I used four ship formations as the victims for the AI F-14. In the pic below, a single AI F-14B has rippled four -54s starting from around 35nm. Immediate warning on RWR.

I've just reported a bug that seems to be related to the way that ED-developed modules detect TWS phoenix launches that might explain why some people are having mixed results. There are some gaping holes in my testing though, as I've only tested them on Caucasus (and PG for the Viper), and I haven't been able to arrange to have a human shoot at me yet. The Hornet, the Viper and the A-10C2 all detect a TWS phoenix of any variety fired by AI immediately. As far as their RWRs are concerned, those missiles are hot off the rail at any range. I have not been able to test with a player flown F-14, but I would not be surprised if it was true of player launched 54s too. If any of you folks reading this post could possibly test that out, it would be appreciated. There are other ED modules I do not own that I cannot test, so the bug may also be present in modules I haven't been able to report on. I can say that if you are flying a Mirage 2000C or F-14, the RWR gives you a warning at the expected ranges when the phoenix is meant to go active.

Firstly, apologies for what is going to appear as the third installment of a duplicate post (the others being on the Hornet and Viper bug subforums), and if the three of these posts need to be moved or merged, then please feel free to do so. I debated posting a single post in the weapons bugs thread, but I don't believe this is a weapons bug and is more likely to be only impacting ED-developed modules based upon my admittedly incomplete testing. AIM-54 TWS launches are detected as being active at what I believe to be unrealistically long ranges. This bug is also present in the Viper and Hornet, and maybe be in other modules too (however it is not present in the M-2000C and the Tomcat). I do not believe that I should be getting an active warning at 40nm. These missiles appear to be active as they leave the F-14's rail. I have only tested this on the Caucasus map so far, although the identical issue for the Viper is present on the Persian Gulf map. I also have only tested against AI F-14s, and not against player F-14s. My system specs are as follows: 5800X, RTX 3070, 32gb ram, DCS is installed on an SSD. My test mission includes a player-led flight of A-10C2s against a single red F-14B supported by a red A-50. A10C2vsF14B.trk dcs.log

I think I've found a potential bug with the RWR indicating a TWS launched AIM-54 at some rather long ranges that seems to be present in the ED modules I've tested but absent from the third party modules. I've just made the same bug report in the Viper bugs subforum, but I'll add one here and in the Warthog bugs subforum too. I would expect that a TWS-guided phoenix would not give much or any warning prior to going active at relatively close distances (I'd have expected less than 12nm depending on the usual variables). Right now, the Hornet detects a TWS launch of any phoenix variant from any AI Tomcat variant on the Caucasus map. System specs are: 5800X, RTX 3070, 32gb ram with DCS on an SSD. I haven't yet been able to test against humans, and I haven't yet tested the Hornet on other maps (although the same bug with the Viper is also present on the Persian Gulf). FA18CvsF14B.trk dcs.log

Found something interesting with the Viper RWR (also seems to be occurring with other ED modules, but not the third party modules I've tested). AIM-54 TWS launches are detected by RWR immediately as the missile leaves the rail, regardless of range. I am under the impression that this is incorrect behavior. I've attached a track and a log. My system specs are as follows: 5800X, RTX 3070, 32 gb DDR3600. DCS is running on an SSD. The test missions included a single red F-14B (ROE weapons free), a single red A-50 and four friendly blue vipers, on both Caucasus and Persian Gulf. Quick edit: I should note that the behavior was present with all AI F-14 variations, as well as each of the Phoenix variants. I should also mention that thus far, I haven't tested against player Tomcats. F16CvsF14B.trk dcs.log PG F16CvsF14B.trk

I've just spent seven minutes and fifty five seconds looking and I can't see it. @NineLine might be worth posting a link to this on hoggit if you haven't already. Might get more eyes on this thread.

Cold or possibly flanking bandit roughly co-alt at low level? 8nm is marginal. I'd be holding fire til 2nm or rethinking my missile selection. So much of the current feedback is from people not understanding how over-modeled the old Phoenix was at lower altitudes, and it makes it hard to separate that phenomenon from actual bugs. Tacviews would be very helpful.

Absolutely agree. They'll be working hard on getting it ready. Once we see another video, we'll know the time is getting closer. It would be nice to get a quick word from one of the devs as to how they're progressing, but I completely understand the radio silence. I just wish them all the luck and hope that it's a roaring success for them. I can't wait to get my grubby hands on this module.

2080ti is still a good GPU. Right now if you were going to upgrade from that, I'd say to wait until after the next generation is released. A 5800X3D is a great upgrade from your 2700X though.

One of the fun things about the AM4 stuff has been that along with ease of upgrading my gaming box from 3600XT to 5800X, the old parts were pretty easily turned into a dedi server box. Looks like my dedi server box will be getting the current 5800X soon after that review, thanks @Voyager. Liberation was still a bit rubber-bandy on a dedi server instance on my gaming rig, but it's been rock solid running on the server box.

I think it will still be useful for forcing a bandit to defend while you close for the fox-2, provided you're up against adversaries with peer-level abilities and low SA.

I'd love to grab these skins, @Strut! They look awesome! Where can I download them?

My understanding is that they had short shelf lives and that might have impacted upon their general effectiveness. The Super 530s were entirely new missiles and were roughly on par with the AIM-7F and -M. Maybe 10nm head on at high closure for the R530. It's very hard to separate out the poor performance of the weapon from the performance of the early radars that were guiding the semi active variant. The IR variant was rear aspect only and might be usable out to 3nm. Like a really big AIM-9B. I find it hard to make predictions about how it will stack up in the game against the Flogger's Fox-1s. Kinematically I'd expect to see the R-23/-24 to perform a bit better than the R.530. There are other factors that come into play though. Most Floggers IRL had poor look-down capability, much like the early Cyrano IV. If that's true in DCS (and this is a massive if, as I believe that most AI have unrealistically high LD stats), then a range disadvantage may not be too hard to offset with some situational awareness and good tactical sense. However if in this case our Flogger AI has the ability to track and launch on things 20,000ft below and 20nm in front of him, life's going to be harder than it should be.

Can't say I'm a fan of this new layout. I much preferred being able to access everything from the main index.

I assumed it might be a pretty difficult task. In the meantime, I might include one of the HAD-friendly radars on the sites just to give players a signal to slew the TGP onto.

Just wondering whether the SA-12/20/23 should be appearing on the HAD in the Viper? I've played a couple of missions lately where they aren't showing up. I assume that is just a DCS limitation, but just wanted to confirm the behavior.