B25Mitch

EDIT: RESOLVED I am doing a clean DCS 1.5 install. Attempting to install Mig-21bis from the module manager, after the file download completes an activation message (admin rights) appears and I click yes. This results in the error below: I then click exit, and the same set of Activation > Error windows appear again. I have also tried this with the registry fix, the 1.5 hotfix, and uninstalling/reinstalling the module, all with no success. This continues to occur every time I start DCS, unless I delete the module. EDIT: A SYSTEM REBOOT SOLVED THIS ACTIVATION ISSUE

Haven't played DCS in a while, mainly due to the sorry state of the aging graphics engine. 1.5 might just reel me back in if it's as good as everyone's expecting, and NTTR would be a welcome bonus :)

Yes, it's awful. I believe ED's policy is to upgrade one particle effect per year - let's hope this one is next :smilewink:

I was thinking December 19th too.

I just thought I'd bring to everyone's attention that today's EDGE screenshots revealed that particle shadowing will be supported. Note the shadow from the wing on the tire smoke: This alone will make particle effects look slightly better, but I think it reveals an interest in rejuvenating the particle effects in general, possibly the weakest area of the current graphics engine.

I'm running a GTX 570 1.25GB. Using the MiG-21 startup training mission (default cockpit view) as a benchmark on high graphics settings, my average FPS improved from 21.5 to 23.5, or about a 9% improvement. This is still less than half of the FPS I get during the A-10C startup training mission (49FPS).

I also experienced this.

The Ka-50 visual damage model is the most detailed of all the DCS modules so far. It also seems to respond to damage fairly realistically, since it takes a lot of punishment to actually down it, but not nearly as much to render it combat ineffective. (similar to the A-10C). The Huey and Hip can sometimes take more hits and still be combat effective due to their simple weapons systems, but shooting them down outright is easier than downing a Ka-50.

Note that there is currently a bug preventing the autopilot channels from working in the Mi-8, which makes it a lot more difficult to fly. You can find the fix here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128655

As far as I'm aware, there's no terrain self-shadowing for the Georgia map.

Second pic taken under identical conditions. Note the improvements: 1.) Grass (obviously). 2.) Far more pronounced shadows, including shadowed grass. 3.) Better visibility (note Mt. Erebus on horizon). 4.) Better terrain shading. 5.) More realistic sky haze. 6.) Improved ambient lighting on the Abrams. 7.) More lush terrain colouring. DCS 2.0 will look fantastic.

It makes no sense to abbreviate "Miles per Hour" to "Mph", because both have the same number of syllables. However, saying "Kph" is reasonable since it has half as many syllables as "Kilometres per Hour", and therefore takes half as long to pronounce. Of course, you could go all the way and just abbreviate it to "K's", but that could refer to either distance or speed and may be confusing.

The are many arguments for a worn cockpit in the MiG-21. I'll list a few: 1.) The MiG is still in service today, but is much older than the Lock On/FC series aircraft. Because the Fishbed and the aircraft from Lock On/FC will likely be participating in the same scenarios and will be seen side-by-side, it makes sense for the MiG to appear more aged. 2.) Soviet aircraft are commonly seen in developing countries with limited resources to maintain them. While Russian examples may be in better condition, the fact that newer and more capable Russian aircraft are available as FC modules means that mission designers will probably lean towards using the MiG-21 in other factions. 3.) Digital art makes use of weathering to increase the visual authenticity of the image. Extremely clean CG objects are often perceived to be 'fake', and need certain imperfections to be believable. This is universally recognized in the gaming industry, and is a core component of artistic representation. 4.) The entire concept of DCS is heavily reliant on becoming intimately acquainted with an aircraft. Players feel that aircraft have 'personality', and weathering is key in establishing a notion of uniqueness, as it implies that the particular plane has a long and interesting back story, rather than being a sterile machine fresh off the production line. The popularity of weathered cockpit mods reflects this phenomenon. Note that none of these points imply that a clean cockpit would be unwelcome. However, since LN only has the resources to create one version, the reasons above dictate that the 'dirty' version is the wiser choice.

The following chart can be used to determine the effects of blast overpressure on a human subject for a given weight in TNT. While the design of the bomb can accentuate overpressure effects to a degree, it is probably safe to assume that the bomb would not be more effective than its total mass in TNT. source:http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA286212 Note that this completely ignores the effects of shrapnel. The chart indicates a probable kill line about 30m (100ft) from a 1000kg blast. Beyond this range shrapnel is the only significant factor, which is based on probability with an inverse-square falloff. source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/usmc/mcwp/3-23-1/appf.pdf This chart indicates a Mk84 10% PI at 225m (note that the unguided Mk84 figure is inflated to 325m to account for risk of aiming error). It is therefore likely that a Mk84 may be expected to reliably kill unprotected infantry at 100-200m range. 'Soft' vehicles would be only slightly more resilient than infantry. Assume a 50% PI of 100m. Armoured vehicles, however, would probably need to be within the overpressure zone (<30m) to be disabled. source: created by B25Mitch

If money's tight you're better off getting a TrackIR and cheap stick, instead of a HOTAS and no TrackIR. As long as the stick has rudimentary axis functions it will suffice. Precision, while nice, is not strictly necessary. Paveway guided bombs, for example, have zero control precision - the steering fins only do full deflection ("bang-bang") motion, and yet it can bullseye a moving vehicle. Likewise, it is technically possible to fly any DCS aircraft with nothing more than an XBox360 controller. I've tried this on a few occasions with the Huey, and once you have learned to predict the behaviour of the aircraft, it's easy. Having a precise HOTAS will do nothing to prevent pilot-induced oscillation - that's all to do with predicting the aircraft's motion. So don't worry too much about having the best joystick. A TrackIR will benefit you far more.