SharpeXB

In 4K the old 2.8 dots are pretty much invisible. But at lower resolutions they were an unrealistic exploit in the game, hence the need to create a new system. Prior to this update the setting read “Improved Spotting Dots” On or Off which is exactly what it did. It turned the new ones on and off, but there were always dots. On and Off just toggled the version. Now the setting just reads “Spotting Dots” implying that now there is just one style. I guess that answers it

This still doesn’t make sense. What’s the difference between: Spotting Dots: AUTO and Spotting Dots: AUTO (local)? The first obviously means that the setting is forced to Auto for everyone. In the second, this means they’re player-selected? Then why say “Auto”? How can a setting be both enforced and player-selected? Just say this: Spotting Dots: (local) And replace the obscure term “local” with “player-selected”

With the (local) setting this is how the other players can make you appear. Visible at 35 miles or as giant cubes The exploit in this example is of course being done by lowering the resolution to 1080x1920 and selecting 2 pixel dots.

An in-game setting that’s an exploit We’ll see how long it takes for people to realize this and force it off.

As far as I can tell they’re all set for Off (Local) but that means players are free to exploit the system and just select big 2 pixel dots.

I guess that defeats the purpose of having a mission setting

Thank you! Now I’m curious what Off (local) means. Does this mean they are still player controlled or forced off for everyone?

Nice!

@Arad12 That’s “Iron Dome batteries” in English

This is already being done now. It’s called “Early Access”. In terms of the language used, the words “early” and “access” have more positive connotations than “minimum” or “viable”. Many people might want something “early” but less would probably find a product labeled as “minimum” very appealing.

The max temp for a i9-14900K is 100c so you are fine. https://community.intel.com/t5/Processors/i9-14900K-Temperatures-100º/td-p/1543181 Mine will get up to perhaps 90 sometimes under load so if those temps are what you get running DCS that actually seems pretty good.

Oh I get it. Just saying if you’re actually ready and stable behind the tanker using your keyboard or whatever isn’t difficult (on a monitor) Agree having a button assigned is of course better. That’s a relatively recent improvement.

Although mapping radio commands is a great idea, if you find it difficult to click “Ready Pre-Contact” you aren’t actually ready You should be stable enough behind the tanker at this point that you could let go of the stick and use your keyboard.

That’s really just the case in games like this, meant primarily for 2D but being run in VR. I know this is a VR discussion but that sounds like some observation about games in general. Very rarely do I see games that are so demanding that they can’t be played maxed out on top hardware. DCS can, again only in 2D as intended.

VR by its nature is about 3x as demanding to run as 2D. Since these games are primarily made for 2D, it wouldn’t be realistic to try and max out all the settings.

To do a repair, just go to the Windows Start Menu, under Eagle Dynamic select Repair DCS

People miss seeing things all the time. In games and IRL. They wouldn’t say “lose sight or lose the fight” if that didn’t happen. I miss seeing stuff all the time in these games but that doesn’t really mean there’s anything wrong with the game. Some those aircraft are fantastically visible in a replay, I just didn’t see it because I didn’t happen to be looking at it, not because it was invisible. The use of labels and icons in these games has convinced many players that seeing these things should be that easy. It’s funny that CFS games put labels on your enemies when FPS opponents are much less visible sometimes. Imagine how ridiculous that would be if those games had labels like this.

That aircraft would be super easy to see in the real game since it’s moving. Also it’s too large for a spotting dot to help with unless the dot was a giant cube covering the whole plane. A spotting dot of just a pixel or so in size would be smaller than the 3D model at this range. I don’t understand why you say you didn’t see this. It’s totally visible in your screenshot. In a still image it looks like a tree though.

Compressed still screenshots don’t illustrate this issue very accurately. In real gameplay the image quality is better and the target is moving. An aircraft at this distance is usually quite easy to see depending on color and aspect etc. If it’s camouflaged against terrain then the camouflage is functioning as intended.

It’s a reasonable guess that this would involve making spherical maps and the ability to stream the content. I figure multiplayer is least likely to use such large maps as this game mode can’t be paused. Such long flights wouldn’t be practical. SP would really need a save game feature IMO to make the use of any larger maps practical.

Two factors that would seem to make this impractical or impossible are: - Performance - The spherical projection incorporated into these flat maps not aligning with one another. I assume new technology for the planned global map would be necessary for something like this. Using these existing maps without some substantial rework doesn’t seem possible. Also I think the game needs a save feature before introducing maps which are too large to be playable. There’s no point in being able to fly from England to Berlin and back if you can save the progress of the mission.

You can turn them on and off with key commands, I believe it’s Shift+F10. That might just cycle them instead of On/Off.

So the zoom speed change takes effect only then? That’s odd. Maybe try running a repair?

Not sure what this means. Zoom in the menu screen?