SharpeXB

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?

Yes, great idea! I’m sure you mean things like the new fog and lighting effects etc. Or training missions with new weapons or systems. Most people probably do not use the mission editor so creating missions just to see these isn’t an option for many players.

Right. I just mean the setting. On a monitor the setting toggles between the old v2.8 and the new v2.9 “Improved”. I think the old version produces a single pixel which is essentially invisible in 4K. I’m seeing actual 3D models, not dots. So for me “off” really seems like off.

What doesn’t work anymore? DCS? The zoom speed edit is still working for me.

Well a MiG-21 from nose-on is a dot about the size of its pilot. But I can see very distant aircraft in DCS on a 4K screen (with the spotting dots off), perhaps too far to be realistic. But they’re very hard to spot and you’d really need a radar lock to find them. What I see (again dots off) seems to comply with realistic values. It’s easy for me to see fighters at 5mi. I don’t see anything in the new Change Log about the Spotting Dots…

Are you implying that you think you should see a high aspect MiG-21 at 20nm? Or even 5nm which would still be very difficult under some circumstances. Because the system is totally exploitable and unequal in effect.

Smart Scaling was intended to make very small objects more visible by scaling them up. An aircraft carrier can be easily seen without scaling it. If you want to go the route of just scaling up every object that’s what the zoom view does. The problem with that smart scaling demonstration is the it only shows the aircraft examples against blank backgrounds where the awkwardness of making them too large would reveal itself. Like the aircraft carrier example.

Because it would look obscenely stupid to scale up something as large as the aircraft carrier. What’s next? Should all the airfields, buildings and cities and trees be scaled up as well? Other games are irrelevant and off topic in these discussions.

It’s going on here… My comment was in response to the idea that a “real pilot” is beyond reproach about issues in computer games that have nothing to do with real piloting.

Speaking of condescending statements… Stuff like this implies that the Devs don’t have any real pilots on their team or have even seen or flown in an airplane

Again what you’re taking about are the resolution and FOV issues of 3D computer games. That has nothing to do with real world piloting and in fact could be understood by anyone sitting in the cockpit of a car. It’s not something a real pilot brings any expertise to understanding. Being a “real pilot” doesn’t automatically confer expertise on every subject. And nearly everyone in the world has flown in an airplane and looked out the window. Such experience is not limited to “real pilots” it’s something nearly everyone can relate to. In this topic the “real pilot” OP doesn’t seem to understand that the history or issues surrounding their supposedly “simple” solution.