DaveRindner

Very little of this makes sense, and generally does not work in my system. MSAA is absolutely FPS killer. With or without Nvidia panel AA settings. Deffered Shading is FPS murder and it looks awfull. Anisotropic Filtering. It slows down DCS 2.5, but not as bad as Defered Shade. Any setting that has Low/Med/High set to anything but low decreases performance.

I tried it every way I could think off. I could not find a settings that works.

The slider is for density of the trees. I am not certain what parameter controls when they appear. To me it looks like they are growing out the ground. I really dislike this implementation.

Sadly trees and grass, but especially trees look bad without Deferred Shading, and work poorly regardless of visibility range. Even at Ultra or Extreme and at 100% trees grow out of the ground. The higher the altitude the worse the effect, because there is less ground clutter to obscure the growing trees. I noticed that civilian traffic is likewise affected. Differed Shading is a FPS killer on my system, and it looks just awfull, regardless of Gamma. I do not understand what it is trying to do, or what it is really for. Maybe I am missing something, or my Quadro does not support a particular features used by Deferred Shading NTTR is effected much less by tree growth, but Georgia Caucasus is heavily compromised. I have rebuilt my metashaders, but on my machine, that approach does not change performance. I don't use MSAA, anisotropic filter, terrain object shadows, differed shading, and HDR. All these are set to off. The tree textures are brighter then terrain, which is distracting, as real trees are normally darker then ground, when viewed from distance and altitude. Aircraft textures are High, Terrain textures low, Visibility is low. 1 Screen (2560 X1440). In KA-50 and UH-1H, a helicopter can collide with trees. Problem is it collided with trees that do not appear in scene, but would appear if trees was set to 100%. You can test out this issue in Instant Action/KA-50/Free flight. Set the trees to 0 or very low number then fly into tree zone, which has dark patches where the tree would be. At very low altitude, in ground effect, slide the KA-50 over the tree splotch. it will collide with a ghost tree. Highest FPS I have ever gotten prior to 2.5 are 38-40. In 2.5, with settings above I am lucky to break 30, with 24-26 being norm. With trees at 100% I get 12-15 FPS, which is unacceptable. So DCS 2.5 is a stepdown in performance from 2.2 and 1.5.8. I was excited with 2.5 when it rolled out, but now not so much. Hopefully DCS will patch this up in short order. HP Z230 , I7-3770 3.4/3.7, PNY Quadro K4000, 32gb ram, 2560X1440 1screen for DCS. System vintage is 2013.

I dunno with detail what the specs are on machine that the sample missions were flown. By I guess it would be higher end I7-6890X ,Core I9 with K, 32 or 64gb ram, and 1080Ti or Pascal Titan, or SLI 2 10XX boards. In VFX post production, my employer/client usually issues me a box with similar hardware, and often a Quadro P5000 board. That is also a 'standard' specs for game, VR, and AR developers. Though realtime games and console game developers usually prefer GTX instead of Quadro. That kind of box can probably drive DCS 2.5 at max setting with three 4K panels. If it doesn't then DCS has some optimization to do. My box was decent home workstation about 4-5 years ago. I7-3770K 3.7ghz, 32gb ram, Nvidia Quadro K4000 (Keppler GPU). Driving 2560X1440 main screen and one 1920X1080 2nd panel. DCS is limited to main 2540X1440 panel. At best I can only expect 24-36 FPS, and lower with trees, and lower with Deffered Shade.

I suspect it is going to be a few updates before performance is optimized. I forsake all AA, Deffered Shading, and ground shadows. HDR and Lens Flare is on for sun effect. Daylight missions don't suffer from HDR set to OFF, but at night the ground is too bright unless HDR is ON. Otherwise night time missions are no harder then day time. Everything else is low.

Turn Deffered Shading to OFF. I dunno what it is supposed to do, but all it does on my system is run slow and looks ugly. Everything is either burned out, or too dark like film noir. Sliding gamma around just brightens or darkens a garrish ugly scene. I7-3700 3.7, PNY Quadro K4000, 32gb ran, DCS is one screen 2560 X 1440. Latest Nvidia reference drivers 377.35 Vsync Off

The update looks great and so far trouble free. At least for me. But I just don't like trees, grass. and Deffered Shade. Deffered Shaded scene looks ugly and garrish, regardless of Gamma and is an FPS killer. Trees if set to 100% slow down FPS. Trees at low % seem to grow out of the ground . Very distracting. Trees and grass, without Deffered Shading, are awfully bright. The leaf and conifer colors are too bright. The tree variation is low. They all look like instances of perhaps 2-3 base trees. They need to be more randomized in scale and orientation. HDR ON and Flare lens effect is OK. But I don't see any difference when dirt lens effect is ON or OFF. Is dirt lens effect , a type of ambient occlusion, or is it literally some kind of dirt effect that I am not seeing.

YES. But it would depend on type of map, quality, variances of terrain, should include maritime and littorals, and price. One adjusted map I would like to see is a potential littoral map of real location but with substantially higher mean sea level with less iced over areas. 50 meters or more, as to create inland sea with access to ocean with chokepoints. Perhaps even user adjustable MSL.

How would F-14A crew fight Fulcrums , assuming only Aim-7F/M , AIM-9 L/P/M, and guns? Fulcrum A would have kinematic advantage of F-14A in nearly all regimes except top speed.

Yep current inventory of DPRK KPAF is 56 Mig-23 of unknown flying condition. So figure 33 years ago they could very much have had a credible flying fleet of Floggers. Personally I would like to see Maverick fightin Fulcrums, but Flagger is more probable.

Perhaps. Gotta check if and when Mig23 were ever provided to North Korea.

And I though DCS simmers have no sense of humor. How wrong was I!

With Top Gun II kind of in production, it is a good bet that original will be re-released with new VFX. Replacement of F-5E Aggressors with CGI Migs. No I have nothing to do with it, and know nothing. I was thinking what would have been the actual threat faced by 1985 F-14A's (D?). The scenario in original film mirrored a Pueblo takeover by North Korea, and air craft markings used by F-5E/Mig-28 were North Korea like for the time. So I figure either the North Koreans would have at that time a Mig-21bis/Chengdu J-7, Mig-23, and possibly Mig-29A flown by Soviet exchange pilots. Both would have been armed with R-60M missiles. Soviets would unlikely to have introduced R-73 in early to mid 1980's to North Korea.

Which is why Air Force combat aviators were usually most relaxed and combat flight ready having fulfilled required rest periods sleeping in a nice warm bed, then in a soggy sleeping bag or poncho liner in mud next to an infantryman M-60 gunner with gas from MREs.

Is this a NATO style MGRS gridmap, or Soviet Warsaw Pact version. The lack of English notations is obvious. I recall, from training, the two being similar, but not identical. Soviet maps always used elevation as terrain feature name. NATO MGRS was not so strict. Both NATO and WP published maps in both variations, but NATO MGRS grids was always used for directing fire and movement , on NATO side.

This is only my humble opinion. Nothing more. IMHO modern anti-submarine warfare is not a good suit for consumer desktop simulations. Here is why I hold this view. The tactics for ASW, even though decades old, are classified, and are an arcane dark art. The tools, systems, and employment of sensors and weapons, are even more classified, and should be. For sake of our submariners. In reality, and simulation, ASW is time consuming and boring. So while it is a usefull tool for training of sub qualled and non sub qualled naval ASW personell, it is too boring for a consumer level desktop sim.

F-5E do form those. Here is a photo of Swiss F-5E pulling G. https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=Hcl9OuT4&id=4C12FB18B78251B768E2A8417092FC7F16D49460&thid=OIP.Hcl9OuT4FHlF9f-OZoyIfQEsDe&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.sky-flash.com%2fspeed%2f076.jpg&exph=371&expw=500&q=F-5E+overwing+vapor&simid=608006928370699646&selectedIndex=2&ajaxhist=0 https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=mftJ3dGv&id=89D2D931D37A819B6A3EDDED64B9B51BD4AD4325&thid=OIP.mftJ3dGvsL8gbcD2XFze0wHaFB&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fczechairspotters.com%2fphotos%2f2015%2f4132.jpg&exph=1017&expw=1500&q=USAF+F-5E+Tiger+II+vapor+trail&simid=608020753832085291&selectedIndex=89&ajaxhist=0 https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=jaAIKuVq&id=82D8EDD75A51397931A9827A858B2BE94DF81325&thid=OIP.jaAIKuVqIEN1p3zK9HlZpgEsDN&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fcdn.airplane-pictures.net%2fimages%2fuploaded-images%2f2013%2f10%2f30%2f331352.jpg&exph=702&expw=1024&q=USAF+F-5E+Tiger+II+vapor+trail&simid=608040351831493628&selectedIndex=87&ajaxhist=0

The ones I got were in new Logitech branded box, from Fry's in El Segundo. Fry's is great, provided you know your own stuff, as their 'associates' don't know how to tie their own shoes.

MFG pedals look incredible. There is another option for high end pedals. Slaw Device RX Viper Both are pricey. Depending on which cornet of net you look, the set is between 500 -800. A bit much for desktop hobby. The other thing is that assembly for MFG is kind of well , constructor set. The YouTube video is 20 minutes. Saitek and TM pedals, are like. Take them out of box , plug them in. Drivers install automatically. Good to go in few minutes.

I am working through the same issue. You have to watch wheel break pressure. Gear locks up fairly low on the applied brake pressure. Mine lockup at about 20% of the slider. Though some disagree, I think this is bad on BST part. Hopefully they will fix it.

Violence and technology. A marvelous combination. I'll give it a try. In mean time I am using TM Pedals I got for my PS4, and aside from pedals being a bit too close to each other, I like TM pedals more then Logitech/Saitek product. Saitek equipment is build poorly. I got X56, becouse my muscle memory was burned in with X55, and X52 Pro. Otherwise I'd be getting TM Hog. Thank you.

Product is brand new. The malfunction occurred about a week after purchase. It may well be a hardware malfunction, but it is not age related.

A FLIR would be nice. Were KA-50's upgraded to SHAR FLIR system? KA-52, was procured as 50 airframe order. I think they were intended to be part of Russian Navy / Naval Infatry, and operate off now cancelled French built LHA type vessels. Russian Army and RuAF went with MI-28N Night hunter as main attack helicopter.

Taiwan, Spratley Islands, Malacca Straights and chunk of SCS would be quite nice. Baltic& Scandinavia theater would be a challenging environment to fly and fight in. North Pacific-Bering Straight-Aleutian chain would be fascinating.