Rotorhead

+1 on that! Exactly my words! As I said in another thread few days ago, ED's product are absolutely the best concerning simulation aspects (flight model, avionics, systems, etc. etc.). I dreamt of sim like that since i played LHX ( - check this if you don't know what I'm talking about :)), and now, I have it. But sadly, things are not so bright when it comes to software quality. Those unnecessary bugs ruined my beloved sim several times in the past, and now again. I wish that ED guys were as half as good at software optimisation as they are at sim engineering.

I already hate it, my friend... :( Ninth day without a slightest notice. This 1.2.2 upgrade did more harm than good and it's not first time for me. What's beyond my understanding, how can things like that happen to a professional software development company?

Well, when ED first announced P-51, I was like: "What? WW2 prop in modern era simulation? No way!" Later on, I changed my mind to something like "Okay, I would buy it, but only with WW2 map and AI units." After watching some videos and reading lots of forum discussions from people who already owned it, i went to "Well, maybe I will buy when it comes out of beta." ...and then I preordered the beta version and did not regret that decision for a single minute. Even out of time / place, P-51 is still worth the money. In fact, it's worth much more. When it comes to simulation aspects like flight dynamics, on-board instrumentation or systems modelling, ED products are the best that money can buy. I believe there's not much other ways to get closer to the real thing except getting yourself a real pilot's license. It's not all about blasting stuff. It's about actually flying the aircraft and that's what DCS gives you. As somebody mentioned before, you can buy mainstream FPS game that you'll finish in ten hours for much more than 40 bucks. Or you can have fully realistic sim, that lets you feel like a real pilot, and keeps you busy for years. In my opinion, $40 is nothing compared to the value that every single DCS module brings to you.

That's pretty much possible. Which is pity.

Some good points there, Exorcet. But I meant it more like that: The old FC2 aircraft are exactly that: Old. There's a chance ED will update them eventually, but right now, they are not up the current standart. Same is true for the current map. Most of the upcoming DCS addons are western. We can clearly see main point of interest shifting from east towards west, which may be both good and bad. More western planes and maps? Sure, great! No more eastern ones? Aww... I'm not blaming it on ED, nor 3rd party developers, nor anyone else. I was just pointing out the current trend I'm not happy with.

I meant it more as a joke, but... DCSW is not beta. Its stable, official release. Only modules currently in beta stage are FC3 and CA and I don't own any of them. Those major issues, like particle FPS bug, or that dreaded FFB issue are DCS: World bugs. No beta. Sorry. Nevermind, let's go back on topic. I don't think that ED, or any of the 3rd party devs are biased towards western airframes. But sadly, let the numbers talk: Modules published or announced by ED (not counting pre-DCS ones, as they were only ported to DCS): EAST: > Ka-50 WEST: >A-10C >P-51D >The mysterious upcoming US jet >Updated cockpit for FC3 F-15C >and Nevada is located where? Right... in the USA :music_whistling: Upcoming modules from 3rd parties: EAST: >MiG-21 >L-39 WEST: >UH-1H >F-15E >another F-15E :doh: >Harrier >Hawk >Eurofighter >T-2 Buckeye >yada yada yada... If you love Eastern planes, this is not pretty look at... Unfortunately, not everybody here is fan of US birds...

Yeah, that would work. But it's another not-so-pretty fix of last resort. Flying with FFB off entirely defeats the purpose of having a FFB stick. It removes all of the G940's advantages and retains only its flaws. Exactly that. G940 worked not only in all previous DCSW versions, but even in previous standalone ED's products, and suddenly stopped working in the moment of 1.2.2 update. Coincidence? I think not. Moreover, it still works well in other games at the same time, and no one of the users reported that he / she has made any changes in settings or installed driver updates recently. It's ED who broke it. No question.

This. And even if you reverse the trim buttons, your joystick will move in the right direction, but everything in the sim will be reversed (trim indicators, trim tabs, etc.). I don't know if it causes some problems, but it's absolutely not the way it should work. If I understand it correctly, your stick is sort of "fighting" the trim. So this trick might be used as temporary workaround, but it's really not ideal. Thank you for your tip though, Dr_Arrow. Let's hope that ED will fix it soon.

No, thanks. There's already enough bugs in DCS: World. :P

Confirmed, FFB still messed up after last update. And no, no conflicts in controls assignments. But thanks for your advice anyway, Wolf Rider. Well, another day without flying... :badmood:

Spot on. This seems like general issue that affects everybody with FFB joystick (at least I haven't seen single person posting that their FFB works). I've said it before and I'll say it again: How can such a critical bug slip trough testing?! Maybe because all testers use TM Warthogs and nobody cares about FFB users? If so, it's not very good testing process, is it? Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I'm just sick of all those "updates". I'd better spend my time flying in DCS than ranting on this forum, but... :thumbdown:

But trim wheels in cockpit work as intended, don't they? I mean, when you turn the trim wheel on you G940 for nose down, the virtual trim wheel in the cockpit goes nose down, too. It's only your stick what goes sideways instead of forward, right? If it's the case, and I believe it is, then it only proves my theory that there is bug in the commands that DCS sends towards joystick motors.

Nope, nothing seems wrong with the key mapping. When I start an A-10 mission, and activate the control axes indicator (RCtrl+Enter), I can clearly see the trim diamond (the small one) moving exactly where i trim. I even tried to fly with FFB off, and the trim itself performed as it should - trim left and hold the stick centered -> your plane rolls to the left. It's the way the sim handles FFB trim what is broken, and it affects all modules. With all due respect to ED team, I don't get how this could get trough the testing process. It's already second time when DCS "update" effectively keeps me from flying it. First it was 1.2.0 update, that absolutely killed performance on my old system, and I was grounded until I got myself a new one. Now, 1.2.2 took my wigs away from me again. It's not funny anymore.

I can confirm this issue for Ka-50, A-10C and P-51D, as I posted here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=96846. Haven't tested it with Su-25T (I don't fly it and I don't even have controls configured for it), but maybe I'll give it a try later. Although I'm sure that results will be the same. Definitely overall DCSW problem.

Yes, having weapons collide with forests would be nice, too. It would make no big difference for AI units behavior (if they can't see you, they won't fire at you anyways), but at least you'd have the possibility to evade already launched missiles by hiding behind some trees.

We all hope, mate... While DCS is great in almost all aspects, having helicopter (and now even land combat) simulation without such important tactical element as collidable trees is just wrong. Something must be done about that. I can remember that IL-2 had forests that were just few layers of 2D texture. While ground units were able to drive through, planes could crash into them. This "selective" collision detection would be great for DCS too. I mean: The forest don't necessarily need to keep tanks from driving trough, but they have to block unit's LOS and also cause damage to air units (at least player controlled). When an AI copter flies trough forest without any damage now and then, I won't mind. All I want is to not being able to fly through trees myself, and not being fired upon by enemy units that can see me clearly even behind thick forest.

My first impressions? Uhhm, well... mixed. The performance really seems to be better a little, also particle effects appear to cause not so big FPS problems than before (but still much bigger than I'd like). The rotor downwash effect still causes huge FPS drop (although it has also improved a little), and some minor bugs are still present (or newly introduced). But in the first place, there are two game breaking bugs: 1. Broken FFB => sim is unplayable :mad:, and 2. huge freeze on Ka-50 mission start. I really hope that ED will adress these issues as soon as possible. But at least they fixed the trains, they don't drive around with automobiles coupled between wagons anymore. :D

Yesterday, I discovered a small (but annoying) glitch related to buildings at industrial compound outside of Poti. I first saw it during low-level pass in P-51. The buildings just disappeared for a while as i flew over. After some investigation, it seems that this behavior depends on camera position. In the attached track, you can clearly see that buildings keep to disappear / reappear as I move the camera around. This bug seems related only to this particular industrial compound, all other buildings of this type seem to be allright (at least I don't know of any others). In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me. :) EDIT: My setttings: Scenes, textures and shadows HIGH, visibility range MEDIUM (also tested with HIGH), water MEDIUM, MSSAA and TSAA OFF, HDR NORMAL Radeon HD7770 2GB VRAM, driver version 12.10 BuildingBug.trk

And here.

Haven't investigated it too deeply so far, but I can confirm somewhat simillar issue here. Every time I start Ka-50 mission, the sim freezes for about ten seconds, right after clicking the start button. After then, it works just fine, only that one huge stutter. It happens both during air and runway start, not tested with cold start yet. A-10C and P-51D seem not to be affected, haven't tried the Su-25T.

Hey there! I've updated to 1.2.2 yesterday and did some testing in the last hours. Aside of another few bugs, there's a major problem with my G940 - the FFB axes are swapped. For example, when I trim right, the stick goes aft instead. I tried to fix this by checking the "SWAP AXIS" option, but it cures only pitch axis, roll trim is reversed then - I trim left, stick goes right and vice-versa. Removing "Config" folder in "Saved Games" and then setting the controls from stratch didn't resolved the issue. In 1.2.1, everything worked just fine. Any help appreciated. Thanks. EDIT: Tested with BS2, A-10C and P-51D with same results.

Yes, I know that the high pilot workload is the Ka-50's main drawback. But I thought that aditional systems of Ka-52 (thus even greater workload) were the main reasons for adding another crewmember. OK then, thank you for correcting me! I feel smarter now:smartass::thumbup:

Uhh... I always thougt that Ka-52 is two-seater just because it has much more avionics and stuff than Ka-50 and one pilot can't handle it all. Am I wrong?

And that's why Kamov developed Ka-52. The same superb airframe as the 50, but this time, real day / night / all weather capable. My favourite #1. But I'm pretty happy with the shark, too. :)

You're welcome. ;)