ac5

I forgot: Setting in the autoexec.cfg: options.graphics.maxfps = 30 Gives 24-25 FPS and not 30. I have tried higher and lower settings, but with this parameter it seems not possible to achieve stable 30 FPS.

Well, this is a very interesting notion with the 30 Hertz / 30 FPS, thank you Sinky for pointing it out. I have spent the best part of last week fiddling with that, and thought, as there is a parameter to be included in the autoexec.cfg: options.graphics.maxfps = 30 there might be also one: options.graphics.minfps = 30 This in order to achieve a stable 30 FPS, which guarantees a quite smooth and fluid ride. I spent many hours testing that in all 4 terrains, and it seemed to work, constant 30 FPS everywhere. But all of a sudden for some reason it stopped working. After a couple of days of further testing, I have come up with the settings depicted in the included screenshot. These settings guarantee 90% of the time (disclaimer, at least with my rig), stable and therefore smooth and fluid 30 FPS in both cockpit and external views, fly-by being a bit stuttery. Unfortunately, this works only 90% of the time with Caucasus and the Persian Gulf. In Nevada, end even worse in Normandy, the FPS jump from 25 - 30 to 50 - 60 all the time, in both cockpit and external views, causing the dreaded stutters. Any further ideas?

I completely agree. 'bout time....

Could not agree more. I am also tired of using half done maps, planes and objects while awaiting the promise from ED or developers to complete them. Paying customers serving as beta-testers.

Not as bad as that here, but that canopy and HUD deserves URGENT attention from RAZBAM... https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=215305

Pointless to say the least... It's 2018....

What can I say.. Again: AGREE AGREE AGREE! :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: The question is.. does ED agree? :bored:

Absolutely agee! :thumbup:

Of course, both of them.... Just have a look at the difference between the BF-1'9 and the FW-190. There are at least twice as bright.

And moreover, the fluorescent lights of the instruments of the BF-109 are too dark, not nearly as bright as those of the FW-190, which seems OK to me.

And: Flashing position lights far too bright in several planes. On the contrary, several plane landing lights are far too dark, seen from the cockpit. (Not a gamma - related issue, I have tried different gamma settings). A-10 C formation / nose illumination in its highest setting is lighting up the cockpit as if you’d place powerful lamp inside of the cockpit itself, and oddly, the nose illumination itself is barely visible from outside. The fluorescent lights of the instruments of the BF-109 are too dark, not nearly as bright as those of the FW-190, which seems OK.

You said it... In the official dcs promotional material you won't find any night scenes... I believe that's because all the maps are "unrealistically dim", and this begs to be corrected! It suffice to have a look at the images posted by MonnieRock to realize this.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2400126/

I completely agree. :thumbup: Also the runway lights are too dark. :(

:thumbup:

Fine enough? You are joking right? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=181918

Also about sun and light. Did you guys see my thread? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=216522

Also about the sun... Did you guys see my thread? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=216522

Also about the sun... Did you guys see my thread? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=216522

Most probably some of the following points are already present in this forum or will be addressed in a future patch. Nevertheless, I wanted to summarize them here. Almost all cockpits 2.5.2 are much better compared with Release version 2.5 WITH deferred shading, some even better than it was the case then WITHOUT deferred shading. The rain droplets are fantastic, the clouds gorgeous, the new explosions and effects great, terrains amazing. Loading times and responsiveness of the program have improved. I acknowledge the huge efforts that have been made, both from ED and the devs. :thumbup: That being said, the sun is now a pathetic - not-nearly-as-bright-as-it-should-be little spot in the sky. It was immensely better in 2.5 WITHOUT deferred shading AND HDR on, as clearly seen here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=202460 Maybe the intention / meaning of this is that it would be the sun as seen trough very dark sunglasses or visor. If it is so, please give the option with / without sunglasses. The struts of the cockpits did effectively “block” the sun in RV 2.5 WITHOUT deferred shading AND HDR on. This very nice and realistic effect has now regrettably completely disappeared. :( Next time you drive or fly somewhere without sunglasses with the sun in a low position in front of you pay attention what it happens and you’ll see my point. See also screenshots. Flashing position lights far too bright in several planes. On the contrary, several plane landing lights are far too dark, seen from the cockpit. (Not a gamma - related issue, I have tried different gamma settings). A-10 C formation / nose illumination in its highest setting is lighting up the cockpit as if you’d place powerful lamp inside of the cockpit itself, and oddly, the nose illumination itself is barely visible from outside. The fluorescent lights of the instruments of the BF-109 are too dark, not nearly as bright as those of the FW-190, which seems OK. Nice reflection / refraction effects of the glass covering the instruments have, also very unfortunately, gone lost. (F-86, BF-109, etc.). See screenshots.

ED? Still nothing?

Funny but very sad at the same time.....

Wondering the same here...

Same here. Release version 2.5.2. No droplets on the A-10 C cockpit.

What do you mean? STILL not fixed the cockpits after all this time?:(