Merlin-27

Merlin's WWII Combat Server is back up and online.

Looks awesome! Good work. Can you spawn there? ... or is a grass airfield still a thing of my dreams like the functioning wind sock. :)

Don't let me mislead you, I'm not saying that every possible engine failure is modeled... yet :smilewink: Just stating that I'm pretty sure from reading and such, that most engine failures were not big fiery explosions like Hollywood tries to teach us. Also remember, just the fact that you were in WEP condition does not mean it is the only stress on the engine. Be careful with the relationship between Prop RPM and Manifold Pressure. If not at the correct placement (Mostly low RPM and high MP) or used too carelessly, your engine lifespan can easily be measured in seconds. From my experience: Always avoid Low RPM & High MP situations and try to stay away from drastic RPM changes with full manifold pressure. And of course, watch coolant & oil temps always.

Sorry about that. I saw it go Tango Uniform and then re-started the server. We also had a few hiccups last night while flying, I'll have to figure out what is triggering that crash. There were some memorable moments over The River last night. A flyable 190 will really add a great feel to it. There's something amazing about a vertical fight with 7-8 aircraft nearby and smoke trails going every which way. Glad to see people flying and enjoying the server. The combat server will be down until for a few days but I will bring it back up sometime Wednesday of next week. I'll be enjoying the scenery someplace tropical and far from any computer annoyances during a little wedding anniversary getaway. 8) Cheers!

Hey man, I saw you logged on my server tonight. Did you have this same issue there? EDIT: Logged on to my combat server and tried about 20 start-ups from Nalchik and Beslan. My findings were interesting. With 0% throttle I can start no problem. With 1" to 50% throttle I have to do the mixture trick to get it to finally catch but it does start every time. You can perform that mixture trick by just switching between Idle cutoff and RUN(Auto Rich). It seems pretty quick and reliable if you just go 1 second between each until the prop gets up to speed and stays there.

Engines seize all the time in RL due to internal tolerances being pushed past their limits. It's a very sudden event when it happens. Also think about detonation and it effects on internal combustion engines. I have no idea if the prop would stop dead in RL but if you are pushing the MP past redline you are abusing the engine, and even if it does keep running it is not happy.

I tried something while flying last night... and had some curious results. Why do frame rates drop (while firing) so much more drastically if there is a populated landmass in view as opposed to just water? I repeatedly saw a huge discrepancy between the two. I expect the fps to take a hit if buildings and such are in view but the FPS drop after firing is vastly different depending upon the background. Is this a known result?

Good question and great detailed answer. I learned something too.

I would hate for all of these pages to go by with you still misunderstanding the reaction you received and why. It seems you got in return the level respect you offered from the start. Originally Posted by AlphaOneSix View Post Well, bullets *do* ricochet off water...

I've seen on random rare occasions where the engine wouldn't cooperate and everything seemed correct in a known environment. Not sure why that is. There is something you may want to try to avoid some frustration at times like those... if you jockey the mixture setting (Mine is a the 3-way switch on my throttle) you can force an ornery engine to start. It's a combination of moving between the three positions a few times to keep the prop rotating until it catches. Might not be the correct method but it's better than punching your keyboard.

I'd file this approach in the "Needs Improvement" section. However, to glean some positive energy from your original inquiry... I do see your point about the arrival angle of the rounds and I agree there would be a declining chance of ricochet off of water as that angle increased. I think most agree. That being said, I'm not sure there are very significant or worthwhile gains to the product/experience/community by devoting much time at this juncture altering that specific behavior and like you saw from your search, it has been discussed before.

This is funny because once Xcom DOES see you... you better hope you already had a plan formulated. :) I was actually laughing when flying with him because there were some incredibly tense moments where we knew we were very close in proximity but neither of us could get a visual for a while. Getting that visual information right is SO crucial and I agree, even some hints like reflections, glimmers, etc would make a difference.

This sounds like an interesting way to approach the issue. The key would be, like Echo said, to find the happy medium. I def don't want it to be too much of a crutch, but as realistic as possible. As a side note, I tried turning up MSAA on a few flights last night to its max and I'm not entirely sure if it was a placebo effect, but I felt like things looks a little more discernable and properly blurred. I need to do some more research on the impact on my FPS but it seemed pretty smooth.

yup. Run a search for it on here. It has been discussed at length. Now, there was some debate of what angles are too extreme for rounds to skip off the water....

What skilll level? It will die.. I promise. I also noticed you can shoot the empennage completely off of the 190 and see it fall away from the aircraft however one regrows instantaneously. I do like the direction that is going in... as I happen to enjoy shooting parts off of enemy aircraft.

Yes! This is specifically something I've been thinking about. Some objects on the ground are very sharp looking. Super high contrast.. in cities and such. When in the background, that is the easiest place to lose another aircraft for me. I haven't tried, but does anti-aliasing in the settings make a big difference there? Sound like the words of a Lagg3 pilot. :lol: I kid I kid. lakirovanny garantirovanny grob = guaranteed varnished coffin

I believe applying the necessary force to break the wire IS that extra step (that cannot be simulated on my "plastic throttle") :) and you would be stopped at the wire before that took place or maybe just short of it. Also once you did break the wire I find it hard to believe you would stop anywhere short of full forward. So, I'm having some trouble understanding why you think the button press is so far from reality. I somehow think we are we are agreeing on this in an alternate universe.

But I think the main point to remember is that throttle full forward means different things depending upon whether WEP was engaged previously. If you are speaking about the relative position change of the throttle before and after...well yes you will not easily be able to stop at 61" without looking at your gauges but that would be in line with the behavior of the actual throttle.

Maybe that could be an option for game mode. In the real thing there was a wire that was broken to allow the throttle to move past red-line settings. It was up to the pilot to manage manifold pressure after this was done. WEP was, as the name says, used as an emergency tool to get a pilot out of trouble. It was not intended to be a "boost" button and the engine and components paid a price when it was used. I believe when the ground crew saw the broken wire it was call to shorten the time between engine re-builds.

This is more of what I was getting at. Even when you know where to look a lot of the time the aircraft is invisible and quite often indistinguishable from the ground scenery...even with non-camo paint schemes. I've had to spot aircraft while flying in RL as well and a well trained scan will help for sure, no argument there. To explain further where this came from, this weekend I was at an outdoor music festival which was situated fairly close to an airfield that has a few flyable WWII restorations. During the musical performance a P-47 and P-51 flew overhead, which of course hijacked my attention immediately. I'd say they were at about 1000ft and I watched them for great distance. I noticed fine details even when they became dark grey near the horizon. Boy, would I love to see that well while flying combat, I thought :) You bring up a bunch of good points. The flickering and studdering takes away from your peripheral recognition for sure. Maybe that is the bulk of what I'm talking about. It may be an issue that is beyond simulation. In RL if you attempt to examine an area your immediate focus generally creates a bit of a tunnel view which sharpens that view. Maybe somewhere down the road our current "zoom" will turn into a smooth transition to a focus mode. The human eye is a tough thing to out-engineer.

I'm not saying it's terrible in DCS... but as a place for some refinement. Rods and Cones :)

Oh they are there.... I have plenty of screen shots of them. Try firing while you taxi. The ground will look like Hansel and Gretel had been there with six M2s.

This issue has improved a little over time but is still a big FPS killer. I'm sure the real question is... What is different between the P-51 and A-10/Huey? Shell casings? Tracers? Tracking ballistics from the 6 guns might be more taxing on the CPU? I think it's fair to say, no one fix could make the WWII contingent happier. Maybe EDGE will be the savior?

I've wanted to start a discussion about this for a while and after flying this weekend I began wondering what the general consensus is on the topic. When flying the DCS P-51D in combat, situational awareness is obviously a top priority. As in RL accounts, this can make all the difference in an aerial engagement. However, as we all know, computer monitors and the human eye are not at all equal in capacity. There lies the big challenge for sim developers and in this case I think ED has done a great job creating a very realistic environment. That being said, spotting enemy aircraft can be very very challenging in-game and it makes me wonder how it compares to the real deal. Naturally, it should be challenging but not impossible when you are looking for an aircraft you know is nearby. I have 20/15 vision myself, but I feel pretty blind when I'm focusing on each pixel hoping to see something. Like I said, we will not see PC visuals on par with the human eye anytime soon, but what is the best solution to overcome this hurdle? I hate to suggest anything that is obviously an artificial aid to spotting i.e. external views or labels or padlocks but I'm hoping to eventually use my eyesight to my advantage as was the case with most successful WWII combat pilots. Also, due to my love for authenticity, I prefer not to use skins that help the contrast. Been there and done this and it doesn't seem to be a much better solution than using labels or such. It's interesting how you can see tracers from what seems to be 30-40 miles away but aircraft are invisible beyond 10-15 or less. Just my thoughts.