SmirkingGerbil
-
Posts
583 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SmirkingGerbil
-
-
Do you mean update from a different release, like Main, and not Early Access Open Beta?
Or do you mean update your existing Open Beta from 2.5 to 2.7?
If the latter, just launching will force an update, or you can initiate an update from the Command Line within the DCS Open.Beta directory using Update.exe.
@SkateZilla Has a great reference for how to do this properly:
-
1 hour ago, Boris_CRO said:
Forest visibility you had before with other name on it - its basically Tree loading distance - keep the settings the same you had before.
Details factors settings are new settings that can help you make your nature or objects less detailed. Before there was only 1.0 and now you can lower it down. If you want it to stay as before just keep it at 1.0 as you do.Thanks sir!
Might monkey around with the factors then and see if they net improvement of any appreciable amount without making scenes look cheesy - if not much difference, will leave as is. -
New Forest and Scenery Factor settings. How do they interact with each other, how are they different from 2.5 Settings? @BIGNEWY
How would Forest Visibility and Forest Details Factor interplay or interoperate together?
Pic for reference:
-
1
-
-
Stellar, everything is better!
As I said in another thread. Hats off! Well done!
-
2
-
-
Posted earlier my specs are there.
So far only in the A-10, but maps like Persian Gulf on High Cloud settings (most other stuff high). A new Simulator, an entirely new experience.It just keeps getting better and better.
I am truly stymied by some of the complaints. Not that I don't believe them, but my specs are mid to high mid range, and I am getting better performance than people with better rigs. I am Track IR though, not VR so maybe that is it. -
Absolutely Gob Stopping amazing!!!! Stunning! Thank you, thank you, thank you ED and team . . . Just a slam dunk.
So far I have focused on Syria, and some 2.6 missions I made with JTAC's and SAM sites. Missions were immediately modified withe new clouds.
What can I say, definite performance increase! About 10% ish, with Syria!! Plus the new Syria map is just an eye watering festival of new eye candy, and it runs great.
Syria is always my go to test, for Stutter, or a performance hit, and the missions I have loaded and done quick run throughs . . . OMG! Take a break ED, tie one off! Well done!
Specs - AMD Ryzen 7 (2700) Boost 4.2 Ghz, ASUS Tuf GTX 1660 Super OC, ASUS Prime X470-Pro MB, 32 GB Corsair DDR 4 running 1600 MHz. Graphics settings mostly High or Ultra Maxed out textures and AA, none of the new motion blur stuff. Radius and Pre-loads set to moderate. Tree Count high. Will maintain high 30 FPS and kick up to 90 FPS depending on conditions. Other maps I will run 60 to 90 FPS with same settings.
Again - well done, just dayum well done.-
4
-
-
Sorry, but this is where I am at. An oldie . . . but perfectly describes my mind set for tomorrow:
-
2
-
-
I am running a little less than that. AMD Ryzen 7, 2700X, Asus Tuf GTX 1660 Super, 32 GB Ram DDR4 16500, SSD. Track IR.
Can almost run that quick in Syria mostly high/ultra similar setting (no DLSS) but a couple of things to help like you mention - non heat or cleanliness related, module settings.
Over Syria, the A-10 will chew way more FPS with the TGP/MAV screen MFD's up, and mirrors as opposed to the F-16 who's MFD's are simple with no moving maps. So in the A-10 I will flip up the mirrors, and only run the TGP and MAV Sensor screens when necessary - gives you back at good 10 to 15 FPS, no settings changed in the A-10C and high to ultra settings on the Syria map. Other maps benefit a bit, but not as drastic.
-
On 4/1/2021 at 5:56 AM, BIGNEWY said:
We make plans, we share them with you all, if plans change we let you all know. Everything is subject to change, we make it very clear.
thanks
You make it crystal clear.
Hence my frustration, and my sometimes snarky responses to the outrage of missed dates. Hopefully, I am not making things worse.
In the podcast, you gave a very good in-depth response to the DCS "audience" types ( @NineLine actually, but everyone makes clear the potential for change) . You mentioned how, on the other side of every question, is a human being, and they have a variety of factors driving their questions or grievances. You also detailed how the Developers are human to, and folks need to factor that in.
Honestly, that was the best part of the podcast for me. You were reaching out, and explaining to everyone how all responses have some merit, and the fact that someone took the time to post, regardless of intent, is taken into consideration by DCS/ED, and yourself.
That, in and of itself, should illustrate to folks the group that is heading up this fantastic SIM, and yes dates will be missed, but if everyone would listen to that podcast, and hear your response, they would understand the team is not making these decisions lightly or vicariously to make folks upset.-
1
-
2
-
-
Here we go, DATE RAGEEEEEEEE!!!!!
220 × 151
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:
No, that's cool. It is an extremely interesting and historic aircraft, and yes they worked wonders getting it into production at all and keeping as many of them going as long as they did. I just eye roll hard when people start raving about ''DER SUPER GERMAN TECHNOLOGY''
The V-2 was pretty damn impressive, and afaik they were the first to start messing with supersonic stuff on any significant level, but a lot of the ''legends'' about German technology are thinly veiled excuses for how they managed to spank the French and Soviets so hard. ''I mean sure, we were poorly organised, using outdated tactics, and only had radios for every 1,000th man, but the real tipping point was all that radical new technology they had, like Panzer IIs! We just didn't see 'em coming! Panzers, man, just say the word. Panzer. That's how far ahead they were, practically lasers. And don't get me started on their coal powered trucks that could ALSO burn wood!''
Point well made. There were some seriously incredible feats of engineering to come out of WWII, from many nations. Some of the Nazi ones were in a class all their own . . . but, like you point out, there was a lot of "mythology" mixed in with the actual accomplishments. Hard sometimes to engage in serious historical discussions about the Nazi War machine, when the mythology starts getting thrown around.-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Mars Exulte said:
It was the first deployed to combat to a significant extent, but was hardly as remarkable as it is often exalted as, especially considering that whole ''bursting into flames'' thing. The Meteor started flying in '43 if I remember right, but was not deployed to combat zones. The P-80 was delayed to late war after an accident but was capable enough to serve for another 10 years or so, the 262's ''superiority'' is debatable at best (the wing sweep was for CoG, and had no transonic value). The Russians were bringing up the rear, but had their own fighters around the same time.
In fact, ALL the major powers had long running jet fighter programs, and began deploying them within just a couple years of each other all around the same time. They weren't all reliant on magic Nazi uberwaffenwundardoctors to come out of the stone age @@
That bursting into flames thing had more to do with the materials they had to substitute due to lack of materials, thus my earlier comments about it being a "desperation" machine, in the final act of the war. Which makes it all the more significant, since the turbine blades were HSS alloys or some other mix vs. Tungsten and other exotics. Again, a nod to Albert Speer and his efforts to keep armaments, ammo, and other production going during the height of the bombing by the Allies.
No, I am not rooting for Nazi Germany, but the fact that Nazi engineers, got the ME 262 in the air, fighting, with substandard materials just adds to the mystique . . . which in my mind makes it more desirable than say the Hellcat which enjoyed the benefits of American manufacturing at its most resplendent and mighty when dedicated to the war effort and the defeat of the Nazi's and Imperial Japan. IMHO.-
2
-
-
ME 262 was why I became an early backer, and kickstarter contributor. If the Hellcat had been offered then, I would still pick the ME 262.
The ME 262 was a "desperation" measure, to try and stall the allied bombers for a bit longer. It was manufactured under blistering bombing campaigns, and still managed to be the only jet fighter of that era to see any appreciable combat, its peers notwithstanding technically or otherwise. Allied bombers, and fighters went up against this aircraft.
Albert Speer actually increased production during the height of the Allied bombing, the ME 262 is coupled to that to try and buy more time. Yes the Hellcat and the Pacific are iconic in their own right, but WWII started as a kickstarter/go-fundme effort and was European centric. I get that Pacific is a big deal, and yes I would enjoy it, and the Hellcat. But outside of the P-38J (as a day one purchase), the ME 262 would fit into campaigns designed around last ditch efforts to thwart massive bombing campaigns, and dog fights with allied fighters.
However, if the ME 262 was shelved, I would pick something that ED offered, and move on. Just hope that the ME 262 gets the kind of ED/TFC engineering treatment it deserves, and sees the light of day in the ED/TFC stable. FWIW.-
4
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, SkorpioN1606689188 said:
Errrrhmmm, I have a friend. Flew for the 160th SOAR, also commanded. Flew the Little Bird at the attack on Haditha Dam (2003?), flew night attack missions on highway 1 during the initial invasion of Afghanistan West of Kandahar after 9/11. They would load two Little Birds each with dollies attached to the landing sleds, into C-130s, fly to the FARP from Masrah( - spelling) in the middle of the night. Roll them out of the C-130s (two together as a flight team or element), and have them off the ramp, bolted up, armed up, and ready to fly in 5 mins. Reading one of his books now.
I so want this module, and so want Iraq, and Afghanistan added to our "world", to recreate these missions, especially Haditha, where he flew in support of 75th Rangers and other elements sent to secure the Dam. He commanded that from a C-130 Gunship, at that time longest insertion flight of an airborne group in history. Once the FARP was setup at objective Rhino? (going from memory), he then flew in support of the attack on the Dam, and defense from Iragi regulars.-
1
-
-
Man, these comments. Mostly here just to revisit the drama. Not sure why, it is like jabbing yourself in the eyeball. Nonetheless, a few simple observations.
1.) Make it an "on/off" feature of Multiplayer for server admins if you want ultra realism and no one using it as an exploit.
2.) Make it user electable in SP. Those of us who enjoy PIO pain and struggle, can do so. Those who want easy mode for self made missions can do so.
3.) ED's own comments and actions promote inclusive design where capable, but without loss of realism and fidelity. They can/will do what is right for the community.
Drama queen elitists invoking various "whataboutisms" because a guy is trying to look for options in a "wishlist" to help out older members are just trolling. Albeit in a high brow manner, but it is just trolling for drama, and the podium to thump from.
Personally, I see no conflict in a user option or server admin MP option for this. Not sure why others do.
ED will do, what ED will do, based not only on input, but internal research and knowledge. All of this, is just pages of chaff and blather. Personally, I hope ED can find a way to implement it, but leave it fully realized for us Sadomasochists that like PIO hell mastery.-
2
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Charly_Owl said:
I don't know how many 600-page technical manuals you have written in your life, but please, do realize that it's not a difficult job to do... it's an INSANELY difficult job to do, even for professionals. Most of the information in the A-10 manual is correct, but there could be a few mistakes here and there. Flagging them is the best we can do.
I have sir.
It is very difficult, and then you rely on the good graces of friends, co-workers and volunteers to wade through your monstrosity and find all the punctuation, spelling and syntax errors.
Even after all that, when they finally go to print, you still find mistakes.
Wanna be tech writers waxing on about how they could do it better . . . is just mental masturbation, and a boring descent into another monologue about how it should be done.
Fine, you have an idea how it should be done, make sure to line up and volunteer to read the damn thing 3 times over before I release it. Then you can critique it.-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Florence201 said:
It appears you are in MSL override mode. An A-A sub mode. This is selected using the DGFT switch. You need to ensure that this is cancelled before going to A-G.
Lo, the clouds parted and the sun shone brightly!
Thank you so much. Once I knew what to look for (as I have only done full startup, taxi, landing lessons), I found the section in Chuck's Guide. Was already mapped to my TM HOTAS, the BHOT and WHOT thumb switch in MAV mode for the A-10C. Worked like a charm. It was forward, putting me in MSL OVERRIDE, and locking me out.
Much appreciated! -
15 minutes ago, Florence201 said:
3/7 will get power automatically once jet is powered up. Then SMS page in A-G to power up 88Cs
This is in air start. I select A-G, and the SMS page comes up, but no weapons displayed:
Then if I select INV, I can see them, but selecting them with OSB yields nothing. I am stuck in a loop. no ability to power them on.
-
1 hour ago, Florence201 said:
What stations do you have the HARMs? If they’re on 4&6 they won’t work
And you don’t need L/R chin power on for HARMs. That’s for TGP power when fitted (5Right)
On stations 3 & 7 - I was turning those on, as I am still learning and didn't understand the relationship.
-
So sorry to do this to y'all. I have googled it, I have watched the vids. I went through Chuck's guides.
HARMS on station. ME mission I created, flying toward a Fan Song site. I start in HSD (right MFD). Power on pylons left/right (for some reason not on in air start ME). Hit AG mode from ICP, make sure Master ARM is on. Wanting to go HARM HAS mode.
I end up at SMS page, no HARMS listed. nada. If I go into inventory, they are there, but I cannot select them from the OSB's relevant to them. WPN page shows OFF. I cannot turn them on. I have removed all weapons from all stations except the two HARMS to try and trouble shoot.
I know it is something simple, but I have literally spent 3 hours on this collectively. I even watched WAGs video on HARM in HAS.
Appreciate any help, no matter how dumb I will feel afterwards. -
I have noticed this behavior as well. Mostly in the A-10C/II, but I always assumed it was because it was offset from Center-line.
I am now learning the F-16C and have the exact same issue. Running TM Rudder pedals (T Series), and setup as shown in your last pic.
I just assumed it was normal behavior, and I would pump the brakes left/right alternately as needed to keep the aircraft straight. -
-
Damage model, is it nearing "completion" in WWII modules? Once completed in WWII modules, will the focus be to bring it to modern modules? If so, is there a module in particular that this effort will start with, like the P-47 and Anton in War Birds?
-
So in actuality . . . they are way ahead of all other sims, and spot on!!!
MASSIVE fps drop after update to 2.7
in Game Performance Bugs
Posted · Edited by SmirkingGerbil
I went step by step through this.
Specifically I think out of all the recommendations, the "Sharpening" setting under NVIDA control panel being turned off is the biggest one, and set Global for all applications.
I have had pretty good performance with 2.7, especially with Syria. I also did a delete of saved games, and restored my config settings, along with this vid - I got a solid 10 FPS INCREASE over 2.5. 45 Solid FPS with Track IR, low level flight over Syria, with the A-10C and left MFD showing MAV seeker, and right MFD showing TGP sensor display. This has always been a frame killer for me.
After following this vid, changing the Global and Application specific NVIDIA settings (for DCS in NVCP), and the only difference for myself and the author in the video in settings is I don't run SSXX anything, everything else as he lists. This is with a ASUS Tuf OC 1660, 32 GB RAM, ASUS 470 MB, Ryzen 7 CPU OC'd to 4.2 Ghz, and MvE 1TB SSD. 45 FPS solid, Track IR, his settings, and both MFD's in the A-10 actively displaying video.
By comparison, the F-16 with its "simple" MFD displays, I am hitting 60 and 90 FPS with the authors settings above.
I would go through this if you haven't, perform the Command Line DCS.exe clean up and repair (or optionally rename saved games folder and let DCS recreate).
I have a moderate system, and I have gained in FPS, and smoothness, with ULTRA clouds, mostly high/Ultra/Max settings, on Syria, and A-10C with two active camera displays on the MFDs - this was always a FPS gut punch in 2.5