Raven Morpheus

Hello all My current PC is a Gigabyte GA-880GM-USB3 motherboard with an AMD Phenom II x4 955 BE @3.2GHZ, a Sapphire 5870 1GB and 8gb 1333mhz DDR3 RAM, 650w Corsair 650TX PSU. I have just seen that Ebuyer have AMD FX 8350 @4ghz for under £150. I'm thinking that the £150 (max) I will have saved up in a month or so would be better spent on a new 4ghz CPU rather than a new 2GB GPU. An upgrade to an i5 or i7 is a bit out of my reach at this time as I'd have to buy another motherboard to do so (and I'd be inclined to build a new PC if I have to do that), and I don't envisage saving any more than the £150 I will have in 4 weeks or so in the near future (next 6 months), thus an upgrade of my GPU or a new AMD CPU is my only choice for the next 6 months. So, a few questions - 1. Could I buy an AMD FX 8350, and just plug it into my current motherboard? 2. If the answer to the above is yes is it just a matter of plugging it in, applying thermal paste and putting the cooler back on and booting the PC into Windows? 3. If the answer to 1 is yes am I likely to see any better framerates in DCS given that my GPU will still be the Sapphire 5870 1GB? EDIT - Disregard this. I've just found information that indicates that my motherboard is not likely to support an AMD FX 8350. My motherboard has two versions, a rev 1.0 and a rev 3.1. Rev 1.0 is AM3 and I believe that is the one I have, whilst rev 3.1 is AM3+, but only supports up to an AMD FX81xx CPU. Looks like the only upgrade option I have is the GPU (and that's assuming the newer cards would even work, again mobo supporting them could be an issue?), anything else and I may as well buy a new PC.

Hello all I wanted to see if reducing my in-game resolution (and switching to 1 screen rather than my usual 1080p 2 screen setup) would net me any FPS boost in the UH-1H using the Stray Eagle mission as a test and seeing what FPS I get on start of mission with hot start sitting on the FARP. So, I reduced my resolution to 720p by editing my options.lua (typing it in-game didn't seem to work) and I turned on the in-game 4x MSAA. That gave me a 5fps boost. So I might get more if I turned off MSAA and live with the jaggies. It's not much but when you're only getting 20fps to being with it's the difference between playable and not. Currently I have 2 monitors, my primary desktop resolution is 1080p, my secondary desktop resolution is 1440x900 but in portrait, so 900x1440, So I'm wondering - Is it possible to setup a multi monitor setup full screen @720p resolution, or can the resolution of a multi monitor setup only be the exact resolution of your desktop combined (i.e. in my case 2820x1440)?

I found Pacific to be rather bad when compared to Band of Brothers. Perhaps it was the subject matter. Or perhaps it was John Seda and a few of the other "nobody, usually play bit parts" actors. Just didn't make good viewing for me. I have watched it once and once only. I keep going back and re-watching Band of Brothers. A similar miniseries focusing on the 8th Air Force does sound interesting though. Just hope it's better than HBO's Tuskegee Airmen film with Larry Fishburne, lets hope that $500m isn't/wasn't wasted...

Huey. Just wish I could fly it as easily as I can the Ka-50.

Landing! On a ship! I can barely land on solid ground!! But yeah, I've noticed the "can't sit still" bug on ships when I played the 1st mission of the user made campaign Crazy Horse. Luckily it was a hot start and I got up before I slid into the drink!

I'll add my £/$0.02. As long as WWII planes come with some context in DCS I'm happy to see them. I dream of an updated IL2 1946 (with all the TFM content and PF/FB content I currently have in my IL2 1946 install) with better graphics and better performance (framerates) - although Battle of Stalingrad is looking good for that, if only currently for the Russia vs Germany angle. Currently however they're just being chucked in (I could level the same at the F86 and MiG21), into the GTO circa whenever it is/was map (2006?), and they to my knowledge don't even come with proper campaigns. I do understand there is probably a reason that is the case though, for the WWII planes at least - ED to my knowledge are picking up the pieces of what was the WWII kickstarter that barely got off the ground. Personally I'd love to see masses more helicopters, it seems all the upcoming stuff is WWII or just not a helicopter, the only one I've noted that could be coming is a variant of the AH-1. Helicopter simming is hugely under-represented. However, when I say choppers I mean iconic ones. To me the Mi-8 isn't. In fact the only iconic Eastern Bloc chopper I can think of really (besides the Ka-50) is the Mi-24 Hind. Now, ask me about iconic Western helicopters...

I agree, adhering 100% to history, blow by blow, shot by shot, isn't feasible nor interesting. However, on the other hand I don't care much for 100% "what if" scenarios full of wild speculation on "what could be". There is a middle ground - as campaigns in IL2 1946 show. And although we're not told everything I'm sure there wasn't much air combat in Ukraine recently, if there was even any at all. None of the conflicts you mention have escalated to such a degree where they could be simulated in DCS in any meaningful or interesting way, in my opinion. Modern conflict is very one sided whether you like it or not, because of the type of "enemy" forces currently being engaged in "major" conflicts. Currently there is no major conflict between NATO/UK/US/RoK/Japan and Russia/China or anyone of similar stature (if there is anyone) and I don't believe, because I've seen how conflict has been resolved for the last 30 years between all major players, that there ever will be. It would simply not be financially prudent, for a start, for any of the major players to go to war with each other and their respective leaders and ours know that. We are in a mutually agreed stalemate, for want of a better term, and I can't see that ending unless something goes very very wrong, and if it does we'll be in WW3, and you and I won't be worrying about how authentic our flight sims are!! So yes anything where the US/UK/NATO etc. (i.e. the west) goes to war with an equally capable force such as Russia/China is fantasy, because the last time they were at war with such a force was Vietnam (and even then the US had air superiority), which ended in 1975. All conflicts since then where the west has been involved have been the west vs technologically disadvantaged/inferior forces, or just didn't amount to much combat, if any, just peacekeeping and patrolling. DCS, to me so far, is a collection of aircraft all thrown together with a single map and fictional campaigns that bear little resemblance to actuality, but if you don't think about them too much can be quite plausible. Kind of like the Gran Turismo of flight sims - one or a few tracks and 100's of cars to race on them regardless of whether the cars would race there in actuality. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy what is in DCS, and want for additional items though (although as I said I don't see the need for a air-tanker), but if you can have hyper-realistic flight/avionics models where speculation is kept to a minimum (I'm assuming ED and co. don't speculate wildly on how a particular plane/helicopter behaves), why not strive for the same realism/authenticity from the maps, missions and campaigns? :)

Mine all work. Same as they did in the previous patches, but I only use the A-10's MFCD's, the Ka-50 ABRIS/Shkval screens and the Kneeboard. I understand there's a Cargo Cam for the UH-1H but I've never even done cargo lifting with it (don't know how to setup a mission to do so either), so I've not seen if the cargo cam works. The only thing I had to do a patch or two ago was to re-do my kneeboard viewport, it seems using the ED-Map name (or whatever it is in PeterPs exports exampe) doesn't work and I had to give it a completely custom name (morpheus). Of course you also have to edit init.lua found in Scripts>Aircrafts>_Common>Cockpit>KNEEBOARD>indicator and add try_find_assigned_viewport("Morpheus") to the bottom and uncomment (remove the two - marks) the line or 2 above if it needs it (can't recall if it does or not).

Well I dunno what the MiG-21 is like as I don't have it, but yeah the UH-1H needs a fix or something. I also don't have the Mi-8 but your idea gave me an idea... I just swapped out the _lod files for the AH-1W (and everything else that has multiple lods, i.e. _lod1, _lod2 etc. which seems to be all air units from what I can tell) for the lowest _lod file that still gives a reasonable looking model. I think it has helped in the FPS department. Don't think it'll help if there's tons of ground units on a map though. But for example - with the default _lod files, on the Stray Eagle mission, when I've just started the mission I switch views to an AH-1W using F2 and I'm seeing 30fps, without moving the camera around. When I pan around to the UH-1H's sitting on the FARPs that gets more than halved (11 fps)!! With the lowest reasonable _lod file replacing all _lod files I'm now getting 50-60 fps when I switch views to an AH-1W using F2, but that still drops to 17fps when I pan around to the UH-1H's! Although I think I might have gone 1 _lod to far with the AH-1W because it looks a little poorer than I'd like and I can't see the pilots! But I don't need to see huge amounts of detail on them because I'm never up very close to them to see it! If I could find the UH-1H's .edm files I could do the same, assuming it even has _lod files! Aha! I found (after a search here) that the UH-1H .edm files are in fact called AB-212! Doh! Doesn't make much of a difference though.

Thanks. That's excellent. I just updated my mission to have all the flyables I currently have (UH-1H, Ka-50, A-10C and TF-51D) available for the same mission.

Interesting. I've been looking for similar files for the UH-1H as I believe doing what you have done could help my FPS in missions where there are more than a couple of UH-1H's in view. Sadly I can't find the relevant files. They just don't exist in my install unless they are compressed into another file?! I have however found .edm and also .lods files for what appear to be all the other static and flyable objects. It looks like editing the .lod files (so that each objects _lod0.edm is not used) would achieve the same effect as you have with replacing the .edm. Unfortunately there are 337 .lods files and not all object appear to have multiple .edm files to act as lods.

I have the Pro Flight rudder pedals and wish I hadn't bought them because I'm not even using them, but I bought then on sale via Amazon. I'm using the twist rudder on my Saitek X52 (which I wish I hadn't bought because I could have waited a few weeks until the X55 became available again and bought that for £30 more!!). My problem with the Saitek Pro Flight Rudder pedals is that they are too big for me (sounds odd I know and I can't really explain it properly). The only way I could use them is by sitting in a chair in front of a desk and I don't sit that way - I sit on my bed and if I use my pedals I sit (again on my bed) with a wooden rig I've built underneath me holding my stick and pedals in place. I don't have the luxury of having a dedicated room/area for gaming with a nice desk to sit at... I imagine the combat rudder pedals would be better for me because the edge of the pedal starts where the post that moves is, where as the Pro Flight pedal starts some 2-3 inches, or more, forward of that post. Also from what I've seen of them you change the angle of the combat pedals which again would help me, and you can't change the angle of the Pro Flight pedals. So, personally I'd say go for the combat pedals but I imagine that in a normal use scenario, i.e. sitting at a desk on a normal chair, there's little difference beside the adjustable angle and the fact they could be a couple of inches closer to you (because your foot would rest further forward than they do on the Pro Flight pedals). Another option, which I was pointed to by a guy on here, which seem to be more appropriate for my use given my seemingly unique lack of space/gaming situation (and quite reasonably priced imo) is these - http://flightsimcontrols.com/store/available/t-rudder-pedals-usb-eu/

MH-60L DAP/ MC-130P combo? As much as I love the Black Hawk and it's variants, it's a modern helicopter and I'm not that much into modern air combat (although I do sometimes wish we could emulate the 160th SOAR), mainly because it's very one sided - I've yet to see the Taliban, Al Qaeda or IS display air superiority or engage in any sort of air combat with helicopters and/or jets, probably because they have none! You have to go into the realms of fantasy and concoct scenarios between US/UK/NATO forces and Russia/China for any sort of a balanced conflict where aircraft become anything but an "uber" weapon available to one side only. So, yeah a Black Hawk and/or it's variants would be a nice addition to DCS, if only to fly around in and do a few "Black Hawk down" type missions, drop some troops off, and shoot some poor insurgents on the ground who can't really respond, but I doubt any missions would require the use of a in-flight refueller as the map wouldn't be big enough. So, again, as a chopper pilot I don't need an in-flight refueller. :P

DCS Vietnam would be fantastic (excuse me if I've posted in this thread before, I can't seem to find my post amongst the 10 pages if I have, and I thought I had?!). As sims or any sort of video gaming goes Vietnam is hugely under represented (most games having either been WWII or modern combat, and now they seem to be progressing to "mickey mouse" futuristic ideas *coughArma3cough* *coughCoD:AWcough*, and the 'Nam war is the most major conflict since WWII, the war in Iraq/Afghanistan doesn't come close to it and I actually have little interest in playing sims/games set there (in general terms, although I do sometimes wish to emulate the 160th SOAR so I occasionally wish we had a littlebird/MH-60 combat available in DCS) For WWII air combat I have IL2 1946. Modern air combat I'm nowhere near as enthusiastic about (due to personal views on the differences between modern conflicts and an all out world war as we saw with WWII), however for me, as a Huey fan, I can only dream of a hi-fi sim such as DCS having a full Vietnam map, with a campaign (preferably dynamic) based around chopper operations of that period. Hell, if the map is correct I'd likely settle for some fictional missions or a campaign based on the exploits of Air America à la Downey Jr and Gibson! Sadly, I don't think there is the will for anyone to get down and actually do anything but talk about it. The DCS WWII kickstarter as I understand it was a non-starter and ED are now having to pick up the pieces (and are only so far adding the planes haphazardly to DCS, no news of intent to produce period correct theatre maps, to my knowledge), so I doubt a full DCS Vietnam would even get off the ground.

Hello I've got a mission I've made myself but it only contains 1 UH-1H placed at Batumi for a ramp start and I'd like to go further and add some of the other aircraft I currently have available to fly to the mission. So, my questions are - 1. I think I know how to add different types of aircraft using plane or helicopter groups (I assume if you want lets say a Ka-50 and UH-1H to choose from I would add two helicopter groups of 1 helicopter each and set the skill level to Player?), but how do I make it so that I get the choice of aircraft at the beginning of the mission? 2. How do I set the mission to give a choice of hot or cold start, like for example the UH-1H Stray Eagle mission does? Thanks in advance.

I would only buy one if it came with other (another) aircraft that can/has to use it and comes with pre-made missions/campaign/map in which it is used (I am admittedly lazy when it comes to missions/campaigns because I admittedly am not very creative), but even then, given it's limited use, I wouldn't want to pay much for it. The problem I see with DCS at the moment is that the additional planes seem to be rather haphazard with no narrative between them. None of the newer modules seem to come with proper campaigns and are a little out of place on the GTO map currently in DCS. A more structured approach to adding modules is needed I think. Like if you add a Spitfire add an English Channel map, a campaign (Battle of Britain for example) and AI/Flyable German bombers/fighters of the era the Spitfire flew in. It's a lot of work, I don't deny that, but it would add a whole lot to DCS rather than the current "here's [insert name of plane] go learn to fly it, go fly in multiplayer if you're competent enough, go make a random mission or two if you want to fly offline against AI" approach. Besides, I'm a chopper pilot primarily in DCS - I don't need an in-flight refueller. :P:D

Hello I've currently got the zoom view axis set to one of the rotaries on my X52 Pro throttle. However I've come across a slight annoyance that I'd like to solve. Example - I have the rotary at 50% (where the detent is), I start a mission with the UH-1H (or anything else really, doesn't matter if I use the A-10C, Ka-50 or UH-1H) and the view zooms out a little as normal when the mission starts. If I then move the rotary on my throttle a tiny bit (I usually do to check it's working) the view zooms in again. But if I zoom out to 100% of the rotary's turn the view zooms out to a ridiculous point. So, how do I make it so that 50% on the rotary is treated as exactly where the default view zoom is? Thanks in advance.

I buy what I like, so I picked the "I buy what I love" option. I'm not that attached to aircraft. :lol: Money is a limiting factor for me, I have other hobbies/games to buy for and I don't have a big budget in the first place (less than £50 per month at the moment). However at the moment I think I have all I want, as the F86 doesn't come with a Campaign (as far as I know), nor does the P-51, and they're the only one's I'm currently remotely interested in, but I already have them to fly in IL2 1946 with campaigns and better framerate. I mainly use DCS for my chopper fix. Then there's the at times poor framerate I get with the current modules I've got, the UH-1H, Ka-50 and A-10C, (although the A-10C isn't quite as bad from what I've seen in the brief amount I've flown it), so I question whether it's worth buying stuff I can barely play with... IF, and it's probably a big (and probably unlikely) IF, framerate improves under EDGE (a constant +50% would be nice, then at the bottom I'd be running at 15fps and at max I'd get about 60fps and on average I'd get 45fps) with the modules I currently have, then I might consider purchasing more modules.

Hello Just started a UH-1H campaign I downloaded called Crazy Horse. I tried it not so long ago but gave up after I found I was in a flight of 8 UH-1H and it killed my frame rate... Anyhow I've gone back to it as framerate seems to have improved (seemingly because I now seem to lead the flight of 3 other UH-1H with call sign Enfield, or at least they follow me, and the other 4 UH-1H (Springfield) aren't anywhere near me). However I've noted a problem with it (which may or may not be related to recent patches, but more than likely is...). On the kneeboard I'm sure the first time I tried the mission in question (the first 1) that the waypoints were displayed properly. I can see in the mission editor there's 7 of them, but all I'm getting shown on the kneeboard is waypoint 0 - where I take off from. Is there any way I can fix the mission (and any others with the same issue) so that the kneeboard dispalys the waypoints as it should? Thanks in advance. EDIT - Nevermind, I've deleted the campaign. It seems the 1st mission is broken, presumably by the more recent patches, because one UH-1H does an emergency landing and I'm supposed to pick the guys up, but I can't seem to! I'm supposed to use a "Descent Menu" but that option isn't present in the comms menu. And I appear to be the wrong call sign, it calls for Springfield 1-1 to pick the guys up, that UH-1H has already landed elsewhere, and I'm Enfield 1-3! I've looked in the ME and I'm supposed to be Springfield 1-1!

Ah OK, hadn't seen the discussion about it. No worries, I'll map another button (don't know if I have one spare though) or continue to reach for my keyboard/mouse on startups. Thanks.

Hello Just a small query. Ever since I learnt how to startup the Huey (couple of months now) I've noticed that my throttle axis (the "precision" slider on my Saitek X52) doesn't actually move the throttle until I press PgUp on my keyboard to roll the throttle to the idle position. So, question is - why doesn't the throttle axis (in Axis commands on the options page for controls) move the throttle to begin with, and is there a fix for this other than pressing PgUp to move the throttle initially up to the idle point? Thanks in advance.

I get the same issue. I manage to edit profiles but get the same crashes also. I find leaving the throttle in it's up position helps, and when editing a mode + pinky command it helps to have the mode dial in whatever mode you're editing and press and hold the pinky button whilst editing the button you want to edit. Only solution I can offer, other than a reboot, for when the crashes happen, is to close the profiler and unplug/plug in your X52 Pro after it happens. I've tried disabling/enabling the stick in Device Manager but Win7 almost always tells me I have to reboot... I've looked and I don't think there is a better way around it. It's just buggy software.

Yep done that. One of the first things I did in DCS World was to setup stuff like that on a 2nd monitor, well once I'd played BS1 and realised I can't see a lot on ABRIS or the Shkval screens if I don't have them on a 2nd monitor. I couldn't find a way to engage from further away on that map though. If I went to the fairly open flat area to the right of the valley mouth I was in range of the SAMs from the settlements to the north (and the labels for the MBT's didn't display so I didn't know where to look), although there seems to be some friendlies in or just beyond that area. If I followed the waypoints set out on ABRIS from the ingress point to the 2nd area as instructed I end up crossing deep into the valley area, right over the AAA on the northern ridgeline. You can imagine how that ends up... The best place I could find, but still saw me in range of the MBT's, was between two of the hills I mentioned, that are to the left as you're flying north coming up to the AO and form the left side of the valley, so the southern side I guess. It was from there which I managed to take down one MBT, before I got shot down... Wish I had a jpeg of that map it'd make it easier to show you what I mean with regards to where things are. I'll have another go of that particular mission over the weekend but I'm stumped on it and as it's the first I don't think I'll do at all well in the Ka-50 campaigns.

Probably. But apparently you can still fix it by editing the stage number. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2180489&postcount=740 Wish I'd have known that a while back (assuming it was common knowledge) because I edited a mission in the UH-1H campaign that I kept failing halfway through, so that I could play from where I kept crash landing, and the game wouldn't let me progress in the campaign, kept making me repeat the same mission. :(:music_whistling:

For anyone having missing campaign progress problems, I did and solved it, I'd like to link to these posts in the other thread - http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2180423&postcount=131 http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2180484&postcount=132