KansasCS

Exactly, it's not a 100% realistic sim for obvious reasons, bit it should strive to be. Adding a 4 missile Option would be a step in the wrong direction. People can mod all they want, really no biggy, but budging devs to add features that just aren't part of the real jet is something else entirely. In terms of ECM, well, that stuff is partially highly classified by nature. So the lack of simulation there is understandable. Information of payloads however, is available, and if I'm shelling out 60$, I want to know the devs worked their asses off to make it as close to life as possible(which they did), not fulfill some air quake dream. That is not the point of this sim. If you want to have more missiles on a small fighter, I suggest the Mig21. Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

Yes indeed, and those were equally redundant. In any case, if we were to have four heaters to the jet, which would be a deviation from the original F5E which could only carry 2xAIM9 on the wingtip, people would complain about the lack of AMRAAMs.

What to expect... A more humble community that is aware of the fact that modeling aircraft for DCS can't be compared to war thunder or Ace combat arcade stuff. (Most of us do, but a lot don't.) That variant bit is a difficult topic. First, because coding a different variant is more then just slapping new missiles and a paintjob onto it. Some variants had different powerplants and avionics all together, effectively making it a different aircraft. Looks and 3D modeling are the least bit time consuming in relation to systems modeling, so just because the base aircraft is the same, doesn't mean it takes a lot less work to create a different variant. And if all the systems remain the same, like you suggested, then I don't think that it merits an extra fee and should be covered with the 60$ I payed for the initial module. Secondly, and this is a guess, devs model aircraft they have access to. Just because they can take apart an F5 in Nevada or someplace and talk to pilots there, doesn't mean they can use that info for an export variant sitting elsewhere. Thirdly, if the documentation is scarce, which undoubtebly it is for prototypes, devs won't go through with it either. So there is your answer concerning RWR in the KA 50. Fourth, and this is personal taste, creating a system whereby I pay for minor addons is not my cup of tea. Modules and campaigns is one thing, but I cringed at texture packs for instance. If every last extra detail is to be subject to payware, I'll look into different filight sims over the long run.

At least one Century series plane (pick one) Of course not, but it can be used as one within the scope of the game, since it's fast enough and and it's not exactly an air superiority fighter. Edit: but has a Radar and AA missiles

We have the M2000C, the Mig21 and the F5 that saturate the interceptor role quite decently. While a Starfighter would be an iconic module (though in all fairness it was a spectacularly unreliable jet and system failures should be modeled accordingly :D), a Weasel F105, complete with EWO multicrew would be amazing :) Can't see that happening though. I'm guessing a lot on Radar tech and frequencies is still classified.

The F5 has been out for less than two weeks, is still in alpha, and already a thread is ensuing about it's lack of missiles etc. Noted, a lot of people disagree with the OP and take the F5 how it is, but still. I respect devs that deal with this sort of unconstructive feedback on a daily basis. We get a module every 6 months or so and still people find stuff to frown about, or see it perfectly possible to model the latest and greatest variant of said module.

Turning mirrors off sometimes gives me an 80% fps increase. From 40fps to ~75fps. It is obscene. Why haven't I turned them off earlier...

Concerning Winter textures not being displayed/Summer textures on a winter map. I'm still having these issues. Would manually installing the mod help?

Hey guys, Is the starway mod compatible with 1.5.4 beta? For some reason the winter map is in fact summer or autumn. For instance, when I spawn instant action winter, it's in fact not winter at all. Which lua do I need to fiddle with to get this working agian?

Splendid Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

TrackIR issues with 1.5.4 My head movement seems off with the latest patch. Also, I can't move my head back 180°. When I pan the view to my 3 or 9 o'clock, the view is rotated towards the nose of the plane. See images.

I'll be sticking with 1440p because the 144Hz Gsync does wonders in terms of smoothness. So the 1080 is more than enough for me, for the coming years. Besides, I was able to sell my 980ti for a reasonable price. Something I didn't mention is the the epic cooler on the 1080. It is able to sustain 69 degrees under load, without being heard. Of course, if you're gaming with a headset, PC volume becomes rather unimportant, but still. The temps leave a lot of room for overclocking (if the standard clock fps isn't enough for you). Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

I got my 1080 today. Indeed, the performance gain is very slim compared to 980ti. But alas, judge for yourselves. I've attached some benchmarks! 1080 vs 980ti benchmark.pdf heaven benchmark.pdf

Sorry, Hoch means high, Extrem means well, ...extreme keine means none aus means off :D german

Actually, if you could just run a 2 minute FRAPS benchmark with this track and post the min/max/avg fps, that would be truly awesome. Edit: my graphicsw setup is seen in the screenshot. I hope you can run at 1440p :D Alternatively, you can run it on a single 1080p monitor(I believe your monitors are 1080p native each) and I'll do the same. Then we can compare. Mk82 air.trk

If you still have your 980ti, would you be so kind as to run a benchmark, first with the 980ti, then the 1080. Just take a standard 2 minute DCS track and use FRAPS. It would be very much aprecciated. Both OCed at your discretion. You may yet be the only dude I know that has his hands on both with a similar PC setup.

Glad I'm not the only one. I wiped out the entire infantry with surgical gunfire in hopes to get a response. Nothing. Oh well. Up to this point the campaign is very neat :)

Just go on any computer component site that lists all the selling websites and filter for ultra wide 1440p and gsync Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

ASUS sells them too, with highly similar specs. I believe the actual screen is the same. Only that the casing, bezel etc, are different. Pricing is similar too, with ASUS being slightly more expensive.

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/474611-3440x1440-vs-2560x1440/ Something to consider when making the leap for 21:9 ultra wide monitors.

1080 vs 980ti for WQHD(2560x1440) The low price was just for a day. After that it went back up again. Also, downgrading resolution is not pretty. I'd rather play 1080p on native res, than 1440p on a 4K. Or 1440p on native. On a side note, I played 4K for a few days before sending back the monitor and settling for 1440p, because back then, my 980 couldn't handle high fps on 4K. I can honestly say that I don't miss it. Again, the overall difference in picture quality isn't that great from 1440p to 2160p I dare say that Nvidia DSR minimizes the difference even further. But I guess people can debate this endlessly. Just like some people get headaches from VR and others don't. Some people see 30fps as choppy and others don't. I for instance notice it instantly when a forest I fly over passes rather chopper or fluently. Those microstutters every 4 seconds can be especially annoying.

Hmm, yea. Yesterday it was available for 700€ Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

https://geizhals.de/acer-predator-x34bmiphz-um-cx1ee-006-a1257523.html?hloc=at&hloc=de

I run my 4790K@4,5GHz Flying low over Kobuleti, with all the tiny towns and forests, I get ~25 fps. Max settings, max draw distance, 2AA, high visibility, no lens effect.

But I thought you already had one? If you're getting a new monitor, get as much res as possible, or a 21:9 curved. There is an acer model with Gsync, 1440p and 21:9, for the same price as the Asus ROG swift.