Worrazen

Great initial post as you had your info's setup nicely with the videos, you can also add your storage disk into the on screen graphs, because this is the hot thing right now to correlate disk-reads with stutters. Make sure you select the correct one in the "instance" number so that you really pick the correct disk that has the DCS installed, and I've recently found out too that, depending on circmustances if there's some stuff paged out to pagefile, DCS will load from that too when it needs it, so you may add both a disk that contains a pagefile plus the installation disk. Not saying this is the case in your case, but this is good to see what's going on so you can rule this thing out if it isn't the problem. Stuttering as in interruption of the executuion of the core engine should never happen in and kind of circumstances when it comes to streaming or dynamic loading non-essential assets such as textures and terrain data, that is the whole point of streaming, that the play continues while things the streaming is built for gradually loads in, and that logic includes it should work smoothly even on HDDs but this is just easier said than done and we all sincer upgraded to SSDs as well as the minimal official requirements have been raised and so we fought this problem with throwing raw horsepower at it. I have recently discovered it may not just be necessairly tied to the speed of the storage, but also to the who else other than the CPU, and that one is more sophisticated, I've did a thread about it but I had to cut the continuation short because I just have to deal with some non-DCS stuff first, I'll get back to it later, and it looked like that the I/O asset loading threads may be fighting for CPU time and at momemts taking too much away from the main thread which causes the interruption (stutter), hopefully it may be an easy fix of thread priorities but I haven't tried that myself yet manually. I haven't tried the latest Beta patch, I planned to take a few days for DCS again this week kind of an intermission so not the full return to beta testing yet, and so I'll do a comparison first, that's why I want ot keep the previous version on. Also all of this could just be some specific HW/SW thing ... because we don't see these kind of suttering on trailers and there's probably a bunch of players that never seem to complain about this, many youtubers don't have this stuttering thing, to my recollection, or they don't notice, and I didn't notice coincidentially, perhaps I don't watch it too much, well I do, I just don't watch every single long hour video, but I do 30% at least but I think that's enough to be able to catch some of them.

Yeah, this thing is being pinged all the time. I think some of it doesn't belong here, take it to the account support forum IMO.

We got to start searching the remote and abandoned russian airfields, there may be something in Crimea too, there's lots of old bases there !!!!! What about the Far East, there could be some abandoned shack with some drawers and the papers could be there all nice and cozy perserved in that winter. Never say never, remember the NASA Lunar Orbiter McDonalds thing: http://www.moonviews.com/

Well ............. ........ .... .. F%$!:cry: PS: If that's real, then again, it's still better to know that, than to be in unknowness.

Too bad they didn't mention DCS :( Requesting comment squad reinforcements ... it's not illegal right, just ... behave.

How the hell do you know that? ------------------------------- ------------------------------- Oh my gawd how slow it is compared to

Well the Hind thing is definitely not a small deal, it's a really cool looking heli to me ... kinda makes up for it even tho I haven't got into helis in DCS.

Doesn't mean things can't change, as old stuff gets declassified and new stuff replaces it ... iffffff only it just worked like there, but perhaps it does and they still don't want to cooperate ?!?! What about just dealing with the Serbian Govt, they got a few systems and airplanes from Russia and I didn't get this idea before despite knowing all of this and posting many rants about it, Serbia will repair and modernize some of the aircraft themselfs and I think this is being done as we speek now, that could be a great time to kinda get in before the modernization is 100% complete and get the data on the old Mig-29s that Serbians may be okay with sharing ... if they don't have any requirement to ask Russia about it lol. Plus you may have some connections with the Serbian WW2 / Mig-21 plane enthusiasts and I believe Mig-21bis for DCS had something to do with serbia in terms of research/employees or no? Edit: yeah, according to corporationwiki. https://sputniknews.com/military/201612231048907647-russia-serbia-mig29-deliveries/

Right ... if the existing A-10C is a mix of suites that don't actually exist like some rumors say then I guess it can go to retirement, but then I'd be very happy if the new module comes a proper lower suite and higher suite editions, not just the higher suite we're expecting, even tho we really have no idea what level suite would the A-10C 2 be in actually, that's just community perception (unless I missed some official info), if it's not that of a chore to have two editions but both based on the new tech/model and being equally maintained. Question is how many people here would actually benefit from that ... I simply offered a few example use cases I speculated about and that's for missions which try to accurately replicate an era for a fictional story ... or the real-event replicating missions which try to mirror the exact circumstances, and it would make sense to use a more appropriate suite for that era, let's say 1995, if a real pilot that flown it with the lesser A-10C it would not feel authentic doing it with ~2015 level A-10. A real pilot might one day try to just for his own memories play with the old suite if that's the suite he was mostly familiar with in real life.

I've had a larger idea for years ... because on one hand it's hard to segment something on just one or a few things that aren't just logically/technicall enoguh, there is the memory consumptions, demographic maybe, ... probably some other things I can't think of right now, while if we just wait a bit perhaps the usual GPU VRAM amounts for high/enthusiast gaming segments may perhaps just mature in future so it may be enough for something DCS could use ... 32GB VRAM in 2 years anyone? I'm not really sure ... but then again I keep seeing an opportunity every 3-5 months where DCS could be mentioned in product announcement or releases, just something for crying out loud! The optimal idea is that it would kinda fit between enthusiast gaming and workstation segments (workstation being AFAIK a step higher than enthusiast gaming AFAIK) ... but it would be hard for just DCS to create and twist arms with HW vendors for this segment alone ... the general simulator segment already existing, just never gets any differentiation in HW or any other segmentation and gets left out ... and I think TFC/ED should do something about it earlier because now there is a big possibility of something like that perhaps shaping up with DCS core improvements, and the "big surprise" of system requirements for the [redacted] simulator 2020 and the WOW factor it made and because of it's brand recognition there is this possiblity that is going to set this stage up where HW manufacturers could be a lot more understanding and motivated for this idea of segmenting and promotion, perhaps not the HW segment totally, you probably shouldn't need a special motherboard for DCS, but just something in the marketing side at least or some other combination, but it's not some made up joke, there is made up reasons the indutry does all the time why you need this and why you need that, so DCS should ofcourse not fall into that cheap idea and if it doesn't make sense then nothing, but if there is a good techincal objective reason then why not give it a try. The hardware industry is sometimes (when it tries to innovate) looking to find good uses for these segments more than just core development, but it kinda struggles I feel, trying to give the SW industry a reason to go all out ... but it didn't happen lately with the AMD Radeon VII, mainstream gaming is still the measly 1080p at 27inch or lower, so they don't have that much need for memory, infact most modern highly popular games are now quite optimized and many even much lesser on GPU than it was usually the norm. The biggest problem I have with the HW industry segmentation is that they completely forget the multi-use-case users such as me, they think that workstation people never play games, so Workstation stuff is sometimes rid of any gaming stuff that I DO want to have, but the enthusiast gaming boards are so much into gaming there's lack of other stuff I need for work, every segment is just too extremely into it's own specialization, it kinda feels, although don't look at me as an expert on all the buying choices out there at all :p Now I don't happen to be able to afford the Workstation segment right now but there's probably others, they probably have more machines in that case, but I'm also purposelly not trying to upgrade and spend on anything right now while this transition is ongoing, not a good idea to do it before consoles launch, because console enhancements also benefit the PC hardware these days and you can see PS5 is better than PCs in SSD speeds right now and probably will have that lead for 6 more months or even a year after release. DCS is from what I heard really meant to be a simulator at first with some game components, NOT primairly a game, so this idea, if it makes sense, would go hand in hand with that ideology. While Modern Air Combat will be primairly targeted more to the mainstream gaming segment, and it'll probably have it's own stuff in there ... but the whole point is this thread is then DCS deserves to have something in it's own segment, and not to be left out of the reviewer/HW stuff scene, because it seems always the lower stuff gets the cake and cherry on top but the hardcore stuff is left out ... in the 90' it was the other way around, it was all hardcore back then! In order to persuade HW vendors into some kind of a promotion of the "flight sim segment" or just DCS on it's own if ED manages to do that haha, the HW vendors have to quickly see a good range of bulletpoints of the reasons such as a list of differentiations that would make sense, and also a list software and usecases if a new segment is attempted and this is the right time to start some of those ideas ... so even if it's not something special to have some new segment, perhaps the HW manufacturers can just create more of a themed HW with some select higher-quality parts and still would fall into Enthusiast Gaming but it would be all "optimized for flight sims" even if that marketing moniker is probably a joke but whatever, it's just better than nothing, as I said, this is a compromise and this is not my optimal idea what I'd really want, which is probably only doable if we have our own freaking factories, just practically impossible, unless I win a lottery some day, well you got my word the first thing I'd do (except personals) will be to invest into DCS and the whole ecosystem for that segment, the joysticks, the stuff, etc. Some people say DCS has gone too much into graphics, ... truth is that unfortunately so much marketing is spent for graphics and so much is rated based on grapics even if it's wrong that DCS would be left out too far back if it wouldn't increase on that, still if people appreciate the whole product based a lot on graphics, while not as good as if someone directly praises the simulation, it still works out in the end as a net positive IMO, for the team morale and everything else around that. Taking more horsepower is a double edged sword, it can signify ineffectiveness and inoptimization, or it can signify a hardcore piece of kit that is really strong and is a must-have and it becomes a challenge and a benchmark , ... the quirks and symptoms of inefficiency HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT or else it's all blamed on "inoptimization/buggyness" whether real or not and it will definitely have a marked psychological effect probably instantly on the very critical reviewers eyes and the idea of a "big daddy benchmark" will be turned upside down. So if the Workstation idea would work, gaming(FPS) performance must be better or the same IMO, if it's only a tad worse it's never going to fly, unless a HW vendor just doesn't mind it or pumps up the marketing lol, in practice not worth it then. I'm gonna go look at some Radeon VII benchmarks now (arrrg I should have done it before writing this thread, sorry) https://www.techpowerup.com/266992/amd-announces-radeon-pro-vii-graphics-card-brings-back-multi-gpu-bridge Now this this looks like an overkill or just off the point there with many non-DCS-helpful things but you get the point, just an example. Oh look a random fighter jet ... what an appropriate coincidence

I feel like there were more training missions for JF-17 the first time it was free but then disappeared or I was just not paying attention and mixed something up in my head.

Yeah this is not for gaming at all, I barely got an old Windows XP game working on Win7 VM on a Win10 Host.

I don't remember seeing this distinct black engine exhaust smoke way back then ... but I did remember the lag from the old standard smoke-generator smoke, if you left it on during landing it would lag a whole lot when it got super dense as you were stopping, probably does the same today ... perhaps less, I had a much weaker GPU back then with only 2GB of VRAM then I foiled the replacement with a wrong one and only later got a proper one I have now. EDIT: http://forums.eagle.ru:8080/showpost.php?p=2117434&postcount=2 That definitely sounds kinda very similar, I'll have a look at it ... well I don't think it's possible to go back to a 2014 build but I could try the mod that is mentioned.

I think many people familiar with DCS at large for the last 10 years and that is a F-15/F-18 fan would concede to Su-27 not as their top choice for flying but for the devs to make it, because honestly you got F-18, F-16, Harrier, F-14 already there on the US side which are not F-15 but kinda something like it. But I could be wrong, perhaps people are more egoistic about their favourites and don't care about anything else :p

There's some inconsistency as DCS has evolved, many common assets are still in files meant only for caucasus or actually the other way around, some stuff is zipped some stuff not, some liveries are thrown in "Textures" folders and some are zipped some not ... there really should be only one place where each aircraft has all the liveries, custom or not and if you add custom ones to the DCS Saved Games then the relative folder structure should be the same, hopefully it'll be solved someday but as you may guess it's a low priority thing. However I'm not sure where you got a 75% compression ratio there ... images usually don't compress well with lossless data compression, I would have to see it to believe it. Perhaps I never paid attention to how DDS(DXT1/3/5) could compress with DEFLATE?

Interesting as I just recently started digging into Mig-21, ... however I didn't play the old Hump campaign yet so I'm kinda unqualified to provide proper feedback for now.

I'm looking to get an early idea what's on people's mind that they find frustrating or painstaking around playing or modding DCS, such as something that is suppose to be a faster job in real life or isn't part of the pilots responsibility, but as a player on PC simulating it you have to do it the slow way to get the game working right. I've not been active around DCS Modding much because my cup of tea almost all the time has been performance testing and similar, I'm becoming more and more active with DCS than I've ever been and while I'm going through busy stuff with non-DCS related stuff I can't seem take more than 1-2 week of a break haha. This is more of an early recon mission, I'll probably not have time for months, but with me, I have no strict deadlines, I can juggle other work around even tho I'm suppose to get done with it first, but no promises. My skill is limited to the following conditions: Low to mid level stuff such as: filesystem operations (naming, sorting, managing, etc) various text (settings) files manipulation help tool for modders (modellers, painters, scripters, mission builders etc) .. etc (can't think of more right now but I know there's more) What is not included in this offer: Tools that ED is working on themselfs, like the new Mission Editor it self. DCS Modding it self. I have no idea yet about DCS scripting nor the API, perhaps I'd need to learn some of it as part of a project but to be honest I'm reluctant to get into real DCS modding because it would spoil me ... I once modified an A-10C to have GBU-10 TERs on all stations and other crazies ... it's like cheats, it spoils the actual realism this is intended for, I don't want my favourite game to become boring. Anything that has to do working with DCS custom file formats where they're encoded and no public API is provided, is out of the question too. If you are using CMD/PS scripts or some other improvised way already regularly, then we could even port that into a dedicated utility if it looks like it'll be faster and more convenient, we could figure out other helpful things or even make it faster along the way not just 1:1 port, for example. Utility would most likely be in C# and Windows only. EDIT: Note to moderator, please move this thread out of DCS Mods, and into the "Mods and Apps" root. Sorry about that.

There's a fair side to those arguments but in general it'll always end up with this: There is a reason there is no talk when there is no ... end-user useful practical important product relevant ..etc .. information. But some people just enjoy the amazing sights of .... Maximum Transparency :music_whistling: But I'm not just saying that from the other point of view ... I as a user really don't want to know. Some people just expect this to be something that was never intended to be, where the jurney is the destination but in a different way what I usually have in mind***. You're suppose to up on the deck sightseeing the sea and islands (product), not down in the engine room bothering the coal-loader guy, the cruise ship wasn't intended for it, they didn't sell the ticket for that, and so gaming companies usually don't sell their working activity either. If you want to do engine room there's a place, time, circumstances, arrangement for that, you'd need to hire a boat owner to explain boating to you ... but he's not going to tell you ALL of his own drama, it's not for sale. It's just the balance, how much updates is too much, frequency, detail, ... what if a change happens and then you would think it was a broken promise ... the risk is not empty. But this serious need for even more updates is something else and I think I've at least partially figured out over the years ... I've seen many gaming forums talking more about the stock market and all the side issues instead of the actual products the forums were intended to be about. This, what I began to call, thecorporation-football has become a new online sport that probably needs it's own dedicated place, where it's more about the development journey and all the details sorrounding that aren't even part of the product, with constant little updates on the status being as little poofs of smoke for a dopamine rush. ***: I advocate the slower pace journey experience, where you as a user really digest and get the most out of each product feature update before even thinking about the next one ... and coincidentially it's easier/better on the devs ... and you get your dopamine rush, like you suppose to, from that enjoyment of the product it self, not from the update/talk about the product. Perhaps a season of How It's Made could do the trick to help some through the wait: :)

I guess holidays should be announced just so that people will hold back a bit ... I'm kinda too busy right now to do DCS ... even tho I have some important beta tests on queue coming up just can't do everything at once! Hang in there people ... try use the process hacker thread-cpu affinity separation workaround from one of my recent perf threads about "too much threading", I think i've seen it help in many other cases not just the one example in the thread (like JF-17 ground radar) ... and make sure you get the latest nightly version which has multi-select for thread affinity changes now supported per my request https://github.com/processhacker/processhacker/issues/583 that should make it much easier and faster doing the workaround as opposed to doing every thread one by one manually.

The ingame module management in the future should be updated. The free periods have shown there's a need for this, even tho it's not a big deal for me, it would avoid all the unnecessary "how to install module" threads. 1.A: When starting a fresh DCS session the in-game E-Shop Icon's "Red colored new modules sub-icon" could have an initial larger circular flash-effect across the top of the main menu to get more attention initially in the first moment when the E-Shop auto-detects new available content, then it would slowly blink without any distracting flash-effect or a significantly minor one; 1.B: After either going out of Main Menu to other menus, entering the E-Shop and acknowledging the new modules (no special user action necessary, you entered it you just seen it 99.9%), or after entering mission editor or playing a mission and then returning to the Main Menu, the in-game E-Shop Icon's "Red colored new modules sub-icon" would stay lit just like now and not blink. 2: The current "New Modules Popup Dialog" would be replaced by a dedicated Available Modules page in the E-Shop, complete with the following buttons and actions: Refresh button to clear local cache and sync/refresh with the remote online ED Server for a list of available modules for your account, Discard Selection button for discarding checkmarked available modules, Chec/Unchek All button, Apply Now button to exit DCS and download/install selected modules and an Apply Later (or Schedule For Next Boot) button to defer the selected installations to when you later quit or restart DCS. 3: The installed modules page would be upgraded to support queueing and selecting multiple modules to uninstall at once, immedately or later, similarly to how it works on the installation(available modules) page. Currently you can only uninstall one module at a time ... and restard DCS each time, uninstalling 30 modules could take an hour if you count the time that you spend idling when you do something else because I presume an average person wouldn't give this procedure 100% focus at all times. If something similar is already in the works then great, doesn't have to be exacly like this.

I actually liked it and had no thoughts of any creppy or girlfriends for the novelty of it and diversity of modules ... but it does kinda sound like one of those japanese cartoons ... I have little experience with any of that anime stuff so my opinion's worthless really. I was selecting between the voices and I found a favourite one but forgot which one. I never disliked any of this because I'm a big fan of warnings and buttons and emergency goodness. I just like the thrill of a sudden WARNING that as a non-pilot I didn't expect and then I go "oooh hold on to your butts, ... btw that's nicely simulated ... challenge accepted" If I have comments I probably would find more techinical ones, perhaps clarity of the audio and mix/volume etc where you guys talk about creepyness might actually fall into the technical aspect in a scenario, but the JF-17 trial is over now and I'm planning to buy it a bit later.

^^ Thanks for your report! So we have a more solid case and what type of HW it's affecting.

So I disabled Wind Turbulence because it would make just about any flying kind of uncontrollable for when I do testing. But I believe it's still not turned completely off, for no reason the rudder jitters around ocassionaly, some planes do it more than others, sometimes a whole mission nothing, perhaps it has to do with wind settings in those pre-made missions vary a lot, but the ruder controlls seem as if my joystick is broken, I thought it was broken for like a month back around winter of 2020, until I found about this. Is there anything more I could do to disable this for now? Thanks

-------------------------------- -------------------------------- **** Thread Milestone **** New Post After Some Time -------------------------------- Last Post: 25 January 2020 This Post: 1 May 2020 -------------------------------- It's official ... https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2165713/statement-by-the-department-of-defense-on-the-release-of-historical-navy-videos/

It's hard to say who's at fault, but it's one of the three: driver, dx11 on your PC, the game. MS might have changed something with DX on the latest Win10 version and the driver doesn't support it. MS might have changed something with DX on the latest Win10 version and the driver does support it, but the game doesn't support it. Stuff like that, if you recently updated GPU driver, reinstall an older one, about Windows 10 updates I have no clue since I don't do updates at all (and if I do I use WSUS-Offline)