Worrazen

I was doing some tests and used autopilot 30 feet from the sea level, GCAS was going off at regular intervals, but not constant, so it kinda not sure about itself, so it trips a bit then thinks it's okay and so it goes. I think that one I have on video and I'll post it part of a performance discussion so it won't be in this forum section.

I'm posting this the last thing today, exhausted (oh no, not sitting on the chair all day either), I'm not going to talk much, it's just a LOD/visibility draw distance bug and it's all in the video. Don't need to watch all 25 minutes I got a bit stretched so I added some background audio to it, I kinda like the feeling of that so I'll be doing that on all longer videos without much sound from the GUIs or Game.

The lighting is all yet to be tuned up, it's a big deal so this is all WIP, all we can do is raise a flag about it so it gets identified by the team. All the color/brightness/saturation values and internal stuff needs to be adjusted, I couldn't get the MFDs looking right despite doing all kinds of adjustments inside cockpit (not mods), I got it close but there's layers inside the TGP/MAV that don't display right in any scenario, at least I doubt that's how it suppose to look.

There is a sea clipping going on in TGP, I'll be opening a new bug report about it, but it's not the same thing you see in this video. I don't see any clipping, it just looks like the ship is very similarly temperatured as the sea, but this could be normal, I don't know that much about FLIR stuff, yet.

It's a big step in the right direction, it just needs tuning so the sorrounding terrain is less lit up, but if there's a strong moon that makes more sense however what I seen the reflectivity of terrain is too much even for a strong moon, it's not easy because I think but I hope not that each of the texture needs it's own reflectivity map to go along with it, possibly making this task as big as FLIR rendering in a way ... , snow reflects light and that's why snowy nights look a lot more lit up and you can see the terrain and other things close to it for quite a longer distance, ofcourse if there's city lights and other sources in the vicinity to make those reflections, but I presume that for snow it would just take those base values and adding a multiplier for snow (snow adjustment) and wouldn't be such a big chore, hopefully. EDIT: Well obviously it's all lit up people ... if there's a FLARE over the airfield !!!!! And nobody cared to mention that, or I didn't saw, but yeah it's my fault of not trying it myself earlier. Well, there's your problem.

It crashes in the middle of enumerating modules, DLLs from System32, so on the outside it seems it could be pointing to DCS not playing nice with a particular windows version. Because I'm on 1607 and I'm not crashing, and you guys most likely have one thing in common: fully updated windows.

Definitely a bug, it's just a label, it's not real.

I've observed this as well, that's just the reality of it I think, it has to render another area, and it also has to deal with extra DRAW CALLS! Which is something Vulkan API rendered should improve a lot.

DCS is known to hit GPU 100% in many cases, because of the rendering cost it doesn't increase the FPS that much in most cases, with low GPU hungry cases you can have 100 or over FPS with very little GPU activity, for example in pause it always hits 100% because the CPU has nothing else to do and has free room to fill the GPU I think or whatever's happening there exactly, I don't want to say because I didn't look into that still. All activity should be frozen when the game is paused, it's sort of a soft pause. GPU activity in pause is a real power consumption argument. I'm resorting to suspending the process with NIRCMD or Resource Monitor. I made myself a small batch file for quickly suspending it (and resuming) @echo off echo. echo. echo ***** SYS-CMD: Suspending Process DCS.exe **** timeout 1 nircmd.exe suspendprocess dcs.exe echo. echo. echo ***** SYS-CMD: DCS.exe Suspended echo. echo --> Press any key to resume DCS.exe pause timeout 1 nircmd.exe resumeprocess dcs.exe echo. echo. echo ***** DCS.exe has been resumed, happy flying ***** timeout 3 echo. echo. exit

As mentioned, put options.graphics.maxfps = NN into your Saved Games\Config\autoexec.cfg file. And in order to easily deal with unusual extensions and extensions in general, unhide the extensions, hidden by default I think ever since Windows XP, probably the single biggest stupid default setting on Windows.

Sorry that this is posted at the busiest times, this is more of a report for those who're interested in the sport of performance speculation, but that I could have posted at any time before or later. Now, I don't do this for drama, I do it because of genuine feedback as well and also part of my learning of the diagnostic/performance profiling tools which I need for in all the other DCS-unrelated projects and stuff. I just wanted to get it off the list as there's quite a bit of cases where I forgot to finish things I started testing and writing about. After being on release build for quite some time I joined the 2.5.6 open beta bug hunting party and thing thing with the F10 View came along. So why is it that F10 AWACS view can appear so laggy at times and quite taxing on the CPU of all things, something I never noticed before as I just wasn't looking, and it's a pretty simple answer. (Text may look a bit crappy due to being downscaled to 1080p from 1440p as usual with my DCS videos, otherwise OBS has too much impact on CPU, perhaps I may adjust the bitrates and quality stuff more, but the source is at 20000 kbps so IDK why it doesn't look better, and youtubes/webstreaming chroma subsampling, yuck) Draw Calls! Draw Calls! Draw Calls! A gigantous ~5000 of them in the F10 View versus ~2000 looking at a city on the Persian Gulf shore. So it wasn't just about the SSDs and loading, that we thought back than, tho that factor did improve things by a lot, so very very interesting. Althought the FPS is kinda similar, that's because the GPU in the F11 Free Look view has a lot more to do, while in the F10 View it's kept back by the CPU having a tougher job feeding the GPU, and because doing those draw calls in DX11 probably not multi-threaded but I haven't looked at the CPU usage data per-threads for this scenario yet. There's nothing to do really, this is exactly the type of stuff Vulkan API based renderer will greately improve for free because the draw calls there would cost a lot less of CPU, meaning that in practice the GPU can do things on it's own without needing heavy CPU usage to babysit it. Additionally because the draw call cost is heavily reduced the CPU can spend it's time on things that are far more important, like the AI, simulation, physics and gameplay calculations. In does not lag so much in all zoom levels, only in maximum zoom out, and the middle portion when you have a lot of details+a sizable area, that is the FPS, but in terms of CPU it's quite taxing on almost all zoom levels so if the whole game simulations starts lagging, perhaps you guys might remember to switch out of the F10 View because I also thought F10 would be light on the system, but it can be the other way around, actually hogging even if you're not looking at the high draw call areas. In the meantime as far as optimization goes, it may only be worth it if perhaps there is some easy trick to perhaps lower the draw calls, truncating some things that could be and wouldn't take a lot of effort to, or to not display those grid lines by default, but we should wait for the bigger and better solution that's as we all know in the works for some time now.

I updated my post, good enough? :lol:

sigh Maybe you should play the game and start exploring the changes, I'm barely processing it, testing some OB and I can't finish some reports for 3 days now because I'm doing like 5 things at the same time, and playing, and the rest, I'm absolutely filled up with stuff to do, this years core-updates weekend news was huge in terms of key things that got confrimed and sort of a roadmap laid out, it's absolutely everything of the high points the community dreamed of for the past years, except maybe the radio-signal simulation stuff but that was only me talking about it and jumping ahead of things, and EVEN THAT got foreshadowed/acknowledged last year, oh my god I completely forgot, I couldn't believe it!!! It was mentioned when the DCS Voice Integration was announced, so I don't know man, you better hide in the forrest because those Scud missiles are soon going to be lock and loaded. Sure there's probably other sides of this community that didn't get some of their nuggets mentioned, but still, Helicopters aren't being forgotten either, did you hear about Mi-24 Hind, are you kidding me, that's the bullion right there, the most important thing is that's in the works, it's not going to be forgotten in history, the documentation is safe and sound, audio is being recorded, access is secured, licenses are made, cockpit and external model is getting scanned, everything's pictured, it's right there, that is the news, you can just imagine easily everything roughly about it, and knowing that gives me a sense of relief every day. It's only after that, that we get into the discussion of details of the quality of the digital version, IMO, but that's just my philosophy around this, it's not just about flying a machine on computer, it's preserving history too, the data is the first, you can always do digital version out of that later and whenever, but in terms of this relationship right there that what we pay for as a module is well spent on a good experience is indeed genuine and relevant, and determines how that history is presented. I got the feeling too many people are too relaxed about how old private collectors can keep legacy airplanes, how museums could keep them, etc, well I don't think that counts for Russia necessairly ... and what happened to a B-17 recently ... (RIP), and the most ridicolous thing about that sector is the lower FAA standards of safety because it's all non-commercial, if I were flying those vintage planes I'd be looking at increasing the safety for myself alone if not for anyone else, I wouldn't want to pilot it, just because it's "special" and it's not for transport, life is still the same, soul is still the same, nature doesn't care about our boreucracy and legalese on paper, I would put in parachutes, I would install inflatable airbags on the bottom to absorb some energy if a crash landing occurs, there's so many things you could do for safety if you really spent the money on it, unfortunately in this for-profit system it's hard to do that. So, is the Russian Military going to let any of the airframes to be just put into museums and private collectors, every month or so at least I keep seeing for the past 3-4 years, reports or the high military commanders and/or the Russian president himself on video talking how the modernization of the Russian military is a TOP priority. So they're dead serious about it, and I was sort of fearing those old style variations would cease to exist and we'll never get to experience the old school of doing things and analog gauges/indicators, not saying that the new version wouldn't be interesting, but it's richer if you have more variations for everyone to enjoy in DCS and it creates a great experience when people compare them and would create further gameplay opportunities for the era-specific scenarios but also perhaps some great skill where a really good pilot could do as good or better in an old variation versus a mediocre one in a modern variation, that would be fun to watch a stream of :) So while these core-upgrades the community has been hammering on in the report don't seem like much to read, you need to understand it's a far bigger deal, Vulkan API was announced so much earlier I have ever anticipated. If all you do is read gaming news every morning/evening as if it was a replacement for the ordinary news around the world and life, then you're going to be disappointed most of the time, this is not cable news, it's not satellite news, not radio news, and not an internet show, not a TV series either, now it could be but I think everyone around here is going to tell you that the chances of that happening by in-house ED is so slim as the chance of them going to Egypt and dig dirt in the search of a Stargate, that is if SG-1 events didn't happen in reality yet; and use it to go to P3R-233 and borrow that Quantum Mirror so they can use it to enter an alternate reality and talk over to the ED in that reality who happen to run a daily DCS news show called The Wingtip Xtreme, to give them a copy of the tapes so they can use it in this reality and bring it to you every evening paradropped at your doorstep by C-130 Express! Back to this reality now, what got confirmed to be in the works this year, was it ever bigger before in DCS history??? I'm here since 2014, I did some occasional lurking before, I played the DCS Warthog at a friends house before, I played Lock-On ages ago too, (and other products) but I can't really count those pre-2014 years in fairness. In terms of key announcements sure the amount of text may not be sizable, changelog is good but not like the move from 1.2 to 1.5 where the changelog was massive, and 2.0/2.5 I think, but you're not suppose to count and rate satisfaction and success vs failure by how many sentences you read in a report! Heh, oh well. I really don't want this turn into GamerTV with hours of talk and reports and all the drama around that, that's like sleazy geoff keighly type of stuff with all the bling and hype, that's the kind of football-match pub type of talk I mentioned in another thread just a day/two ago, where there's more talk about all the offtopic things than the product it self, and the players themselfs becoming sort-of financial advisors and analysts, how which company will do this move on the table, oh that company has 3 more cards to pull of, and the third one has another trick up it's sleave. That's what the podcast is for an other 3rd-party stuff and your private talk with your friends, ofcourse I'm not saying people can't do that, it's your free will and time, but it shouldn't be regarded as some important thing, because it's all unofficial speculation in the end and doesn't fit into what the official forums should be about IMO. We have all the community podcasts that I'm queueing up to listen to, search around a bit, they last for an hour, there's many general aviation sites that post more lengthy explanations on DCS updates and happenings, there's the Alert 5 podcast, and a new one but I forgot the name now. Less info actually makes it more interesting because I consider it spoilers. Besides the Supercarrier was announced too early AFAIK so it had a larger timeframe of news around it, more stretched out tho but still. Now there's a legitimate need for news, but I'm more about the key points, the details don't bother me so much, I rather do it by feedback. If you want to hold the seller to your expectations then open a wishlist post and explain there what things would you like to see, because this is the key part, this may sound a bit harsh but it's the hard truth and it applies to all the unpatient customers around here, what is it that you actually want, do you want the product or you want a list of paper talking about the product?

I've got no mods and I can see it takes longer for quite a few ares, it may be some prepwork, file cheks, license checks, network delays, but it's nothing like what some people are saying for me, it's really not that extreme here.

Why don't we first ask if the OP meets minimum requirements of a (mid-to-high range) SSD for DCS? Because the preloading thing has kinda been over with ever since SSDs are the standard for DCS, at least I have no issue. (Remember, cheap SSDs can be worse than HDDs)

Can you post some actual data please? Use GPU-Z or Rivatuner statistics server with MSI Afterburner overlays and create a video of the cases you think are too resource hoggy.

Yah, updated, I took also to fetch the track, because I was doing a bit unusual stuff in that mission I never did before, showing off DCS to some of my family members, then I took a spin and I crashed into a landed ally on the carrier and it was burning weird (flickery smoke) and wanted to report that bug, but it stopped burning before I could snap a video. That said, I didn't play that mission in 256OB before so the above may not be it. However sorry though, I'll be keeping Windows version 1607 (LTSB 2016) for the forseeable future, at least until mainstream support ends, October 2021, not that I need that support but that's the timeline this version should be supported in fairness if following MS rules. I consider that I have relatively great stability record with DCS, a few crashes here and there, most of them random and unrepeatable.

I saw that Opera saved form entry for "Stuck in Loading Screen after a mission" but I can't find a thread on DCS forums using that search entry. So I must have forgotten to post the thread or something. There's at least two other related threads that are not mine. Mission was F-18C (early access) standard "Close Air Support" mission where you start on aircraft carrier in the snowy caucasus, (but I think there's other F-18C missions too with snowy caucasus) The screen seems frozen as it has a standard looking loading screen, a background of the sky, and just says "loading ..." the app does seem to be responsive and if I right click on the taskbar item and select close DCS will show a dialog asking me if I want to quit, yes or no, but it doesn't do anything if I click Yes. EDIT: The log did not change after forceful termination. Added log file and last track. There was no crash reporter, or any further messages. dcs_log_freeze_loading_screen_19Feb2020.zip

4++ Su-35S https://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/2020217430-gSRRZ.html Those images don't display for me, Grimes. The links to pp.userapi.com aren't working for embedd on my Opera browser on PC. The links to pp.userapi.com (Grimes) aren't working for embedd on my Opera browser on PC, but they do work in Firefox.

What's the difference, well there's a lot of infrastructural changes you can't see on first glance. The remaining modules were switched to the new DRM, it seems the old copy protection was completely removed, no more dcs_protect.dll, a10_protect.dll, fc3_protect.dll and CombinedArms_protect.dll, so they're all gone and so are the recurring CPU usage spikes :) I figured this out in summer of 2019 or so but just didn't saw the need for more drama. It was better for everyone, the last thing we need is panic about a spike in CPU usage that's on another thread-s that doesn't quite affect things that much visibly, but it really stood out like in some cases it could have an impact but I would have to do a lot more testing to confirm and I wasn't motivated to do so, it's a lot of fun but it's exhausting doing this, and a time killer, it would end up looking pointless for raising it just as it was being fixed, it just took a few more months than I thought.

This is probably prepwork for the new audio engine, great stuff, I like the structure updates because in long term it's going to be better, there's legacy DCS stuff from when Caucasus was the only map still lurking around, there's the whole thing of double liveries folders and a bunch of other inconsistencies, like some liveries are in VFS ZIP, some are just thrown in dds format with where the description.lua is, etc.

It has happened every single time on all kinds of types of exits, main menu, automatic by module management, quit game from mission. I think over 10 times that I've ran and stopped DCS today. But, it's a kinda dud, doesn't do anything to stop me playing.

Sure on the feedback side, but you're still forgetting like many of us, it's OpenBeta, it's not obligated to be optimized, IMO.

There's this thing called Release version which is the one we're all suppose to use, so the argument of "mods get outdated so quick" loses some of it's credibility because you're not suppose to expect mods working on OB and I'm certain it's a policy but i'm not 100% sure, and OB is purposelly updated at a faster rate. Adding stable mod support would be a large undertaking with I don't even know what kind of coding and infrastructure support, tools to check mods, and a totally different development style which would affect how things move forward, I mean, it would be like developing an OS. So are you serious you want to put that kind of a strain on the studio and slow down development of core upgrades, Vulkan based graphics engine, new ATC, and oh so many things? Well no, because, what is DCS, is it Unity or Unreal Engine 4, it is not, it has no any of the infrastructure support, legal documentation for users at large, etc etc, and that may be possible, but it would take effort, and I rather have Vulkan API rather than 3 months of more mod support. This could be overblown, I'd say most of the time mods aren't broken such that they need a rewrite, but need just a small adjustment or addition. So it's a question of how much mods one has time for, where is this idea coming from that mods have to stay working for years and you can churn out unlimited numbers of them. Don't get me wrong, I'm modder my self, but I never took it for granted, maintenance was part of it as per usual. You maintain your health as well, do you eat once per month and you're done, do you wash clothes once per 3 months? Life requires maintenance. But the final (in this session ;)) question is, do your mod fans value the patch more than they do your mod? If the mod is worth enough to them, they won't update.

Isn't that sort of expected, graphics are getting improved :) We'll just have to ride it out until Vulkan based graphics engine, because it's better if they put more effort into that vulkan rewrite rather than maximizing the optimization on the current engine.