Vanguard

Just got the video, game changer. It's been awhile since something was introduced that actually changed the way I would play. Now we can more easily see what other players/wingman have targeted and ignore hitting the same one. Very cool. Its amazing how the HMCS is able to show all of this... just seeing other players wedding cakes in the TGP would have added this level of functionality long ago. The information is there, it just doesn't show it.

Agreed, I removed a few choice adjectives before landing on "ultimate" in an attempt to be neutral, but yes, I meant economical/value for what you would get from a pure DCS rig.

I think the reason these threads keep going full circle is because people who have a grasp of what they are talking about offer advice and people simply don't want to belive what they are hearing so they go and open a new thread with like minded people to feel comfortable in their echo chamber and then someone outside that circle finds the thread and you folks respond with here we go again. The only "here we go again" I really see going on is the yet another comfort group. At what point to you stop and ponder why everyone keeps saying the same thing, and maybe asking yourself, maybe its me... Why I'm puzzled: There are peeps out there with the best rig money can buy and still can't run max settings in VR. So if you have less than that, you need to reduce settings until you're happy, and no amount of hardware or money thrown at the problem within practical limits is going to solve your problem. Post after post of where am I bound and what should I buy. Well, you're GPU bound at your current settings so buy a better GPU. Ok, one week later, guys now I'm CPU bound. Yep, now go buy a better CPU... you can keep going full circle until you've got the best of both, and... you'll still be unhappy because the game needs optimizations on both ends, multithreaded and vulkan together to address the issue. It's like FS9 threads 10 years ago, and new MSFS threads today, same same. If you're on budget and looking for advice to squeeze more juice out of what you got or a limited budget, these threads make sense. If you're looking.for a pill to solve you're problem, it doesn't exist yet for under $3000.

I didn't get an i9-9900k for DCS, I bought it for other things that I do and I happen to run DCS on the same rig. You're correct it's not the ultimate choice if you're just buying a "DCS rig."

I really don't want to sound like a arrogant d-bag, or throw my credentials around to make a point, but you seriously don't know what you're on about. Not CPU bound... maybe just my case?: 2 cores at 4.7Ghz pinned on 9900K, hmmmm. While the system is at 21% total utilization you say, hmmmmm. I have a 2080 in case anyone is interested. The GPU utilization on task manager is bound on memory utilization and should be full all the time FWIW. Everything set to max, 60fps. After you pull your head of of DCS and look at the latest and greatest titles out there and see what is possible with today's hardware and come to grips with the fact the DCS is about "fisher price" quality graphics relative to gaming, (yet top notch in terms of flight/combat sims) or maybe you're in the gaming industry and understand what the cards can/should be able to do compared to what's it's accomplishing here... it's all about optimization. Sure you can throw your wallet at it just as much as you can strap a supercharger on a V-12 engine instead of re-grading the hill you're trying to climb. Right... how about you "science the **** out of it", and maybe do some tests. Set DCS CPU affinity to use a single core, then run a CPU bench test and consume 20% CPU. Shocking... you lose about 18.8-19.2% frames. Hmmmm.... Now run a GPU bench test and consume 20% GPU while DCS is running. FPS loss? Rounding error. This isn't "my system", it's true for yours as well. There is so much in these forums regarding "evidence" when speaking about modules, how about you show some yourself before... leading your flock astray and wasting their money. Why do I reply to these things :doh: I have no personal interest in what y'all do... go ahead and buy a 3080 and then start your own thread like this one: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=286339&highlight=3090 and cry to the community it didn't really help...

This question keeps coming up, and peeps need to realize for the moment that DCS for the most part is CPU bound, and you will not see much of an improvement. In layman's terms, it's a pipeline, CPU->GPU. @60fps you have ~17ms to generate a frame, @50fps, 20ms. Let's say on your system with a 2080ti, the CPU takes 15ms and your vid card takes 5ms. Voila, you gets 50 fps. You drop $1700 on a new video card, now your CPU still takes 15, and you GPU is down to 3ms... now you get 60fps. The point is, with a CPU bound game, yes you'll see an improvement with a vid card upgrade but you should invest in a CPU with high single core performance first. The numbers above are not reflective of DCS, just numbers to illustrate the issue, and how industry benchmarks mean nothing on a case by case, game by game basis. ED are working on multi threaded improvements and Vulkan integration. If i were you I'd wait until early/mid next year for some those gains and pickup a 3090 for 60% of the price by then as well. In the meantime, I'd also recommend using a small fraction of that money on upgrading your potato CPU.

What a bomb truck, 91 rockets, and up to 4 CBU-105/97s along for the ride as well if you forgo the sidewinders on the tips. Simply Ridiculous. Oh, let's not forget the 1350 GAU-8 rounds while we're at it. Add 3 wingman to the mix for fun... sure sure.

1 & 2 are okay, but it's an extra step whether you're happy with the loadout or not, you need to go to the rearm window and change it and wait. Would be equally unrealistic for an SP runway hot start mission, and, oh wait for the ground crew to run over to the runway with their screwdriver. I'd be happier with #3, or, simply only allow DSMS INV laser code change on the ground for the weapons that don't allow inflight. Then we can pretend we got the right codes in the first place and just update the DSMS.

The waypoints of the fuel truck are defining the spawn zone for the enemy units. The fuel truck itself will not be visible in the mission. This is a creative way of not using circular trigger zones and allowing the polygon defined by a route to become the spawn zone.

Bugger, I thought it was returned in search objects but you're right, it's not obtainable unless created by a script, too bad.

Somewhat... you can use the Spot:getPosition() function and then compare that to say a radius of a unit, and if it's within 1 meter of the center of the unit you could "assume" it's lased, but technically you could be lasing the dirt between its wheels and it would still return true. Given the engine has sensors for LWS etc, I assume ED could certainly implement a proper trigger if they wanted, and either have it for all units, or only trigger for units with a LWR sensor.

It is certainly a pain, I have to remember to keep something open like an explorer window so I have something to alt-tab to, and then do what I want. It's been an issue since day 0.

Also, not sure how accurate the info is, but according to wikipedia: Accuracy: Specified 13 meters; Realized around 7 meters I've never seen it miss by more than 1 meter, it's a sniper.

Can you post a track file?

I was playing the exigent riviera campaign and noticed that all the "commercial" traffic showed up as hostile as well, which raises a question... IRL, would that be the case? I think we need a new Country, similar to USAF Aggressors, called commercial traffic or something that we can put in the neutral category and assign to random air traffic. Actually, I'm building a campaign at the moment and this is all quite limiting. I want the general airfields to be neutral and the military airbases to be blue/red, and at the moment all I can do I select a random country as being the owner of the other airfields.

This is great. Is there an equivalent to this for Caucasus somewhere?

Well something is wrong for sure. I can usually get 2 or 3 if them off just by quickly relocating my TGP while the tail is between the 2 launch Q triangles and at most if and when it misses, the edge of the crater is touching the vehicle I intended to strike. Do you have some crazy winds in your test mission? Shouldn't matter but I'm just trying to see if we can narrow it down to something. Could you post a track of this happening? That would be the most useful way to debug this.

Some here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=281351

Thanks mate, I'll give it a go. That's probably why I noticed it more now, I think I lowered both of those settings one notch when I got the Syria map. Have i9-9900K and 2080 Super. I get 60FPS in the air, but as low as 15 on the tarmac and I was doing helo ops.

Looking good. I had a mission last night and the smoke marker was in a forest, the new lower lying marker couldn't be seen above the tree line, looks like the new one may correct that, I'll let you know. Thanks again mate.

In a triple wide monitor setup its extremely distracting. There is a bow line if you will about 300m in front of the jet where all the shadows are changing form low to high LOD. Out of the front window most of it is masked by the cockpit, but in triple wide, the left and right screens are full terrain and you can see lower, it's like a tidal wave moving with the jet, feels like I'm riding the cusp o f a nuclear shock wave as the entire terrain is changing below me. Major immersion killer. Anyone have any tweaks, settings, mods that can assist with this?

Not sure what it's from, but I couldn't help but notice as I was circling for another round of attacks, there were bursts of smoke coming from the target area and it was the same particle animation as when a target gets hit... the initial wide plume before the burning starts, but nothing was getting hit. It almost looked like tanks were "popping smoke". I had engaged some targets previously, perhaps it was happening as vehicles finished burning out, but it was quite noticeable, 2 or 3 puffs of smoke around the area for no apparent reason. Anyone else notice? I'll try and get a track.

As someone pointed out, it's all about the collective brake. This helo can melt your brain when you first take it out, then you get the aha moment, and finally understand how the autopilot/trimmer works and life is good. The collective brake should be held for even the slightest movement of the collective, in the real helo, you would be forced to. The Mi-8 actually has an option under special for "hydro lock" which forces this.. the Ka-50 has no such option but that doesn't take away from the fact that this is how the helo needs to be operated. For you TM warthog owners, I've put the collective break of the springy side of the speed brake switch. My thumb is always resting there and I ensure I engage it each time I move the collective, settle the helo best I can around 0 FPM vertical, then release the brake when I'm happy. The autopilot will have 15% authority from that position, and will set the altitude on release. Becomes second nature using that switch, I use it for all helos.

Looks awesome mate. Hopefully the FLIR update somes soon enough so these don't form a blanket over the battlefield. One favor: Could you put a parent folder in the zip, like Taz1004_Better_Smoke_v2 before Bazar, that way we can just throw the zip file in OVGME mods folder instead of having to extract it. Keep it up!

Just put .miz file in your Saved Games/DCS/Missions folder or Saved Games/DCS.openbeta/Missions if you're on open beta On win10 that's located at C:\Users\<your username>\Saved Games\...