PitbullVicious

I tried repair, deleting metashaders directory from Saved Games, but still have this problem. No Mods installed. System specs shouldn't be an issue... EDIT: @NineLine, what kind of information could be useful here?

I dream of Finnish B-239 and Karelian Isthmus map...

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before. A quick search on this thread didn't bring up anything. I hope that the Dynamic Campaign system will include possibility to set different objectives and victory conditions for each side, so that it would be possible to design campaigns with uneven and unbalanced forces, which has been the case in quite a few modern conflicts, and is a common feature in many strategy games. This would make it possible to have multi-player campaigns with unbalanced plane sets, with the underdog side having victory conditions, such as delaying the stronger side from achieving their objectives, or a "political victory" in terms of costly war through striking vulnerable targets, while avoiding direct conflict. This would encourage more tactical thinking and playing to the strengths of different OBs. For example, a shot down F-15 fighter would be worth more victory points than a MiG-21bis, as would a APC or command tent compared to an insurgent MG truck. Delaying a capture of an airfield beyond certain time would be considered a victory, even if the defending side would get all but decimated in the process (to simulate costly operations and the rise of political discord in the stronger country). A bit more complex system (might require quite a complex engine) could introduce other constraints, such as avoiding collateral damage for the stronger side (a relatively simple calculation for targets in urban areas could already work here?).

Grrr... will be missing this one too (this time due to summer holidays, which I guess is about as nice reason to miss as there is).

After changing several times between Release and Open Beta versions to create a report about the VR optimisation (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=243521), I was really hoping for a feature or preferably an option to cache different DCS versions. I really like the idea of having just one installation of DCS and being able to switch between versions from command line, but downloading the other version every time one switches takes a long time, to download. Especially in this case, as there were big changes to the maps, the size of the Beta to Stable DL was around 12GB. It would be nice, if we'd have an option to cache the latest Release and Open Beta versions. I'd expect this to be quite a bit smaller than a full second installation, while allowing easy and quick switching between two versions.

First 5s of flight, looking forward (fixed my headset, so the view would be as much the same as possible for all test runs): Beta (v. 2.5.5.32299): Avg: 62 fps Release (v. 2.5.4.30386): Avg: 45 fps (seems to lock to 45 fps as soon as I click fly, before that fluctuating around 60 fps, which verifies that ASW is off) System Specs: i9-9900K @ 5.0GHz ASUS RTX2080Ti 11GB 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 1TB Samsung 970 EVO PLUS M.2 NVMe SSD Asus ROG Strix Z390-E Asus Xonar DGX 5.1 Sound Card Oculus Rift CV1 Oculus app version 1.38.0.256587 ASW Off NVIDIA Drivers: 430.86 Settings -- System: Textures: High Terrain Textures: High Civ. Traffic: Off Water: High Visib. Range: Ultra Heat Blur: Low Shadows: High (Resolution: 2560x1600) (Aspect Ratio: 16:10) (Monitors: 1) Res. of Cockpit Displays: 1024 MSAA: Off Depth of Field: Off Lens Effects: None Motion Blur: Off SSAA: Off Clutter / Grass: 1500 Trees Visibility: 100% Preload Radius: 150000 Chimney Smoke Density: 0 Gamma: 2.2 Anisotropic Filtering: 16x Terrain Object Shadows: Default Cocpit Global Illumination: Off Message Font Scale: 1 Rain Droplets: <Checked> Vsync: <NOT Checked> Full Screen: <Checked> Scale GUI: <NOT Checked> Settings -- VR: Enable Virtual Reality Headset: <Checked> Pixel Density: 1.7 Use Mouse: <Checked> Cursor Confined to Game Window: <Checked> Use Hand Controllers: <Checked> Force IPD Distance: <Checked> 58 Use Built-In Audio Device: <Checked>

Excellent investigative work Sporg. Makes this a useful bug report now :)

I'm having same problem. Deleting Saved Games or repair don't seem to do anything.

Needless to say, I've enjoyed the Gazelle very, very much (just have a look at my Youtube channel, or reddit/hoggit messages). Yes, there might be some points of improvement, but I've been very impressed with the amount of love for the module, and I've always been positive and tried to be encouraging rather than overly critical, because I think that Polychop has got the attitude and motivation to deliver. And once one has motivation, everything else can be learned and improved upon :) I'm really looking forward towards to your next module. And I also like that we have a new user "Polychop Simultions" online, with a rather positive and engaging demeanour :) Welcome!

IRL recon (in modern militaries) is a joint effort of collecting information from different data sources and no, one helicopter isn't expected to do all the work, nor would a helicopter be necessarily the best asset for this kind of task (getting coordinates for static targets). There is a grain of truth here in that sense, though, that more data points you have, more accurate will your intel also be ;). I've had a small glimpse from the infantry perspective into this during my mandatory military service, where I was for a short period trained as a recon squad radioman, which is possibly why I find this fun and interesting. I see this more as a fun (YMMV) gameplay element, that one could easily extend to MP missions in way of cooperation between different assets. One could also easily use several helicopters / flights in MP, one for each observation point to speed up the process and make it even more collaborative. I've had a quite intense self-planned mission on Blue Flag server, doing this kind of recon on one enemy FARP. Unfortunately at that point Hornet didn't yet have precision munitions and toss bombing with waypoint accuracy up to seconds was nowhere accurate enough. But it was fun flying the Gazelle mission (I got shot down on my way back from the mission, but at that point I had already finished acquiring the coordinates and "radioed" them home) :) Going further, one could build a mission where Viggens would first do ELINT to get a rough position of enemy positions, Gazelles for the more accurate recon and then Hornets and other fast moving assets would do the strike. Better to see this just as one tool for bit more immersive and varied gameplay than a realistic description on how recon is done IRL.

Just to eliminate one possibility (sorry if this seems trivial), but I believe there is a separate dot for manoeuvring targets in the sight picture, which is "below" the main pipper dot. I think in this picture it is the small elongated +-sign close to the target aeroplane: https://i.redd.it/xwtjmtp4t3e11.png I think that this is the pipper you generally need to align with a target pulling 2Gs (or more?).

Could you post your sight picture? I have been able to be rather accurate with the default loadout.

JDAMs accuracy is increased, they actually now hit the given coordinates (within CEP), even from maximum range. The problem of acquiring exact coordinates still remains, as you've noted, and is a separate issue. You just need to convert lat-long decimal from DD MM.SSS. *runs away*

Which DCS version?

Did you set EFUZ to INST? Worked OK for me, once I did that.

Worked OK for me in single player.

Ah dammit... will miss this one too :/ Hoping to take part in the next one again...

Made a quick tutorial showing how to use the Gazelle and its Viviane camera system and NADIR navigation system to recon targets to get precise JDAM coordinates for the F/A-18C Hornet:

Made a quick tutorial showing how to use the Gazelle and its Viviane camera system and NADIR navigation system to recon targets to get precise JDAM coordinates for the F/A-18C Hornet:

Thanks for the answer :)

Hey, after testing yesterday's new beta I was glad to find that the JHMCS target indicator bug had been fixed. However, in my mind I was expecting also the DT2 cross to be visible on JHMCS, but can only see the L&S target. Both L&S and DT2 indicators are visible on the HUD. WIP, bug, or working as expected?

Hi again, Wags, I had no problems with ft vs. meters when testing JDAMs (GBU38 ) today. Did I just get lucky? (tested from 23ft to 780ft elevations).

Hi Wags, I was playing around with the PP JDAMs and got the impression that decimal seconds already work, if you add them after the first enter press after deg, min, sec input. I could do pretty damn precise drops with that (more about how I actually got the coordinates later ;) ).

I think that it is different manifestation of the same bug. If you turn your JHMCS on, the JHMCS box is shown on the HUD about 4 degrees below the centre and not where you are actually looking at, and the angle seems to be calculated from this "ghost box". At least this was the case before yesterday's hotfix.

It's been reported, but not exactly with the way you describe it (same bug though): https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=237211