Czar

I tested your falklands mission. No issues from the runway here and GPU load is as expected. Different from @demonesque report. I can't use that medium settings. It is a no go for me. I lock the FPS at 40 for the reason of not having any drop ever on any map, besides Sinai and Afghanistan because I don't own those yet. That's including the heaviest of them all, Marianas above its biggest city. Smooth and I can completely disregard on where I look and at any zoom level without worrying about performance on a 64gb Ram system. Is this issue only triggered by the F-4? I had missions with the F-4 that had zero issues and everything was perfect on startup, taxi and takeoff -> Climb to ~25k ft -> bomb/strike and by that point, if I would dip bellow 900ft AGL the slow down/GPU overload would occur. I had an Sa-6 shooting at me on my latest mission last week and I couldn't mask myself behind the small hills on the region because of the massive input lag this problem induced and it would lead into crashing my plane so I couldn't press at all through the Sa-6 defended area to get to the objective. Other missions the problem appeared magically on landing, a place that was free of this issue when I took off from there. Radar ON or OFF, no difference. Mirrors ON or OFF too. I'll jump into the F-15E, F-18 and F-16 and have full missions on those. I'll report back on each. Edit: I'll use your last mission posted as well with those planes. Perhaps is a faster test. Thanks. Update: I flown your last mission with the Hornet and the Viper. From base to mission and back to base. Zero issues.

Thank you, I completely missed it and didn't connect the name, my bad. I will test it.

That's interesting. Is it a free mission? If it is and you have a link with time to post here I'd appreciate. Thanks. Edit: It is on this thread itself. I was blind.

The developer in charge of the map is not Razbam. The developer is detatched from Razbam. Is the same from Kola map.

Saddly the developer seems to be asleep with this issue. Should a new thread be made to get the deserving attention?

It is not settings based. It is a problem with the map. I got the performance back after landing with a combination of ESC key (pause) that I can't reproduce. (time constraints) If it were dependent on modules the performance would never go back and it would >>>always<<< perform badly near the ground. Something happens after climbing that overflows the GPU/graphics tasking when getting bellow 900ft in unknown conditions. I've put the vegetation sliders, either grass and forests to ZERO without success of fixing the issue on the fly. I've flown low level with the F-4, for fun, on an instant action mission and it performed fine down low at that map region (free flight IA mission). Something is off with the map. I've had low end systems with DCS, many different setups. It is not because the map is "heavy". It is a render issue somewhere.

It is likely ED is looking to work with AI generated voice like the ones present in MSFS, in a new system... hence the new callsigns weren't followed by new recordings. Seems effortless is variety and can produce output based on written words instead of a database of recordings. The whole current native radio comms system is highly outdated, in its limited asset variety and responses, not that AI generated is the thing that should replace everything (that is actually nauseating...). I wouldn't be surprised if it where scrapped to put in place something completely different than what we have today. It will take time...

Look for the FOV value on Options -> System Settings while inside the cockpit. Press RALT+Num 0 (number pad) to save the FOV value. Alternatively: <your windows root drive>:\Users\<your windows username>\Saved Games\DCS\Config\View, look for SnapViews Lua file and edit your field of view from there. I'm not sure if VR takes those values into account. Perhaps you have that elsewhere on your VR software or inside DCS options. Forget about the Stereoscopic 3D image infographic. The moon is rendered at a infinite distance and the VR goggles are still two screens and will always be two screens. Changing the FOV value for the overall render would change directly the rendered moon size in relation to the whole screen. The perception of being small might come from the fact your FOV is too wide, not that reducing FOV to get the moon at the 'correct feeling size' would benefit your gameplay. VR goggles are still an approximation to real life vision. You'll have to prioritize the best way to interact with the sim over something else eventually. Good call on Stellarium! Great app to check this out.

'Best result' is subjective. For me the 'best result' is the moon at ~1/2º of diameter in the sky, measurable, and so on for other things yet to be improved. These old games/based on old visual tech have some things wrong based on the tech limitations and media at the time. Lower end monitors...etc. Things based on nature were often disregarded. The FOV setting present in the sim will affect how big the moon is. If FOV needs to be set high for peripheral vision distorting the moon size on the 2D plain of the screen (vr included, it is 2 screens) it is a limitation of the media/display philosophy/display ergonomics and the moon will appear smaller. All sims are a bundle of compromises, no exception. Make your adjustments via config files for your taste if that doesn't break IC for you and it is all good. I'd prefer DCS to remain with real values for these stuff out of the box while I manage my own setup limitations. The best reference in the game, and would be IRL as well, is the HUD. It projects on the infinity its symbology regardless of your FOV/zoom setting. If you were in a real plane IRL, that would be one of your best tools as well.

...remember also, the VR hands are wearing gloves.

Yes. The moon is larger than 1º in BMS (?). Unless FOV distortion is taking part there. The image on the left, the moon is comically too big, sorry. Seems wrong from first sight. The hand test: You need to extend your arm to make a fair measurement and still I wouldn't trust VR hands to do it. The HUD is the best option to make measurements in sim. Your best option is to contact someone from ED dev team and figure it out the values they put it in and why.

https://lco.global/spacebook/sky/using-angles-describe-positions-and-apparent-sizes-objects/ The human finger tip covers about 1º to 1,5º. The moon has 31 arcminutes or 1/2°. If the VR hand is in proper scale, it is possible that it can be off by a little too for usability, DCS seems correct. You can try to photograph the moon at 1x at any day of the year, the results will always be mediocre if the composition doesn't ask for a tiny satellite. Been there, done that.

Once you render a scene on any 3D program or render a video, these CPUs are hitting full throttle until the task gets done. For people who constantly renders videos and people who work with 3D, this issue is major. The 14900 owner just need to do rendering for either video or 3D to stress their CPUs, and that's very common for high end CPU owners. These tasks pushes CPUs to 100% no matter what, hence a fairly reliable benchmark tool.

The measurement should be done with a HUD like draconus did. The Apache screenshot has a much wider FOV than any of the pictures above. If comparison would take place, it should be the same exact FOV from the cameras. From observation, the photos have a much narrower FOV than the usual DCS gameplay, as you need peripheral vision. To add, DCS has little to no outer glow for the Moon, making it look smaller than the real life shots counterpart. All these elements needs to be taken into account. Take shots from the moon IRL with as much wide FOV your camera has towards 1x zoom and you'll see just a spot of light and not a ball. FOV is important guys.... disregard the 'feelings'..... 'Warthog HUD' Thanks for the measurement and hard data. Too much 'I feel like' around these forums... Example for the moon at 1x and 30x zoom: https://r2.community.samsung.com/t5/Galaxy-Gallery/Moon-1x-and-30x-zoom/td-p/14817034

I'm looking out for impressions from owners as well. From the recent update, and how the map feels today.

I don't know what you're on about. I can't comment on it.

"Public" is not the right word. "Unclassified" is. It has been stated by community managers and staff countless times against sharing leaked documents, even worse using them for development. Keyword is: "leaked".

Understood, but wasn't Belsintek absorbed by ED, hence ED started pumping out helicopters after? This would be why I'd presume the pipeline would stay as they were. The Apache ended up coming out although it is really a no brainer to build a module for it.. Thanks btw.

but...but but... the Cobra. : ( AH-1S Huey Cobra was/is on the pipeline. https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/248262-weekend-newsletters-2018/?do=findComment&comment=3517055

Press 'M' or click on the mirror to turn them on if you find yourself already into the mission.

Make an exception on your AV(s) for the whole DCS root folder -> Repair DCS -> Log in. +1 to this. There is no difference on files after a re installation in comparison to a repair while repairing is 100x+ faster. Keep the massive DCS files for ever. Only Repair and Update it as you please. File deletion troubleshooting is only valid for game saves files on your 'user' folder outside DCS root folder, and those files are automatically generated on DCS launch.

This need a hotfix... With the ending of the Open Beta branch to consolidate everyone into a single version and the promise of having a better QA would mean issues like this wouldn't get through final patches.

I can agree to that for the design part. Placing, copying, organizing etc leaves a lot to be desired. Very old indeed, but still powerful with its native trigger mechanics. Maybe with the Dynamic Campaign AI goodies, some of perceived limitations can be mitigated like the autonomous AI tasking, so less can be dependent from outside scripting. Fair skies.

Nº 1 for me: Dynamic Campaign. Nº 2 for me: Higher fidelity damage model for ground units. It is likely that if you research and spend enough time with the editor, amazing things can be done including dynamic scenarios with it.