M1Combat

Mine doesnt do that.

Just as an addon to Floyd's post :)... It's generally better to press the FTR, fly the aircraft, then release the FTR, and in central pos trim mode... release the stick to center quickly after releasing FTR. Just like in the Shark. Subtle difference being that you "hold" trim instead of "press and release" trim.

I'm not quite sure what the problem is. I think you may have skipped a word right before that , so I'm not 100% sure I know what you're saying here, BUT... Without doing anything at all to the trimmer system aside from pressing trim, moving the stick, and then releasing trim... my trim system works fine in central pos trim mode. If you're disabling anything related to trim I'm suspecting it's working (or not working since it's disabled...) as designed? Again... I reserve the right to be mis-understanding you here :). One more thing... central pos trim mode (and the other settings in that dropdown) are set specifically to make the trim system work with the stick type you have... Central pos trim mode set the system so that after you release trim the stick won't have any affect until you center it physically, then it "grabs" the in game stick again. It's used for centering sticks. The other settings are used for sticks without springs and sticks with FFB.

Have you read the first post in this topic yet?

@Dangerzone Also I forgot... With the integrated stuff you could tune into someone else's freq and hear them (even on the other side) unless they've enabled encryption... and you could jam comms with the right aircraft... Lots of cool stuff if the comm system is integrated.

LOS issues, realistic attenuation based on distance/weather etc... stuff you can only get if you're integrated I think. SRS might be able to do attenuation but I think LOS issues wouldn't be doable. Don't get me wrong I think SRS is excellent and I use it myself but ED plans to have features that just won't be available unless the solution is integrated.

But has a lot of real drawbacks compared to what ED are sdhooting for :). Don't forget that bit :).

I haven't tweaked OXR at all and it still works better than SteamVR for me. Maybe I eventually moved the resolution scaling slider... I don't remember.

It's kinda better to do it on the local system IMO... assuming you have enough memory.

What happens if an AI C130 points it's prop wash at our dear little windsock and runs up the engines? Does it affect the windsock? What if a player slides off the runway and hits our windsock??? does it knock it over or explode the plane? That about that truck that drives in front of it? We have placeable windsocks... What happens if someone places one down wind of a building? I know... bad placement but do the devs program for that? What about windsocks at FARP's that have crosswind relative to the general wind in the area due to terrain features and/or trees... Oh yeah super easy... just change up the animation a tad what's wrong with you devs???? Yeah I get it... I'm being a bit ridiculous... But so is saying "it's not difficult" when you have no idea what the design goals are. Then suggest a windsock that only works based on mission start conditions when the devs are already working on turning this into a complex wind sim? So they'll then have to go REBUILD the windsock again from the ground up??? Anyway... I'll stop contributing to the thread :)... you're welcome... BUT... Please don't try to tell the devs how their job isn't difficult until you actually know what their job IS...

Well... I don't disagree with you MAXSenna :)... 99 times out of 100 I do exactly that... But... There are a few very derogatory techniques used when people are trying to make their point that tend to set me off. Two of those were used in this thread so I decided to respond for MANY reasons. The two techniques are being derogatory to the devs based on how easy their job seems to be and trying to convince the community that "nothing is happening" regarding a specific feature when there's actually a LOT happening but the statement is made by someone who has clearly not paid enough attention to know what those things are and how they might affect something so simple as a wind sock. The more we let these things just slip through and go unchallenged the more people read them later, even years from now, and think "well clearly these devs just don't care about their product or customers...". As was even stated in this very thread. Sorry... I've been around flight sims long enough and ED long enough to know that this isn't the case. It's more a matter of having a small dev teams working an EFFING MASSIVE project and... more importantly... working it with a specific approach that defines that things aren't done "the easy way"... but someone comes along and just says... "Well... this is crap... just do it the easy way and it'll be easy... duh..." Ugh... Sorry, but... wrong approach.

Well... if that was the case we wouldn't be having this discussion sir :).

I'm only taking issue with this bit here... "It is not a difficult work" I find it to be offensive to developers when people say "Well your job is just super easy" when they have no idea what the design goals of this little detail are. As I've pointed out... Is it still "not difficult" if the plans include modeling heli downdraft, or a truck driving in front of the windsock? wind gusts? changing weather conditions???

Yeah... I understand animation too sir. You missed my point. The point is that you're sitting here saying "Oh hey if you implement the windsock in exactly the way I think it should be done then it's be easy peazy...". And you're right... IF they chose to do the windsock as you say, and MAYBE they will. But that's not my point. My point is... That's a bull<profanity> windsock that only works for when you start a mission. That's crap and is very unlikely to be the way ED will do it. You know that.... but you want to try to justify your statement by re-qualifying yourself as an SME. I don't care what you think you know about animation and modeling and making entire effing games sir... What you DO NOT know... is what ED wants out of their windsock model :). Well yeah you're right that the animation bit isn't super difficult. As I said in my first post here. BUT... the bit you're missing is exactly what ED's windsock design goals are :). You have no idea. You DON'T actually know what you're talking about. You know at least a tiny bit about modeling and/or animation. Good for you :). Awesome. Means nothing here because we're not talking about modeling or animation. We're talking about a windsock design goal and people's interest in just throwing random meaningless shade at some developer because they think they know all about it. How about if an AI truck pull up and stops upwind of the windsock? What then sir? Does it go limp or not? I would choose not for simplicity's sake... but neither of us know ED's design goal with the windsock so neither of us can talk intelligently on "how difficult a work" it is or isn't... and you know it.

No. "highly offensive to the folks who have done the work you so simply dismiss just because you aren't paying attention." YOU don't know what's going on behind the scenes because you aren't paying attention. As I said. Other people DO know what they're working on and why it would take a long time. YOU don't. Because YOU aren't paying attention. But you're fine with using your position of not knowing what's going on to try to tell everyone else that nothing is going on. There's a word for that...

Well let me start by saying that I too have found it a bit curious that windsocks don't work "correctly" in DCS... They should. However... Please don't say things like "It is not a difficult work". You have no idea how difficult it may or may not be. You don't know the code here. It may be relatively easy... sure... but you don't know that for 100% sure. Even adding "As far as I can tell" or "it seems" or "I think" to your comment improves it a lot. "Take the wind direction to orient the windsock (work actualy) and take the wind's force to choose animation, at the starting of the mission. 6 States of animations : 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 knots" - Yeah sure that sounds legit as far as the overall process goes but that doesn't mean this is all that's involved. As was pointed out to you already... there are placeable and static objects so your "it's just really easy trust me" comment is already blown out of the water. Also... Just at the start of the mission??? Wut? If we're going for making them work right then they should make them work right. That means they change with gusts (which will need improvements to the weather model), they need to change with downdraft from heli's... maybe they even need to be ripped off their pole in a "Buzzing the tower in an F-14" situation. Yeah sure super easy blah blah blah. You have no idea. Also... Regarding updates to the weather system where someone says "The fact the weather engine we got hasn't received a single update in almost 1.5 years" is both complete bull<profanity> AND highly offensive to the folks who have done the work you so simply dismiss just because you aren't paying attention. Knock it off. Be nice. Do you have ANY idea the kind of things they're working on with the weather system and why it might be actually legit that it's taking so long to get your pet little detail done? Thought not. No raindrops on the canopy in rain3?? Isn't rain 3 pretty heavy rain? Do you just want drops that would be the same as the drops from rain 2 or do you want a sheeting water effect that's affected by the speed of the aircraft as it taxi's (you won't see a damn bit of rain after about 75MPH on the takeoff run) or do you just want "drops on the canopy" that would be exactly as unrealistic as no drops because neither of those is reality for the level of rain in Rain3? So what is it? You want realism or you just want something to bitch about? Clearly everyone involved would like to see the sim progress faster than it does... That includes the devs. Anyone posting some bull<profanity> statement like this has CLEARLY not been around either ED or the flight sim hobby for very long. OR... if they have they just haven't been paying attention to the peculiarities of the genre. There's a LOT of very entitled mindset in this thread. Knock it off. Of course feel free to not... you do you... but understand that the flight sim world is about .001% the size of some of the other genre's of game... so it just can't support having huge dev teams that can implement your pet feature or even make major adjustments to core sim systems on your preferred EA FIFA style schedule where they change... names and stats....

Just lock it to a different core. Also... 3.8Mhz? WOW... Like what an old 8088 overclocked???

You can also run a dedicated server on another core on the same system if you have the memory etc...

OK that makes more sense but doesn't sound the same as what you said before. It sounds to me like you're saying in this last post that your CPU/GPU combo was super well paired and both working hard until you were in a more heavily AI/Scripting situation, then with the old setup it would go CPU limited and tank... But after the new CPU the new CPU keeps up. Well that's still benefits in a CPU limited situation. Not GPU :). Sorry to belabor the point but I think it's dangerous to say "yeah even when you're GPU bound this CPU upgrade will give you 30%"... because that's not really what happens unless you're "barely" GPU bound and it switches to CPU bound, then you see the benefits in the situations where you used to be CPU bound. Which is what I would expect based on all other reports I've seen :).

Good on Win11 here too. Get rid of all oculus stuff.

For quick access you can just open the kneeboard, select the page it marks ([ and ]) and then there's also a kneeboard "quick glance" button that makes the kneeboard appear only while that button is pressed. IMO much better than the F10 map features in most cases where you're attempting any realism... but less good when you're attempting to communicate in MP :).

I believe they've said it will and is a WIP at the moment. Regarding the community volume on the subject... I think many people are awaiting the dogfight AI release as well as the likely BVR updates before they "go loud"... Probably an improvement over people who, historically, have just outright attacked any non-perfect first implementation of any new feature IMO :).

You were GPU limited with a ZEN2? You're saying if you are GPU limited... Upgrading to an x3d will provide maybe 30%? I feel I'm misunderstanding you. My research shows 20-30% if you have a good GPU and were CPU limited, but only maybe 1-2% if you were already GPU limited.

The info I've seen shows a clear (but small) improvement in GPU limited scenarios as well. Not worth the cost... but it's there.

That's not really true... Though I suspect your smiley at the end was supposed to convey that. Smoothness is much better with OXR but framerate is same or slightly less generally. That said... Even with a slightly lower framerate (generally about .5-1% lower) you will STILL have a better experience with OXR because of the way it is much smoother at a given framerate.