M1Combat

I do. And what you said is that it's a one trick pony :). I just disagree Hiob :). It does all the other tricks pretty well... but does DCS VR very well :). Anyway... it doesn't really matter :)... It doesn't fit your usage scenario. Great. Don't buy one :). Have fun :). To my eye it looks to be well in the ballpark of all the other higher end CPU's for non DCS VR stuff... I'm not saying it's the fastest thing ever in all usage scenarios... I'm just trying to make the point that it's not really a one trick pony is all man

LOL... OK Hiob. I suspect you're getting caught up in meaningless FPS numbers or something but it's all good man. You chose not to pick one up... That's cool :). If it doesn't sit super nice in your usage scenario then that's fine :)... but this is the VR section and the x3D seems to do that "pretty well" to say the least :).

So about this bright red bandit you have... Must just be a corrupted texture right?? I mean I'm sure it's just the random one you picked for this demonstation and SURELY not all of your enemy planes appear that way... Right? null

Well... One trick pony means it does one trick only :). To me it seems the x3d does all the other tricks about as well as most other higher end processors... but has an extra trick also... But yeah it does seem pretty well aimed at "3D"

Sounds like game flight mode... I know you say it's not but I think there are settings in a mission and in the settings screen etc that can force it on???

@edmuss Interesting... I used to set SVR to 100% (and the numbers read 2160ish below the per-app slider) and it looked fine. The lense distortion correction point seems like marketing speak to me... But I'm not sure. What I do know is the higher you go with the resolution the harder spotting becomes in VR... to a point... You can go low enough that it just looks too pixelated so you can't spot (aircraft anyhow) and you can go high enough that the "dot" that is a plane gets removed or faded by the SS routines. With both my current G2 and my old Vive I found the best setup for spotting enemy air is real close to 1:1 native pixel res... or just a bit over... like +10-15% pixels.

@edmuss So what res do you recommend in OXRTools for the G2 to get close to "native" res?? 77%? You're saying that 100% is really ~3176wide per eye? Thanks for your time... I'm sure you've said it before but I looked back through this page where you're talking about res a little but no clear suggestion for 1:1 res for G2.

Intel has a LONG history of over-hyping new memory technology in order to sell motherboards. I get that progress is progress :)... But I've been playing the gaming hardware game for a LONG time. They do the same with new sockets. They say "well we need to make this new socket because "new stuff"... but AMD does all sorts of new stuff and stays with the same sockets for more generations... saving the hardware builder a lot of money over the life of a motherboard for very little performance cost. That said... I've used Intel for quite a long time because for probably the last decade AMD just didn't have the performance. Ever since the older version of the Core2Duo before they yanked all the cache to get people to buy their more expensive chips up until my last system a while ago which was an LGA1155 I think. For my last build I swapped over to an AM4 board. Couldn't be happier with AMD and how they continue to treat their customers right.

SAME thing happened to me the other day aside from that I didn't make a shortcut on the desktop to the file, I had just downloaded the file to the desktop directly. It appears that MS is doing funky stuff with the desktop folder for likely security reasons. I assume you're running Win11?

They haven't gone silent. You just clearly aren't paying attention :). Even to THIS thread where they have responded ... in the same way I've seen them respond to this question dang near every time it's asked. They will NOT give release dates any more (I'd love to go into why, but I won't... you're welcome) so the only thing they have to share is that they're working on it. Do you think that's a lie? Three things... Lets start with expectations... One... What makes you think that Vulkan and multi-threading are going to significantly impact YOU in DCS? Two... What do you think the overall immediate impact of Vulkan and Multi-threading will be in DCS in general? Three... You realize these modules that have been releasing recently have been in development since about the same time or even before the engine team was put to work on the re-write? I mean... have you been around since before 2.1? The Edge update? That was needed before the vulkan/multi-thread update and I'm pretty sure the new Vulkan/MT stuff has been worked on since then or likely before. It's been a subject for a "long" time friend :). It's not like they were like "Hey... lets attract MILLIONS of people by telling them that we'll update the engine... then... while they're waiting for THAT we'll just bait and switcheroo and sell them these super easy and quick to create modules to STEAL their MONEY!!!! MWAHHH AHHH AHHH AHHHHH!!!!". Come on... Seriously... This isn't some 12,000 employee AAA title developer that STILL just re-skins COD and FIFA 99 every effing year... AND... the software they're building is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex. Oh and ONE MORE.... They DO actually create engine updates if you look around and know what to look for. Have you taken off from one of those new fangled "Not perfectly flat" runways yet? Yup... that's a VERY important core engine update that actually affects more people than Vulkan/MT will for years. Vulkan/MT will really just bring VR performance up to being equal to pancake performance (at best... IMO...)... then the devs and community will go about finding super cool ways to use all the extra performance that will be on the table after Vulkan/MT is built. Just be patient. Anything else seems entitled. So far ED have a VERY good track record of doing what they say they will. It's just they also have a VERY good track record of over promising on release dates :). Look... What are your hardware specs and what are you trying to run? Are you just assuming that because you can crank up the options in other games and get good FPS that this means the DCS engine is bad? It's just not that simple. Not even if those other games are Flight Sims. This one is different. That's not a cop out. It's the truth.

That was my point

So how many of the module creation folks do you feel have the expertise to re-write the underlying engine? Not only does the company actually need to survive first and foremost (sell stuff)... but also the game runs spectacularly when not running VR as far as I can tell. I only run VR though...

Yeah that's exactly how. It makes it so I have to pay attention to the terrain... so I just find it much better to set the trim to produce what I need the aircraft to do for a while without the alt hold. If I have to pay attentiont to the terrain anyway I'm basically still flying the thing and it's taking part of my attention away from searching and destroying. So... I find it better to just accurately set the trim in those situations and as long as I trust my trim I can do what I need to do with only glancing out the windows occasionally. With the added benefit that I can get where I'm going a bit faster ;). The benefits simply don't outweight the drawbacks. I feel like with the alt hold I'm always flying around it and if you get good at setting a long term trim (as I suspect you are) you just don't lose anything. And the other big one... When you're at a high hover a ways behind a ridge and you chop the power to start a descent (to avoid fire etc) the att hold channel fights you so you end up about .5 seconds late into your evasive move compared to if you had alt hold off. And again... I have yet to find an offsetting benefit to having it on.

Bring flares... Useless relative to some other stuff... sure maybe... But not useless. I've done many a shark missions (even MP) at night.

Love this stuff. Thank you to everyone who put in time to make it happen. Bravo

I played around with it quite a bit some time back... my take away was that I do like it, but... I found vikhr's more difficult to use in close combat, while guns and rockets were about the same. Vikhr's at distance is pretty similar. I do like the way the heli behaves... but I found ultimately that I prefer a bit of the stability augmentation. If you're holding the trim button while flying (you should be) you kinda have the best of both worlds... full control authority but with the stability augmentation that gives you that last bit to get guns on target more steadily.

The above turn rate numbers in the graphic are for F/A-18 E/F it looks like. Very different aircraft.

Fo Sho... I'll very much look forward to the charts for sure I just won't be too bothered if they aren't available on day one :). It's all good. I can find the data :).

Really... My smiley did that? Wow. You are clearly both overthinking this and underthinking it all at the same time. Really... LOL.

I never said they shouldn't give us the charts... But thanks for AGAIN deciding to be on the attack, make a bunch of assumptions and try to climb back on that high ground you were never on. Seriously... I'm 100% sure I didn't pee in your cherios so I can only assume you just did it yourself by just deciding to look down on people by default. IMO this doesn't even have anything to do with an EM chart any more. It only has to do with YOU trying to justify not just doing EVERYONE in this thread a damn favor and saying something like "Hey it sounds like you're saying the devs shouldn't giver us a chart because you don't trust them or because you don't think it will be accurate or because you'll need to spend some time verifying it or something..." and I would have clarified a long time ago. Instead you chose the "be a dick" route. GFY. I'm tired of your bull<profanity>. You made assumptions about what I meant and I've attempted to clarify from post one and you just want none of it. Your goal is clearly to simply find someone to pick on to try to make YOURSELF feel good about YOURSELF... You could have simply asked instead of making assumptions... I would have clarified... But you didn't want that... You would rather choose to belittle people and try to find fault with them and what they say. Well... You mis-understood me. I've clarified AND not changed a damn thing I've said... only clarified. I've even tried to say I'm not interested in your conversation if you're going to just make assumptions and be a jerk... But no... you just keep being a jerk. Keep going if you like... I don't care. But you are certainly not going to put words in my mouth and then attack me as if I'd said them. Or you are... but like I said...

I think you'll want saturation to make it less washed out and the RGB are used to re-balance. You might be able to turn all three RGB up equally to add saturation. I'm not sure as I've not messed with the color settings yet.

Let me just try to clarify... I don't think that the charts provided (If they are provided) should be used blindly. We have NO idea if they are stock charts, charts built from a flight model 6 months before whatever FM we get first... no idea. So... at the LEAST they need to be verified. The absolute BEST they can do is give us a ballpark to start from (save us a few minutes). But... When I get the aircraft I'll want to fly the dang thing... So IF we get charts I'll take a quick look and then set about verifying them. If we don't... I'll set about learning what would have been in them anyway. Can I hazard a guess that this is pretty close to what you might do??? Please keep in mind I'm only trying to mention the overview as opposed to every step in the scientific process leading to good data... before you decide to write out whatever 900 steps you can think of to prove to yourself that I'm a gamer and you're simmer...

Yikes dude. You're SUPER condescending :). Thanks for assuming the opposite of what I meant about practice LOL. What I meant was that practice makes permanent... as opposed to perfect :). It all depends on if you're practicing right or wrong in the first place. If you're just practicing whatever chart you're given without proving it's correct first... well... then you just don't know. So again... it's the DATA that's important and it needs to be verified, or derived if it wasn't given in the first place. Exactly what I've said and meant from the beginning no matter how much you'd prefer to find people to point to and support your own view that you're on a higher horse to yourself. Anyway... I can tell you're just here to show everyone that high horse you think you're on so I'll leave you to it. Just note though... from the very moment I said something you've done nothing but try to point out how superior you think you are completely based on incorrect assumptions about me and what I've said. You "evidently" look down on people as a first approach and "assumably" only change your mind once they've proven to you that they deserve a different treatment. Well... You don't know me... and you can go stuff your assumptions that make you look both 12 and like a jerk. And then you keep saying the SAME thing I'm saying. LOL I mean aside from the manual thing :)... I just thought that was funny. But whatevs... I guess I'll just chalk it up to a complete lack of a sense of humor too :).

"It's actually easier to make sim-specific charts than to make the sim match ones from the real manuals." I know :). "You could just as well say we shouldn't get the systems manual" Yeah... no need until it's done :). Practice makes permanent :). Anyway... it's a thread for progress pics :)... Sorry for helping to drag it off topic :).