Jump to content

captain_dalan

Members
  • Posts

    2732
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by captain_dalan

  1. Sorry for the necro, but i've had this problem for a long time now, and it seems that at times it may be related to older content, such as, missions i have created and set weather to a couple of years ago, are more likely to have jagged/filled with artifacts clouds in the distance. Didn't investigate more.
  2. You can also disable it manually, by editing the options.lua in your savedgames/dcs/config folder, and setting the value for launcher to false, but i wouldn't recommend it if you feel uncomfortable with editing lua files.
  3. This gave me an idea, i disabled the launcher and started DCS.exe from the MT-bin folder directly as i did before the update, et voila! Performance issues seem gone. Whatever the issues are, they may be launcher related!
  4. The poster solved the issue of the FC3 planes not showing, buy buying FC24.
  5. You should not pay extra for something you bought already, just to have it work as intended from the start
  6. Where do you put this? And which file it is exactly? EDIT: also, i don't know what they did with the performance, but even my launcher video is stuttering
  7. null nullBottom right says it's running MT, but ingame performance, especially when looking around is all over the place, as bad if not worse then it was in ST before update. Is the new launcher launching ST or MT? And is there a way to launch DCS by bypassing the launcher? null
  8. nullSame! Note i have bought FC3 and F-86 and MiG-15 as separate modules, now they are all gone from my game. null
  9. To whom do we address this finding? And should we file it as a bug?
  10. Believe it or not, i have seen MiG-31's surviving hits even from a Phoenix, though not most of the time..... fortunately....
  11. Most of my on-speed 3 wires tonight seem to be a ball or two high, but it may just be dumb luck, or me messing up some fine detail, after all, i hadn't done this in months. I wish i made a recording. Huh, good question.
  12. Confirmed. And it has nothing to do with the missiles. As soon as the track reaches the edges of the screen, there is a VERY high probability of getting an X over the track. And it's not even that far off boresight. This is probably worth investigating. EDIT: the target is a MiG-15, so no ECM or CM.
  13. Is this only against the Phantom? And when you say no ECM, you mean no jammers or no counter measures?
  14. In an ideal world, yes. However, i can't see how you can make Jester communicate with a wingman, especially a human one, to sort bandits out and coordinate actions.
  15. And then why not set the selected/highlighted contacts to "do not attack"? After all, it's what we do now when we jump into the backseat.
  16. I hope this is so. I haven't practiced CASE I's in a while, this actually makes me wanna try them again.
  17. Oops! Looks like i forgot to upload my tracks! That's what happens when you post at 3AM!!! As for manual loft/loft assist, i didn't use it in this case, but it would not effect the guiding anyway. You may be able to notice in the tacview bellow, but the second MiG was barely in my cone when i picked it up. From previous iterations of this mission, i am well aware i can't maintain proper tracks on both bandits, but i fired the second FOX anyway, for academic reasons. Here are the tracks BTW (finally) Tacview-20240606-020555-DCS-F-14A_IA_Syria_BVR.zip.acmi Tacview-20240606-021233-DCS-F-14A_IA_Syria_BVR.zip.acmi
  18. The A's seem to working properly, as long as you can keep a working track. Note the 2 tackviews bellow, in both i fire 2x 54A's at two tracks (MiG-29's), in both i lose the track on the second one (the furthest) and the missile fired at it goes ballistic, while the second missile homes true in both scenarios. As for the exact state of the missiles after today's patch, i can't say. Many more tests are needed, from different test scenarios. EDIT: though from the 2 independent test so far, they seem to loft less (about 1000-1500ft) on 40 mile shots and they also (probably as a result) seem to have a bit less energy at the going active point (about 0.1 mach), and at impact (about 0.8 mach). How will this affect Pk against defending targets? No idea. More systematic tests are needed, and user experience from online use. IMO, these changes are just band-aids. All the missiles are long overdue for a transfer to the new missile API.
  19. Woe be on those that bought and fly warbirds...... and let us spend a quiet minute in morn over all the poor souls that bought the F-4..... Seriously though, the hood people at HB did so much to convey what the aircraft is doing, and that's even without the Jester callouts, one needs but listen and observe what's going around in the cockpit. As for HUD BFM, all the energy in the world ain't gonna save you if you can't offset a turn circle, and good luck doing that by looking through the HUD.
  20. Good luck!
  21. BFM is many things, to many people, but looking through a HUD ain't one of those things. There's even a derogatory term related to the practice. Even just on the topic of max-performing, you ain't doing it by flying at a fixed airspeed or g-number, so a more cluttered HUD won't help with that either. Even if that HUD provided you with the bleed rates and degrees per second of turning rate, unless you absolutely memorize ALL the EM charts for all the altitudes and all the loadouts, as well as you extrapolate all the values in between those charts, AND you are capable of keeping track all those numbers .... then maybe...... just maybe, you can pull it off. It's much easier to listen to the plane though. If you really need at the very least some orientational numbers of airspeed and altitude, then IMO, a much better solution would be to have options to configure Jester to call them out more often, especially when they are changing.
  22. There's several good videos on YouTube on the topic of these early microprocessors. Suffice to say, while they were lightyears ahead of everything that came before, in terms of what modern people think when CPU's are mentioned, and the technology available from the 80s onwards....... let's just say, that thing had to work its semiconductor butt off, just to process the data needed for the wing sweep.
  23. Also note, if the current radar target isn't IFF'ed as bandit, Jester will respond with "no can do" or something like that. Same will go for scenarios when no contacts are present on the scope at all. To shorten the launch time, you may want to go ACM cover up.
  24. Quite possible, i generally don't use it inland and on instant action or training missions, at least not at ranges large enough to notice, so i can't tell.
  25. My pleasure! Note on TTI bandits, AI pilot skill is often tied to the airplane they are flying, with the more "elite" opponents flying Flankers and Fulcrums, so take that into account when engaging them. As for Pk, feel free to experiment. I have found that shorter ranges often give me north of 66% Pk, sometimes up to 75% for the AIM-54's, on TTI Syria. And up to 5/8 kills per 4x2x2 loadout, with the Sparrows being the major culprit for Pk not being higher (very often they both miss well inside the NEZ, they just eat CM i guess).
×
×
  • Create New...