hellking

I really enjoyed the first mission. It was like playing a dedicated high quality WWII game. But I cannot play mission 2 because the mouse cursor does not show up?? I can see the tool tips appear as I move it around but I cannot see the cursor itself.. Maybe it is because I play in VR? I have re-started and the problem is still there. Does anybody else experiencing the same issue?...

I don't think it is correct to say that the depth of field is naturally there in 3D. In fact, it is not there because light rays can only come from one direction (as opposed to a spectrum of directions in real life). You can experience this as the weirdness you get when you look at objects that are very close in VR (your eye lenses want to focus but there is no need, hence creating the weird feeling). Oculus had a plan to implement DoF by having a camera track your eyeballs and know where exactly you are looking at, so that that object will be drawn in focus, and others would be blurred. I don't know if the next version of VR will have this.... But if currently DoF is applied, what object will be blurred and what not be blurred? If the focus is kept on the plane, it may not feel natural in VR since you may be looking at other objects... EDIT: It appears there is a lot of reading on this if you search "oculus depth of field"

Wait, you need to eliminate every single enemy unit? I guess I am expected to turn the labels on in this game? Otherwise it is nearly impossible to spot every itsy bitsy unit (AA guns are quite small to spot).

Am I the only person who still has this bug?... I was having this bug before 2.5, and I am still having it after 2.5. I go to WP2, wait, eliminate all targets, etc. nothing happens. The sunset in this mission is beautiful in 2.5 by the way.

+1 first thing i looked for a Chuck guide today..

Great to hear that it looks good in VR! :thumbup:. Can't wait for this module!!

I am a bit worried about NAVFLIR visuals in VR. This is a kind of that thing that takes forever to be implemented.. I hope that it is supported right from get go..

Dumping fuel and moving aircraft carrier helped! Thank you all!:thumbup:

Ok! I must admit I got what I asked for with the new update :). But now I fail on Su-33 aircraft carrier take-offs in my own previously designed missions. (I can land and take-off with ease in the quick start FC3 mission). Is this a bug? Anybody else? EDIT: Forgot to say that 1) I put the flaps down 2) I put the brakes down 3) I engage afterburner 4) I engage emergency afterburner immediately 5) I release the brakes 6) I do a nearly full stick down 7) Aircraft barely maintains 140 km/hr. 8) Splash into the ocean

I could not find the answer to this question anywhere... The current take off with Su-33 feels scripted. Almost feels like there is a script that keeps the nose and aircraft up for a few seconds after take-off. Then it suddenly shuts down, and you have to pick the nose up and raise it high enough that the aircraft doesn't go into the sea.. The issue is that it doesn't feel natural at all... Is this a special mode of the aircraft, or simply due to inaccurate physics model during take-off? Will this be fixed?

I would like to confirm that time acceleration during INS has nothing to do with this.. I have not done any time acceleration during start up and the (slow flying) problem was still there.

I have been having the same problem!.. The first time it happened I tried to stay in formation with the lead and tried to keep ~130 knots. The aircraft immediately nosed down at couple of hundred feet and I couldn't recover and had a spectacular slow-motion crash. Well, things that you wouldn't do to stay in formation with your lead... ... I have been accelerating time during INS alignment but considering that alignment takes much longer than starting everything else up, it is a bit of a pain to wait in real time...

In my case, with DCS 1.5 and 2.0X, my GeForce 980 GPU hovers around %30 while CPU hits 100%. When I use SLI, GPU's go back down to %15. But I don't have a 5.1 GHz CPU like you do (not a lot of people have it also). I have a 3.1 GHz with 32 GB RAM and SSD. This is exactly what I am talking about.. People are comparing FPS's while their systems and test environments differ a lot..

When comparing FPS's, don't forget that there are factors other than your graphics settings or hardware that have a major impact: 1) MODULE: There are those modules with very complex cockpit models (MIG-21), and there are those that are simpler/optimized (F-86, FW-190) 2) NUMBER OF A.I. OBJECTS: The performance degrades more and more with the number of A.I. objects in the sim. 3) WEATHER: In Nevada, with 2.0X, you get halved FPS with any cloud in the screen. 4) LOCATION & HEIGHT: As you know cities are more difficult to draw compared to an empty sea. When comparing smoothness or FPS, we need to put these in the same footing as well. In general I am not happy with the graphical bar being set higher with every release. It seems like it is getting away from VR users.. I am personally more happy with flawless performance rather than eye candy.. I think at the end of the day everything may be hanging on the design decision to keep graphics on one core only..

Great video and landing effect! What it is missing is pilots head being jerked forward when it lands. The guy in the video must have great neck muscles... :megalol:

DCS is CPU bound as long as you have a decent graphics card. I don't think you will see any appreciable advantage if you have a card better than GeForce 980. What is interesting is that the great expensive zillion-core CPU's will not help your problem with DCS. What you need is a good single core performance CPU, which means a high CPU clock. I learnt this the hard way after buying a new expensive machine and having to give it away to my wife because it was worse than the 3 year old CPU which happened to have a high clock frequency (it is still a good CPU after 6 years).

To be honest, I am looking forward to the clipmap fix more than any other new map. When I purchase new maps I would like to feel like I will be getting good quality and ED won't be switching to other products without finishing existing in due time.. I understand that these issues happen in alpha, but if the clipmap issue is carried to beta it will be major disappointment..

Drag is in vertical direction (plane is literally falling like a brick), but the force from afterburner is in horizontal direction. I don't see why it doesn't accelerate in horizontal direction because of a drag in vertical direction. But don't get me wrong: here I am not expecting the plane to stop moving down and recover. It should still move down but with increasing horizontal speed.

I just wanted to stop by to say that I have been experiencing similar unrealistic behavior (I was too lazy to create a thread for it but when I saw it I said aha!). When the AoA is very high, speed is very low(<50 knots), afterburner on, and plane facing horizontally, the plane does not accelerate (not even a bit). This is against the physics laws since at low speeds there is no drag and afterburner should nudge the plane in the direction plane is facing (horizontal direction).. The only way to get the speed up seems to be to face the plane down and reduce AoA.

Trim speed seems to go down with the frame rate. When I play in heavily loaded mission with a computationally expensive mod (and use Oculus Rift), trimming gets x2, x3 slower. When I reduce the computational load and have high FPS, trim becomes normal. In other modules trim rate is based on actual time passed and not on frames passed.. Can you implement this? Thanks..

Just wanted to say that I am having the same problem. I tried the mission twice and it gets stuck right after CCRP instructions. I will try the fix.. Thanks.

Just to clarify, I am not doing a cold start. I am doing a hot runway start. Similar to other modules, you would expect the plane to be ready to take off with full flight control functionality in a runway hot start.

00Donkey's solution fixed it! Thank you.. Now I can enjoy the plane without having to hold the stick down and creating oscillations with every move I make.. At a minimum, this seems to be a problem with how runway starts are setup..

I feel like Viggen is the most FPS demanding module, right after MIG-21. Even in a clean mission, i see stuttering with the same graphical settings I am using for other modules. I wish developers offered an option to simplify textures and/or 3d model. Something like a "LOW - MID - HIGH" cockpit model option..

The module is not very Oculus friendly in terms of performance. MIG-21 was also not very friendly, but this one seems to be 10% or 20% less friendly (less frame rate on average). This small difference is a huge problem because MIG-21 was already at the limit of what can be tolerated in terms of stutter (if you also want to enjoy shadows). Would it be possible to add an advanced option to reduce the textures or 3D model one notch? Textures seem to be much more detailed than my eyes can see in the Rift... I really love the artwork, but cannot enjoy it when it is stuttering.. 3.2 GHz CPU 32 GB RAM 2 x GeForce GTX 980