sc_neo

yep, 16, no SSD, is that anti aliasing issue that we had when deferred shading was first released a thing of the past or do we still need to disable that in the gpu drivers and as well as in game?

just tested this once more. Without deferred shading my 7870 on nttr with almost everything on high or better runs pretty smooth with 30fps in the Vegas area and 45 to 60 elsewhere. Even with drastically lowered settings (medium mostly) i get 18fps in Vegas and just below 30 elsewhere. The Vram is just packed to the brim and those 30 fps that feel very smooth with DS off stutter pretty bad when DF is enabled. Its just that damn 2gb vram limit. Anyway, i guess i am stuck on 2.5.0 for the time being until i buy a new gpu. Can't buy nvidia for the forseeable future,....not after that anti consumer and probably outright illegal Geforce Partnership Program (remember Intel like 10 years back)! And AMD still needs to deliver after the promising Ryzen comeback on the gpu side as well.

ehrm...do i get this right, the open beta enforces deferred shading from now on? My graphics card can't handle that (amd 7870 with 2gb vram) and used to fly nttr with deferred shading off. Maybe enforcing this right now was not the smartest move when gpu prices are still up in the sky. The started to come down, but its still a bit to high for my maste atm.

Thats a long list...great to see stuff is fine tuned in all corners! Can't wait to test it out myself. Btw; ''- Restored behavior at ground, the helicopter will begin to roll or pitch around 45% torque'' Was that behaviour thrown out of the module in some earlier patch and now that code is re-imported? Or are we talking about a new flight model adjustement due to new RL pilot feedback?

Thanks man, that was a golden tip! I thought i had to run IDView constantly in the background and thus it would be kinda of a substitue for the TARGET script. I didn't know that it only altered the devices win registry values. After some fiddling around, it works like charm now! So in the end, it was not that TFRP slider 1 (the main steering axis), but the two toebrakes are interpreted at 100% all the time according to DIVIEW. The TM game controller displays them at a zero value though. The trick that did it was to max both axes out with min,centre,max set to its maximum of 1023 in DIView. Counterintuitive i think, but that is what it takes to have them report 50% like all the other axes in neutral. Both problematic games have no issue with my TWCS anymore...nice!

Yep, have been disabling all controllers in arma 3 when rebinding. Still cumbersome to do it everytime. Thx for the tip with DIView. I was hoping to forgo an extra program...then i might rather go with the TARGET script. Andyway to give the virutal thrustmaster device a TARGET script presents to windows the same name as the default 'Thrustmaster TWCS', so i don't need to rebind hundreds of keys? Btw, i contected Thrustmaster support explaining in detail what is going on and they said they relayed the info to the driver/firmware engineers and that it would be considered whether this makes it into a new firmware some day. Fingers crossed!

Especially over the last two years DCS World has made great strides in the shape of aircraft released, engine improvements (looks) and maps released. I really like me my NTTR map and Caucasus 2.5 is looking really, really great. All three maps in the latest iteration, as well as the upcoming Persian Gulf map, look really great, and even when taxing on the airfield or flying fairly close to the ground (helos) they look a great deal better than what we had before. But the overall flatness of the ground is still apparent and better textures and grass implementation only go so far to amend this. There are many so called open world games that cover huge areas that increasingly come with very high degrees of ground level granularity. Its not just the textures that are HD, but the overall level of uneveness of the ground in combination with HD textures gives these digital worlds a high level of believability. There are rocks, furrows, grooves, trenches, small humps and hills with ridges everywhere, trees and bushes placed organically. Lately, a number of space games have started to build whole planets procedurally, and that with an astonishing level of detail when standing on the surface. Yes, big budget productions and without having to rebuild real world areas, thus having artistic freedom to a higher degree. I am in no way trying to be salty about what we have atm and i am aware that this sort of stuff depends to some degree on man power and financial resources, HDD/SSD space and hardware on the consumer side and technological feasibility on the development side. I am especially interested in the latter point, technological feasibility on the development side. What would it take to have DCS World maps display that aforementioned high fidelity ground granularity that we see can be achieved with procedural generation? Is that mainly a question of consumer hardware limitation and developing tools to procedurally build this stuff simultaneously fitting in with the specific regions sattelite imagery would be the 'easy' part? I'd be more than interested to hear some thoughts from ED's map team devs on what they think how this could be achieved or what the stumbling blocks are likely to be. Again, this is not like...''why was this not implemented yesterday, i want it all, and i want it now!''. I am just curious what the road to this could look like. For me, this is the one thing i'd be most keen to see happening for DCS World since we have all those great helos and planes, and most of the lighting can look incredibly good. I know lots of people want other things improved first, but this thread is about ground level granularity.

steht irgendwo das geplante EA Datum? Was schätzt ihr, sollte wohl Ende Mai kommen oder, wenn ab dann der Preis nach oben hüpft?

Hey guys, this is not a direct DCS problem but since some here have that throttle and TM seems not to have a proper product forum, maybe someone has an idea. So i have an analog axis input problem that stems from the TWCS port connector for the compatible TM TFRP rudder pedals. If you don't have those installed, the TWCS driver still registers a 50% input for the TFRP rudder axis. No problem for DCS, but other games like Arma 3 and HITMAN 2016 for instance register this constant input. HITMAN 2016 outright refuses to work properly with mouse and keyboard and thinks i've got an Xbox controller plugged in. Arma 3 on the otherhand adds the TFRP rudder axis input to each keybind i want to remap. It doesn't have such a nice dedicated modifier list like DCS. So once i finally tracked this input signal problem down to that TWCS port or better the false rudder pedal input signal, i set up a TARGET profile for the TWCS which does not contain the rudder pedal axes at all. Yep, that sufficiently solves my issue. But i kinda don't like having a TARGET profile running at all. I would have to spend a good deal of time remapping everything. Is there any other way i might be able to disable this TFRP rudder pedal input signal without TARGET?

Also ich habe Anfang des Jahres, und im letzten Herbst glaub ich, recht rege an der Diskussion zum Flugmodell im Gazelleunterforum teilgenommen. Und einer der wichtigsten Punkte, der mir im besonderen aufgefallen und etwas sonderbar vorkam, war das zentrische Verhalten in der Rollachse. Darüber haben wir dort lange diskutiert. Ich hab seit 2.5 kaum Zeit in der Gazelle verbracht; aber bisher war es immer so, das du einfach nur collective geben musstest und sie hob ab und sie bekam etwas vorwärts und links drift, aber das wars. Das Teil ist ließ sich völlig freihaendig fliegen, solang genug collective drin war. Keinerlei roll, kippen nach links oder rechts. Wenn du den MI-8 so versuchst zu starten, kippts du einfach direkt auf die linke Seite um. SAS an oder aus hat da keinen Unterschied gemacht. Also vollkommen stabil in der Rollachse. Wir ham dort lagne mit dem Entwickler Pat drüber diskutiert, vorallem wie unterschiedliche Beladung das eigentlich beeinflussen sollte. Er stand zu der Zeit wieder mit den französischen Militärpiloten in Kontakt und hat direkt zu der Fragestellung (dem zentrischen Verhalten in der Rollachse) nachgefragt, und uns vermittelt, dass dieses Verhalten als von den RL Piloten als korrekt angesehn wird. Soweit ich weiß, lässt sich das SAS ja auch nur teilweise abstellen, und da die Militär Variante autohovern kann (und dazu muß die ja aufjedenfall sich elektronisch stabilisieren lassen), kann es schon sein, das diese absolute Rollstabilität tatsächlich so ist. Außerdem, wir haben ja wirklich niemanden der das Gegenteil belegen kann Aufgrund echter RL Erfahrung in dem Teil. Ich sehs jetzt so; ich hab den Entwickler direkt gefragt, er hat bei seinen 'subject matter experts' nachgefragt und das dann so bestätigt. Zu gleich hat die Gazelle in den letzt vier Monaten so einige patches und Anpassungen bekommen. UND; Polychop macht den Eindruck sich in dem Heli-Sim Genre etablieren zu wollen. Ich würde annehmen, dass deren Erfahrungen über die Jahre zu nehmen, und sie auch ihre älteren Muster anpassen, wenn neue Erkenntnisse dies nahelegen.

Whether those dream scenarios of using two or more 'different' gpus to its full individual potential and that without imposing any cpu/memory overhead will ever come true with Directx or Vulkan remians to be seen...but i am fairly doubtful. Delighted to be proven wrong of course. I am happy though that ED chose Vulkan which will as far as i can predict become the industry standard. Doesn't matter whether this comes sometime this year or next or there after...but once it reaches a mature state in DCS and EDs manages to stay at the frontier of the continous Vulkan releases....things can only improve!

+1 for checkbox for butter smooth HUD refresh rate.

''We have confirmed that it is possible to migrate the missions to the NTTR map though (without having to redo them from scratch). '' Thats good to hear, thx for letting us know!

i prefer a good, radom mixture of formal and buddy like lingo. Its about getting closer to a real human relationship that strives on diversity instead of being perfectly right on every shout out. On ther other,...remember, Jester is probably only the first iteration and testbed of years of advancing copilot, ATC, tanker or JTAC ai. I am sure ED is delightfully keeping an eye on this aspect of HBs F-14 project. Always good to share core tech to make the whole sandbox flourish!

Thanks for the update! That wind screenshot at the end looks incredible! ''This drag data allowed the team to compute highly accurate installed net thrust, which in turn revealed that some previous FM drag tuning which slightly deviated from wind tunnel data was no longer needed. Level flight acceleration, fuel burn, and top speeds are now very close to published values. Thrust is at the heart of any fighter jet - and ensuring accurate engine performance within a few percent of stated values is incredibly important to us.'' That sounds really interesting, hope you elaborate on that in detail in your up coming videos on the FM and engine system. Do i get this right: a flight model in combination with the engine model essentially is a sort of ''number cruncher'' and before you added certain calculations for 'spillage drag/lip suction effect', the output of both calculation systems would return values that would not match real values as closely as you liked. Once you added calculations for those effects, it all popped in place with real world data? Looking forward to see this in your videos, maybe give us a bit of a history how your FM and engine model evolved and how certain affects left out or omitted deviate the entire thing from real world data. So to speak, give us a glimpse into the evolution of your FM code! Concerning the kneeboard: why not give us access to making notes in it during the entire flight? Is that what the kneeboard is actually for, to make mental notes and jot info that comes over the radio (nine lines, frequencies, range and bearing info) down quickly. Yes, i could do it with pen an paper...but i find myself quite often in the position where during flight, mission critical info appears for a couple of sec in small print on the screen and i'd like to have an easy and immersive way to note that. Might might become a handy feature!

Hey Sabre, any progress update on the NTTR conversion would be very welcome :)

Sounds promising and much appreciated. Still a bit vague though for my taste. But i trust ED has heard us and will make it a proper offline mode. Hoping to see more details soon so my wallet may open again :)

+1 for adding it either directly as a quality of life thing that works right out of the box like in the M model or add it as an extra setting in the miscellaneous menu for the Gazelle, just put it in there as a special option just like the FFB option or english cockpit.

great to hear the Gazelle is being refined further. Thats how you build a reputation as a developer which will cast a good light on future products!

@David OC ...yes, that ''pitch/stick for airspeed'' was tripping me up as well. And as you stated, the misconception that you would control your airspeed via the stick comes probably from not completely understanding what the AoA indexer lights left of the HUD really indicate and are supposed to tell the pilot. At least i am still not entirely sure about it myself :) So; i was not sure whether those changing indexer lights (donut) where indicating ''angle of attack'' or whether they were about the correct true airspeed that the aircraft should fly down the GS and eventually touch down at. Now, if i am not mistaken: the AoA indexer lights really simply measure/indicate only AoA, but AoA is of course the COMBINATION of correct approach angle of the airfoils (as in degrees to the horizon) AND a specific true airspeed for a specific aircraft. Now, if i am not completely off in my physics here, AoA changes with different true airspeeds at the same angle of the airfoils in relation to the horizon and vice versa. If i keep that angle of the airfoils to the horizon rock steady but increase true airspeed, AoA decreases for instance. If i decrease true airspeed and start to descend the airflow comes not straight and level anymore, but comes from foward below thus inceasing AoA. Thus i would actually conclude that neofighter is correct in stating that you pretty much use the stick for alignment and keeping the correct angle of your ''hook'' towards the flight deck/wires. And you would establish that correct angle early on and fly that till you touch down. GS control and true airspeed control would then soley happen via the throttle. Besides, it makes the apporach procedure somewhat easier i think, because you simply can put you main focus on one control input.

@Sir Gus ''...A friend of mine that flies the Gazelle in real life,told me that the flight model is totally unrealistic compering to the real thing.'' If that is so; would your friend care to elaborate in detail how it compares to his experience in the real thing? Ask him to register on the forum so he can lay it down ;) @FragBum ....good to see you still enjoying some Gazelle time. My brother recently bought it as well so i can have a dedicated gunner now!

This is why many of us will be willing to churn out 60 bucks or such for this module! Heatblur is exeptionally good at making potential customers appreciate what goes into creating a DCS worthy aircraft. Nicks description pretty much sounds like HB's simulation will be just a tiny bit short of a full fidelty fluid physics simulation that wholesome creates every surface/pipe in -and outside the aircraft with all gases and fuilds flowing along, around and through them. Will the HB F-14 be a fuller simulation than other recent additions to the DCS playground? Maybe, probably...how could we tell as long as HB is (thats my impression at least) the only dev going really deep into explaining what's going into making their modules. It's brilliant PR...if you do the hard work, don't hide it behind bullet points....lay it out in reasonable detail so beople have their chaw drop from time to time... I'd like all devs to do this from time to time. I don't need such detailed posts like every two weeks...but if we got something from every dev like once a quater....that'll be swell for sure. And thats not only 3rd partiss building aircraft. How about ED writing a technical post once in a while about a certain aspect of enhancing the DCS world sim. For a start: multi threading or parallelism and how VULKAN can improve things and future prove DCS. Or map building. Be proactive and describe broader technological advancements...instead of defending a missed deadline. Anyway, as stated above, this is exactly what makes me appreciate HB F-14 project so much more that i am all in buying this asap! Keep'em coming...

Thats a neat setup and organization i msut say. Especially your comprehensive and picturesque answer is much appreciated. Until now i have set it up like you have, albeit only differentiating among aircraft. I think i will try that OvGME setup i mentioned as solution three. See how this goes. Thx again.

So i see three ways of placing a downloaded mission. 1. The mission folder in Saved Games\DCS World... 2. In your respective DCS Install folder in DCS World 2 OpenAlpha\Mods\aircraft\A-10C\Missions\ 3. OvGME-ing a seperately setup folder to either of these locations. Solution one hast he problem that it does not display the respective mission for the correct aircraft ingame (they show up under the general header My Missions), but you can make folders with the correct names. With solution two, missions show up for the correct aircraft ingame, but they are affected by the 'cleanup' cmd command. Solution three, mirroring solutions two folder structure to present it to the game via OvGME or such enables you to ''pull'' all your custom missions out before you clean up your installation. BUT: did i miss any other vanilla mission folder where i 1: see missions for the correct aircraft in game and not only in the general 'My Missions' folder that is not affected by the 'cleanup' command?

soweit ich es weiß, sind das alles (von user durch mods) 'veränderten' Dateien bei bei einem update oder repair in diese backup Ordner verschoben werden. Falls du davon nichts retten willst oder brauchst, hau weg.