funkyfranky

2019-06-28 22:27:23.530 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker)enterToState_:0 2019-06-28 22:27:23.530 INFO DCS: wcTanker::onEvent:4 2019-06-28 22:27:23.530 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker)enterToState_:1 2019-06-28 22:27:23.530 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker::Channel)enterToState_:0 2019-06-28 22:27:23.530 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker::Channel)enterToState_:1 2019-06-28 22:27:23.624 INFO Lua: Lua CPU usage: metric: average mission execution: 74.3041 % 2019-06-28 22:27:23.627 INFO TACVIEW.DLL: Recording flight data in [D:\Users\frank\Documents\Tacview\Tacview-20190629-002723-DCS-FPP_Training.zip.acmi] 2019-06-28 22:27:23.628 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 gc() LOD 0 8 squares 2019-06-28 22:27:23.629 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 gc() LOD 1 8 squares 2019-06-28 22:27:23.629 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 gc() 0.219300 ms 2019-06-28 22:27:24.753 INFO DCS: wcTanker::onEvent:5 2019-06-28 22:27:24.753 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker::Channel)enterToState_:6 2019-06-28 22:27:24.753 INFO EDCORE: (wcTanker)enterToState_:3 [color="Red"][b]<WAITING...>[/b][/color] 2019-06-28 22:27:31.010 ERROR NET: HTTP request https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/gameapi/stats/dcs_world/?cid=483D0DCD4F681A5321CE18AE98A90977&uid=ca3bfb597f768ef125874d7270324309&an=DCS%2Fopenbeta&av=2.5.5.32533&t=screenview&cd=user+mission failed with error 28: Timeout was reached 2019-06-28 22:27:41.009 ERROR NET: HTTP request https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/gameapi/stats/dcs_world/?cid=483D0DCD4F681A5321CE18AE98A90977&uid=ca3bfb597f768ef125874d7270324309&an=DCS%2Fopenbeta&av=2.5.5.32533&t=screenview&cd=mission_offline failed with error 28: Timeout was reached

Leads to stalling the mission when loading for several seconds, I might add.

I'm getting this error even in single player!

Thanks mate :thumbup:

Regarding the white flashes, is there any comment by Oculus (I dont follow their forums regularly)? Is it even known at this point whether it is a hardware or software issue? (As many have mentioned, it is not really a deal breaker but it would be nice to know the origin to potentially take further actions, i.e. eventually return for fixed hardware or just wait for software improvement.)

Ejected pilot hinders aircraft to taxi to its parking spot. ==> Complete airbase out of order :crash:

I might be, that the actual spawn command is a bit delayed. Then the array/table with the defined liveries would already be initialized when the spawn happens. But if you want to be safe, you should put the line with the liveries (or other options) before the spawn line. But hey, whatever works :D

Ja, sehr traurig :(

^ This, plus the liveries should be specified after the :New() but before the :Spawn() command. Otherwise the spawning will not know that special liveries are defined.

Glitch of the Msta barrel when turret is turned: DCS 2.5.5.32533

Not a silly question at all - I've been sloppy ;) To be more precise, what I call "controller" should be the object the getController DCS API functions returns.

For the records: controller:setOption(9, 0) -- Alarm State Auto controller:setOption(9, 1) -- Alarm State Green controller:setOption(9, 2) -- Alarm State Red

Absolutely :thumbup:

:doh: ja, sorry, Du hast natürlich gerade ganz andere Probleme.

Not true in my case. Also others have reported no improvements with FPS>45.

Dann solltest Du den Test auch mal machen und Deine Ergebnisse posten. Das kann nur helfen.

Na zum Beispiel nicht die gleichen Einstellungen in beiden Versionen verwenden. Einer, der erst 50% mehr FPS angegeben hatte, hat dann festgestellt, dass er in der OB eine Pixeldichte von 1.8 und in der Stable eine von 1.0 verwendet hat.

Also bis jetzt scheinen die allermeisten Tests (fast) keine Verbesserung der FPS zu zeigen. Und dass die paar wenigen, die Behaupten, eine signifikante Verbesserung zu sehe, richtig gemessen haben, wage ich mal zu bezweifeln.

It is well possible to correctly disable ASW and still find the system snapping to 45 FPS in a certain FPS range.

I've seen something similar when placing static helos on a FARP.Sat view in the ME position did not match the position in game. I needed to fiddle around quite a bit to have them where I wanted to.

So far, it looks like you are the only one who sees that +50% which raises the question, what's so different about your system/settings?

TF-51D Instant Action mission Flight Over Tbilisi Average FPS 2.5.4 Release: 60.3 Average FPS 2.5.5 OpenBeta: 63.7 Graphics settings: Pixel Density: 1.7 Specs: i7-8700K | Asus RTX 2080Ti Strix OC| 32 GB Ram 3200 MHz DDR-4 | Asus Maximus Hero X Oculus Rift S (ASW off), Oculus Home 1.38.0.256587 NVIDIA game ready driver 430.86

Great pics, phil :thumbup:

Thanks mate :thumbup: That's what I feared. Yeah that would work in this case. I'm however looking for a more general solution to do a clinical attack on a specific target without "escalating" the conflict. I.e. in general there could be more red units around and making them all invisible would cause other issues. I would be nice to have some option, which allows tasks like "fire at point" or "attack group/unit" to overrule the ROE or a least the ROE RETURN FIRE if a mission designer explicitly specifies a task to attack something. I might take this to the wish list thread.

Similar problem here: I want to use the fire at point task to shell a ground group on the shore form a naval group. But as soon I switch the ROE from WEAPON HOLD to WEAPON FREE, the naval group also opens fire on a ship of the other coalition using anti ship missiles. So question is how to attack a specific target only? Simplest way would be to set ROE to only RETURN FIRE, but then the task fire at point is not executed unfortunately or am I missing anything?