divinee
-
Posts
141 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by divinee
-
-
I can confirm this. Waypoint 25 cannot be used as Bullseye. If steerpoint 25 is selected for bullseye, indications will be for the missions bullseye, not waypoint 25.
-
-
Also had the same. All sensors were jammed to that same position where the emitter was seen in HAD. Even jdams VIS cue on HUD went there immediately. CZ didn’t work. I was able to put litening to SP but that was all. Sadly i wasn’t able to get track.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Munkwolf said:
It's something I have to do maybe once a month, after a reboot, and if the lighting is low. Really not that much of an issue. It's funny that you keep trying to make assumptions about my experience in order to be "right".
I’m not assuming anything. Just pointed out something. Like i said, everyone can do whatever they want and what suits them. This conversation seem to move to personal stuff so i’m not gonna continue it anymore.
-
1 hour ago, speed-of-heat said:
Actually with significant changes to the lighting conditions you can drop to 3dof in game.
Yeah, that's always possible. I didn't mention that because usually people know not to change lighting radically when using inside-out-tracking at least when they are flying (hopefully)
-
On 10/8/2021 at 8:55 PM, Munkwolf said:
if there were faults with just re-calibrating instead of clearing environment data, why have I had no issues with that approach?
Some like me may find it easier to re-calibrate (3 clicks and I'm back in DCS), some like you may prefer clearing the environment data cache. There are options - whatever works and seems easiest for the user.
The issue is that you have to do that
When the environment data is ok, you will not drop to 3DOF in the middle of running DCS.
-
3 hours ago, Munkwolf said:
Cool man, glad that works for you. I was just posting what has worked for me for over 6 months now with the G2.. and seems easier and less clicks than having to clear the environment data, in case that is helpful to somebody else. Only time I've cleared environment data is when I was setting up the headset. Seems like a bit of overkill imo to get the headset tracking 6DOF, but again, whatever works for you.
Just explained that there might be some faults in your method knowing how the inside out tracking works. But go ahead and do what suits you. No one forces you to do anything
-
G2 is not using SteamVR reprojection. SteamVR just relays the settings for WMR. WMRFSVR and SteamVR settings really use WMR's own reprojection.
-
7 hours ago, Munkwolf said:
In my experience don't have to clear environment data and redo boundaries or such, either. When 3DOF happens to me, I can usually move the headset around maybe turn up the lights in my room and it fixes itself after a few seconds.
If that doesn't work, I quit SteamVR, and WMR is usually asking me to look side-to-side and down at floor. After that it'll put me in the WMR house. I relaunch SteamVR and DCS and good to go.
When glasses drop to 3DOF and lighting etc is ok (good, uniform lighting and no blank white walls around) it usually means there is faults in the environment data. It is possible to still get the tracking work again like you have described but the faults are still there. The environment changes a little bit all the time (you move stuff on the table and so on..) and it is quite usefull to clear that data from time to time. With a good environment data with G2 you don't even have to turn your head to calibrate the glasses to the environment. Clearing and teaching new environment takes less than 1 minute if you are using only seated position and requires about 10 mouse clicks. Then you don't have to hassle with wmr on-off-on, stemvr on-off-on, turn your head and so on. With boundaries it takes few more minutes but you don't have to do that every day.
-
1
-
-
-
5 minutes ago, icecold951 said:
Nothing really changed as far as I can tell, but the headset disagreed. Had to redo the boundaries and all. Also went ahead and reinstalled steamvr and steam WMR portal.
The glasses still can lose the orientation for various reasons and still all you have to do is to clear environment data from windows vr-settings and teach those again (boundaries or seating position).. Reinstalling software is a little bit overkill for tracking problems, just for the clarification if someone else is having 3dof problems.
-
-
3 hours ago, icecold951 said:
I'm getting a new bug as of today. When in VR, if I move my head forward I stay exactly the same and simply the whole world moves forward. I can't move around in the cockpit. Reverb G2. Anyone else?
It's not a bug, you are in a 3dof mode. Mostly happens when you change stuff in the room. Please clear the environment data and teach the room or sitting position again.
-
10 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
That's your problem right there: too many pixels to render, which brings even the most modern PC to its knees. I assume you mean both global SS and game-specific SS?
I have a 6900XT as well, and have global SS set at 100%, game-specific at 50% (for a total of 76%), and DCS PD at 1.0We'll have to wait a few more generations for PCs to be powerful enough to render the Reverb's native resolution.
G1 has different percentage numbers in SteamVR. 100% means the native, about 2160x2160 per eye resolution. 6900xt should be more than sufficient to run G1 with 100%. (By the way, i’m able to run G2 with 75% SS, about 2700x2700 resolution with my 2080S and i have quite stable 45+ fps everywhere else execpt marianas.)
-
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just to inform, i installed nvidia's 466.55 hotfix drivers and i haven't got any crashes with wmr for steamvr beta. Have anyone else tried that?
edit: running windows 21H1 and steamvr beta
-
I'm using english version and i've been having those crashes occasionally. After installing latest hotfix drivers from nvidia(466.55), i got rid of that crashing at least temporarily. I haven't been able to reproduce that crash since yet but time will tell. Also at the same time i got rid off the wmr for steamvr beta crashing.
-
12 minutes ago, SpaceMonkey037 said:
Hmm, yeah this might be a semi-solution. It would allow for markpoint to be added, however markpoints themself aren't an essential part of the aircraft. So ED might save the efforts and just go directly for markpoint implementation with the DTC. Out of my knowledge what exactly will happen, but my guess is this anways.
It depends on how long it will take to implement that DTC. We haven't heard any news from it for quite a long time so i wouldn't expect it too soon. But yeah, there are more critical things in F-16 which should be implemented first but markpoints would just ease up some things quite a lot.
-
On 4/29/2021 at 10:07 AM, SpaceMonkey037 said:
I think the problem with integrating mark point into dcs is that SPI isn't applied in-game like it is IRL, this causes complications. Btw, mark paoints are steerpoints 26-30
<-- and this is the second problem with integrating markpoints. Right now the steerpoint system is really simple. Every steerpoint works like a NAV steerpoint (very simple version of NAV steerpoints that is). IRL it's only steerpoints 1-25 who are NAV route steerpoints, while in game all 127 steerpoints are NAV route steerpoints. For markpoints to be integrated correctly it would require an improvement in the steerpoint system.
You might ask "Why does it require an improvement in the steerpoint system? Just make it possible to "quick add" steerpoints using the mark feature.", and the answer to that is that mark points don't function like normal NAV route steerpoints. The only actual difference is the way the function on the HSD, they show up as X instead of the usual NAV route steerpoints O. They also don't have NAV routes connecting them. For "quick add" to be possible without an improved steerpoint system means that steerpoints 26-30 will function completely different to the rest, and this would be very strange. My take on this is that you either fix the entire steerpoint system, or you leave it as is. You can't mix mach things as that would create more problems than solutions because of the incorrect base model for the steerpoint system.
The next step in the steerpoint system requires the integration of DTC as most of the settings are only programable through the DTC. This would then mean that realistically we probably won't see markpoints being introduced until we have DTC implemented and an improved steerpoint system to go with it. (this will take a long time)
Lastly, IRL mark points arent used as much as you might think. You can't simply mark random tanks on the ground and start bombing, as this would have a very high chance of friendly fire. For that reason you really do not want to fire upon something you've don't have confirmed coordinates for. Mark points main use from what I've understood is to serve as a way to save a SPI slew as a steerpoint (like you say).
Mark points definetly are a needed feature, but it will most likely require a lot of other improvement to be a good additoin. The steerpoint system beign so bare bones is one of my biggest issues in the sim currently. And I hope ED gets around to improving the system.
Why it’s not possible to limit the number of the navpoints what we have now to 25 and then use 26-30 as markpoints almost like hornet does? All that is needed is changing of the icons in hsd and not using connecting lines. The rest of the points can be implemented when possible (like with dtc). Even that would be more usable and closer to real thing that what we have now?
edit: points 31-127 could be left as editable in mission editor so those could be used to limit areas etc. More work but still less than overhauling whole waypoint system and implementing data cartridge
-
Any info about this? Is this still considered by ED?
-
On 3/31/2021 at 11:34 AM, jojo said:
There is a new coder at work, and a big update coming for April 7th.
Wait for it...
Does it have something to do with 2000-5?
-
On 3/27/2021 at 4:53 PM, BIGNEWY said:
I have asked our QA team to take a look, I am still unable to reproduce on my system however.
Thanks.
You have quite a lot of more VRAM than previous posters and ~most of the VR users (11gb vs 8gb). To easily replicate these kind of situation you need to crank up the SS% or texture settings a lot so your vram usage increases to same levels..
-
7 hours ago, Northstar98 said:
That's news to me, but it's par for the course and what I was expecting. I was expecting end of March, or maybe the first couple of weeks into April. If you've been with DCS long, you'll hopefully becoming accustomed to taking a release date, adding 2 weeks to a month (at least) and actually expect it then, you can then be presently surprised if its earlier and hopefully you won't be too disappointed if it's later.
It sounds bad, but that's unfortunately how things are and there is no magic solution given how unpredictable it all is. I think ED have learned their lesson from the 2.5.6 situation which was not fun, and it was very long lasting.
Yeah, i’ve been in sim scene since -99-00 so nothing new to me
Just wanted to point out that even ED is now starting to mention april so people better not to get dissapointed if the patch is not coming in march.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, dburne said:
Ok - I have been running the Beta of both Steam VR and WMR for Steam VR and not having any issues.
Also latest Nvidia drivers.
And you have 24gb of vram?
That kind of solves/fixes most of this problem
Best SEAD aircraft?
in Chit-Chat
Posted · Edited by divinee
F-16 with harms and HTS is just so overkill with AI SAM's. You can loft HARM's from about ~60nm, they will go to space and dive from there 1000kn+. Even SA-15 and SA-10 have a hard time with HARMs. Kinematicly F-16 is propably the best for SEAD and combined with HTS+HARM i think there's just no comparison.
Edit: We really need skynet etc or real IADS system so AI SAM's wont make suicides
Then it's more about tactics etc than just aircraft and it's capabilities.