Donut

Hey everyone...I didn't want this to become an argument about early access. It's about the F-16 and what it's current status is...I am finding that it is still in a poor state. I see people listing all of the current systems that are implemented, but I am finding that they are all still a WIP or bugged. As of right now, 2+ months after release, what is actually working? Which systems are 100% accurate and functional. I don't want to learn something only to have to forget everything and relearn it due to it being WIP, incorrect, or bugged.

To be honest, I think some of us thought we would be getting an early access aircraft of the same quality as the Hornet was at it's day one release. Early access is fine and great, I fully understand and support it...the frustration is not about the lack of features, it's about the low quality and rushed and incomplete effort for what we do have. It is frustrating to encounter a bug, something that is incomplete, or just not functioning properly in virtually every aspect of flying and operating the Viper. Maybe the Hornet (and Tomcat) spoiled us and set the bar too high. I purchased the Viper with very high hopes, but have been so far let down when compared to my early access experience in the Hornet and Tomcat.

Well, even without humidity implemented, the over wing vapor in the Hornet and even the Viper are far better. It's really non-existent in the Tomcat right now. It would be nice to hear what Heatblur's plans are...

I eagerly pre-purchased the F-16 and flew it on day one of release, only to be extremely dissapointed by the low quality, number of bugs, and lack of basic features. Two months in and I would like to give it another chance... After flying around some today, I unfortunately have to say that there still seems to be very little that is working, not bugged, or just completely missing. It is a very frustrating aircraft to fly and operate in it's current state and I cannot really learn anything yet since just about everything is still incomplete. Maybe I am just being unrealistic and my expectation are too high in regards to development... What are everyone's thoughts on the current state of the F-16?

Not postponed, but definetly held back...third party modules have updates ready...

Any update on this?

In DCS at 1440p, there is no question that the 1080 Ti struggles. If I had known that I would have to lower settings significantly to maintain a 60 FPS minimum, I would have stayed with a 1080p monitor. If I see a 40-50 FPS drop from baseline empty map FPS on the Stennis with other aircraft on the deck, the new, more detailed Supercarrier module will only be worse. Maybe Vulkan will help...hopefully it is released alongside the new carrier.

On the list of planned features, I do not see external air and power carts listed. Are they going to be included as static carrier deck vehicles/equipment?

I don't know, didn't think it did...that is why I was questioning KTFBGB.

Thank you for the help. I normally do fly with a frame rate limiter set at 60, I just turn it off for testing to see what my actual FPS is. Even with the framerate limiter on, I will see the dips below 60 FPS. I don't see any temperature issues...CPU hits 70C at 100% usage, GPU hits around 60C at 100% usage. All of this is air cooled. I am currently running a stable 21% overclock at 4.6GHZ. I tried up to 4.8 GHz, but only saw a 1-2 FPS increase...not worth the increase in temps. Thanks for the tip about the mirrors, great idea. I will try turning them off while on the ground/deck, and turn them on once airborne. I already have depth of field, motion blur, and heat blur turned off.

If a 1080 Ti is meant for 1080p, then what GPU's are for 1440p, 4K, and VR?

Empty airfield compared to empty carrier...sure. It all evens out though as soon as you start adding just a few aircraft. I see the same 40-50 FPS drop with just a few aircraft added to the ramp of an airfield or carrier deck.

It varies greatly... This is all in the Tomcat; Viper and Hornet are on average about 10-20 FPS higher. On the ground at Nellis, completely empty map, FPS around 90. Flying over Las Vegas or Persian Gulf cities, FPS will drop into 60's, sometimes 50's...completely empty map. Over open desert or ocean, clear blue sky and empty map, FPS will shoot up to 120+ and even max at my refresh rate of 144 at times. Near cities or other aircraft, FPS takes a significant hit and I struggle to maintain 60 FPS...away from everything, it is perfectly fine. For me to maintain 60 FPS in all situations, I have found I need to turn shadows off, mirrors off, and turn down visib range.

For a bit of perspective... 1440p monitor, i5 7600k at 4.6GHz, 1080 Ti and 32Gb of 3200MHz RAM here...while on the deck of the Stennis in the Tomcat, four static aircraft parked, in the middle of open water, out of site of land, empty mission, I see FPS drop into the 50's. This is with shadows low, terrain shadows flat, MSAA 2x, SSAA off... Along with deck sliding, FPS impact is my biggest concern with the new carrier.

I have all my hope in Vulkan too. I have shadows on low and default, MSAA 2x, SSAA off and still see FPS drop below 60 at times. 4.6GHz CPU and 1080 Ti struggles at 1440p. I even briefly bumped my CPU to 4.8GHz and overclocked my GPU as a test, but still could not maintain a 60 FPS minimum in all situations.

So oddly, there was no mention of a WWII Pacific map in the Corsair preview today...can't really have the Corsair and Essex Class carrier without it. Maybe this means that one of ED's "secret" maps will actually be in the Pacific...

Three weeks left... I wonder if we will get a nice preview video like we just saw from ED, or if it will just all of a sudden be included in one of the next Open Betas.

Interesting that there is no mention of a WWII Pacific map. You can't have the Corsair and Essex Class carrier without it. I wonder if this is because one of ED's "secret" maps will be in the Pacific..

For those flying the F-16, who in the world would buy each separately? The current Warthog stick/base is cheaper than if you bought the new stick and base individually. The announcement seems to capitalize on the DCS Viper release, not highlight it.

It actually looks pretty incredible. Great work ED, and to Glowing Amraam as well for the great video! Looking forward to it's release...

Your turn Heatblur...now we need a Forrestal Class preview video! :pilotfly:

Great news! I will be tuning in!

Are you talking about VISIB RANGE setting? I think Extreme has been available for a long time. While it does nothing to the actual texture resolution, it does increase how far out you can see detail/scenery. This gives the appearance of increasing the texture resolution. You are right though, it does make a significant difference compared to lower settings. It does have a high impact on FPS though, but I keep mine on Extreme because it really does look amazing.

Terrain shaders? Really? I have always deleted the fxo and metashader folders, never even knew about the terrain shaders. I will have to try that and see if it does anything. I still don't know why we have to do all this though...but every little boost in performance and FPS helps, so I keep doing it.

Wow... If this is all true and "nerfing" is something ED is doing (can't believe I am saying the word "nerf" in a simulation forum), then ED has lost all credibility and respect. ED...is DCS an arcade game or a simulation of real world aircraft and weapons? Weapons should be modeled as close as possible to real life considering available data, and not tweaked because one has an advantage over another in the real world...and not tweaked because ED can't get their act together and finally fix missile performance in DCS.