Donut

It is no secret that the F-14 takes an incredible amount of CPU and GPU power. With my setup listed in my signature, there are times where I see FPS drop into the 50's-60's on a busy airfield, carrier deck, or flying over some of the Persian Gulf cities. 60 FPS is my threshold for acceptable FPS and I would like to maintain at least that at all times. DCS and especially the Tomcat look incredible at high graphics settings, so it is hard to choose what to sacrifice. I have most everything maxed except shadows on low, terrain object shadows flat, civ traffic low, and MSSA x2. Which settings would everyone suggest be sacrificed to improve FPS while also maintaining visual quality...if it's even possible. I am a little concerned that FPS will drop even further with the new more detailed carriers. I did do a quick test earlier...I lowered MSAA to off and lowered visib range to ultra but did not see any increase in FPS on a busy carrier deck or airfield ramp. The increase in FPS was only noticeable away from everything. This is not unique to the F-14 though, I saw the same results with the Viper and Hornet.

Yes, I get that FPS in 1440p. I do have most things maxed out, except shadows are low and MSAA 2x. I actually ran the Tomcat mission Defender of the Fleet today and saw my FPS drop into the 50's at times on the carrier depending on where I was looking and how much was in the scene. However, these low FPS numbers are not isolated to the carrier...with the Tomcat I will see 50's-60's at a heavily populated airfield or flying over some of the Persian Gulf cities. Over open areas and up high, I see FPS up into the 100's-120's. I see a significant drop in FPS with the Hornet on the carrier as well, but I can usually maintain at least 60 FPS. The Tomcat takes a ton of CPU and GPU power for sure, and it still isn't enough. I am concerned as well about how much lower performance will go with a more detailed carrier environment. The below image shows 56 FPS right after landing on the Stennis. I used the F-14 Caucasus Case I Instant Action Mission.

Guns and/or AIM-9M only...

Are there any specific strategies/techniques when it comes to BFM against the F-16CM Block 50? The F-16 has incredible power and performance, but is it unbeatable? I am looking forward to what everyone has to say!

I have updated the latest Nvidia drivers, cleared fxo and metashader folders...performance does seem a lot worse lately. I normally limit my FPS to 60 with an external frame rate limiter, but for the first time ever in DCS, I have seen FPS drop into the 50's on a busy carrier deck or airfield ramp when flying the Tomcat. I am seeing a significant drop in FPS with the Viper and Hornet as well. Something seems off....

Can confirm as well. Thank you ED!

Yep, noticed a significant drop in FPS here too after latest updates. Depending on which aircraft, I am seeing 20-30 less FPS now, nothing changed on my end...and yes, I delete the fxo and metashader folders.

Any word from ED on performance impacts with the new carrier module? In either the Tomcat or Hornet on the Stennis with other aircraft, my FPS dips into the 60's with a 4.8GHz CPU and 1080 Ti, non-VR. Unless some behind the scenes performance improvement magic is happening, I imagine I would see the FPS dip to an unplayable rate with a more detailed and crowded carrier deck.

This is a great question, but by the end of the year!?!? For something that should have been finished on day one...I am hoping that it is completed any day now. Like others, I was extremely surprised that it was not ready on day one and have become more disapointed each day...along with the flight model, the internal/external model and artwork should form the foundation of an early axis release. Development of additional systems, features, and bug fixing are what the early access period is for and is what is generally expected and accepted.

I think the complaints are due to the surprise of how early access the F-16 seems to be. ED with the Hornet and Heatblur with the Tomcat set a certain standard that the F-16 has fallen well short of.

ED needs the money now, hence the whole reason for early access, and super early access of the F-16. If they didn't need the financial support, they could afford to wait a little longer and release a more complete and polished product. This is all fine of course and I have no problem supporting them, but I do need a better return on my investment than what the F-16 has so far provided.

I don't think it's worth even $60 right now...someday yes, but we are far from it. I view early access as supporting ED and future development, so I didn't have a problem paying that, however; the F-16 has taken the term "early access" to the extreme. We are a month into early access and still do not have a complete external model, lights, and artwork. I understand the need for early access and support it, but there has to be a minimum standard. I don't think the F-16 meets that standard and to be still saying that a month after release is unacceptable. I would like for ED to demonstrate an acceptable level of quality and development for early access products.

The manual says the aircraft must be set up specifically for this beforehand. Is this simulated/possible in DCS right now?

73...that is great! Never too old to learn and especially never too old to be a virtual aviator! Happy flying!

I don't know what today's patch did, but it did something great in regards to rudder control and ground handling. I can finally control it during the take off and landing roll...hopefully everyone else is experiencing the same. Thanks ED!

Yes, that is correct; however, I needed to run the script to bind a key press to an axis which made is necessary to find out how to make the 8 way functional again in all 8 directions and mapped in DCS. I actually was able to make the ministick function as an 8 way and I use that for the Jester menu, which is what I ultimately wanted to achieve. Again, thank you. I don't think I could have figured this all out without your help.

Okay, I finally got everything to work! What Ant0ine suggested above is what worked. Mapping 4 of the hat positions to a DX direction made all 8 directions able to be mapped in game, Thank you to everyone for all the help...happy flying!

After some testing I have found the following... When I first enter a mission, the FOV is at 105. When I use zoom, the FOV resets and remains at 85. What is everyone else seeing and what is the default FOV supposed to be?

While running the TARGET script, I am unable to map any of the hats in DCS, I have to do it in the TARGET GUI. Without running the script, yes, I can map all 8 directions on the hat. The TARGET software is really disapointing. I am going to try Joystick Gremlin and see if that can achieve want I want...map key presses to an axis and be able to map the 8 way hat.

Hmm, I don't think I understand...I have 8 separate key presses that I need to map, so I need more than just 4 positions and be able to assign the diagnals as well. I am using it for Jester with the Tomcat.

I wonder which FOV Heatblur considers to be the right default one...

Thank you for the help. I have no experience with the script editor,.but I may need to learn in order to accomplish what I need. Does the ministick have 8 directions that can be mapped as well? Thanks for looking and confirming what I am seeing. It's a mystery as to why Thrustmaster doesn't allow the full mapping of it's own controls.

Could you be a little more specific, I am not seeing anything listed as 0, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7... I am using the GUI, I click on the 8 way hat in the 3D view of the throttle and there are only 4 positions available, up, down, left, right. Another option would be to use the ministick as an 8 way and assign 8 key presses to each direction, but I can't figure this out either. Thank you for the help.

Okay, so I got it to work thanks to the helpful tips from Ant0ine; however, I have to map the hats on the throttle in TARGET as it won't let me in DCS. I am running into the problem that the 8 way hat on the throttle is only recognized as a 4 way...and tips for this?

They already said the P-47 wouldn't be out until next year...the carrier is the only other possibility.