Maverick87Shaka

From official newsletter, NVIDIA DLSS 2.0 is coming to DCS World. It was also the very first shoot of the 2023 & Beyond video: It's also mentioned that they will take a look at AMD FSR just after put in place the DLSS, but it's not really a planned feature so far, we need to wait further confirmation on this.

In a recent video ED shows nvidia DLSS in action, so probably DLSS will be the Super Sampling technology that will be official supported by DCS. I'm not expecting that they are going to implement/develop and support also the FSR. If the FSR can be "enabled" just by OS driver, without any kind of implementation required by the software, you'll be able to use it with DCS, but I'm not sure it will be like this to be honest. I believe some kind of implementation it will be required to make FSR work without glitches or any other unwanted effects. Please also note that it looks like the future of DCS will be with Vulkan API, and not with DX11/12.

I can't advise for all other servers, but general speaking server admin prepare different level of difficulty just to make sure that everyone can enjoy the server. Taking for example my servers, you have a radio menu to spawn new mission, you have to choose first of all the "difficulty" level: easy, medium, hard. based on the difficulty, you'll find different threat level. In easy air to ground mission, you can expect only light anti air like zu-23, while on hard level you have to expect heavy SAM protection The same for air to air mission, the enemy aircraft type and ammunition will depend on the difficult level selected. On top of that for example on my syria server there is a conquest mode. So you can work to conquest more airfield, the "first" one will be "easy", while going deep in the enemy space, more close to their main base, it will be very difficult for strong CAP and sam resistance. This is how I've arranged stuff on my server, but I'm expecting is the same approach also on the server where you can select mission to sapwn etc.

Most of the time popular server are the more complete in terms of things to do (AA,AG,transport and logistics, helo CSAR and so on), with detailed briefing to explain what pilots has to do and so on. So basically even if you fly multiple time on the server, you'll not be annoyed since there are generally also some randomization for target etc. But there are still good solution that are less popular, but they are really friendly place to fly for new players as well as experienced virtual pilots. My suggestion is to read carefully the briefing, where you can normally find all the information that you need, and of course select a server "close" to you, lower is the ping, smoothest will be the experience A general command that you can see in all the server, use the radio menu, and look under Other submenu, all the "custom" things of the server, goes in that place!

1. Yes, performance it's the same, even the RAM that is the most impacted at the moment. 2. Yes, you just have to give a different working directory ( -w parameter , -w server1, -w server2 and so on) 3. Yes, just remember that each things need to run in their own working directory. Normally I don't change any parameter of the client/standalone shortcut on desktop after the installation, so it will work on SavedGames\DCS.OpenBeta and I also use it to perform update, and then I create a shortcut to start the server, using -w DCS.server1 --server etc. this is the best scenario (in terms of disk footprint that was the initial request) if you want have a client and a server running from the same machine. I do have this configuration for years in the past, works really fine and make me able to open mission editor ( full client installation ) to adjust a .miz file directly from the machine that we use as a server. Of course to update stuff, all server instances and client must be switched off to run updater.

Definitely not needed. You can run a server from full dcs client installation without any issue at all.

I don't remember from what exact build, but Voice Chat now relies on the same port as the main DCS netcode as far as I know, and trying to modify the voicechat port from autoexec.cfg doesn't make any change actually. You can safely run multiple instance on the same machine, just changing the main DCS port. EDIT: 11 Nov,23 main DCS port and webgui port to have control over it with web gui

We have 4 different server instances running 24/7 on the same Windows server 2019 machine, none of them has crashed since months.

Sorry, I was not so clear on my post...... When I talk to "security" in this context, I mean the "game integrity" itself, not the potential security issues on overall system (that still an option btw). My concerns expressed here to put a mod in a public server, is related to the actual ability to cheat/skip/bypass any integrity check. Unfortunately ( even if in a limited way ) also DCS community is affected by "annoying people", and server admins had to deal with it.

skipping for a moment the stability issue/bugs and the troubleshooting, that is part of the problem for sure, but the real stopper to me ( personal opinion ) is the lack of "integration" in DCS. I really love the way how it's implemented on Arma3 (steam), where you can directly see, download/update, enable/disable mod just clicking on the server that is using or not a mod. The launcher that they have ( now! ) it's the "baseline" for a system that makes use of the mod "safe" and easy! In fact, the server will include the "hash" of the exact mod release, and make the "integrity check" also for the mod, that actually is not happening on DCS. That's why I'm not using MOD on public server! We use mods just times to time in our private server for squadron mission/fun fly It's a pity since some mod really deserve a space also in public server, but cannot be done foregoing security. ( at least for me, as I said )

The idea of an "USP" is really interesting, to me it will make easier for both new and experienced players navigate thought multiplayer slot list. What I would like to add to your idea, it's something like a checkbox where you can select also what module are allowed. In this way mission editor ( and slot list ) can be "managed" to appear sorted by task/mission. You can i.e. create CAP slot, tick F-18,F-16,F-14. Then a CAS slot for A-10 etc. ( and of course a shortcut to tick all available module, so you don't have to do it manually if you want all of them ) Since the growing number of module available the current slot system is becoming an issue, confusing and hard to maintain for mission and server designer. It will not be easy, I believe it's a major core change on the slot system, so I would like this slot refactory will be the opportunity to also make it "dynamically" editable during Mission Execution thought API/Scripts, like was done with the warehouse system right now. Fly Safe!

This is an amazing step forward thought a core ME feature, I want really say Thanks to ED! It will be amazing have this feature in place when will be time to play with C-130 and CH-47 FlySafe!

Ciao @CARLONE1951, oltre a riportare il log come indicato da BIGNEWY, scrivici anche tutti i dettagli del tuo pc, e se riscontri lo stesso problema anche su altri giochi ( se li usi da quel pc )

I'm part of a company that makes his business in "harsh environment", and one of my battle in 2021 was try Starlink as replacement of our current poor and expensive geostationary satellite. While trying too change habits and prove it that is reliable for run business is long process, we've switched all the media entertainment, private call and "non working" stuff to Starlink, and people really start to don't feel alone in the world, they can finally even make a video call with their family that basically it was not possible before :D Before send the first antenna on production site, of course we've put in place a test bench in our lab. while we don't actually play DCS over starlink, we've put under monitoring system bandwidth and latency, and it was quite decent ( about 40ms ping with some packet loss, when no "heavy load" is applied. ) . Not perfect as a cable connection, but not so bad compared on what we had currently. So basically, if you're not covered by any cable ISP, Starlink is definitely a good option to me, it's not perfect, but better than a mobile 4G connection. Some of our results during the test:

You can run a server from your openbeta installation in a dedicated working directory, and run openbeta client on the same machine. Don't need to install dedicated server

Yes, with moose you can subscribe for events and use it. Dead event doesn't contain position, so you have to deal with it (welcome to the workaround zone!) If it's not a fast moving vehicle that you have to track, you can create a scheduler that check and update position every 10 seconds for example, and after event dead retrieve that information updated from the scheduler, and spawn the infantry from there.

First of all you have to load MOOSE, since you've not mentioned anywhere is worth to mention. After that, you have to make sure of what code you have to use, since you're trying to retrieve information from a DEAD unit, that is not possible in DCS. So you have to save the coordinate from dead event if available, and use that for spawn the infantry.

Players most of the time are not really aware of what happens behind the scene, and they also are not supposed to be. From my prospective it's responsibility of the server owner, especially in a PvP environment, try to guarantee a fair play on their own server. Take the decision to use a MOD, using the workaround to editing .miz file to don't make it "required", simply kick in too many risk, at least for me, as I said. BTW. A-4 is an amazing MOD and it's clear that people love it, I'm not making any critics to the A-4 mod itself that is brilliant, but the way that is "hosted" sometimes since may have some drawbacks.

It doesn't mean that doesn't face issue due to this decision, as well is not immune by IC tampering attempt.

That basically it's the worst choice that a server admin can make in my honest opinion. It's a workaround for a current DCS mod limitation, but it will ruin everyone experience, and also open the door for potential IC tamping attempt.

We're warming up your seat! The last miles are always the hardest, and the team is presently working night and day to get DCS: F-4E ready for launch. The Phantom has now been in development for just over two years, and we've been working incredibly hard to build not only the ultimate recreation of the Phantom, but a sustainable platform for Heatblur moving forward, starting with the launch of the F-4. Every rivet, screw, breaker, lamp, and otherwise will be accurately recreated in what we hope will be the ultimate simulation of the legendary Phantom. Our current focus is still on wrapping up some of the most complex and intricate systems coming to DCS: F-4E, such as Jester 2.0. Not only do we have to make sure that new features developed are great, polished and fun on day one; but since we'll be re-using a lot of our new technology in both past and future aircraft, we're treading thoughtfully. We've always tried to look for new ways to further DCS and our own products, and the Phantom will be no different. Elements like better in game learning or RPG-lite mechanics in JESTER are just some examples of where we've gone this time around. Our key priority however is ensuring that you have a great experience on launch day, with a rich and as close to feature complete experience as we can provide, and we'll be sparing no effort to get to the quality you all expect. We can't wait for you to fly the F-4. Stay tuned for more news, including F-4E, but also MSFS F-14 as well as updates to DCS: F-14, Viggen and other Heatblur elements shipping this year. We're somewhat quiet at the moment as we have our heads down and are working hard, but we hope to share much more soon. Thank you for all of the support, we couldn't do this without you all! FONTE: Heatblur Facebook

Yes, you just have to run DCS_updater.exe repair from command line, but I don't believe it's the problem. Another players solved issue just resetting several times his router, confirming it was a problem somehow on his connectivity. You can give it a try with a quick power off and on of the router If the problem persist, test a repair, and then eventually let me know, I have spare VPN server that I normally use for troubleshooting etc.

Did you have a VPN service that you can try, just to check if using a VPN you're able to see servers or not. It can be a problem related to your ISP, using VPN you'll bypass any ISP block/restriction.

Yes, if you want use mission with the mod on server, you need to install that mod also on server, in respective saved games folder of the server. Coming back to the original question, yes you don't have to install the original core module like the F/A-18C, even if you're going to use it in the .miz file that you run on server. Only terrains.

A mio avviso molto meglio del warthog di TM.