Mr_sukebe

I currently have an issue, where if I’m below roughly 800’, my frame rate goes to single frames. It seems to affect all of my aircraft (haven’t tried them all). My assumption is that below that altitude, the game engine is asking for additional visual data that is swamping my VRAM, as I fly in VR. I’m very much hoping that the negotiation will resolve itself soon.

Agreed, whilst I love DCS WW2, if ED can’t scale, I’d rather they focus on Cold War and similar aircraft. For all that, would be ace to have a 3rd party give us a serious delivery of WW2 goodness using DCS technology and maps.

I vaguely seem to remember an interview with Matt W, probably 3-4 years ago, where he stated that the warbirds had proved to be more profitable than the jets, as their systems were considerably simpler. Which always made me wonder why ED didn’t build a new dev team to churn them out. Maybe ED were expecting 3rd parties to do it?

No useful suggestions unfortunately, but I can add that I was SP last night and conducted an aerial refuel

I’ve recently updated my flight control mappings for the rather lovely EE. Can I simply copy and paste those control files into the relevant folder for the CE and BE (pilot)? Has anyone done it and had issues?

Might be useful to include a price

Cobra for sure. I did think that ED had suggested that it was in their pipeline for some point in the future

If you buy via Steam, around 30% of the purchase price is going to Steam and not ED. I buy all of my modules stand-alone to optimise the money ED gets such that they can keep developing DCS

One question, what would be the selling point? Il2 already offers that, and can also easily be found on sale regularly. The old marketing adage was to provide something that is one of the following; - First to market - cheaper - better

+1 could this be done as a variant, similar to the move from the Ka-50 to the Ka-50 v3. I’d be happy to cough up extra for it

Having most other modules (including all of the existing choppers), I had a very good think about the Chinook and have decided that it’s a no from me. Not that I don’t want a Chinook. However, I’ve come to the conclusion that the time period I enjoy the most is Cold War. So I’d love a Vietnam suitable version, but a glass auto lots just doesn’t appeal.

I was told that using the turbo at low altitude increases parasitic power loss and is not recommended. I’ve never tried to verify it, but I do fly the P47 with that assumption and always take off and land with the turbo boost disengaged

Looking awesome. One question, as I understand it, bomber command primarily attacked at night (at least by the time Lancasters were available in numbers). Will the Lanc being built be viable for night time use? I’ve been using the Oboe script on some of my missions, and that will help for shorter range missions. For longer range work, does the plan include a vague representation of H2, or is the hope that we get illumination bombs for our Mossie?

Did you clean out your FXO and Metashader folders?

It’s called suspension. Not any different to what you have in car, though in an aircraft, it’s having to deal with much more weight and higher shock loads. As it happens, I was out in my Mustang today, and I thought the bounciness was very cool. We’ll get used to it

no, it won’t be as good as DFR, though performance “could” be similar. The point of DFR is that the eye tracking allows the area being looked to be full on visually, with the areas in the periphery to be allocated less “effort”. In practice, it means that wherever your eyes look, it’s consistently good. Fixed foveated rendering allows the use to define the central area of the screen for full on visuals and then for the sides of the screens to be blurry. If your eyes move off centre, it’ll look crap. DFR is a very clever way to save processing power whilst maintaining visuals.

Is the jetseat powering up, ie has the red light on?

On first loading DCS, we’re presented with a hangar. I spotted a mod that changes the default VR view such that it’s just black. The creator suggested that it removed the VRAM requirement to host the hangar. It does “feel” like it helps performance. I’m hoping that this could be added as a tick box option, as it does appear to be a very risk free change to a single file.

Hopefully a quick question, are the electrical systems on the Hind now complete? I was pottering about in one, and couldn't help but notice that most of the voltmeters to the left of the DC power selector (the big knob thing that can be rotated) were reading zero. Is that correct? I've taken a scan at some online videos and Chucks guide, couldn't see anything suggesting that I'd missed anything from my cold start procedure.

I wonder if the rounds include proximity fusing?

What timezone do you guys fly on?

+1, agreed

Agreed on all counts. I’d love to see: - either a removal of auto assign, or at least make it optional via a tickbox It just buggers up my control's - a simple “default” set of key bindings to cover the most common controls, such as pitch, roll, battery etc - that there would be an option to inherit the default bindings to an aircraft, but that it would only affect those controls with bindings in the default set, so wouldn’t override the other existing controls

maybe that could be extended via the North Sea to eastern England. Could have long range bomber strikes into Hamburg and similar

+1, though even if we had one, I’m not sure we have an aircraft to launch it from. If you’re looking to re-enact the (in)famous Exocet attacks by the Argentinian air force, using a “vaguely similar” aircraft to the Super Etendard is the easiest solution. For that, take a scan at the Viggen. The RB15 anti-ship missile seems to have fairly similar range and warhead.