Mr_sukebe

No, tell me it’s not true!!

Assuming that ED have already decided to do Vietnam and we know have Afghanistan in the works, then maybe: - Iran/Iraq - southern Japan / Okinawa - the Med, taking in southern Italy, Libya, Malta, Sicily

Excellent news. The F1 is one of my fav modules. Just based upon my experience of that, I'll probably end up buying the F104.

I thought that it would be worth mentioning this. Just been on a fairly lengthy mission in VR with the F15E on the Syria map. Flew the mission with no issue. Parked up, closed the aircraft down and exited the mission. At this point the screen stalls and hangs. The only way to resolve was to go to task manager and kill DCS. What I thought was interesting was the reported memory usage. According the Windows Task Manager (WTM), with the stalled DCS.exe still running, the total RAM usage was 25GB. After killing it, it dropped to 6.1GB, i.e. a 19GB drop. Why that stood out was that in Process tab of WTM, DCS.exe was showing as using just over 8GB, i.e. a discrepancy of over 10GB. Any idea why this would be any different and do others see the same? dcs.log

Makes sense. Good luck! I'm a Brit, so VERY much in favour of getting an EEL.

Just incase you were unaware, Razbam do plan to release an EE Lightning at some point, though we've no idea when that will actually be.

I'm using an 8 core 9700k. The IPC of the 7800 is probably 30-50% better. Sure, that would be a decent upgrade, but only if I wasn't more bottlenecked by my GPU (3080ti), as I play in VR. Take that into account, and I'd probably have negligible benefit in DCS. Once we have Vulkan and DLSS, that might of course change.

Right now, I’d buy a 7800x3d. I’m rather unimpressed with both AMD and Intel that they’ve yet to offer a full on 16 core or above processor. Sure, Intels 13900 has lots of cores, but it still has 8 performance cores and then a few pants ones. With the 7950, you get 16 cores, but on 2 CCDs, which have different fast RAM and don’t talk to each other very well, meaning that it’s also really a 8 “performance” core CPU. As we now have MT, I’m waiting now for the next step change when we can have 16 or more performance cores.

I agree with the OP. You have a think about the prices charged and I do wonder how they do it for the price, particularly so when compared to some other software out there.

Have you tried taking the cold start nice and easy, i.e. - Power on / turn on the engine - turn on the GM first and give it 2 mins to complete - initiate alignment once the GM is finished. Wait until the count reaches 999 AND the Green light pops on next to the amber light - once completed on the above, arm up and turn on the radar, not before I've just tested the above again on Sinai. Works for me. If you still have an issue, please attach a log file for ED to check.

As already stated, DCS is not about balance, which is the remit of arcade games. DCS is about accuracy to whatever is currently possible. If it happens that this results in an imbalance, then that's just tough. That's not any different to most historical wars, e.g. either of the Gulf Wars, Vietnam etc. Within say WW2 we had great examples within the Pacific theatre. At the start the Zero was easily the best aircraft as it was as fast as it's enemies and could also outmanoeuvre them. By 44', the Zero didn't really improve much. Whilst the Hellcat and Corsair couldn't outmanoeuvre a Zero, they were significantly faster, and with the use of appropriate tactics, ie. boom and zoom, ripped them to pieces. I don't believe that the Zero was ever really on "equal" terms with any aircraft that it faced.

Sorry, but that’s not correct. For lower calibre units, even without wind, there will be the ballistic trajectory of the round. At say 400m, that might not be a big deal, but if you’re trying to shoot at an aircraft that might be a half a mile or a mile away, it becomes much more important. The larger calibre weapons are single shot, and without proximity fuses, far less effective

No, mine kept stalling fairly early into alignment, resulting in it not correctly aligning and setting off the associated red warning light. I tried it again a little while ago on Sinai in both single player and multiplayer. Worked fine. So I’ve no idea if there was just something weird going on, or whether the recent patch included a fix. Either way, seemingly all good now, which was great, as I’m really enjoying the F1. I think it’s a great combination of complex and antiquated. Sure, it’s not ever going to be as effective as an F16, but I find it so immersive to fly and incredibly characterful. An amazing job for a new 3rd party creator.

I’d like the throttle

I’m not a fan of connecting power hungry peripherals directly to my PC motherboard. I’m currently using 3 Anker powered USB hubs. I also replaced the stock USB cable with a high quality USB 3 unit. For comfort, I use these: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Zeltauto-Management-Reusable-Fastening-Organizer/dp/B07K7DGKHN/ref=asc_df_B07K7DGKHN/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=309904160813&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3469704349076634024&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1007135&hvtargid=pla-663954981355&psc=1 I found the QP to be terribly uncomfortable stock. The above are really cheap and are stretchable bungee straps. I’ve got 3 on my headset going side to side. Made a huge difference

It appears that we might have an issue with F1EE alignment on the Sinai map. Anyone else got the same?

If you create your own missions and you’re using a map with few default TACANs, it is possible to add a TACAN beacon as a unit. If you put that vaguely near the front line or on the way to the target, it can be used as a reference point.

Personally I’ve taken the slightly more hardcore approach, and have happed the controls that disengages the fuel flow for the afterburners. It’s a switch to the right of the throttle and has a cover. So for normal flight, I switch off the option to engage the afterburners and use it only on take off and combat

Chances are that most are unaware that we now have settings to avoid “some” of the areas of opportunity. Encourage the server owner to investigate the use of min altitudes for big Flak units

Are you mistaking CPUs for GPUs? I found that MT has very much made my GPU the bottleneck in VR. I’m hoping the Vulkan and being able to use DLAA instead of MSAA Will both help performance

Wow, that’s cool. Does it have any weapons or defensive capabilities?

what’s more realistic? From what I’ve read most small arms fire and non radar/computer guided AA has been pretty much ineffective against aircraft unless there’s lots of it. For myself, my intent is to: - Set a min altitude for big Flak units, to reflect that they weren’t used against low flying aircraft - disable AA fire for most armoured units (eg tanks, APCs). That will prevent T55s sniping me at 2-3km away with their main gun - have dedicated smaller AA fully enabled, eg boffors, 20mm units, dedicated smaller calibre units such as Shilkas Whilst it increases the complexity of mission design and build, I believe that it better reflects what I’ve read over the years. Whether you choose to use it is your concern.

Update: Just tested the settings. i.e. within Advanced Waypoint/Options/Restrict Targets/ then chose the option of Engage Ground Unit Only. With that enabled, I was able to fly my Huey right up to a BMP3 and park next to it without being shot at. Without that setting enabled, I was being sniped by of all things the 30mm cannon. On checking, the BMP was unable to hit the Huey with their machine gun (sorry, not sure what it is). However, flew it twice and all of the hits and damage were from the 30mm cannon. What would be cool would be if we could apply the setting of Engage Ground Unit only by weapon, e.g. such that we could enable it for the 30mm cannon, but leave the machine gun free to fire. I'm guessing that would require significantly more effort. On a positive note, we have a partial workaround that does work. Excellent.

Good shout ref the ME options to limit target type. I’ll take a scan later. As feedback to ED, can I suggest that these changes are mentioned in one of the upcoming weekly updates. Clearly Shargat and myself were unaware of the new capabilities which have been added at some point and either they weren’t in the Change Log notes are we’ve missed them. The key point being that we’re probably not alone in being frustrated with this game logic for a long time, and not everyone is going to spot and read this thread. On top of that, sing the praises of your dev team that we now appear to have a fix.

It’s very easy to setup, give it a try