Mr_sukebe

A few thoughts: Simplifying DCS doesn't feel like a prudent approach. I'm assuming that most of us are here because it feels like the closest we'll get to being in a real aircraft FC3 approach? Maybe, but then it's a sideways approach, and with WW2, is simply replicating what's already out there in that good, WW2 sim, or for that matter, the arcade versions. If ED wanted to do that, I still think that the easiest approach would be to just buy the developer of the good WW2 sim and incorporate their aircraft into DCS I do wonder if we're too focused on the technology and should maybe consider more of "the dream". What I mean by that is for example: Car manufacturers love to show us these ads of families taking their Suv into the wild outdoors. The fact that it'll probably spend most of it's life shuttling the kids to school is irrelevant Racing sims, the dream there is to get yourself into the GT academy or a place in a real racing team Want to play in Tier10 tanks? Yeah, this way.... The examples are part of the way that people are sucked in and motivated to "git gud", and none of them talk about the fact that every one of them requires time, effort and similar. For myself, my personal dream that onboarded me into DCS was wanting to learn to fly a helicopter in the most realistic environment possible. I did my research, looked at loads of videos (this is back in 2015), considered the civ options, and ended up buying a Huey. Crashed it a lot (of course), but the dream was what motivated me to keep practising until competent. So maybe more streaming of missions would be a good thing, to raise awareness and possibly display "the dream" that someone might have, whether that is to learn to fly a chopper, get into Warbird fights, or conduct a night strike in an F18. Maybe a simple walkthrough guide on how to become a competent pilot would help? In my case, I'd just read Chickenhawk, and tried to practice in roughly the same order that the author said he'd been taught. At the end of the day, half the battle on learning to fly is basically the same for all aircraft, i.e. awareness of how to navigate, deal with the weather, basics of aerodynamics etc, so why not have a simple step through guide that covers the basics, regardless. Sure, post that, you need to spend the other half learning all about the airframe you're going to fly, and how to actually use it well.

Why report it? I don't believe it's DCS. I think that it's Windows. In addition, we have a very simple workaround. It's worth making people aware.

What’s the polling rate of your mouse? If you have a Logitech similar to mind, try reducing the polling rate to 250 or 125.

+1. Love mine, and that's coming from a Virpil base.

There’s a whole bunch of WW2 German ships available within a mod. Can’t remember who did them, but they look awesome

I have to say that I'm more excited about the Corsair than I am about the Mig29

Better still, bring out the 109F/G versions such that we can keep the late 44 K4 and D9 for Germany defence

Feel free to merge in anything that I captured here: As long as we have a decent guide, I don't really care who the thread owner is.

Have you read any of that thread? If so, did you notice the recommendation about trying DLAA?

With those settings, can’t say I’m surprised. Take a scan here:

Just to add, I’ve recently moved from a Virpil alpha to an alpha prime on my AB9. Both work fine.

that surprises me. Is the Mi8 already Vulkan compatible? I rather assumed that part of the reason for the KA50 and F5 updates (both of which are great) was as to ensure they’d work with Vulkan. With the age of the Mi8, I assumed that it and probably the Huey would be due an overhaul. I was hoping so, as I’d love to see both enhanced.

Whenever you attempt to use a mission, if it has a mod that the player doesn't have installed, it'll tell you. You really think that it wouldn't be possible to filter based upon that? Apologies, but you're coming across as argumentative just because you can be. To add to the above. If you see no value for this for yourself. That's cool, and I appreciate you saying so. However, to then continue to state that it's of no value to someone else is simply ridiculous. Clearly, I wouldn't raise the suggestion if at least I didn't see value for it. As part of raising this suggestion here is to judge feedback from fellow players to see whether others value it. So yes, please DO post to say that you it's not of value to you personally, that is useful for the thread. Don't however extend that in a presumptuous manner to people that you don't know.

Sharpe> you seem to have not read my comment that the use of the suggestion should be OPTIONAL for players to choose whether or not to use it.

A definite “area of opportunity” that DCS has in the multiplayer realm is consistency of mods. There are some ace mods out there, but if a player tries to join a server and the player doesn’t have a mod that’s needed to join, all they get is a name of the missing mod. personally, I’d love to have: - a central repository for mods, that would host all mods that are needed to join a server, ie aircraft, ships, statics etc. To exclude skins, which have large texture volumes - the option for the mission hosting server (eg myself) to auto upload to the central repository - when a player attempts to join a server that needs a mod they don’t have, they’re given the option to download from the central repository. Sure, might take a couple of mins, but as we’re excluding larger elements like skins, hopefully the volumes won’t be too onorous

Interesting question, things that spring to mind that I use: - Simshaker - Quad views / DFR - Emptt VR hangar - a host of excellent skins - scripts, MIST,CTLD and CSAR Now, I tend to avoid non core mod aircraft, ships and similar. They’re often brilliant, however if I want to host a mission for someone to join, they’d need to have the same mod, which can be a pain. my thoughts are that this is easily the most helpful game forum that I’m a member of and there’s some very talented people amongst our community who are very helpful

Interesting test, thanks for posting. My own experiences suggest that DCS appears to be primarily use 4 cores. My assumption is that ED configured MT to work with lower spec CPUs aswell as 8 core units. I wonder if CPU core usage is conducted by the application or Windows? Have to say that I don’t know, though I’m guessing it’s windows. ref the stutters, no idea why that would be. Is it windows switching the used cores and possibly resulting in a time delay??

and the Meteor. It was already flying in squadrons in 44', though initially held back from flying over enemy territory. By late 45', there might have been a decent amount of them, and with no Germany to deal there's a good chance of them seeing action in the east. It's an interesting point that the Meteor was faster than the Shooting Star (IIRC), and it's possible that the US might have bought quite a few Meteors, just as they later bought Canberras.

As I understand it, Mosquito’s were sent to India for use in the Burma campaign. I don’t believe that the RAF had any involvement in the Marianas. The potential “what if” that springs to mind would have been if the Japanese had not surrendered, even more so if the Soviets had not invaded Manchuria. As we know, if the Japanese hadn’t surrendered, the plan was to invade Kyushu first in late 1945’ and the mainland in 1946. By then, the Royal Navy Pacific fleet would have been more fleshed out and as I understand it, the intent was to also have British troops during the invasion. “If” that had happened, it’s possible that Mossies might have deployed out.

DCS is now multi core. From what I’ve seen, it seems to primarily be using 4 cores. The 13 and 14 series both suffer from potential degradation issues. I’ve not looked into the details as I didn’t buy one. The AMD 7800x3d and then 9800x3d have pretty much consistently been shown in benchmarks to be a little faster than the Intels, a little cheaper and use less power. The only concern I’ve seen is with the use of memory. Seems that AMD have still to fully resolve their memory management, meaning that it you want reliability, only buy a single pair of RAM. Right now, the largest fast DDR5 module that can be bought is 48GB. 64GB will currently happily run DCS. If however I was building a new rig, I’d be inclined to go for 96GB for at least a little future proofing.

As of right now, the optimum CPU is an AMD9800x3d.

Right now: 9800x3d 5090 96GB RAM NVME5 SSD

I've now been a Virpil user for a number of years and currently use a CM3 Throttle, couple of their panels, a Hawk collective and a T50 base with a Virpil Alpha. The T50 base has been superseded with an FFB base, and it felt time to grab myself an Alpha Prime, so I did. Thought that some might be interested in my view on the differences. For ref, I've also used a Mongoose CM(1) grip, TM A10 and F18 grips. So, the Alpha Prime, when compared to a standard Virpil Alpha: The body is heavier, cold and has a grippy texture to the metal. It feels utterly solid The hats on the various 4/8 way switches have been changed and improved with newer, and IMO better versions that I find a little more ergonomic to use The scroll/encoder wheel seems to have been updated, such that instead of 3 physical clicks up or down to result in a button press, it's just one. That was always some that annoyed me about the Alpha The trigger button has a less sticky feel to it I think that the rest on the side has been repositioned a little and works a little better for me The flip up trigger guard now registers up and folded as separate button presses, which is a good thing I have discovered a couple of issues, which is probably a result of running it mounted on my Moza AB9 base: The button mappings have moved a little. Might not sound that big a deal, but it has meant a need to remap every button on the grip for every aircraft that I have in DCS. Let's just say that it was rather time consuming... Two of the 4 way switches (the TMS and DMS hats in an A10) register a press to the central button on releasing any of the axis buttons. As the Moza software doesn't allow remapping or changes to logic, my only solution was to not map those two central press buttons. So overall, I've lost a single button. Not a big deal, but it's there Is the Prime better than the Alpha? Yes, it is (IMO), I love the feel of it, it's very tactile. Is it worth the money for the upgrade? Probably not. The improvement is distinctly marginal as I already really liked the Alpha. Do I feel short changed? No. I prefer the Prime and even though the enhancements are pretty marginal, they're there, and frankly, I've had so much use and enjoyment from using the Virpil gear that I've been through, that I definitely don't begrudge the cost.

If anyone has experience with both the new NLR Pro and a Jetseat, please do advise.

Can we call it a matter of opinion. My experiences with DLAA vs MSAA, were that I much preferred DLAA. I've no idea how DLAA and DLSS are getting mixed up here. DLSS is the overall technology and most commonly refers to the upsampling capability. DLAA provides Anti-aliasing and doesn't upsample.