Mr_sukebe

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.

Please take a scan here:

Did you disable the ability of the AI to use WEP? There was a fairly recent post that the devs had added a capability to “restrict use of afterburner” and use it with AI. Bu default, the AI can and will happily use WEP. Adding that restriction will make them somewhat less like UFOs

You're nearly making a case for 128GB of RAM...

Please take a scan here:

"Sometimes" is possible, if highly unlikely. Do remember that the only area really armoured is the tub around the pilot. The other components depend on double and triple redundancy. There's likely to be something in it that will cause a single point of failure and it can take just one very lucky shot.

Pasting the old config files and renaming them with the new controller IDs does work, though it has to be by aircraft aswell. So if you have 30 aircraft and 12 controllers, that's 360 file renames to do.

Quick question on Skynet. Is the logic applied "perfect" or "good". What I mean by that is that in real life, you'd have anywhere between newly trained operators who might be tired, and absolute experts manning SAM sites. Is their a degree of variance in the settings for Skynet that can apply different skill levels or accidents/coincidences into the mix?

How many of these concerns are addressed by Skynet? Apologies, I've never used it, so can't comment on it's capabilities.

You’ve posted in the bugs section, with barely any details of your system, settings or what you’ve tried and have not attached a track file. Can I please suggest having a go at the above

Opening post updated

A key point for me is that I've tried to pull together what feels like a fairly comprehensive set of recommendations on optimisation within DCS. When I see people complaining about performance, the way they post often gives me little confidence that they've actually used the search engine before making a noise, and even when provided with guidance, tried to follow it. For reference, I'm talking about this post: Please, take a scan, it might help.

Do you know anyone who's hung up their VR headset as a result?

Have you tried checking your VRAM usage when opening and closing the F10 map? Last time I checked, opening F10 required circa 1GB of VRAM. Do you have enough spare VRAM to allow that? BTW, when you say that many have hung up their VR headsets, who are you talking about?

+1 on Luc's comments. If I were building a new PC, I'd most likely to for 96GB.