MikeMikeJuliet

Takes a while to get the TrackIR curves where you want them, but other than that, its much more useful. With triple monitors you still need to use a hatswitch or equivalent to look around at times, particularly up and down... or to check you six.

Something else on turbulece is, that while it is dependent on windspeed in DCS, it should not be so. Turbulence can be caused by convections, which don't require wind at all. DCS also lacks the ability to control turbulence layers, since they hardly concur everywhere at the same time.

As said... probability is that updates happen on fridays... and the 26th is the last friday this month. Hence I expect the 26th earliest. Might come later.

Small streams make up a large river in the end. And this is a simulation, no? Therefore a move toward certain level of pictorial realism is in order. That might also have unexpected gameplay effects. I for one believe this might have a certain effect in dogfights with WWII aircraft, since objects that are very bright tend to look larger/closer by than dark objects. That, in theory, might misplace a shot in just the right circumstances. Yes, yes, it is a stretch. But, again, it's the small things...

Stated right here by Wags himself: if the timestamp doesn't work, try this: and forward to 10:23 So yes, new explosions, new smoke effects and, eventually, new clouds are on the way.

As you said, it enhances gameplay if the PBR reflections make the view distances more realistic. And yes, the distances are more about LOD issues and the engines rendering distance... but if applied to all LOD:s, it should affect the visibility of different objects. Some may show up better, while others may disappear into ground clutter for example.

You are one cheeky Threadnomancer, Aginor. Though I did see the Mudspike early access look at the Normandy. I was very impressed with a few of the screenshots on the B-17s and the Sabres, as those showed new lighting and PBR the best. Go check it... and look at them shiny shiny metal fuselages... and the sun glare off of the propeller on the bombers... Not every aspect promised earlier will make it to the 2.5 initially, as stated by ED, but what we see already shows progress is ongoing.

Which is exactly why I keep telling weather is important, but not a priority-1 -issue... Naturally all bugs and more significant gameplay/simulation features (like the ATC) precede this! I mean, you can say "yes" to an idea without meaning that you want it before anything else...

On a side note. I do believe people (me included) come on these forums to post criticism, improvement ideas and wishes, not because we think DCS is a piece of ****, but because it is dear to us and we want to do something to make it better. I apologize if I've worded my posts too strongly. On the whole subject of weather... it adds so much to the experience of flying some may not even believe. A proper flight model is just half of it. It is almost like at the moment we have a brilliant FPS with a great gun... awesome it handles great, it's powerful and it looks terrific... but the sounds and the smoke on the barrel looks like stock assets from 2003... Sorry, a terrible analogy but it had to be done...

Exactly my point of "most of us wouldn't notice if it was faked or not as long as it is done well". No point in simulating every little detail, but as it stands DCS simulates almost nothing. It would not require a supercomputer to have a system that would generate different kinds of turbulence in different kinds of clouds for example. It's not Real, but it Feels Realistic. Quute frankly I think it is impossible to go full realism on weather in decades, if not centuries... But we could imitate it convincingly enough for it to be called realistic. No reason to go all "butterfly effect" -level of calculations here. Plus, such a complex model would not be appreciated by the audience, since we couldn't tell if a bump in the air was made by a random generator, or a super complex algorithm. Just as long as the random generator is made well, and it applies turbulence approximately where it might actually happen. Games and simulators are always going to be about smoke and mirrors. Reality is way too complex to model on a PC.

Lol, I'm sorry. The whole rant was more aimed toward cichlidfan and others who "appear" to counter every desire for a more realistic weather model as "not part of a combat sim". I should have specified my intent more. I thought it was apparent of the text itself. Didn't mean to slap you :D

Firstly... there are so many threads about weather in the forums that I can't believe people don't find them. Aaanyway. I do aknowledge the fact that there are A LOT of things to be fixed and improved in DCS that take precedence over the weather modeling. Thag said, I find it very odd that people would not have all possible weather effects modeled into the game. They might be concerned of the performance cost, which is a valid concern, but to dismiss weather phenomenon as "civilian" features is ignorant. As I've said time and again, weather DOES affect the combat simulation and experience. What these people don't realise, is that vibrations, bumps, noises and rumbles have an effect in a real cockpit. It might not be a lot, but try to read your instruments as efficiently in very bumpy weather. Managing switches in the cockpit is slightly slower if you need to keep your hand steady when the aircraft is thrown around in convective turbulence. Turbulent air might just give you the last push to stall when you desperately don't want it in scissors at max AOA. Adverse weather effects might slightly affect missile performance and radar. You can't bloody see in poor weather... And please, don't try to tell me landing and take-off are not part of a combat flight sim. You can't really call your mission a grand success if you crash your plane at the last second because you were too lazy to land it properly in gusty winds... I say it again, weather is NOT the greatest priority and the most critical issue, but don't dismiss it because it says "combat" on the tin. Besides, all these micro scale weather phenomena affect the control feel of all aircraft, and I do see A LOT of concern on these forums toward accurate flight modelling. Weather is a part of aerodynamics, which is key to accurate flight modeling and proper feel on any aircraft. And I bet most of us here wouldn't have a clue if ED faked these effects if they are done well... because most people here have never touched any of the aircraft presented in the sim. Those that have can are welcomed to tell me to go f myself because of this rant. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet PS. sorry for any typos, I'm on a phone

The Vive controllers have been showing virtual hands for a while now, so its not surprising the Oculus Touch controllers were integrated. Now I just hope for proper VR gloves that you can use with your HOTAS as well... since now you need to grab the controller to do anything and then leave the hand rolling around the cockpit as you grab your hotas again... and that is UN-immersive

Talk about a resurrection of a thread! But as nothing other than "it is being worked on" is announced, all we can say are "we wish for this and for that"... We have no idea how complex or simple ED is going to recreate the ATC, and we don't know its date either. Might not even be at the initial 2.5 versions. They might be pushing it for post-merge updates.

Small streams make up a large river... I don't expect to see this addressed in the near future, but it would be nice at one point in time.

At least the reflections are getting an overhaul. I believe it was on Mudspike on the early look at the Normandy map in 2.1. version. Found it! In the latter half of the article, a few screenshots and a brief mention on the subject http://www.mudspike.com/preview-of-dcs-normandy-1944-and-wwii-assets-pack/ Not quite on the lights yet, but it shows promise, eh

Disregarding the latest piece of news, ED has ESTIMATED Normandy release by the end of May. That is, I expect it to be released on the 26th of May earliest. Optimism is all OK, though I've rarely seen such things actually be fullfilled. The positive surprises are those we are not given prior info on... those that we do know of... well.

Interesting find. That has got to be unintentional.

Indeed. And it seems that the Merge requires a lot more work to complete than us customers or even ED ever anticipated.

Fair enough.

Whoa! A conflict on the internet! :D

We gotta remember that such DISadvantages are part of any aircraft as much as advantages in turn radius, speed or armament. I know this is chit-chat and more akin to lighthearted babble than a super serious thread... but still, I wonder why some folks want to remove all the obstacles from the cockpit (and smudges from the canopy)... such problems are a part of the aircraft one chooses to fly. A cockpit with all its flaws is just as much a part of the aircraft as any other aspect. You can have the ultimate super fighter on your hands, but it doesn”t fare well if you can't see out of it. Something I feel couch-professors and know-it-alls forget That said, I do enjoy taxiing around with the canopy open :D

That fould be feasible. And such mouse-over features shouldn't be difficult to implement from a technical standpoint. I wonder if it were possible to have the briefing weather update itself periodically during dynamic weather... that is, so long as we can't have an in-game ATIS working.

Let's be real, Shagrat. The gui for the dynamic weather could be way more decriptive. That is why real pilots use things like SWC:s so they can see the big picture at a glance. It doesn't have to show the exact position of each cloud, but a general idea weither or not you should expect a autumn storm or a sunny calm breeze. No disrespect intended. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

A little side tangent, gents. First off, the minimum cloud base is 1000ft, right? Regardless, some airfields are on sea level. Telling someone to "just use an airfield that is higher up so you can have the clouds lower" seems like trying to evade the whole subject. Wha IS an easy fix, is to allow the cloud base limit to go higher and lower. Those are just arbitrary limiting numbers. The visibility issue is tricky, yes. And something that unfortunately requires either a "x-visibility everywhere" or a proper dynamic weather system. DCS has always been poor in using multiple cpu-cores for the reason of complexity and integration level of its components. That said, the one thing that could be dedicated to a separate core is the dynamic weather, since that data wouldn't have to be synchronised with the aerodynamic similation on the go, but rather at longer intervals (the issue of keeping cpu cores synchronized is the issue why multi-cpu may indeed be slower that a single-cpu solution). An easy fix, no. But one that might be feasible. That said I do believe this would require a full rework of the whole weather system. On real life topics: It is not that rare to see a cloud base of, say, 100-500ft AGL and still have virtually unrestricted visibility below them. Low cloud does not mean it is foggy. Many times quite the opposite. On tve importance of clouds... Clouds and weather ARE an important tactical and technical aspect in air combat. Do not dismiss it so haphazardly. Clouds restrict and or allow CAS. Clouds are the perfect cover against IR and Imaging seekerheads. Clouds are a handy escape route in dogfights. High water concentration in clouds reduce radar detection ranges slightly. Contrails up high reveal you to your enemies (and in is also not uncommon to have no contrails at all). Humid summer weather can restrict detection by a large amount in low altitudes, even though visibility is tecnically very good... And how about poor weather in the home base... it is quite important to know which airfield is your divert airfield, since that determines your bingo fuel, which limits your playtime which might effect the whole operation. Weather Is important because aircraft FLY in weather. People who only enjoy the Arizona all-year-round CAVOK need to remember that on other parts of the world (Caucasus for example) have poor weather. A proper weather system is not the most important thing to have in DCS, but I'd be hard pressed to dismiss it as a "civilian sim" feature. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet