S D

Fine for me mostly, a few patches of stutters but i find taking my rift off for 10/20 seconds let the HMD screen go into standby then put it back on clears it right up. If your desktop mirror shows decent fps, but its feel choppy in game, try the above. Also as mentioned, delete your fxo & metashaders2 folders in saved games.

I can confirm this behaviour. As pointed out it was never really fixed for the F18, only reduced. This is visible when the ship is moving and more exaggerated when the ship is turning. Its fairly easy to trigger this behaviour still in the F18, generally by adding or removing weight/stores/fuel from the aircraft. The aircraft will slide around slightly until the rearm/refuel is complete. This has caused us to have to connect to the cats, before rearming in multiplayer, this seems to stop the sliding. As for the Tomcat, the sliding is much worse than the F18 and very evident even on a ship moving at 8knts with any real kind of wind and sea state conditions. Will just post this here, as it popped up in the Heatblur forum. Clearly shows the sliding and it gets much worse than what is shown here, when the conditions for the ship change.

This is related to the deck sliding, which has been a thing for ages and reported (and apparently fixed) on the F18 forum. It has never been properly fixed. So you know the sliding behaviour increases as the ship speed increases and also when the ship is turning. Its making carrier ops in multiplayer almost impossible right now as you generally crash into something or go overboard due to the sliding, during INS align. To clarify this is not a Heatblur issue, but a core DCS problem that needs a real solution. The sliding starts currently in the Tomcat as soon as you crank the right engine. I'll just repost this here as it shows the problem, it was posted in another bug thread. As you can see the side to side sliding motion, is what is causing collisions. When this behaviour is exaggerated as described above based on ship conditions, it can result in drastic shifts over the deck.

Just to pipe up here, this is now easy to see with the Tomcat, the client in the rio seat, experiences what other clients see. This result is the rio client blacking out. Bottom line i would imagine this might get some more attention, same goes for the apparently fixed deck sliding.

Yup its been down since Tuesday night, i figured it was to get it ready for the release.... guess not.

Hey guys, currently trying to get the new server stuff going. I'm running into an issue where if we log into the GUI remotely, none of the mission files appear when going to the add missions. Accessing the GUI locally, the files show fine, but nothing appears when remote access. Problem solved. Always double check you have the correct port forwarded. :P

When was the last time or have you ever cleared out your fxo and metashaders2 folders?

This is definatly not user connection, but i would agree netcode, as this is not just the Hornet. I have a sneaking suspicion its linked to whatever methods they have used to reduce deck sliding.

Have a look in the docs for CA, is explains what you need to do. In short you click on which vehicle you want to control, then click the little tank looking icon on the top bar.

Yeah, go to the advanced mode of the reply system. There is an attachment option.

No the "bouncing" is much more akin to massive desync. The aircraft shoot up and down in the z axis, below the ground then up in the air. Would also like to add, this might be worth moving to 2.5 bugs, as this happens with other aircraft also. Have experienced the same behaviour with the AV8B.

Can confirm this, aircraft that start on a carrier, CVN/LHA start to bounce as soon as they touch down on an airfield. It appears random as to when it happens, some times client or host can land and there is no bouncing, but take off again and land...the bouncing starts. Will try to get a track if there is not one posted soon.

Do your aircraft have the frequencies preset to channels in the mission editor?

Best place to start when doing controls, is select the HOTAS option on the dropdown. That is pretty much everything the pilot has available at any time on his controls (throttle and stick). All the big binds are on there, there is a weapon select 4 way, that will set your AA Guns or 3 choices of missiles. Get as many of those controls set as you can on your own setup, this is always a good baseline to start from.

This problem still persists, so i'll bump this back up. Obviously not that many people going from the ship to land, but this is an issue that needs addressing.

As mentioned, it definatly is, even on its own. If the site is covered like it should be with shorter range protection, like SA15's, then it becomes and incredibly hard nut to crack, without advanced tactics. Unfortunatly we cant simulate the ECM enviroment which would be the primary inhibiting factor for the site. You either going to have to get clever like Hawk said above, or combine the SEAD strike with say a cruise missile strike, ideally hitting it from different directions. Even then its going to take alot of missiles, to break through the layered defense of the S300 site, if set up as it would be in RL. Again with no jamming/decoys, its just a shooting gallery for them... I would imagine a combination of weapons systems, with something like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADM-160_MALD drawing enough attention to get a few missiles through.

Clients using CA, cannot set move waypoints nor fire weapons. Client is able to control speed, if the server host sets waypoints.

Ofcourse its been broken.... Confirmed, in MP clients cannot give any orders. Server host can give move waypoints and set the speed. You can select targets as the host, but all of the cruise missiles are fired on the first target. Frustrating as my lastest mission relies on cruise missile support *sigh*.

What is the score for ground based EWR? Should these be included along with SAM sites in the script call? i.e should i give my EWR sites the same prefix as the SAMs? Also i noticed on the debug, the sa-2 appears in the text as sa3 goa. I'm assuming this is just because you used the sa3 as a base to build the sa2 class. But just making sure... fantastic job on this Grimes. Really should be implemented into the engine.

The amount of effort required currently to get an enjoyable mp experience, is tbh too much for most. Nevermind people running servers and having to create content to go on these servers. You take that away and deliver on dedicated servers, a stable base and drop in drop out mp campaign and you watch mp explode. Not only for the campaign itself, but for them to create a mp campaign, alot of functions will be have to built into the game. So much of this stuff content creators have been crying out for for so long, aswell as paying more attention to the stability and consistency of mp. To do anything complex is so difficult currently, give people the methods to do this stuff without having to create their own frameworks, to do even simple tasks expected of airborne combat and the content will come quickly.

This... very much this. I haven't heard multiplayer mentioned once and honestly with ED's record, I doubt this dynamic campaign will be multiplayer.

Pipe up... really? Well this is officially me piping up. So is it not many or not any? Because everyone i know that uses VR and DCS gets this now, as do a couple of monitor users and by the looks of all these threads, there are alot more than YOU estimate.

From a couple of pages back...

Its not assigned to some VR function in the GUI controls is it?

Definatly this, also with things like MOOSE or SRS, it would be nice if ED could try to develop more of a relationship with these big community contributors, with the idea of adaptation or intergration (even simple discussion on issues with the game that hinder development of these tools), of these hugely popular and useful systems.