Patersonski

I completed Dixmude recently and found the same thing - 2 or 3 missions where you're flying towards a FARP with a lot of objects and the frames drop into the single digits. This sounds dumb but my solution was to 'not look at it'. Don't fly direct to a busy FARP, but to a point near it so that all the objects are not on your screen on approach, then pivot over at the end. Also, when you're landing, face the side of the FARP with the fewest objects (least bad frames). I don't remember this issue cropping up after mission 10 so if you can get through this one you'll probably be OK. Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

Thanks Cichlidfan. I obviously had no idea about the Osprey either, although these aircraft were being used to transport Trump for NY to NJ, rather than to and from the White House, which may have influenced the escort. Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

Does Marine One count? If so my closest personal encounter was on my lunch break today. I work in downtown Manhattan near the East River, and when the weather's nice I generally have lunch by the water. There's a helipad nearby that ferries tourists around the island, but for some reason it was empty today. I thought that was odd as I like to watch the choppers takeoff and land. I'm always amazed that not a single one, yet, has hit VRS, got sucked into the ground, and exploded. After a few hours in the DCS Huey I thought that was the only way to get down. Anyway, my curiosity was short lived because at that moment there was a loud WUMP WUMP WUMP above me and I see a V-22 Osprey coming in. Not something you see in Manhattan every day (although I did see F-15s on 911). It proceeds to land (sorry, juggling my rice pudding and couldn't get a shot of it in flight), and then a second one comes in and does the same thing. They were a lot bigger, and LOUDER, than I expected. At this point I'm deep in WTF-ville, but the answer soon materialized when the President's chopper, Marine One, appeared and landed next to them. Then an identical Marine One (a decoy I guess) followed it in a couple of minutes later. Trump had been in town for a couple of days and I was seeing his ride out of there (i.e. his evacuation crew after his awful comments on Charlottesville the prior evening.) I've attached some photos. The first is Marine One on approach, with the top of the Brooklyn Bridge behind it. The second is a zoom of the chopper almost overhead. Then I show it going in to land with the two V-22's on the pad, and finally all four shut down. Just another day at the office.

Good one! Add it to the list ED.

Bingo! A great example of 'Project E.' Agree. The cost of the Rift during sales is roughly the same as my graphics card, which I think is an acceptable benchmark for 'reasonableness'. Plus the DCS user base are hardware junkies anyway. VR adoption in this community may be faster than most people, including ED, expect.

Interesting stuff guys but not quite what I'm looking for. If you're the ED program manager and your 'to do' list in a 2d environment is projects A, B, C, and D, then there's a rapid shift to VR and your priorities change to projects A, C, E, and F. What's E and F? For example, DCS graphics are superior to what the headsets can currently display (put foveated rendering aside for the moment), so will the rise of VR mean that ED can pause development on further graphical fidelity and deploy those resources into something else? More frames? More maps? Some sort of change to optimization that suits VR better than 2D?

Like many of you I'm a recent VR convert. While I was initially a little shocked by how bad the graphics were in VR (at 1.5 PD), when I tried to go back to flat screens I realized the depth perception was just too hard to give up so I've resigned myself to 1990s graphics in a box strapped to my head. Clearly there's an ongoing shift in the DCS user base as others go through the same experience. The vast majority of us still use flat screens (in PvP you don't really have a choice) but my question is this: What are the development ramifications if that user base rapidly shifts to the point where VR represents the majority of players? In three or four years with VR Gen 2 I'd argue that's certainly a possibility, at least among the consistent player base. Put another way, if you were in ED's shoes how would your development priorities change if most of your customers suddenly cared much more about VR than 2D? e.g. Things like deferred shading is a current priority, but would they have done it in a predominantly VR environment? Where would those resources have been deployed instead? I don't know much about software development and would be interested in other's views.

Maybe this has been mentioned but, additionally, Normandy is not yet on Steam. The average Steam user is younger and more comfortable with multiplayer, as opposed to the older immersion focused guys. So there's an opportunity to boost numbers materially when Normandy ultimately hits Steam. Between now and then the Steam community will also grow relative to the non-Steam group given the recent change in key transfer policy starting with the Mirage. In other words Steam will sell a LOT of Spitfires and they'll all be ready to roll when Normandy hits. The trick will be to have the product developed enough by that point to give them something to do and a reason to stick around once the novelty wears off, which leads back to Phil's great points on missions. Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

The Mirage basically forces you to choose between the Steam and non Steam clients. If your existing modules are non Steam the right move is to wait for an E-Shop sale. Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

If you buy the Mirage on Steam it will only work on the Steam client. If you buy any other module on Steam they will work on both the Steam and non Steam clients. If you buy non Steam modules direct from ED they will not work on the Steam client. All future modules released on Steam will be like the Mirage and only work on Steam. Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

rrohde: "...I was more concerned about them looking at the .ru extension of the forum website... no comments there?" ^^ This is exactly what I was thinking. You work for Lockheed yet HR was relieved that rather than googling personal health issues you were merely logging into a Moscow-based Russian website that specializes in and collects military aircraft performance data. That's the bit I find funny. PS. OMG RyboPops I just read your signature. No evidence of ED there!

I don't know what the issue is but in the user files download section there's a single player mission for Nevada that is basically a shoot-on-the-move tutorial. Maybe that or its associated YouTube video will help you identify the problem Sent from my ASUS_Z01FD using Tapatalk

Sure thing. My temps on that downtown Vegas with everything on high scenario are 49-54C. Here's my setup: Core i7-5820K 3.3GHz 6-Core Processor @ 3.9. Noctua - NH-U9S 46.4 CFM CPU Cooler Rosewill - Legacy QT01-S ATX Mid Tower Case Rosewill - RFA-120-K 74.5 CFM 120mm Fan x 3. Two front, 1 back. Asus - X99-PRO/USB 3.1 ATX LGA2011-3 Motherboard Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR4-2400 Memory Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive PC Power & Cooling - Silencer MK III 600W ATX Power Supply Windows 10 64-bit Also as an experiment switched out the Gazelle for the Mustang and the fps was 90+.

Happy to help. I have a 27" monitor set at 1920x1200. I don't have the A-10C but I jumped in the Gazelle on 2.05 (not 2.1) and flew through downtown Las Vegas a few times averaging 80 FPS, and it generally stays within 75-85. This is with everything on High. If I take textures from High to Low or take civilian traffic from High to Low it barely makes a difference. I've attached a screen shot of my exact setting below.

I have Nevada/2.0 and am waiting for a couple more weeks of bug fixes before I download Normandy, but I'm reading on these forums that 1.5 skins need to be updated for 2.1. Should I also assume skins made for 2.1 going forward will not work properly in 1.5? At the moment I essentially have a single liveries folder (a symbolic link in 2.0 references the 1.5 folder), which works very well, but going forward will I now need separate 1.5 and 2.1 folders because the skins will be incompatible? Thx

I have this exact GPU, running on a Asus X99-PRO/USB 3.1 ATX LGA2011-3 Motherboard with an i7-5820. I'm no PC expert so all I can really say is that its build quality feels high, it was plug and play, and it's run perfectly since day one, which was 9 months ago. It replaced a GTX 770 with predictably a big performance boost. The PC it's in is the one I use for DCS. If there's some sort of (simple) benchmarking software or DCS scenario you want me to run and report back on its performance I'm happy to. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No, Top Gun was a freak thing that captured lighting in a bottle at the time. Tom Cruise in his prime, great supporting cast, soundtrack, and of course the F-14 all coalesced perfectly. That sort of thing is very rare. Also remember that Top Gun came out during the cold war. That backdrop gave the movie a little gravitas that you may not appreciate watching it now, and there's no "evil empire" (with apologies to our Russian friends) comparable in a modern remake.

Coincidentally I'm also on mission 5, but just wanted to jump on and say - GREAT PDF! More seriously, I found myself speeding across the ocean the other night, under 10m, with night vision on and thought that was freakin cool; so thank you! Looking forward to what you come up with for the L and the Mistral at some point. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

^^ Better yet set up a symbolic link (google if unfamiliar) in 2.0 pointing to the input folder in 1.5. That way no matter which version you're using your inputs will be maintained and updated in the one place. You can do the same thing with liveries.

When you're looking at your kneeboard map, hit RCtrl + K (Kneeboard Current Position Mark Point), or even better map it to your HOTAS (you'll use it a lot). It shows your exact position and directional heading.

Exactly right. From a customer standpoint there should be more flexibility (keys transfer in both directions), not less (now keys don't transfer at all). Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't understand the logic for this. I read somewhere that a module bought direct from ED standalone will put more money in their pocket because there's no Valve cut. A lot of people (most?) discover DCS on Steam, invest in a few modules, but then ultimately migrate to the standalone version (delivering higher quality revenues). With this change the keys won't transfer, so nor will the customers, who will not want to write off their Steam module investments. End result is more Steam users relative to standalone and lower quality revenues. They had it exactly right before this change - a one way transfer of keys from Steam to standalone. What am I missing? Could this be telegraphing an exclusive move to Steam at a later date?

I guess this was a no-brainer, but if anyone wants to change the music on the Bell 47 opening screen and mission editor to the MASH theme, here you go: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lw1xkainc7j2um0/AAD1oxZd9hIEoGwbp8FehiG-a?dl=0

Worked fine for me, although posh Meatboy douchebag then stole all my kills and I came back with a zero.

I bought one last year. Overpriced, buttons feel cheap, and the stick squeaks. Don't go there. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk