SW0RDF15H
-
Posts
71 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SW0RDF15H
-
-
It's my understanding the higher the resolution, the harder to see. A one pixel aircraft on my 27'' screen is four times the size of a one pixel aircraft on YOUR 27'' screen. There's a limit to what anybody can do about the reality we're chasing pixels.
And what a real pilot can see is irrelevant in this context, as mentioned above. Even if that were not the case, you know how everything looks smaller in games when they're actually to scale (Arma, DCS, etc)? That's because of the narrow field of fov on a small screen directly in front of you. You're literally watching people (yourself) fly jets on a TV in front of you. Your sense of scale and perspective is totally f'ed up as a result, as you would expect.
That said, while difficult, I've managed to track my wingman after breaking to engage ground targets, and kept close enough track of him that when he broke off I followed him out of the AO. It's difficult, but far from impossible.
Conversely, I used to fly with a guy in War Thunder years ago that would routinely lose track of me while in close formation, like 'Ok, I'm turning right.'' two seconds later he's like 'I lost you' @@
In this context, the WHAT and HOW you're looking matter a lot.
First, make use of the tools at your disposal. Zoom needs to be readily accessible on the fly. Some people don't like that because ''MUH IMMERZION'', irrelevant, as already established this ain't real life and we're operating with handicaps that don't exist in RL. Additionally, objects have render cutoff ranges, they have to or the game would be unplayable, as a result you can zoom and see objects that are theoretically within visual but outside render. Lastly zooming turns one pixel into several, increasing odds of you noticing it. Choosing to disregard this tool is a personal choice, but akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face, zoom is unrealistic but so are the view ranges. Do you want to be blind and unrealistic, or see the other guy and be unrealistic? There is no solution that is not ALSO unrealistic.
Secondly, most people move their eyes around too much. You're searching for a pixel in a pixel stack, let your eyes linger and watch for traces of movement or out of place colors or distortions. Try to keep track of your orientation as well so you know which directions you should be watching in first place so you don't waste time diligently searching for stuff that isn't there.
The only solution to this is 220' FoV, 10k+ headsets, then you'll have proper scale and visual fidelity. Until then, there is no perfect solution, they all are flawed with varying levels of suckitude.
Fantastic response!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Yep! I'm getting constant crashes on my server when trying to host a public multiplayer game (RED FLAG ONLINE).
It's so bad that I've given up trying for now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Currently you do not have control over where an AI group spawns on an airbase. Its been reported as a bug for some time.
Okay, thank you.
-
EDIT: Turns out I missed the 'true' boolean from the respawn function. Units will now respawn on the ground as expected...
But this creates a new issue. The AI units refuse to respawn in their original positions. They seem to shift to seemingly random parking spots. This strikes me as a bug also. Control over the AI in the parking position is pretty important for missions development.
Anyone able to shed some light on this?
-
After hours of testing, it seems safe to conclude that the mist.respawnGroup function no longer works as intended. If your 'respawnable' aircraft units are placed on the airfield or runway, when they do respawn, they do so in mid-air over the position that they were placed in.
No matter what I try and do, nothing will force them to respawn on the airfield. This is particularly frustrating as it means a lot of the missions I've made will not work properly either, as the respawn function is very popular and most of us mission designers use it a lot.
Example .miz can be found here: https://we.tl/CrdnVvVONx
(AI units will start on airfield and be destroyed after 5 seconds, then respawn at 10 seconds in. And you'll notice they're already flying over point when they do respawn).
The function was working fine just a few months ago when I released my last mission to the community. So is this a bug in the latest version of 2.1?
-
Hi, the autopilot and Gau-8 auto-stabilization bugs happen with other servers I played. In single player custom mission there is no problem but in multi players the "bug" occures.
For the liverie bug here are two pictures : the 1 with a F16c usaf two tone grey camo in custom mission (all variants of usaf grey camo are the same with no bug) - and the 2 with a F16c with bugs in your mission (bugs between gun port/canopy - wings/fuselage)
Thanks very much for pointing those out. I have no idea why there are bugs with the F16s on my mission. If anyone knows what's causing this, please do let me know.
-
Hi Swordf15h, nice red flag server, not many players yet....
I like playing yours F15c training missions to.
On your server does it need to have some mods or skin mods ? For exemple the f16 aggressors have for some the lizzard flanker camo (light sand, nato Brown, dark green) and others a strange grey camo (two tone grey usaf but with strange bugs) : does it mean we need a mod skin like agressor camos for f16 blk52 (with arctic aggressor, blue flanker and others)
Other thing with A10A (I only played 2 times with it but i'll come again with f15c) the autopilot modes don't work and the auto-stabilization when firing Gau-8 doesn't work to so the nose instantly goes up when firing.
A last note the aggressors are sometimes very aggressive and other times my RWR show them enlightning me from everywhere but they ignore me.
Have a nice day - bye !
(BobbySixKiller)
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback. It's very helpful for me. However, I'm not sure if I can help you with the issues you've described. I have no 'mods' installed so there should be no problem with aircraft skins. I did use the brown colour blk52 for a couple of the aggressor groups, just to keep things varied. The other F16As use the standard USAF skin. If you could post a screenshot of the 'bugs' you can see in the aircraft skins, I'd be very interested to see and find our more for you.
Also, I don't own the A10A or A10C modules, so I can assure you I haven't made any modifications to those aircraft. Is it only on my mission that you get the 'stabilization' bug?
Thanks for the kind words and feedback. I intend to keep the server running all the time and continue to build upon the mission. Will adjust the difficulty of the aggressors as a matter of priority. I would hope that with enough players, it wouldn't seem be so difficult anyway, so hopefully more people will join the server regularly and make this the ultimate multiplayer mission.
Cheers
-
This is not supposed to be some shameless plug for my newly created mission, I'm simply bringing this to the attention of the DCS community because I would really like to see an interesting multiplayer mission available for DCS 2.0 that we can all enjoy playing. And one that is always available online, full of other players to engage with.
Right now, only a couple of servers (in 2.0) have any more than a handful of players, and I believe this is due to lack of hosted missions where pretty much anyone of any skill level can participate and enjoy themselves, no matter what they choose to fly or do within the mission.
I have designed 'Operation Red Flag' to cater to ALL types of players; serious and the not so serious. My aim was to create something where the more casual players could play without effecting those of us who prefer to take it more seriously.
First problem with 2.0 is that being set in NTTR, it doesn't lend itself to many different mission scenarios without breaking realism. What I mean by this is that we wouldn't (really) expect a full invasion of Russian forces to head straight to Vegas. A lot of 'these types' of missions feel very thrown together without a lot of thought to realism and even professionalism (no offence to anyone).
I wanted to create a mission of professional quality and one that was perfectly realistic. Exercise Red Flag was the obvious choice of scenario, and so I started working on the ultimate training mission, just a few weeks ago.
Other than the obvious benefits, the Red Flag scenario is especially appealing because of the use of simulated weapons. Putting this in game makes total sense - being blown out of the sky for making a small mistake and having to start up and taxi etc etc all over again, (after a while) would make me quit and do something else. It would be far more fun to be told that you have been hit and would have been fatal, but still be able to carry on and enjoy engaging with the mission.
So I made a custom script that detects when the player has been hit by the enemy and tells the player what type of unit hit them. I used the 'IMMORTAL' setting on all the player-controlled units (this prevents friendly fire too, obviously!). This allows the mission to act very much like the real Red Flag, and coupled with TacView recording, you pretty much have an identical Red Flag mission.
Another great thing about this mission is that after a while, the RED units will regenerate. This means the mission never ends, and people can drop in and out when they like and just enjoy the game however they want to, and always have an objective to pursue if they wish. I have done this intelligently though - Red Air respawn back at their own base and have to takeoff again, like in the real Red Flag, and Red ground units delete themselves and regenerate back in as long as no Blue units are in the vicinity. This makes for a flawless, smooth mission restart that doesn't interrupt gameplay.
I'm promising great fun to all who want to try this out, but we do need players for it to work. Of course, none of this really works with only a couple of participants - if we can have several squadrons in at the same time, this would make for a superb gaming experience.
I'm now hosting 'Operation Red Flag' on a top-spec machine and I will leave it running 24/7 in hope that after a few of you read this, you'll want to join in and start playing on the server regularly.
I will be adding more to this mission. There are things I'd like to add but it was important for me to get this out of the door as soon as possible to build up the interest.
IP is: 91.125.115.47:10308 or 89.197.85.84:10308
OR look for 'EXERCISE RED FLAG' server.
It would be great to have those of you across the pond to host a version too!
You can find the mission file here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2640527/
SW0RDF15H out!
-
Looks like they finally fixed the "visibility range" setting to function correctly. This is intended, not a bug. You should probably set it to HIGH to get the desired effect.
Okay, I'll give it a go. Thanks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Some more examples. And these are with 'Visib Range' set to 'Medium'. Awful!
Please can someone shed some light???
-
After the recent update, I've found the terrain draw distance is.... almost non-existent.
See the screenshot above from 30,000ft - the terrain abruptly cuts off quite obviously. This is on the 'LOW' visibility range, but I've been happily using this same setting for months, and it doesn't normally affect how much terrain gets rendered - normally is just affects the quantity of objects that are visible at different ranges.
This has happened before to me as well - reinstalling Windows along with DCS fixed it... That was 2 months ago.
I'm confused. Please can someone help? Is it that the 'Visib Range' setting now functions differently???
-
Yes, I made 3 screens showing this problem. Each one from the first to the last getting slightly closer (NOT zooming):
As you can see, getting just a bit closer causes a BRUTAL fps drop...I guess something gets loaded at this distance that causes the problem, but the thing is I cant see any noticeable difference in quality so it shouldnt be considered as "justified". I also doubt its due to trees because seems like you can find spots with lots of trees where this is not happening so maybe some object among the trees or building with some problem or with an extreme and bugged poly count, I dont know...also, I have triple buffer enabled so no problems there (also note I get 45fps in between both extremes)
Nice job! Hope devs acknowledge!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I think he's referring to the fact, that old non-clip-mapped terrain rendering method used in 1.5.x doesn't utilize gfx cards as efficiently as 2.0.x does. For my old GTX780 it's 66% vs 100% respectively, in next gen cards the difference is probably even bigger.
Exactly. Just look at CPU render times between 1.5 and 2.0. It's a completely different ball game. Offloading more of that work to the GPU gets you a better chance at smooth gameplay.
Unfortunately, 'smooth gameplay' seems to be a surprisingly subjective thing for a lot of people.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Well if you're all happy with VR below 90hz, then great. But I can't stand it! Opinions, I guess
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
No, this is 1.5.6. I can give it a shot with 2.0.6 as well if you like.
Ah right, I get it. 2.0+ is useless without NTTR...
Okay, don't think you'll have as much luck with 2.0.
There's been some confusion in this thread. I was sharing this method because those of us who use VR need more performance headroom, but anyone still using DCS 1.5 may as well give up with VR, as the old graphics engine won't get you anywhere near a constant 90fps. Just FYI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Disclaimer: I've not read the whole thread, so apologies if this is old information.
I've just set up a local server using a brand new freebie account. Copied the missions over from my paid account (with premium aircraft) etc to the free-install server box and I can fly with any aircraft I like.
You do not need to purchase all your modules over again. :)
--Baker
But are you talking about DCS 2.0 here?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
This has given me an amazing performance increase in the KA-50 Vergeev Group Campaign.
First mission sat on the runway where the Civ jets are taking off.
Normal Single player campaign I get between 22 and 40 fps.
Using the method here and setting up my own local Muliplayer game I am getting 58 - 80
Glad it's working for you! Worth the additional effort!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I talked about this long time ago...trees have some kind of problem. When very near the trees, I get 60fps but suddenly, I move the camera SLIGHTLY to some point in the center of the trees coverage and fps goes to hell, as low as 25fps with my OC'ed hardware...from 60+ to 25 fps just by looking at "anything" on the trees or getting just slightly closer to them...
Can confirm this. Fly down close to the ground over Vegas and watch the stuttering over areas with even a small number of trees - until you fly over McCarren airport, for instance, and suddenly all smooth again until you pass it by.
The additional load is put on the GPU. An extra 5-6ms in frametime lost, which is abnormally huge. CPU seems unaffected.
This is clearly a bug. Hope they're aware, as this could be one of those difficult ones to get anyone to acknowledge! :noexpression:
-
Is there a way to play through the campaigns the same as single player ? Or do i have select each mission seperatly using this method
So far, I've only got it working on single missions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
So I've just upgraded my PC to beast mode specs with SLI MSi 1080s. I want something more immersive qnd right now I actually have nothing for head movement. Not even track IR or anything and I fly alot of formation stuff with friends and air refueling. So my question to you, the community, is how is DCS 2.0 Nevada doing in regards to either oculus or vive? I need to get some sort of tracking system so why not get vr? I've noticed 2.0 has been stuttering quite alot since I got my new build so I'm wondering if VR will be affected by that. So yes or no everyone. Go VR? Or just stick with track IR on my 27" monitor instead! Thanks in advance to anyone with helpful input.
PC specs are Intel i7-6850k, MSi gaming pro carbon mobo, SLI msi1080 gaming X versions, 250gb Samsung 960SSD and 1tb SSD Samsung evo, 32gb Ram corsair platinum.
2.0 is a dream on VR. But SLI doesn't work in VR. The second card is probably what's giving you stuttering.
Make sure you enable the XMP profile on your RAM.
Turn in game 'shadows' down to low, 'visibility range' to medium, 'DOF' off, and max out everything else.
MAKE SURE VSYNC IS OFF!!!
Be very careful who you listen to on these forums, regarding hardware and performance. There's some awful advice going around and it can all get very toxic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Why ? Make sure V-Sync is OFF ??
"even if the CPU wasn't missing the 11ms render target required for smooth 90fps"
Hu ? why 90? are you on VR? or regular 60 for monitors or 144 ?
VR - 90hz
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Can someone help me understand this better? Is this a process that would also help offline single player missions as well?
If you read my original posts on the first page of this thread, I explain the whole concept and process pretty clearly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Demon,
I like your energetic posts...but...you gotta read more closely and make comaprisons between apples vs apples and oranges vs oranges.
Look at your post where you definbe the clocks 4790k to 7700k ( Post #16 ) !
You grant the TurboBoost ( 4.4GHz ) for the 4790kbut put the 7700k to its stock clock of 4.2, which is then NOT CORRECT. The Turboboost for 7700k is 4.4GHz for ALL cores and 4.5 for 1 core, whereas the 4790k does afaik not clock all cores to 4.4 but only 1, all cores go to 4.2 iirc. Either way, you stole 300MHz from the 7700k :D
no big issue, just misleading those who dont know the CPU's details. I do and I have built multiple machines with 4790k and 6700k and 1 with 7700k. I have worked all those CPU's...almost to death hehe
Bit
I think we're both wasting our breath dude. There's no helping some people. :S
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
What do you mean?
Upgrading the RAM from 2133Mhz to 3000Mhz, it's ok. But upgrading from DDR3 2133Mhz to DDR4 3000Mhz is not good. You need to purchase a new mobo and CPU. It's not worst the price. The i7 4790K (4.4Ghz) is probably as good as the i7 7700 (4.2Ghz) for DCS.
I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong. You mustn't give out advise about this stuff if you don't have the hardware yourself, to test your theory. 'Probably' isn't a word that should be used in discussions as technical as these. These sorts of comments lead people down the wrong road and ends up really wasting money. It's happened to me many times and the only way to know things for sure is to buy the gear and test it for yourself.
I have two computers, one with a 4790k, DDR3 2133mhz and the other with 6700k, DDR4 3600mhz AND a 3000mhz unit too. I have been endlessly testing these rigs on DCS 2.0 for months, buying countless hardware parts and monitoring the differences in performance between them. The advise I have been posting across these forums this week has been the result of a conclusive series of tests that I'm sharing to help people avoid wasting their time and money.
If you want a jump in performance, DDR4 is one of the biggest game changers I came across in said tests. Same applies for Projects Cars, just FYI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[LATER IN EARLY ACCESS] F18 - DDI Wind speed and wind direction
in Wish List
Posted
Can someone please explain why the wind speed and direction on the DDI A/C page never change?
You can do what you want with the ME wind, but these two bits of really useful info always read the same.