PeaceSells

Just checking: In the "CONTROLS" setup screen of DCS, in the "Axis Commands" tab, there are two zoom fields. One is named "Camera Zoom View" and this can't be assigned to joystick axes (defaults to MOUSE_Z - mouse wheel). The other one is named "Zoom View" and this you can assign to joystick axes. I actually don't own the MiG-21, but I suppose it's true for it too.

Cool, thanks for the explanation!

Less stutters because HDD won't keep being read all the time. But if you have SSD instead, I don't know if it will make that much difference. I have HDD, so it was really worth it. You will still get some stutters from the video card though, as you have only 2 GB of video RAM, like me.

But I would upgrade to 16 GB of RAM right now if I was you. It will instantly benefit you even in DCS 1.5 and it's cheap. I did that (I have specs kinda similar to yours).

I thought it was only used for comms with AI, but apparently it's possible can control everything with it? Dumb question - what's DLC?

Thanks!

If Thrustmaster only replaced the 6 buttons on one side of the base with just a few more on the stick, or 1 more hat, it would blow the competition away. I don't understand all the compromise just to make it ambidextrous. Who flies milsims with the left hand anyway? I'm left handed and I fly with my right hand. It makes 0 difference, you are only good with the hand you practice. Left or right hand is just faggotry.

Thanks Grimes! I will certainly try the Mbot's campaigns and much probably get the Ka-50 module. Does the Ka-50 come with the Georgian Oil War Campaign? I already have the A-10C but didn't start the campaign yet (still in the training missions).

Hi! I have completed the stock campaigns for the Su-25T and Su-27. Have flown most of the stock F-15C campaign and the first 4 or 5 missions of the stock Su-25 campaign. Honestly, the one that kept me most interested was the original free Su-25T campaign because, although it's far from being a dynamic campaign, you don't have to fly the same exact static story-line scripted mission sequence until it's over. I read somewhere it's a 'semi-dynamic' type of campaign. Are there any other modules that have this kind of campaign? Are there any DLC campaign of this type? The descriptions I've read so far in the purchase pages gives me the impression that they are all static story-line centered campaigns...

I will love to fly the Su-33 with PFM, but I would love even more to fly the MiG-29 with PFM!

Right. It has a total of 16 buttons, but it's not actually a 16 buttons controller, because: you have 4 buttons on the stick, 6 on the left side of the base and 6 on the right side of the base. You obviously only use the base buttons if you don't have a separate throttle and you keep both hands on just one controller. Even then you'll only half of the base buttons (the ones on the left, if you use the stick with your right hand, or the ones on the right if you use the stick with your left hand). It's made like this so it's ambidextrous (it's more targeted at "Star Citzen" style of games then realistic sims. Obviously, if you have a separate throttle, you will only use the 4 buttons on the stick. To use any button on the base you have to take a hand out of the throttle or the stick, so they are not HOTAS buttons. Therefore, out of the 16 buttons, only 4 are actually HOTAS buttons. As a matter of fact, it's easier to reach for the keyboard than to reach for the base buttons. Yes, I never used TARGET while I was only playing DCS. But now I started Falcon BMS and apparently the HOTAS doesn't work there without TARGET. So I was forced against my will to learn TARGET.

Looks like you're right, TWCS throttle doesn't use hall effect sensor, but it is 16-bit just like the hall effect sensors on the stick. About the mini-stick... I would expect the Warthog, due to its price, to have a better mini-stick than the T1.6000M...

Works perfectly without TARGET. In my searches on the web I didn't find anyone else complaining about this, so it might be something wrong on my end, though. About the lack of buttons on the stick, I did end up binding everything I wanted to the throttle and stick, despite that. Plus, if you use the TARGET software, you can be creative and fit even more functions in one button, but you'll probably have to learn to script. About the quality of the mini-stick, I can use it reasonably well now that I lowered the sensitivity A LOT. On the other hand, the hall sensors of the main stick (only pitch and roll, no hall sensor for twist rudder) and the hall sensor of the main throttle are very accurate. There is a tiny deadzone on the main stick, but that doesn't get in the way at all. Not using a hub, everything is plugged directly to the back of the PC. I tried plugging to two different USB ports, but the problem persists. I need to test some more...

I have bought the T1.6000M FCS recently as my first HOTAS and it has 3 things that bother me: - low quality slew mini-stick on the throttle that require a good deal of dead zone (but I suspect this isn't exclusive of the T1.6000M) - stick only has 4 buttons - TARGET software keeps dropping the throttle (throttle stops working mid-game when using TARGET)

No, the default zoomed out view is there to compensate the lack of field-of-view you'd have in a normal monitor if it wasn't zoomed out. It's necessary. You can't compare looking at the real world with your eyes to looking at the world through a monitor. The monitor will at the same time give you less field-of-view and less resolution. You compensate field-of-view zooming out and compensate resolution zooming in. That's why you'll find the zoom feature in every realistic game, to reproduce human sight and FOV as best as it's possible through a monitor.

In most games (DCS included), the default view is zoomed out. So, to get 1x zoom, like naked eye IRL, you need to zoom in in-game. Plus monitor's resolution doesn't compare to the real eye resolution, so, in order to see details that you'd see IRL with naked eye, you have to zoom in even more in-game.

I actually have no experience in VR. My experience in normal monitor is that antialiasing off sometimes helps spotting ground vehicles, but I'm not sure about aircraft.

I think the real question is "do you really need to ask a real fighter pilot if being able to see at 60 km is correct, and if not able to see at 500m - 2km is correct?" I think whatever limit distance ED decides to implement will be good enough, as long as it's not inverted as it is at the moment. You can even see through clouds right now. There will always be discussions about what is the exact limit, and they will be always off. The good side is that it doesn't matter, as long as it's not astronomically off as it is right now.

Exactly. This was extensively discussed by many at the model visibility thread (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3074477#post3074477). ED suggested turning labels on and closed the thread. No. There is a "phantom zone" about where the dot transitions to the plane model. In this zone the plane is almost invisible, until it's very close.

Guys... Able to see at 60 km and unable to see at 500 m - 2 km... This is really really bad.

Interesting, I was thinking something similar some days ago. It was about other games (1st person shooters, another passion of mine), that have big problems with cheaters/hackers. I was thinking how many people would accept paying a monthly subscription so the developers keep the anti-hacking software updated, because currently they are 99% useless. I guess most people wouldn't, but I'm sure many would. It's funny, because most people already pay for skins (CS:GO, for example) or DLCs (BF4 and DCS, for example) continuously, but would complain about paying for something actually useful to them.

The scenario already flies well, it already happens... when a new module is launched, old features get updated/corrected to accommodate the new module. Bound to the launch of the F-18 there will be carrier improvements and also Su-33 improvements. It also happens in other games, see the release of the Marksmen DLC or Arma jets (urgh!) for Arma 3. Each came accompanied by many improvements for players who didn't buy these DLC too, like the ability to rest your gun on surfaces (Marksmen), sensors overhaul (Jets), among others. Those were free core game updates for for everyone. (For the record, I don't fly Arma planes). There's no reason why a paid new module wouldn't bring improvements for the game as a whole.

I own the A10C, Huey, FC3 and the Nevada map. I regard them as high quality, they are worth every penny I spent on them and I wouldn't say they are broken in any way. But DCS has a few known important problems that remain there for many years, despite being every now and then brought up by users (model visibility, AI and mouse lags are just the ones that come to my head right now). They aren't too many, but they are there for years and in both v1.5 and v2.1. Important problem means it should be priority no. 1 and fixed before releasing new content, that's just basics and there's no way around it. At the same time, ED is a company and has to do it the way it works out better commercially too. Why does it work out commercially to release many new content before fixing basic stuff? Because you guys always buy them. You guys complain, open threads, whine, throw hissy fits, but when a new colorful module is released you jump on it like kids in a candy store. I have my eye on some modules like the Ka-50, the Sabre, the Gazelle and obviously the F-18. I want this F-18 DCS level study sim real bad. But will I buy them? Much probably, but first I will wait till they improve some of the basic stuff. We all know they are more than skilled enough to improve those things mentioned, "new tech" and "WiP" are obviously no explanation, every game is "new tech" and "WiP", new technology is in every software all the time. Priorities are priorities. They just don't do it now because they're prioritizing new content. And they only prioritize new content because you prioritize new content. Sorry, I have to say you guys don't really sound much bothered by the issues. I'll repeat what others have said before and state that I would much rather pay for an update that fixes basic problems of DCS than pay for new content. I will gladly pay, and I will keep paying for new modules until I have probably all of them, but I will only do this as long as I feel the basic issues are being at least improved. So... how many of you will buy the F-18 as soon as it's on pre-purchase?

Do you have anti-aliasing off?

I feel your pain. I guess maybe if they increase the contrast between the planes/units and the background it would solve the problem, right now they blend too easily.