KCferrari

I have, but due to the piper not actually being predictive, it still tends to throw me off. It doesn't work at all how you'd think it would by just looking at it, when you're not used to this gunsight style. I'm more used to the air to ground and F-15 style sights where you line up the shot and the bullets simply land in the middle of the piper.

I can't hit anything with the snake. The shots just never seem to connect for me. I have better luck aiming manually with the gun cross.

As a small indie dev, it is quite worrying to me. In Canada, a 1080 Ti costs over $1600 due to this bitcoin nonsense, making it incredibly difficult for most gamers to keep their systems up to spec, and making VR content is not worth the effort at all due to monetary investment needed in order to properly test the software, so as much as I love VR, bitcoin mining could potentially entirely destroy it. After all, no one's going to buy a brand new headset which needs a GPU they can't afford. Since only a small percent of players can take advantage of the best GPU's, it's not worth developing content that does either. AAA developers obviously have much better resource to make games more scaleable however, but lets face it - no one wants to play the latest and greatest on "Lowest" settings. People want better GPU's but simply can't afford them, and with the global GPU shortage, can't even buy them because the stock is gone. In DCS, the standard is of course much higher, but you're also only looking at the small sample of people that actually post on the forums. The steam average is far lower, and being a free to play title, there are countless numbers of people that may try the game and quit shortly thereafter due to its particularly high system demands. So really, the hardware sample here is incredibly warped towards the high end, whether the players are active on the forums or not.

Hmm.. That could also be true. Perhaps the numbers used for this just need to allow a few more decimal places to fix this. I guess its either that or update frequency, but who knows. Either way, I love the G effect for the immersion and realism of being tossed around by the forces, but the laggy stepped feeling of it has made me turn it off, since every time I roll, it feels like i'm dropping frames.

Well.. It's an attacker.. The 3rd type of aircraft :music_whistling: Not really sure why you're all debating its usefulness in air combat though, since it was really never meant to do that. It's meant to only attack ground targets while operating out of makeshift airbases and small ships, which the hornet can't exactly do. Either way, its systems may share some similarities with the hornet, since it has a more modern display setup. In my opinion, it could probably prove to be good for some hornet training, if you're dying to get some flight time in something a little closer to the jet we're all waiting for here. :smilewink: Even though I have yet to get the harrier for DCS, it has always been a favourite of mine in other simulators due to its uniqueness.

Yea.. I think you meant to link something else, lol :music_whistling:

I still fly it with a twist stick - obviously not ideal, but it does the job. I love just flying the thing around vegas, skimming treetops and dodging buildings without any computer help. It feels much more alive without the autopilots :)

Well, without triple buffering, you only have a front and a back buffer. Once the back buffer is full, The GPU is at a standstill if it's waiting for the screen refresh. With triple buffering, the gpu can still be pumping out an extra frame to display. Pre rendered frames is basically the same thing, but works for DirextX, and you can choose how many additional frames it will prerender. In other words, 2 prerendered frames would mean 2 back buffers, which is the same thing as triple buffering. Therefore, if you set it as such, it should provide you with a little extra leeway for frame drops, and hold 60fps more easily. The more frames you pre render however, the more input lag it may cause. For instance, if you're some sort of madman and set it to 10, what you're seeing could be frames rendered up to 10 frames ago. It will of course only fill up the back buffers when it has time to, though. Set it to a reasonable number like 2 or 3 if you're using it. It is a standard option available in your gpu options, like triple buffering. Also, i'd highly recommend not using DCS vsync. Driver vsync gives much smoother results in my experience.

Triple buffering only affects OpenGL programs. DCS is DirectX. Instead, you'll need to change the maximum pre rendered frames.

Well, I ran into this issue myself, in a ground attack mission I threw together. I had a loadout of quad rocket launchers, alongside some Belouga bombs. Both weapon types can be selected and fired perfectly fine, however the button for the ext rockets does not appear. Only the int rockets can be fired. If mixing a/g weapons like this wasn't allowed, its a bit weird that you can fire some rockets but not all of them.

Honestly this is no question to me. In terms of lighting, the global illumination of the deferred shading makes the lighting look much more consistent with reality. The PBR materials have their proper characteristics as well, which are completely ruined with DS off. Without DS, the sun is also a basic directional light, making the landscape and exterior views look like a game from 10 years ago. There are still issues with the cockpit light levels and whatnot especially at night, but overall, DS is something i'll never turn off. Personally, I find the ideal look right now is DS with a reshade sharpen filter, alongside minor color correction, if you'd prefer the more subdued look. Either way, we know that many elements are still a wip, and will be improved in a few patches. It's still a beta, after all.

Personally, I'd love to fly an F-20. To be able to fly the F-16's rival that never was, in a fully detailed sim would be pretty damn cool. I'm sure all of the information for its parts and avionics would be available, but I also doubt it would be possible since we don't know much about it, especially compared to many of the aircraft in modules we have now. Even though we know the performance of its individual parts, how they all come together is a different story. Are detailed performance stats even available for this thing? There's also not exactly any pilots around to explain how it flew, and we all know that pilot input plays a crucial role in nailing these flight models.

It seems like the camera movement from this option has a noticable jitter, as if the camera shift movement is being calculated at a much slower framerate than the rest of the world. I do not use TrackIR or VR, so my camera is firmly planted forward, making any movement of the canopy frame dependant on that. I am also running at a constant vsync 60fps, with nothing around causing lag of any sort for this test. When the setting is on, sharp rolling from side to side is the most obvious case, where the frame seems to jitter back into place. The scenery remains perfectly smooth with the setting both on and off, and yet the canopy's shift seems to skip frames. So, it really just seems like the camera shift isn't being updated as fast as the rest of the game for some reason.

Even running at a constant framerate, the game has terribly inconsistent frametimes and will sometimes microstutter when flying low over trees, if you have them set too high for your pc. Unfortunately i cannot capture a graph overlay, but even in regular flight, instead of a smooth flat line you will see a rather jagged mess, and this definitely needs to be addressed at some point. In the meantime though, I've tried countless combinations trying to fix this, since it bothers me to no end as well. Rivatuner's limiter does not seem to work in DCS, and it's usually a go-to for fixing this sort of thing. The best solution that i've found so far is to disable the ingame vsync and try using nvidia inspector's standard vsync, alongside a 60.7 fps cap. Vsync alone doesn't seem to smooth out the passing terrain, but in combination with the limiter, it seems to do a decent job preventing the jittering scenery. No idea if this will help you, but it certainly helps me.

Well that's not quite true, trim works without autopilot, but in a slightly different way. Without it, trim is pretty much just regular stick trim. With autopilot channels on though, trimming also actively attempts to hold the current pitch/heading/etc. The reason i bring it up, is if you usually fly with it off, the autopilot will try to pull the nose back to where you last trimmed, which could mess you up, I guess. Either way though, the description here seems like it would be more severe than anything autopilot would do. Exiting auto hover has only ever been smooth for me though, even with the most recent 2.5 patches. The only button that has ever caused me to completely lose it is accidentally bumping the trim reset button.. That never goes well.. :music_whistling: