TOViper

see https://forum.dcs.world/topic/292949-bransleregl-man-at-spawn/#comment-4891893

Oculus Rift CV1 (Oculus Dash), no SteamVR here.

He folks! Coming with the latest OB Update 2.7.11.23362, I experience an increase in fps while operating on the SC. Textures are set to HIGH, Terrain Textures are at LOW (no need), and Water is set to MEDIUM. Now comes the point: Even on my system with the 1070 GTX, having: - Shadows ON (the "new" ones and the "old" ones), - A lot of deck personel visible - Some Tomcats and Hornets (AI + static) on the deck the fps is far higher than before, I would say in the region of about 50% I don't know what happend in the background, but I have the impression that ED implemented some improvements and optimizations. In the next days I will fly a lot on the carrier, and hopefully there are no degredations on other parts of the SC not visible at first glance. I just want to share this and give ED feedback on this long lasting issue. I am now really happy again, since the SC was P.I.T.A. in terms of frame rate for a very long time. Whatever you guys at ED have done, the latest update brought a noticeable improvement! Kind regards, TOViper

No plans for MP, so it would be great to know if it works in SP and how. Currently I have no clue ...

MP 2.7.11.32262 When a Hornet is spawned beside my Tomcat, my aircraft instantly crashes into water and the F-18 is destroyed too. See attached trk, go to the Supercarrier with F9 and see whats happening. SC-HORNET-TOMCAT-POPULATION_TOViper_v8_2.7.11.23362_dayops-20220429-225549.trk Mission file here: SC-HORNET-TOMCAT-POPULATION_TOViper_v8_2.7.11.23362_dayops.miz

Nevada VR Oculus Rift CV1 NVIDIA 1070 GTX (8 GB) OB 2.7.11.22211 F-14A SP Terrain Textures to HIGH: fps = 8 Terrain Textures to LOW: fps = 45 stable Worth noting is, that a certain time ago I usually used to use terrain textures set to high, and never had problems with that. So the problem came up during the last updates. Maybe this helps when investigating.

Jerec, may I ask you which ground textures are you using? They look very different (very nice indeed) to the standard textures. BTW: Have to try your Gripen mod, can't wait seeing this bird flying!

+1 Yep. More focus on landscape than cities, maybe this would be the key to make it work

Hello Mike! Seeing the pictures of the cockpit makes me smile and fear. I am long time user of VR, playing a sim on a screen became a no-go (i would then rather go playing guitar or biking instead of playing on a screen, honestly). The newest AH-64D e.g. consists of MANNNY triangles to be calculated, and in VR this number doubles, and thus it currently kills VR user's fps with "low" to "medium" setups (like mine). Which optimizations are you applying to the EF module? LOD? Textures? Number of Triangles? Other secret tricks? No hurry for answer, just for interest. Kind regards TOViper P.S.: Please be so kind and look to my P.M. (if you haven't seen it so far)

Hi folks! With the trigger condition "X: COCKPIT INDICATION TEXT IS EQUAL TO" I can check for a certain value shown on a indicator. On the Viggen's data panel for example, with this condition I can check if for the most right digit a "2" was entered, this works fine. But in fact I want to check what number the user has typed in, so I have to use a script to determine the number. Is this possible with LUA code as well? After half an hour of searching I am still not able to find this certain information in the sources I currently use (DCS manual, Forum, Google). Thanks for any hint! TOViper

Thanks for advice! ad 1: I am using multiple Voice Attack Profiles with complex programming inside the profiles (some profiles only use one "category" [like ICEMAN, or RIO, or all other except these two] of the whole list), and thus I am pretty sure I have to do this by hand. ad 2: The problem comes only when I look into the keywords.csv, there the double entries are listed in separate lines. ad 3: I cannot see any double entries in the database, nor is the database corrupt (see attached picture). Seems the problem comes during the "Export" procedure when using the EXPORT button. Once I got rid of them, I can easily copy & paste the text lines into the profiles.

+1

Hey folks, every time I update my VoiceAttack Profiles with the KEYWRD list, the following items are conflicting once I try to add them to the "When I say" line: 963 Boar 964 Chevy 965 Colt 966 Dodge 967 Enfield 968 Ford 969 Hawg 970 Pig 971 Pontiac 972 Springfield 973 Tusk 974 Uzi 857 Platform Can we get rid of them please in the next update? Just for information: I usually export the words via the EXPORT button to a CSV and then create my own textfile with the *;* syntax to copy & paste it to VoiceAttack profiles.

Current problem seems to be the amount of VRAM, which for the 1070 is 8GB. I opened another thread where I am showing weird fps versus GPU utilization versus CPU utilization. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abZIOFS9SeI&ab_channel=ToVip

OB 2.7.11.22211 Then white-red striped OFF flag of the airspeed indicator doesn't show up, neither if cold starting nor hot starting and turning off electrical power. The identification number of the flag is [2007]; in ModelViewer the flag can be set to 1.00 and it really shows up on the instrument, so it is exists. Other OFF flags work fine (ATT, HÖJD, etc.). See pic:

SP OB 2.7.11.22211 After I was requested to press spacebar once ground power and air supply are online, I pressed SPACEBAR and landed "within" the RIO. See attached pictures:

Oh, that was new for me that failures work in multiplayer too. Thanks for this information!

Hey! Are you expecting random failures to work in multiplayer? I somewhere read that failures don't work in multiplayer. Just asking ...

Considering your writing, I have to say that I have the same problems with the F-16 and its displays. Could it be that the "new" display programming (that was introduced with update 2.7.11.21408.1) creates that kind of problems (it was labelled as "Added a new FLIR rendering system for AH-64D, F-16C, F/A-18C, and A-10C/A-10C II"?

@BIGNEWY Hello BigNewy! What about preparing a survey/poll regarding "top requested features" for the mission editor. I very liked ED's idea for a poll regarding the priorities of the F-16 functions during the earlier days. Why not doing this for the mission editor? E.g. let's say 20 features to be implemented for the year 2022? Anyway, thanks to you and ED for the continuous improvments of the mission editor! Kind regards, TOViper

Hi Spirale! I gave your track file a view. I see: .) A too shallow approach (not steep enough) .) Radar returns of the vehicles past your designated target make the wings appear later most probably > the radar doesn't know which target you like to hit My suggestion: If you have an target-rich environment, turn OFF the radar ranging and use QFE as only source of information AKAN OK.trk edit: here is my track showing that the bullets hit the target right on. I just waited for the pull in order to see the bullets impacting where they should

Hey spirale! Can you provide a track, otherwise things might get complicate. Increasing dive angles lead to more and more precise triangulation. Take two examples to extreme: 1. If your dive angle was 90°, there is no triangulation necessary, since the bullets just have to follow gravity. 2. If your dive angle was 0°, the triangulation needs to compensate for a) air density impacting the drag of the bullets at max b) the current aircraft's speed at max c) gravity at max So the steeper you dive, the more accurrate the results would (should ) be. Which speed are you flying in the moment of triangulation? Which altitude are you flying generally? I don't say that there is no problem with the triangulation in the current build, but as stated in the Updatelog from March 17th, HB repaired this issue. Anyone else have problems with AKAN aiming? Edit: Just did a test, works fine at 0 MSL at 29.92, dive angle 20°, speed about M0.8. See track file attached. 2022-04-09_Viggen_AKAN_training_at_0MSL_1013hPa_M08.trk

I usually tend to use about 20° dive, and with the "big" Viggen update on March 17th it became really usable. Be sure to switch the HÖJD CI SI switch back to RHM once you are below 2500m (it automatically switches to LD once aircraft is above 2500m). I am not sure if this is really helpful for your certain situation here, but usually it should be done anyway as normal procedure.

According to RC2, the TMM is disabled by default. When RR is disabled, the solution is calculated by triangulation using the QFE. The QFE value therefore must be as precisely as possible. IMHO the calculation then assumes a firing distance of about ~1500 meters, so the wings should appear one and a half kilometer before the aircraft hits the ground.

INDEED & OF COURSE!