Flighter

Hi Kulla. Tacview should be on on the main server. The beta has limited bandwidth and the export is off only for this reason. If you still have problems let me know and I will check it. I have not updated tacview for quite sometime. Cheers !

Hi Jim ! Of course there is no ban involving you. Plus bans do not involve nick-names, only IDs. I checked the logs on the OB server. It seems there are two of you : The other Specter was in the server while you tried to login. Cheers

Hi there ! Will have a look into it at first chance ! Cheers !

Hi Soko ! Thanks for letting me know. I know one cheater is enough to spoil it for a lot of people. It also spoils it for them. I will switch on the integrity checks again (had them off for Kegety's VR mod). Still many times the internetz play tricks on us and unfortunately many legit players appear like wrong-doers. I had a quick look to tacview recordings and I have to say nothing seems to be wrong with "better". I use bold because nothing feels as bad as a false accusation. Please PM me if you think any further discussion is needed. I also want to emphasize that I would like to keep this thread positive and friendly to all ! Best regards, Merry X-mas and an even better New Year !

Hi Stuart ! It's very nice to hear that you enjoy the server ! Thanks for your kind words. I hope it is helping improve ppl's dogfighting skills -- the server's initial purpose. As well as having fun !!! :) I am afraid that I have not much free time lately and even keeping the server up-to-date is an overstretch. But I will be glad to ping you if I bump onto you on-line. There are quite a few brilliant and friendly people that I have met on the server (I will not mention names as I may forget some). See if you can team up. It would be my little server's greatest success, having people meet and forming play-friendships ! Best regards and (if you celebrate them) Merry X-mass and the best for the New Year !!!

Hey there Jaguaras ! Thanks again for your time. Please check out the beta server. There should be two 1v1 banks, namely 1 and 2. So players should join the pairs 1B and 1R (eg 1v1-1B-F15C against 1v1-1R-F15c) or 2B and 2R (eg 1v1-2B-F15C against 1v1-2R-F15c) The smaller server may have less lag and I may remove the other slots and just leave it for GUNS only and 1v1 slots. No debugging whatsoever due to very limited time... Let me know if all works. Cheers

Hi aeroflux. That should be no problem. Will do on next map update. The only reason I have them only in the guns area, is because they only have guns (?). You will be a brave man among the F-18s and the Su's ! Cheers

Hi Kula ! I have opted for a fuel capacity that will give each plane a similar maneuverability; especially in the guns area. It does not mean I got it right, so I will check again and reduce it a bit. Very good point regarding the performance issue. It's the one thing that spoils it for me too. I am afraid there is no other area having runways so close together. Your solution is in your settings ! And hope that ED takes VR players seriously one day and fixes it. They were almost there before the deferred shading became a must. :( Have tried Kegety's mod for the VR shaders ? Tacview export should be on for the main server. The beta is bandwidth challenged so no can do. I will check that the main server has not exports turned off by mistake. Cheers !

Hi Evontroy ! I am checking the MIG29's in the guns area and see two S's and two A's for each side. Maybe you can explain a bit more ? I assume the flares are for the "AIR" slots. Correct me if wrong. The 3rd and fourth slots of each MIG29 group should have 60 flares. Thanks !

Hi there ! I really do not know if this is a good thing. Imagine a server showing 4 players and once you join you find no one to fight with. It'll be more like a private affair, something you could host in private and have a friend join. Still I am not totally negative. Jaguaras, please give me a suggestion as to what planes to have; not more that 3 or 4 for each side. I could make a test run on the beta server. Plus it will be in the middle of nowhere, nowhere to land in case you want to test all weapons or rearm. BTW It's always nice when I see you on line ! Best regards

Many thanks for the feedback and update Grimes. Much appreciated. Let's hope for a speedy fix.

Hi Grimes, thanks for the info. Had a look for the previous report and to my surprise I found one from the 26th of May; not even marked reported so I assume it may be even older ! https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=209551 Is ED developers aware of this ? I would say this is high priority and it was reported on open beta. Now migrated to release.... I just retired all the carriers from my servers ("Just Dogfight") because of the very reasons described in this older post. Please, fix this, especially with the F18 and carrier operations, it's a big hit to game-play. Cheers

Someone from ED please ? Can you verify and report ? Thnks

Hi ED people, the rest... When spawning on carriers the amount of ammo is set to 1000000 regardless of the mission settings: I can only replicate the issue when connecting to a server. Local play or play on the same machine as hosting shows the correct amounts: Please verify if this is a bug or something on my side. Having a dogfight server and people running around with 120s is bad... Store settings : Cheers

@2RGT Oberst Very nice once again !! Much appreciated HDpilot, the integrity is off because of the modified shaders (by Kagetys) not passing integrity test. It's been months and months and we (VR users) have been shown a majestic big middle finger by ED. I would be ashamed to have been proven so 'below average' by one of my users and after all this time have done NOTHING about it... Anyway.. I haven't done much of anything with DCS lately... maybe things have improved and I am ranting for nothing ! :) Buckeye, if you see a "b" in the server's description, it's the secondary machine running the beta branch and having limited bandwidth. It usually is temporary and a byproduct of the beta branch catching up with the so called "release" branch. You know the one with no bugs, exhaustive testing, respect to the customer etc etc.... hmmmm.... Cheers

OK, this is cool !! Many thanks STORM-1 (and no, I refuse to call you Newbie). Exciting, fast 'n full of action. [YOUTUBE] [/YOUTUBE] Small thank you waiting for you in the server... Cheers !

All set guys ! Enjoy !

Hi Buckeye. The only reason that the objects export are off, is available bandwidth. At the moment I have not switched to the main server with the 800/800++ Mbps. As soon as I find the time, all exports will be active. Cheers.

Try the above link. You will see that if you have a GTX1080 (not even Ti) you can have very good quality now ! On the other hand, I happen to have Aerofly FS2. They have implemented a renderer with vulcan and they just included it in their main release. The news with Oculus are bad. It's way slower from their OpenGL renderer. It may be a bug of course (they have also released an update I haven't tried yet). But Vulcan is certainly not a silver bullet. And I do not know if it's the best choice for smaller companies with not many man-hours to spare. Cheers

This works without loosing the glass optimized shader :

Hi Johnathan. You are always welcome to our server ! You can do the labels for all your missions by placing an alternative lua file (attached) in your local config. The folder should be in: <your user drive and folder>\Saved Games\DCS\Config\View For example in my machine the file is : C:\Users\flighter\Saved Games\DCS\Config\View\labels.lua Note that : -"DCS" may be something different according to the version of the DCS that you are running (eg DCS.openbeta) - The "View" folder mentioned above may not exist. In this case you have to create it yourself. Hope this helps Cheers Labels.lua

I have a butcher's fix for the shader compilation error (until properly done by the OP): At line 101 of glass.hlsl (Bazar\shaders\model\functions\glass.hlsl) replace : mp.diffuse.rgb = Diffuse.SampleBias(gAnisotropicWrapSampler, input.DIFFUSE_UV.xy, 3);with #ifdef DIFFUSE_UV mp.diffuse.rgb = Diffuse.SampleBias(gAnisotropicWrapSampler, input.DIFFUSE_UV.xy, 3); #endifI repeat this is a butcher's fix. I have tried various planes in Caucasus and all seem OK ("JUST DOGFIGHT" server). I cannot but be impressed by 90fps. Again, thank you Kegetys ! On another note : The man has clearly knowledge and brains. But if I understand correct, you say that ED people don't and that's why they could not do it ? !!!! Cheers !

At last some hope... Kegetys, I cannot thank you enough for a variety of reasons. Probably the most important one is bringing back some hope to this slow new renderer. Your pipeline is just fantastic ! It just takes a man with brains and knowledge. And you clearly have both. Do you mind sharing how much time it took you to do the mod ? And here is a nice, nice chart (rest of the thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=207002 )

Amazing improvemnt from a mod !!!! OK, just saw this thread : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=215373 Of course I had to try it.. and the results are amazing. I hope ED has seen this. What a great job Kegetys !

Hi imacken Good to see your results. I assume that PD was set to 1.5. Judging from your better system, it makes sense. I get 73 fps (instead of your 90). Another interesting observation is that the difference from Superposition benchmark (you are 27% better: 8921 / 7021) is also reflected in DCS fps (you are 23 % better, but you may be above 90 fps and you do not see it). I can verify the issue you mention, with the fps with oculus being not very informative of what the game itself is doing. They lock up in various numbers that do not always make sense. Especially if you have 90 fps, there is no way (that I know of) to tell what the real frame production is (without calculating it from other parameters). The "performance overhead" is more informative and has a finer resolution; this is the reason I chose it for my comparison between the DCS versions. Maybe you can see the difference there. Best regards.