Sylosis

I gotta agree (partially) with you on the F18. Some have flown the aicraft in early access. However, to recommend a plane that is far from being released is kinda dumb... Also, nobody is mentioning that the Harrier is still in beta... It is still a work in progress, from what I know. I think whoever recommends it should also give a heads up that there are still bugs and things being developped. Such as the missions, trainings, etc, are under development.

Though I agree with the statement that you should get a module that you like, there are still, I think, modules that are more complicated than others. From the clickable cockpit modules (not FC3), I own the Mig21bis, the Mirage 2000C, the F-5E, the A10C... If I'd list them by levels of difficulty, the least difficult first, I'd say: F5E - Mig21bis - Mirage 2000C - A10C. And I should say... the A10C is a lot of fun, but it is "by far" the most complicated module I have. Obviously, once you get the hang of it, one could argue that "it is not all that complicated". But, the learning curve is steeper that the others. At least this was my experience. I think, one of the reason for that, is because you basically need something like 6 hat switches on your joystick for the A10. If you don't, like me, you map them to something else, but it does increase difficulty. Most of those "hat switch" controls are for things you want to have access to quickly. That is, not have to push buttons on your keyboard. And also, understanding the logic of locking, slaving targets, etc on the A-10 takes a bit of time to get. There are a lot of posts on this forum that help understand though. It really helped me.

What I thought exactly...! :lol:

Interesting indeed, however... when would that be?

Hey thanks for that info. I've really enjoyed your M2000C campaign and also the one you made on the A-10 (don't remember the title right off the bat...) Definitely a positive point to know you are currently working on this!

The AV-8B really interests me, however I'm not sure I want to get it now, as from what I know, the package is just the aircraft. So for the same price of a brand new package, you get 0 missions, tutorials, campaign...? When I bought the F-5, I was finding that the "no campaign" was a bit annoying, since it's a module just as expensive as any other module... I don't regret buying it, yet I am not overly satisfied. The thing is that I am not that much of a multiplayer guy in DCS. I'm not super good at it, and therefore online, I just keep getting killed over and over again. So packages with missions makes more sense to me. So, that being said, about the AV-8B, should I wait until they "finish" the package? Or maybe I'm wrong and it's already quite finished (includes missions and everything)? Is it ever going to have missions, tutorials, and campaigns? I already own the Mirage, F-5, Mig21, A-10 and FC3 airplanes. My favorite is probably the Mirage. I like more modern planes, yet I prefer the Mirage to the FC3 since it's more simulation oriented. Anyways, was just curious to get some opinions on that. Thank you.

Maybe some "nuance" to this is, what do you want? Max settings + Best possible Performance, or Medium to High settings wiht Good Performance? Because, I feel there is a huge gap between both things in terms of "Investment". To have Max Settings + Best Performance, you'll need to buy a computer that is the price of a small car, as pointed out above (just the 1080Ti is 1000$). I mean a rig that can push DCS to very high settings at great performance is probably around 5000USD. Not everybody can afford that. However, for relatively good settings and performance, you can spend much less money, like 1000 USD. I think a CPU with something around 3.7 GHz speed + a GTX1060 6Gb or the likes would do it... It wouldn't be that big of a problem if it weren't for the freakn Bitcoin mania that made computers parts, especially GPU, completely stupidely expensive.

So this is really what it's all about...? I thought moving it to the SSD was just helping the loading screen when starting DCS itself... didn't think it had an impact "in a mission".

You are surely right and this is kinda depressing... :( What were they thinking?

I think the interesting question is why 2.5 is officially out, with such a major issue still going on... I mean, DCS itself is free... so don't tell me that at some point they had to release it so they get their money back right?

Hi, I don't think I'm suffering from any bug, I think it is somewhat normal, however was wondering if I could change anything to my settings, or my rig, that would help this. In my flights, there will be occasions where the game freezes for a good second or two, as if it loads the rest of the map or something like that. When it comes back to life after that second, everything is fine. I suppose it is map loading, but I really don't know? I don't have all my settings available at hand right now, but I run on settings that are a hybrid between high and medium I guess. My rig is as follows: Windows 10-64 bits i7-6700k 4Ghz GTX1060 6Gb VRAM 16 Gb RAM 256 Gb SSD and 1 Tb HDD (DCS is installed on the HDD). Is this because I haven't installed DCS on a SSD? Or it is the thing that DCS would now require 32 Gb RAM? Even in 1.5 I had that issue, and still have it in 2.5. But I only run 2.5 nowadays, hence why I post this here. Thanks for the help

Thanks for your question 1- I think it wasn't, I would have to re-test. Because in mission 3 I am 95% sure it wasn't the same heading between my HSI heading versus the heading shown with F2. But, I think this was a separate issue, caused by using autostart. Also ,dumb question but how do you use the ruler in F10 during a mission? 2- This was incorrect. The range was obviously wrong, and as I mentioned, was decreasing, even though I was getting away from the beacon, as seen on the F10 map. 3- Yes they were Not sure... as a matter of fact, there seem to be multiple missions in the campaign folder with a number "2"... but the suffix changes. I'd have to check, though I can't do it here. Ya I noticed that and was already ignoring the bank steering bar, as you propose. I was only looking at the top ruler with a circle, again as you mention. Though I mostly fly using the HSI. Personal preference I guess...

Thanks for your input. Yes, I made sure the RSBN/ARC switch was in the right position. Also, unless I've always been wrong, I do believe I understand radial interception, etc. Just to be sure, I guess I can tell you how I understand it briefly: 1- The needle with the "O" on it indicates the direction of the beacon itself. The "O" tip of that needle is away from the beacon, the other side it towards the beacon. 2- The other needle is the one I adjust to intercept a certain radial. If, for example, I am perfectly at 000 deg from a beacon, say 20 nm from it. If I align my HSI needle for a course of, say, 90 degrees. I will see that I am left of said radial and, if I turn to heading 180, I will be flying directly towards the beacon itself, but flying perpendicular to the radial I want. When I fly above the beacon (20 nm later), then I will intercept the 90 deg radial I set my course on. I could then turn left to a heading of 90 deg and follow that radial, away from the beacon. Would you say my understanding is correct? Cause, I mean I flew mission 3 of the campaign like that and everything was OK. Mission 1 was also OK. It's mission 2 where nothing was working. I have found another post on the Mig21 where people seem to complaint about beacon interference in the campaign... I'll try to find it again and link it.

I think you are right about NPP not being adjusted with autostart. At least, in my last flight, allthough I prepared my flight using the Mission Planner to find my correct headings, I was always off by a 10 degree during the flight. That is: if in mission planner I was supposed to turn to a heading of 145, it had to be 135 (approx) during the mission itself... So I assume the NPP adjustment had not been done by autostart. But still, this was just an error of 10 degrees... not a completely abnormal unexpected behavior....

Are you saying this is the "normal" way of flying away from a beacon? I mean... What I am doing versus what you are doing should yield the same result, isn't it? And, if your way is indeed the "by the book" way I'm surprised... It's a bit counter-intuitive. Anyhow, I think that it still doesn't quite answer the question sadly, as it doesn't explain why I was getting "closer" to the beacon, since the distance gauge (upper right of the cockpit) was decreasing and not increasing. It stayed at 000 for some time, as if I wasn't catching any signal. And then it finally started at 144, and decreasing, even though I should have been getting away from the beacon. So ya... doesn't make any sense, no matter how I was setting my HSI.

Hi, I'm in 2.5, doing the campaign of the Mig21. In the first mission, I didn't have any problem. But now, in mission 2, I have some navigations glitches (at least that is what I assume). First, I use autostart, just because I was getting a bit tired of starting the aircraft, since I suck and need to retry every mission at least 5 times! :) That being said, it took a good 15 minutes of flight before finally I was catching the Kutaisi RSBN (Channel 13). The problem is, I took off from Runway 8 of Kutaisi, and flew almost directly straight (heading of 62, as required by the mission). So I thought I'd adjust the HSI to fly on the 62 radial. So, since I have already been flying for a good 15 minutes, I should already be directly on radial 62 right? Well that is the problem... To be aligned with a radial, I need to rotate it to 120 ish. EDIT: I still don't know what the issue is... but though the RSBN for Kutaisi should be 13 (as per the kneeboard?), it seems I'm getting closer to it as I fly away from it... :( So... is it the wrong RSBN number that the kneeboard provides?

Oh ok this is weird... I am confident I redid that training last weekend and it wasn't "in the forest". I guess it might be a glitch then for some people. I'm surprised I didn't have it...

You don't really mention what you are hoping for with this thread... Advice... suggestions? This is not a bug, it is as intended. The gate is low because you are required to do a steep dive. And the fact that the rest of the mission doesn't trigger is normal behavior in dcs. Most missions are built with a bunch of events that trigger some actions. Sadly there isn't much that can be done other than practicing. You should be able to do that steep dive and go through the gate. Especially now that you know that it is that low, you can "plan" your maneuvers ahead and make it. I remember it took my a few attempts before I was able to do that training mission.

Thank you, gentlemen, for your advice. I might first try the "fading off tags" and see how it works. Then the next step might be to completely turn them off. It's true that, looking at interviews and such from real pilots, they seem to be struggling just as much as we do. I remember watching a F-16 pilot (if I remember things right) and he was explaining that he was asked to support a group of soldiers getting fired at and when he got there it was very difficult to identify who was who (friendly or foe). Only way he was able is the guys on the radio gave him precise info as to where they were, so he was then able to know which group was actually the enemy. That kind of radio chat isn't really possible in DCS, as you pointed out...!

First off, I'm not a super hardcore DCS simulation guy. I really enjoy DCS, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying this to point out that I'm not the kind of guy that has built a cockpit replica of the A-10 in my basement, to play DCS (I have nothing against it, as a matter of fact, find it pretty cool). That being said, so far I have limited myself to play with tags on. Not that I necessarily want to go EASY mode all the way, it was just a question of training. I thought I'd leave them on until I find that I'm good enough to turn them off. But, the thing is, I don't think I'll find an obvious indicator that I am ready for turning them off. I think the only way to know is try it... My "fear" is though, that I'll just take forever to locate ground targets. When it comes to air combat and the likes, I'm not extremely concerned. It's really ground attacks that worries me. I mean, just this morning I was attempting the first campaign mission of the SU25T campaign, and I was having an impossible hard time locating targets on the TV. The tanks and other targets are essentially the same color of the ground in my monitor (I know that it is exactly purpose behind their camo paint). I was helping myself by at least aligning my reticle with the tags on my HUD, but even then I was really struggling to find my targets on TV. However, I should say the mission is at dusk, and it is cloudy, making visibility relatively poor. And, the default loadout doesn't include Night Vision pod... I guess maybe that would help if I added one before takeoff. So anyway, I was getting shut down easily because I was getting too close, not being able to find targets... Which made me wonder about turning the tags off or not. If I'm that bad, maybe I should leave them on... Anyhow, I guess I'd just appreciate any kind of tip from anybody who was also juggling with the idea of turning tags off. Thanks in advance. oh and, maybe relevant information: 32" Monitor (165Hz 1ms 1080p MSI Monitor) TrackIR i7-6700k 4Ghz GTX1060 6Gb 16GB RAM

I understand your meaning better now. And, therefore, I wonder who can max out those settings.... If I could, I'd try the computer I use at work for structural simulations... it's got 12 physical cores, 192 Gb of RAM and a 3000 dollars GPU... If only I could haha...!

Well I apologize for jumping in, unless I don't get your meaning, I'd say that I wouldn't call your rig "reasonable" by today's standard. It definitely is high end, that is for sure. Of course, if by "reasonable" you meant "it's a good rig", then I agree. It is good, very good even. I think it's important to point out, in case somebody that isn't super tech savvy reads this thinking it's true. Your video card alone is more expensive than most common desktops you'll find on the market.

I read in another thread that they are working on night time lighting issues, so maybe this will also cover the gamma/brightness behavior "in general". I'm crossing my fingers...

Well I hope that while they are at it, they fix it in general (for any lighting condition)! :pilotfly:

I think that in general, the brightness, shading, etc. is just crap in 2.5. Not that I want to hijack your thread, but there is also that same kind of problem in day time missions. Some cockpit instruments are impossible to read, as they have yellow arrows on white backgrounds. I have seen multiple comments here on the forum about lightning, shading, gamma settings, etc. and it seems an issue everybody has. There are lightning and bightness issues for any time of the day it seems. I guess 2.5 was far from being ready to be released... Which makes me wonder why the rushed it, since people don't even pay for it... if it'd be a 60$ paid sim/game I'd understand that you'd want some ROI but it's not even the case.