Jump to content
Server maintenance Tuesday 18th June at 05:00 UTC

draconus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11014

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by draconus

    New Caucasus Map (and tech needed)

    in DLC Map Wish List

    Posted · Edited by draconus

    1 hour ago, GEIST said:

    highly saturated images

    Make sure you start with calibrated monitor before comparing colors to anything. If it's VR I don't know if they keep any standard here.

    Maybe it's your preference so just fly in overcast.

    You can also use DCS color settings, graphic driver color settings or monitor color settings to get what you want.

    Now, remember that RL can generate all kinds of light, contrast and colors and everything inbetween. IRL the flora changes its colors daily. DCS can only recreate some part of that, including sun light, shadows, moon light and seasons (if available). It's like artists can only capture a one moment in time with the textures - everything else is light and saturation that goes with it. So there's no one "correct" image or color range - it's all dynamic.

    • Like 2

    New Caucasus Map (and tech needed)

    in DLC Map Wish List

    Posted · Edited by draconus

    15 hours ago, Bosun said:

    (And that's just the rendering details - there's an entire other layer to this, which is in-game camera aspect and 'lens' size.

    Yes, it all is important, not just model details (they are decent enough for most objects, maybe apart from the mountains, but they were never considered crucial part of the sim), but most important are correct model sizes displayed on a device with correct camera focal length.

    To even start comparisons you have to put yourself in the same display environment, meaning usually VR with correct IPD. Then the game has to have correct size models. Now put yourself next to a man, a vehicle, a tree and a building - it's all correct size in DCS. Other test you can do with flight time over known distance with known speed - also correct.

    15 hours ago, Bosun said:

    Games like MSFS have really pushed the bar, and having 2010 map-technology now is showing its age. MSFS has much higher detail and is still performant, so this isn't an impossible goal.

    You can't compare them directly like that. DCS has much more to do with both the terrain (object DM, IR data, seasons, terrain interaction with weapons and units on all surfaces) and other simulated aspects (avionics, sensors, FM, weapons, other air, ground and sea units) than civil flight sims. It's always a compromise between quality, simulation depth and performance. Year after year, as PC performance allows, we get more details, bigger areas, better textures, more in depth simulation. And no, it's not 2010 tech, it's in constant development.

    It's easy to put out highly detailed mesh and cover it with high res textures, normal and displacement maps. Now make it a huge area with whole simulation on top and it's unplayable on current top end hardware. You can't expect high quality without impacting performance. Genius new engines, optimisations and smart graphic tricks can only get you so far.

    14 hours ago, Qcumber said:

    Not quite what the OP was suggesting with this post but I think a new Caucasus map could offer an opportunity to expand the area south and east to meet the Syria map and upcoming Iran map. 

    There's no upcoming Iran map. Maybe you meant Iraq? Even then that'd be Turkey/Armenia/Azerbaijan/Iran map - I don't find it very popular. Please take it to https://forum.dcs.world/forum/339-dlc-map-wish-list/

    23 hours ago, Wait4It said:

    Maybe even partner up with one of the great game engine makers (Unreal, crytek).

    ED is not stubborn or stupid. They did try to use other engines but found them lacking to the given tasks and had to go with their own engine. They try to implement different new techs as they come out.

    • Like 3

    Traing Missions

    in Missions and Campaigns

    Posted

    17 hours ago, too-cool said:

    Maybe I missed something but there doesn't seem to be any Landing training missions for the F-15E, was this area missed? Thanks TC

    You missed it - the second last is called Overhead break - and it's a landing training mission for overhead break pattern :thumbup:

    • Like 1

    DCS: Kola map by Orbx in Early Access available now!

    in Official Newsletters

    Posted

    27 minutes ago, PLUTON said:

    Hahahahahaha it's good it makes you laugh and it's good for your health, or I'm French and what I mean is when we press F10 what do we get in the maps view my friends (is it good this time?) and well for me when I press F10 nothing happens anymore no maps so I don't
    I don't know where I am visually.
    Otherwise everything is fine

    I can't check but you should check your DCS > options > misc > F10 AWACS view. The restriction can also be forced in the mission itself or the mission from the server you're flying on. Last but not least check key binding for F10 map view or if it works on any other map.

    • Like 3

    ATTENTION: SPOILERS! - F-14B CAMPAIGN REFORGER PART I+II FEEDBACK THREAD - Read at your own discretion.

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    34 minutes ago, McVittees said:

    Just played mission 1 of Reforger 2 campaign, got stuck off of taxiway when took left turn to de-arming area too soon. 🙄 Quit mission thinking "never mind, I'll be able to skip this mission" but when I hit 'end mission' I got a 'campaign failed' message. Not going to re-fly mission 1 again at time soon; is there a way to skip to mission 2?

    Ouch, so close 🙂 Haven't you tried to afterburner it out of the hole? Should be possible when you're lighter weight after the mission. But, yeah, if you didn't get to the parking spot zone and no "mission complete" message then it's officially not completed.

    In the campaign window you can just click "SKIP" to skip the mission. Might be required to hit "SHOW" button first if it's not visible.

    image.png

    • Like 1

    Increase HUD font size and brightness??

    in F-15C for DCS World

    Posted · Edited by draconus

    On 5/4/2024 at 2:14 PM, bop1701 said:

    The text is pretty small, and even when turning the brightness to max its hard to read without really having to zoom in.

    You have already found the keys for HUD brightness and color change. There is no way to change the font size - it is how it is IRL.

    Now please provide some screenshots because there can be some other parameters in play here:

    • there is a RL problem reading the HUD flying toward the sun - pilots have to use HUD repeater (not available in FC3 F-15C) or other instruments then
    • you may have your fov/zoom set too wide and the HUD is simply too small to read on your monitor
    • you may have set wrong pilot head position (too far forward in this case) so the HUD readings are small relative to the available HUD glass area

    Flaming Cliffs 2024

    in Forum and Site Issues

    Posted

    On 5/3/2024 at 5:59 PM, Dan_Farrell said:

    Hi I just cant find where to purchase Flaming Cliffs 2024. Cant find it can anyone help me thanks

    It was just an announcement:

    Quote

    We are also thrilled to announce Flaming Cliffs 2024 that will be coming soon to DCS!

    F-15E not authorized

    in Bugs and Problems

    Posted

    5 hours ago, TrainAss said:

    Are you arguing against using Windows defender as your AV software? I'm not sure I follow your statement. Even if you're a small business and you just let defender do its own thing because you cannot afford the management setup, it's still leaps and bounds better than McAfee, Norton, Avast, avg, trend micro, Kaspersky, etc.

    I'm not against Defender. I was specifically replying to your statement that companies use Defender over any other AV software. That's simply not true.

    And that it's way better than any others isn't true either.

    • Like 1

    Why do you fly FC3?

    in DCS: Flaming Cliffs

    Posted

    4 hours ago, diasmon said:

    In conclusion, as long as FC has the same flight model, weapons and systems, then I see to advantage to flying FF. Because FC is not about simplified systems, it is about simplified procedures.

    I can't agree. The systems are either missing or very simplified in FC. You can play pretend with procedures but have no option to do it realistically. There are no modern smart weapons so there's not much to configure either. Even then, it's not like you incessantly click in FF. It's still 99% flying regardless of module quality.

    A few points I don't understand how could they be an advantage of FC3:

    • The mouse is just one of the input options in FF and it can be placed on the left side too. You can use keybinds, additional panels, voice, hand tracking or even full cockpit - that's on the user.
    • If I don't have much time I don't do full cold starts - I use airstart and Instant Action missions.
    • Keys may be standarized but you still have to fly and fight differently with any one of the FC aircraft and their systems, while simplified, are also very different.

    Covered switches can be problematic, I give you that.

    • Like 1

    DCS: F-14 Development Update - AIM-54 Phoenix Improvements & Overhaul - Guided Discussion

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    7 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

    For some of it yes, but other things, like basic weapon parameters, say motor thrust or nozzle area in this case, it's not really all that hard to change and test the changes.

    It might work for small group of enthusiasts or modders but not when business is involved when even preparing the changes, tests and files for community takes additional time then changes and results need to be looked upon, understood and tested again. Sometimes it is done though in special cases to test in larger groups or beta programs.

    But why Phoenix needs any changes now? Where's the bug report?

    Any update on Supercarrier being updated

    in DCS: Supercarrier

    Posted

    12 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:

    After those items are completed, maybe we can talk about extras, beyond planned features.

    I like some of these esp. WO/bolter or barricade while I don't much need the others so I'm pleased with current development of deck directors, which happen to be beyond the original scope.

    • Like 1

    New "Flaming Cliffs 2024" aircraft questions (F-5E, F-86, Mig-15)

    in DCS: Flaming Cliffs

    Posted · Edited by draconus

    12 hours ago, Flogger23m said:

    An F-15C likely falls into a similar situation.

    No, it doesn't. Both A and C are cold war machines but even 90-2000 versions are not a problem. We already have AMRAAM, 9X and JHMCS capable Hornet, Viper and Strike Eagle (some features still in plans) with 2000s avionics, tpods and weapons. Wags' only argument against was F-15C's single role as air superiority being less popular than other multirole types.

    That's just a single but very well known aircraft. There are still many icons to recreate.

×
×
  • Create New...