Hippo

Is it correct? It feels too far forward, and perhaps too high*. I can't see the numbers in the HUD when I recentre. Cockpit looks great, btw. Thank you. To be picky though - I'm not too keen on the reflections on the side windows. *It's possible I might have tinkered with view lua files in the past, but I don't think so. Is everyone else seeing this (Rift S)?

Incoming?

Running in VR. I think night is greatly improved. I do my testing by running a mission on a moonless night where I land at Anapa on 04 so fly over the towns on the coast. I am currently using a gamma of 1.3 on this. Many recommend 1.0 but I find this makes the DDI's a bit too dark, also I can't see anything of the wings, where I think I should see something. Before the patch turning gamma down would also make ground lights very dark, I now think that they are brighter now and much better for it, although I think they should be brighter still. Conversely, turning gamma up would make the ground textures, especially when close to landing, very visible in very odd garish colours, which looked awful. This is now much less noticeable, and the textures are much darker. There's still room for improvement, though. I really don't like the "upturned bowls" that are the aerodrome landing lights when coming into land - I think they look awful. They get better once really close (once landed), but I still think the "halo" effect is too large. I think the landing lights should look more like very bright points (like the stars, but much brighter), with a less pronounced halo effect. Curiously the red landing lights, which are closer than the white ones, become visible later. Going to daytime - as to daylight being washed out, well, sorry to be different, but I find a gamma of 2.0 to be quite realistic and approaching what I would expect in reality. A gamma of 1.0 just seems too dark to me. This is all for the good (in VR at any rate), and it's finally nice to get a half-decent night experience in VR. Hopefully improvements will keep coming.

I just hope it stays as an option (cough, deferred shading, cough).

Looky here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4213061&postcount=48 Next to the rightmost arrow, you can (if you look very carefully) see the word NAVY (just) reflected on the underside of the wing. Or at least I think that's what it's supposed to be. Worth the drop in FPS? Discuss. EDIT: sorry, got my post in just after i noticed petsild posted the same thing :)

Well, what can I say!?? THANK YOU. :). I would never have thought to try this. Early days so far, but I just tried a carrier landing as a quick test, and I think I was onto something... Using a range from around 78 - 90 % RPM, it's the first time I've ever felt I had the level of precise control necessary to follow the ball accurately. There are definitely issues, and further testing and tweaking are required, but first impressions are very good. Thanks again.

From the DCS manual: Hopefully, that clears things up? In my very simple single player missions it triggered as soon as I entered the mission (or at least it did in 2.5.5), after clicking on "FLY". This behaviour has changed in 2.5.6, and will surely break numerous missions already out there?

In 2.5.6 it works with "hidden on map". Same with 2.5.5.41962. Maybe he means it didn't work in the version before that: 2.5.5.41371?

Isn't there a forum rule about about not making other users feel inadequate because of their equipment? The X52 Pro is very good overall, I think, for the money. I have a Cougar with hall sensor and gimbal mods in storage, which I suspect will be better, once I get it back home. However, I still suspect its physical range of motion won't be enough. Clearly you're happy with the Warthog throttles - I'll have to try one out sometime.

Apologies, you're quite right. Just tried with 2.5.5 and it worked. Not sure what I did a few weeks ago.

Something fishy here. I also wrote 43505 in the title of one of my posts, only to see later that it was wrong. I initially blamed it on a typo / poor eyesight, as I copied the number off the main menu screen. Maybe I had copied it correctly after all, and it's changed since?

Thanks again. Aside from this new bug, was there ever any practical difference between MISSION START vs ONCE? I've only started using the ME recently, and I created a number of missions with the F-18 where cockpit switches are set up. For no particular reason, I set these up with the first immediate actions under MISSION START, and the rest, which require delays, under ONCE, TIME OVER (x). TBH, it all looks tidier using ONCE for everything, and begs the question, what is the point of MISSION START?

Sorry to doubt you, but I tried this just a few weeks ago (only once so I might have done something wrong), and I'd swear I could not get the SAMs to not show up in the SA page. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=241032&highlight=sa+page+sam EDIT - oh no - I'm going to have to put back 2.5.5 and test ;)

Always good to have a backup of Saved Games, just in case. In practice, I find that I can just switch the main game folders around, and everything just works without touching Saved Games. I don't believe that DCSW uses any other folders or stores information anywhere else. Actually I can copy the main game folder alone to another computer, and the game will run and create all the required files in Saved Games from scratch - of course, I lose all settings, missions, etc. P.S. It's probably no longer an issue nowadays, but I always install DCSW outside of program files (I use "D:\DCS World OpenBeta" and would use "C:\DCS World OpenBeta" if I wasn't using a 2nd drive). Just eliminates another possible source of problems.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4210190&postcount=5

On a Sunday? For goodness sake, go home to your families - it's only a game.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=263369

All your points are valid, and I agree with them. Clearly the option I suggested would be an imperfect compromise. I was practising carrier landings only last night and it feels that I just need to blow on the throttle for the tiny adjustments required (and this is with an adjusted axis curve) - this makes it almost physically impossible to have the precise level of control required. I do already compensate for spool time, and am certain this is not the cause of my problems. I simply cannot be bothered to introduce a separate utility to do this. Lazy? Yes, but there comes a time where all the tweaking just gets too much.

Sorry to resurrect, but can someone please clear this up? What I can say for sure, is that until relatively recently (and notwithstanding what is stated in the link), the opacity number DID vary the opacity of the label itself. Quite irritatingly, this stopped working, and has never been fixed, as mentioned in this thread and others. e.g. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=230253&highlight=labels With the following file, the label would initially "blip" (op=0.7), then become nearly transparent as the target was approached ( op=0.2 / 0.1), and then fade away when close enough to the target (op=0.05 / 0.0) so the label was no longer necessary (which is exactly what I intended). Now it's just solid all the time. -- Label parameters -- Copyright (C) 2004, Eagle Dynamics. AirOn = true GroundOn = true NavyOn = true WeaponOn = true labels_format_version = 1 -- labels format vesrion font_properties = {"verdana.ttf", 20, 0, 0, 0} local symbol_def1 = "." -- Default symbol -- local symbol_id2 = ". %N" -- Symbol with object name local symbol_def2 = "□" -- Default symbol -- local symbol_id1 = "□ %N" -- Symbol with object name local symbol_def3 = "•" -- Default symbol -- local symbol_id2 = "• %N" -- Symbol with object name AirFormat = { --[distance] = {format, alignment, color_blending_k, opacity, shift_in_pixels_x, shift_in_pixels_y} [2000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.0, -5 , 15}, [2500] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [20000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [20030] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.7, -5 , 15}, } GroundFormat = { --[distance] = {format, alignment, color_blending_k, opacity, shift_in_pixels_x, shift_in_pixels_y} [500] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.05, -5 , 15}, [3000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.1, -5 , 15}, [10000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.1, -5 , 15}, [10030] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.7, -5 , 15}, } NavyFormat = { --[distance] = {format, alignment, color_blending_k, opacity, shift_in_pixels_x, shift_in_pixels_y} [20000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.0, -5 , 15}, [20500] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [21000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [30000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [30030] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.7, -5 , 15}, } WeaponFormat = { --[distance] = {format, alignment, color_blending_k, opacity, shift_in_pixels_x, shift_in_pixels_y} [50] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.0, -5 , 15}, [500] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [530] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.7, -5 , 15}, [560] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, [5000] = {symbol_def2 , "Right Center", 0.0, 0.2, -5 , 15}, } -- Colors in {red, green, blue} format, volume from 0 up to 255 -- ColorAliesSide = {192, 192, 192} -- ColorEnemiesSide = {192, 192, 192} -- ColorUnknown = {192 ,192, 192} -- will be blend at distance with coalition color ColorAliesSide = {220, 220, 220} ColorEnemiesSide = {220, 220, 220} ColorUnknown = {220 ,220, 220} -- will be blend at distance with coalition color ShadowColorNeutralSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} ShadowColorAliesSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} ShadowColorEnemiesSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} ShadowColorUnknown = {192, 192, 192, 255} BlurColorNeutralSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} BlurColorAliesSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} BlurColorEnemiesSide = {192, 192, 192, 255} BlurColorUnknown = {192, 192, 192, 255}This is infuriating, as it is really useful in VR. If you're going to break something, then please fix it - otherwise what's the point of beta testing.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114030 If you have the space I recommend you backup the previous DCS game folder every time there's a new update. When the next update comes around, if you want to go back you just rename folders. In this case I made a copy of 2.5.5 on the same drive (say in a folder named DCS OpenBeta 2.5.5). When my live DCS (in folder DCS OpenBeta) is updated to 2.5.6, I can rename that to DCS OpenBeta 2.5.6, rename DCS OpenBeta 2.5.5 to DCS OpenBeta, and I'm back to where I was. Both versions remain available for testing, comparing files, etc.

And another thing... With all the strangeness going on with the ME, pls can someone confirm? If I now make an air defence target "hidden on map", it no longer shows on the SA page in the mission? A good thing, surely? Although "hidden on planner" would perhaps have been more appropriate for this? Why is this not in the change log (again)?

Very possibly, although I haven't checked. My mission building knowledge is tiny and insignificant. Hopefully those who know what they're doing will chime in.

I'm not sure about all of the details, possibly aim-120s are involved. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=247311&highlight=weight However, on some of my missions where the display was giving a weight around 5000 lbs higher than that in the mission editor, it's now correct following the update.

Using Rift S I'm liking gamma = 1.5 at night, 2.0 by day. No particular reasoning, just gut feel. Should there be a "correct" value for Rift S for this, which should be the same for everyone?

Even after looking through the NATOPS I'm not quite sure what's going on here. It seems we need to distinguish between TACAN stations and channels. It looks as if the stations work like memories (they can be set in the HSI - DATA - TCN page), and there are ten of them. I think it's this station number that shows up in the FPAS, and they're just using 10 (0 in the TCN page?) for now as the full functionality hasn't been implemented yet. What I don't know is if by selecting the station in the TCN page, that is the one that is used for navigation by all systems?