Stal2k

To Virus's point the stereo thing is not a "fix" as it creates other problems with deck crew in one eye and per ED staff it's not ready for public use. Turning MSAA off is more of a workaround than a fix as I don't want to turn MSAA off :) I think the fix here is an actual fix from ED, hopefully in the next patch or so. I think from the feedback we can say it's narrowed to Lighthouse + Reverb (maybe anything that uses motion smoothing?) and certainly when looking toward the island of the carrier.

That is almost literally what I'm saying/showing in the video above? FWIW I plugged in a Rift S and no more black bars.

Summary: I worked with BigNewy on initial troubleshooting steps to ensure this was worth the post. With the new SC module and using built-in missions for both the F-14 and F-18 this issue could be observed. It's easiest to see when first spawning on the deck, trapping or glancing down at the deck on initial. Large black bars that take up ~60% or more of the frame rendered to one eye that flash by pretty briefly if you are moving fast (initial) or can be there most of the time if you hold your head still (when first spawned in). Issue: Intermittent black bars popping up in VR HMD when looking at or in the general direction of the SC island. Troubleshooting steps: The usual, was directed by ED staff prior to posting this so please assume repair/clean/mod removal and all manner of general idiot-proofing was performed. Other notes This appears to be related to the lighting, as a similar issue exists within the C-101 module and has for some time Interestingly, upon first spawning into the F-14 mission (quals) with the briefing still up, you can look around without the bars. The instant the deck crew spawns after hitting fly they are present From checking out a recently posted (IMHO related) thread about clouds/smoke etc in one eye there is a chance this is just impacting lighthouse based HMDs like the Vive and Index Video link 1 Video Link 2 dcs log.zip

Thanks, that is actually somewhat helpful as a workaround until they fix it! edit: Assuming Kontiuka isn't a dev, can anyone from AvioDev comment on if this is a known issue and/or in the pipeline to be fixed?

I mean both multiplayer or singleplayer, under either setting the AI C-101 will not engage the player. If the designation of "client" is relevant then yes, have only tried getting it to engage with a client slot. The "Two totally different mission files" is my way to try to get in front of the "did you try turning it on and off" levels of troubleshooting. In the past, whenever I've had an issue like this, one of the first things that is asked is if it's a specific mission or general behavior. That is me stating that this behavior was observed in two completely separate mission files, not a single mission or some derivative of the same mission.

Hi, I have a question regarding the C-101 AI and if this qualifies as a bug or more of a known issue/not implemented. Both myself and another person (on open beta) have tried to utilize the C-101 to engage another player, for me using the same method that works on virtually every other plane (CAP-->Orbit-->Engage). The C101 just kind of orbits and neither engages or reacts to being shot/shot at in any way. In the event this is new information, here is what was attempted in order to get the desired AI behavior: Ensured we were using the CC, not EB with loaded guns Two totally different mission files Played with the advanced waypoint/cap/engage settings Explicit ROE Used default A2A loadouts Tried the combined arms style attack, although the C-101 does not appear to currently support

Any plans to add an A4 to this as an optional version? I can understand why you wouldn't want to for the base since not everyone uses it. I tried to add it in myself, just replacing two of the tomcats and everything seemed to work ok until trapping, then they would just kinda do this weird thing where half the plane would clip through the deck and eventually explode for the first few. After that, it would just kinda explode whenever it hit a wire. The only way to kind of make it work was to spawn a 'fresh' A4 on the carrier deck. Not sure the level of effort here, or if the issues is even with your mission but thought I'd ask.

Great. Yes, before he couldn't keep it level. I know I made two posts on it, but as a reminder, the C-101 is a great testbed since you can see the trim and aren't dealing with an AI pilot.

After my flight today I wanted to confirm this issue is not just with the F-14. The same thing happens in the C-101 which suggests it's an issue with the routine (as you stated). The nice part about the C-101 is you can see the roll trim gauge moving without any input once you switch seats. Unlike the F-14 this doesn't cause the jet to careen into the ground because both seats have flight control, but it does cause an unsustainable input situation. The C-101 may be an easier module to replicate/debug this in since the actual instrumentation can confirm the issue. As a reminder, I'm using the "Default Hat function in VR = 1" which I assume is required to duplicate the issue.

I bet it's what you said, because I do tend to forget about the APU or flip it off w/ mouse. With VR I always hit the Right Engine Ign switch instead of the APU, which I don't think CTS could fix :) Ok I'd file that as a PEBKAP then. Thanks.

Ugh, I swore I posted this already but I can't find it so I'm going to do a short version - let me know if this doesn't make sense. Profile: F-18 Config: Warthog boat switch as AG/AA mode toggle Issue Encountered: Boat switch not remapping to AG/AA mode upon GSU How to reproduce: I'm not 100% certain this is the cause as it was random but, I THINK it's what sets it up. If you use the boat switch for the engine crank but do not return it to neutral it never properly remaps to the master mode selection and retains control of the engine cranking with the gear up. Hope this isn't a double post, let me know if you need any more clarity.

I scrubbed through the whole stream that was from and it is in fact the default SAPHEI (non tracer). So It's still a bug, just backwards. A much less severe one at least, but the clip still shows that if you use the default ammo every other client besides you can see it.

Hi Home Fries, Two quick notes that I hope aren't too hard to chase down. F18 - Not sure if this is CTS but if there are custom curves in your .lua profile for WH the right throttle is not on the same one as the left around the AB engage mark. I thought maybe this was my fault until it followed me across machines. I do have the AB detent option selected. F14 - (Default POV Hat Function in VR = 1) Whenever I try to swap seats from pilot --> RIO there is a good chance of the plane getting stuck in a steep roll that is almost impossible to fix even after swapping back. I thought this was a HB bug but I think it's actually what equates to a trim command being 'stuck' when I swap seats. I'm still not 100% sure this is CTS but it would make sense given the methodology. The easiest fix I see would be to require the shifted trim hat even with VR = 1. I realize that conflicts with the "vr mouse" but I think for the F14 it's worth it, personally I never use the VR mouse but I'm not the only CTS user :)

Hi, This seems like something that would have been caught much earlier, but between another person on Discord and BIGNEWY I'm going to post it here. Should be pretty straight forward, you can see it plain as day in this clip - yes I selected ammo with tracers, you will have to take my word for it. The shooting starts at around the 50 second mark, If it isn't obvious the VR cockpit is the actual F16 client while the top left is the multiplayer host, bottom left is a spectator. This is recorded in realtime.

Calling this training ground at this point does it a disservice :) Thank you so much for this contribution to the community.

The HC is for a different HOTAS (cougar). There is a section in the setup help file that goes over this, but suffice to say you just need to pick the right HOTAS profile + KB. You will probably want to know what the N and R's that appear after some KB profiles mean too, that just means normal/reverse numpad.

How much time is enough time before we can start begging for some F16 Home Fries goodness :) :) :) ? Trying to play DCS without CTS is like flying without TrackIR/VR.

I have both headsets as well. I agree with all the pro's Aurelius lists in terms of the Rift software advantage, it is real lol. To his point, your system specs determine greatly what type of experience you are going to get. At first, I was really disappointed with the index, I didn't get the comfort people really seemed to boast, the FOV was better sure but all in all it wasn't like it just blew the Rift out of the water. Coming from a CV1 I had grown quite accustomed to the software advantage Rift offers (ASW/Dashboard, shit actually working etc). Something strange happened though, when I forced myself to use the index for a week because of return period, I really found it hard to go back to the Rift, DCS included. The takeaways are this, unless you have both you won't really miss much in terms of DCS, on anything less than a top tier system you are probably going to have a better time with the Rift S. On top end hardware, the Index is a better HMD (cost aside) and you can enjoy mostly all of the Rift exclusives with Revive. After all the "fixes" I will say the only thing that really annoys me still is the audio, but you said it's a non-issue. The tracking is really impressive with the Rift S if I'm being honest. In terms of mileage from the Index, even with top end hardware (I suspect this is true in more than just DCS) you need to tweak, tune, test and repeat. DCS just isn't hitting 80-90 FPS consistent as it sits today on top end hardware. That being said, it's important to note that the Rift S is a 80hz (80fps) max vs the index which has options 80-144. Since you are going to be sitting at 1/2 your max FPS (or less) pretty much always the index will "scale" bettter with newer hardware, if it's still around when that happens :) Yes, that could be a 5fps difference (40 vs 45) or a more substantial one (40 vs 60). I'll admit I'm still liking the 90hz vs the 120hz for DCS but I'm nowhere near done tweaking. I'm pretty confident through overclock tuning and maybe some settings/SS I can get a stable 60fps (1/2 of 120).

i7 7700k, 2080ti and now 32gb ram. What you describe is where I was at, it was also where I was at with a 1080 gpu.

I think it's just the move from 16 -> 32. I don't think speed is irrelevant but for sure it's using 19gb according to my monitoring. Using this thread and some anecdotes from other similar ones I could see that almost everyone claiming they were happy with performance had 32gb of ram. There is even one within the last two pages that has slower memory, but 32gb and says it's cool.

Ok, can confirm ram made/makes a huge difference. I upgraded to 32gb of 3200mhz ram from 16gb on 2400 and it's like, the improvement I thought a 1080-->2080ti would give. I'm no longer locked to 45fps and it's much better. Not perfect, but I think I see what everyone else saying it is fine is seeing.

It is a thing for people with top end GPUs because they aren't being utilized. You can see threads in this forum right now. That was my sort of initial spiraling event hehe. For context, I had the exact same rig prior to deferred shading and it would be hard NOT to lock @90fps, rarely would it drop into ASW land. When I upgrade from a 1080 to a 2080ti my performance with the exact same settings was worse in terms of stability. I actually had to introduce a PD of 2.0 (1.8 was actually the sweet spot) to put enough of a load on my GPU that the CPU wouldn't drop frames. MSAA was a feature that came with deferred shading, one of the chief points of this thread is, yes a 1080 is, in fact, plenty, the problem is that plenty also represents the current top-end for performance as hardware just stops mattering. Circling back to the whole deferred shader thing, what I was trying to say was prior to the update VR users enjoyed an experience that I feel should be roughly equal to what you could get today with high-mid to top end hardware. Since nobody apparently really is, I'd settle for just a stable 45fps but am having trouble even getting that. My new ram should be here tomorrow going to see if that does the dew, I'm also working on something else w/ hardware spoofing.

What you are saying makes a lot of sense, HOWEVER think about it this way. The number crunching aspect of DCS really hasn't changed a whole lot since a year ago right? The biggest kick in the pants to DCS VR was the move to deferred shading, which had nothing to do with the simulation (which I believe is actually tables, not real time) and everything to do with the rendering pipeline. either there is a lot of turnover in this community and/or people have short memories. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3467302 I remember there were a lot of folks with pitchforks because they could get full, smooth DCS VR prior to being forced into using the deferred shading. The official company line was (paraphrasing) "It's a lot of work to maintain two rendering pipelines, deffered shading is the future of DCS." which I certainly understand. The next gen hardware didn't really move the needly much vs what existed than but there was once upon a time were DCS had excellent, smooth VR with even a mid tier system. If you weren't around for that, it certainly looks like DCS is DCS and we are just waiting for hardware to catch up - but in reality, you aren't wrong that simulations in general have similar shortcomings when it comes to VR. It's easy to blame the number crunching behind the scenes, but I think it likely has more to do with having to engineer 1st party VR integrations on top of engines that have been updated for (sometimes) decades that can generate acceptable 2d performance. If you think about X-Plane, FSX, hell even ED and some of the racings sims, these aren't built on Unity or Unreal and because of that require a lot more engineering to implement a VR SDK as gracefully as "built for VR apps" are able to. It isn't just that someone decided they were going to make a VR game and knows how to optimize, it's that they did it in a engine that requires a few clicks to install an SDK with the low level stuff already done for you. Am I a bit bitter they pulled the option to disable differed shading a little prematurely? yeah :) People went way harder than I've seen anything recently, I think there was a thread like 10+ pages deep where someone clearly spent hours benchmarking before/after to make a point that fell on deaf ears. There was some hope when they announced the VR performance update, like "hey we found a thing in our terrain engine, 50% boost incoming!" (editorializing) to "Well, you need to have ASW off to see it" --> "ok it didn't work for everyone" --> never updating the other maps with the patch even though some folks saw a benefit.

In light of all these responses, I might do an experiment with memory aka justifying buying myself a new 3600mhz 32gb kit. You aren't wrong at all about the CPU but I didn't just purchase the 2080ti for DCS. I mean, I won't lie its probably what I was looking forward to the most but I'm not regretting my purchase because of the outcome. I was using a tool (fpsVR) I saw Swevivr use that although costing $3 and displaying nothing new, offers a very nice overlay within the HMD and visualizes exactly what is going on. It's definately the CPU choking, like you said the 7700 ain't that old and with a nice high clock speed shouldn't be holding the system back like it is (that is on DCS). However the thing I'm noticing aside from pretty much everyone that says they are content with VR performance having 32gb of ram is the number of folks with a Reverb / Pimax that are almost universally satisfied. It gives some credability to two things I can't quite prove but have seen evidence of; 1) DCS imposing it's own frame lock based on a hardware detection for the more mainstream HMDs. I've seen both PiMax and Reverb users claim to see frames between 1/2 and full refresh of their HMDs. I haven't seen anyone with an Oculus product or Vive claim anything other than the appropriate "ASW on" frame rate, full bore (80-90) or less than half. I don't want to go on a big long spiel here but you can see evidence of this in the big VR performance update thread where they were asking for users to post their results - so many people were saying 1/2 the frame rate to the point Wags and company were trying to walk people through disable ASW/Reprojection even though people said they did. I currently have a Rift, Rift S, Vive and Index handy to test and can never get it to register between 1/2 and full regardless of ASW state 2) DCS VR is masochistic perf wise - The other angle for the "yay reverb / PiMax" crowd is the resolution, as you pointed out. One of the first things I realized moving to the 2080 ti is that DCS actually ran BETTER the more SS(PD) I threw at it. The GPU was outpacing the ram/CPU so bad it was causing massive dropped frames and slowing it down via increased resolution just resulted in a poor frametime vs poor frametime + dropped frames. I might just update the initial post in case anyone else could benefit from this, especially after I get the RAM, after that I'll get a new CPU just to see what actually gives the most gains. Since I'm not going to get another HMD anytime soon, I'm hoping that my crappy 2400mhz ram is starving my CPU by proxy. Otherwise I might try something with NVIDIA panel or hardware spoofing to try to hunt those witches I outlined above :) Maybe using NVIDIA to 'ghetto super sample' I can mimic or force a similar render outcome to that of a pimax or reverb. I swear by the time I'm done tweaking this I'm not going to want to actually fly anymore :) Thank you, everyone, for your inputs thus far!

No it isn't, I'm just wanting to achieve stability. I gather from the responses I likely need 32gb of ram and possibly a new CPU to get that. I'd love if I was locked @45fps all the time but the reality is I dip into the 30s if I'm doing anything other than free-flight, 20s at an airport and multiplayer is around 15-20 as well.