Infiltrator

I along with others have got to a point that we won't spend another penny on DCS until Vulkan is released. I get that Rome wasn't built in a day, but I along with many others have literally spent thousands on a gaming rig to play DCS. So to still be on 2 cores in 2022 is just beyond a joke and it's driven many away from DCS.

We're just PC enthusiasts who want the most immersive flight simulation experience possible. I personally got my 3090 for MSRP. I wouldn't have paid retail for it. I managed to beat the scalper's bots. If you're a VR user like myself, getting a 3090 is worth it for the eye candy. The 24GB of RAM also eliminates VRAM bottlenecking. Efficient & minimal mission creation seems to be what is handling the CPU limitation ATM. My only concern is ED will keep delaying the implementation of Vulkan & instead keep creating more content & features as a means of diverting people's attention from the elephant in the room. Finance is obviously an issue as ED have to pay their bills & wages & Vulkan isn't paid DLC which in my mind keeps it at the bottom of their priority list. ED's priority is to create content & modules to keep the money rolling in, which is understandable as they have to 'keep the lights on'. I'm just concerned Vulkan will keep being pushed back. I know little to nothing about coding. But from what I gather going from one API to another is an enormous undertaking which requires many thousands of manhours of work. Vulkan is now 6 years old & we've been discussing Vulkan's implementation into DCS for over 4 years so it's understandable that some people like myself who have spend a lot of money on gaming rigs are now beginning to become impatient. With Sims like Star Citizen Chris Roberts knows he has to release an abundance of news with Star Citizen's development because it keeps its player base happy with at least knowing what's going on behind the scenes. Sure, things are pushed back, but at least people are kept informed. With ED all we get is a newsletter & a newsletter that hasn't even mentioned Vulkan for a while now. An ETA with some development news would be nice & reassuring instead of a blanket of what seems to be secrecy with a: "don't worry it's coming" to boot. I love DCS in all its splendor, but there's only so much one can take when shelling out money on components in anticipation for what seems to be an imminent implementation of the new API that will unlock people's hardware's potential. I now find myself digging deeper into keeping myself entertained when playing DCS. Meaning I'm constantly flying my favourite module & taking on harder missions to keep myself distracted from the frustration of not knowing when.

This is what I played my first PC game on.

Multi-core processors have been out for 17+ years and today's modern games can utilise 6+ cores. ED can produce as much content as they like & release all of those stunning trailers. But if they don't implement Vulkan I'm gone. Some people have spent £2,500 on a GPU, and for what? A game that needs a lot of fine tuning in order to run 45 frames in VR? I was once into Arma 3. That game was release almost a decade ago & still Bohemian Interactive's flogging that dead horse with their single core engine by continuing to release sticking plaster content. I fear ED will follow their lead in continuing to polish the game & add more content on a outdated engine in order to try to keep their audience & to "keep the lights on" as so many like to mention. I've literally just spent £550 on an i9 12900K CPU. Why would anyone settle for anything less than multi-core gaming in this day & age when investing so much money in components? If you're reading this Wags tell the Devs at ED to pull their finger out & to get that Vulkan implementation prioritised! People don't buy supercars to drive them on single-track bumpy lanes!

I've played ED's flight simulators since the Flanker days. I think DCS is absolutely amazing and I've invested a lot of money and time in the game. With that said I am however growing impatient of the lack of news of the implementation of Vulkan. It's been talked about for several years now and nothing's changed. It's a bitter pill to swallow having to keep waiting and waiting when people like myself have literally spent thousands on their gaming rigs just so they can get what can only be described as mediocre framerate performance when in VR. Reading the latest newsletter about polished features and bug fixes with no mention of Vulkan is incredibly frustrating. As much as I love DCS if Vulkan doesn't land sooner than later I'll moth balling DCS and migrating to MSFS2020 because I just cannot justify spending so much money on hardware when DCS delivers such poor performance with its current engine. ED really do need to prioritise Vulkan and keep people regularly up to date with the development, otherwise people will stop investing in the game and eventually they'll drop it completely.

I've been taking on the mighty SA-19 Tunguska in the KA-50 and I was wondering how sophisticated the AI are with detecting my presence and how they actually detect the KA-50 and other aircraft. Does turning off external lights make you less detectable? Or is it a simple case of a basic tigger area? I'm guessing locking onto targets alerts them, but I'm curious to how the AI work.

I've had issues with getting TacView to work & none of the quick fixes seemed to have worked. But as it happened, it was SRS that messed up my Export.lua file. To fix my recording issue I simply copied the export.lua file from :\Program Files (x86)\Tacview\DCS\Scripts and pasted it to :\Users\YourUsername\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\scripts I hope this helps. Infiltrator

I've heard people say that the SuperCarrier should have been offered as a 'free' update. You know, get thousands of man hours coding and bug testing for "free". Maybe these people would rather travel to Russia to give out food parcels to ED's devs so they can feed their families and run generators at ED's offices to keep the light on. The salty tsunami of lemons all sucking on the same acidic bitterness was inevitable because they don't understand the complexity of DCS Worlds' development. If all the lemons spent a day at ED and observed the development of the SuperCarrier and its challenges, I'm sure they'd all stop crying into their cornflakes. When the devs fix one thing it often breaks several other things. It's the nature of the beast of game development and the very reason why modules and updates are often delayed. It's almost impossible to predict an exact date when a module will be ready for release, but game developers are between a rock and a hard place, as it's pretty much mandatory that they have to give an estimated date of release to satisify consumers a to given themselves a date to work towards.

I find the KA-50 flies weird if my collective, rudder and cyclic axis are bound together.

When the sun's behind the KA-50 the glare it can produce on the Abris is absolutely unbearable! I know a little about dynamic lighting, but how sunlight is able to somehow penetrate through the cockpit is a tad little unrealistic, just as how the dust is able to penetrate the footwell when taking off/landing. This really does need to be fixed, because it makes locating and locking onto targets impossible. No FLIR to see at night and blinding glare in daytime :hmm:

I've flown the Hornet for a couple of years now, and although I've in that time bought both the Huey and Gazzelle, I haven't flown either, but since I bought the KA-50 I haven't put it down. In fact, I've removed the detent from my Warthog knowing I'll be flying the Black Shark for a while yet. Until the SuperCarrier comes out of course. But yeah, the KA-50 is a blast to fly and challenging to learn.

I hope they finish the module with this update. When creating a VoiceAttack profile I soon realised how badly implemented some of the controls are. Some default keybinds are duplicated and conflict, whilst the Datalink SA-TLF switch isn't even listed in the keybinds! Good job it is clickable! I'm guessing ED may have ran out of keybind combinations?

I recently enabled rudder trim in the options and set it to center. However, I soon noticed the cyclic wouldn't randomly become unresponsive often refusing to respond and sending me crashing onto the ground. Is this a known bug? Also, is rudder trim implemented in the real world? Cheers Inf

TBH, I don't care if certain functions aren't simulated as long as their functions are behind the scenes and have no visual representation of an animation other than the switch being physically moved. Every control - albeit simulated or not - should be clickable, regardless if it's functional or not. If it doesn't move like it should in real life then it breaks the immersion. That's the bare bone of it.

For me the Hornet's attack radar is totally broken. It's frustrating as hell then you can't lock an enemy jet up when you have the element of surprise. For nowe I've given up with the Hornet because of the radar.

Yep, it irritates the hell out of me when there's a switch and it doesn't do anything. It's like an FC3 aircraft. If I'd known the KA-50 had so many unclickable controls I wouldn't have purchased it because it just irritates me.

ED should have called it the KA-50 Lite.

The devs could attach a hint with the description of what the switch is for and a bracketed "(NS)" not simulated. The KA-50's cockpit is otherwise part high fidelity part FC3. The devs could also add a small 'dud' sound to the action of an unsimulated switch/control to give an audio idication it's not simulated. That would clear up any confusion. How many people hover their mouse pointer of an unsimulated switch/control believing it's simulated and the lack of action is either a bug or their pointer isn't placed over the control correctly :unsure:

Is it a bug or is there a lot of unclickable switches? Even if the control isn't implemented it would be nice if the switch, button was clickable.

Yeah my thoughts exactly. I've read the center plate also needs to be shortened. I think it'd be an idea if Arozzi sold a plate kit specifically to work thrustmaster and Saitek HOTAS' and pedals. But then I have my Slaw RX Viper pedals which are pretty niche, so it begs the question if Arozzi would design a pedal plate to accomodate the Slaw pedals. What I particularly like about the Arozzi stand is its feature that allows you to attach your office chair. That of course prevents your chair from being pushed back when you depress the pedals.

I'm very interested in the racing simulation stand. Although I'm unsure if it'll be suitable for flight simulation. I'm wondering if I'll be able to mount my Warthog and Slaw RX Viper pedals to the mounts. Has anyone else had any experience with this simulation stand? https://arozzi.com/product/velocita/

It's the nature of the beast that updates will often break things and require patching. But more importantly it's two steps forward and only temporary one step back. DCS World is looking more and more beautiful and realistic. To achieve this level of realism and immersion code will of course become more complex - thus more suceptable to generate errors. The devs are pushing the envelope with the development of DCS World and it's evident from their outstanding work that their more passionate than anyone about bringing DCS World to simulate the real world. Kudos to ED's devs.

There you go, 2.5.6 compatibility : https://github.com/mrSkortch/DCS-ME_coalition-modification/tree/1cbb7663d98f2698cbc97f8a69ea64fad6811e8b/MissionEditor/modules

Yep. The update has broken the mod :cry_2:

Broken This mod no longer works for me when trying to load the Persian map after updating to open beta 2.5.6.43453. It worked fine before the update, now it hangs when loading the Persian Gulf map at terraingraphics.init: 97, persiangulf.ng5 I have to revert back to the original files or the mission won't load.