Csgo GE oh yeah

Pretty fat on the F16 fixes. This pleases me.

I really don't want to start anything so i will leave this thread after this post , but being honest i personally don't recall a period where the phoenix worked "perfectly well". It has been a 'topic' so to speak from the start. I also think that most of the issues are not new at all. It's just that on this F14 subforum they don't get any attention, and if something does pop up it's met with a lot of resisting F14 owners and quickly pushed aside. An example: I saw a post on a squadron discord where there was a discussion about the hornet '32 second' thing and another ECM bug i believe. It was talked about in full openness. But as soon someone merely post a link to that (now locked) desync thread here, the post was removed minutes later and the poster banned. Turns out that that squadron is also test team for F14 i hear later....Stuff like that does not really help bringing bugs to light to say the least. As for the tact tournament: Every match that i have personally watched the MK60's kill count is much higher in absolute numbers. The 80's era analog MK60 is way over represented in kill count especially when considering a team has at most 2x F14's vs twice the F16's/hornets.

DCS does not 'revolve' around tournaments that is absolutely correct. But this topic is about just that and so in this context i use 'game breaking'. Context matters Anyway, just because DCS is not about tournaments, does not mean that a tournament organizer can't decide to eliminate certain weapons that have game breaking (for tournament play!) bugs. The way i see it ... If you're gonna organize a tournament, then try to do it the way you as organizer think it's best. And not half-assed because "DCS is not about tournaments". I can see both perspectives, but to me fair play is more important than for instance the novelty of a relatively new aircraft. But that is different per person. I personally don't feel including the phoenix (espcially MK60) makes for more interesting gameplay, quite the contrary actually but again that is 100% personal so ... to each his own i guess. As for 'fixing "every" bug" before release , obviously i never said that. But i do think that if you are going to bring a whole new super fast missile to the game, it might be wise to first find out if the base game can handle it. I mean i guess they did do testing but maybe not enough multiplayer testing. Or they did and decided that since the game is singleplayer centric it wouldn't be a big deal. Which is ok but then don't complain when the missile is banned in certain multiplayer scenario's.

It's not as easy as saying "well it's the DCS problem" and then just go fly competitive with these issues. If anything maybe the missile's behaviour should have been tested better before bringing it into DCS in the first place. It's the same thing with the tomcat ECM. The developers should not just build something that does not play well with the existing infrastructure, and then turn around and say "well we built this window but the house we built it for is the wrong size". AIm54 is really weird online, there have been very (for comp play) serious bugs in the past such as completely silent shots , and to this day apparently silent shots still exist (tv guiding). You can't rely on your RWR at all when a phoenix missile is involved so a big part of gameplay (notching) gets random instead of skill based. Now, if a tournament organizer decides he has no problem living with these things that is his right and more power to them. But, they should not sh*t on another tournament organizer who decides differently .

In 2d yes. :d

Ok well let's start with the radar of the F16. In what scenario do you think this would be an issue in competitive (tact or satal) ? And what i would like to know , the bug you mention in your first post, is that a thing ?

Got my 3090 wayyy back when some people still had hope that the 3080 would become somewhat available within a few weeks from launch. I actually did manage to get a 3080 from an actual store before that, at scalper price though. But it was too noisy for me. Anyway, it did hurt a little while pressing in my pin number, but knowing now that it was going to take 1.5 YEARS for anything to become available again i'm glad i did.

I guess it depends on what the actual unfair advantage is. In competition having a radar range of 80nm or 70nm is moot for the F16 and F18 and actually every other aircraft except the F14. Because Viper and hornets are shooting are engaging usually from closer than 20nm. If you actually want your amraam to hit you're talking sub 10nm ranges. So ... And usually there's even an awacs. So in short, it doesn't matter for the competition. Even the Hornet has this '32 second memory' thing which i'm sure most of you are aware of. But that is also something that can easily be checked and mentioned in the rules. However in case of the F14 the problems are of a different nature. Completely silent phoenixes due to desync or exploits, or 100% safety if you simply turn on your 'blinking ECM' are actual problems. And now this new bug you mention ? Is that a thing now ? I really hope not . Then there is the phoenix missile itself. The "overkill version of the amraam" as HB called it. Problem is that there is no real difference between the mk47 latest version and the analog 1960's mk60 version in game except that the Mk60 goes insanely far and insanely fast while still having the benefits of the later shorter range version. I can notch an active amraam-c quite easily if i am somewhat prepared. But the 1960's MK60 is a different story. It is impervious to chaff , and it should be easier to notch but the missile never seems to be where my RWR says it should be. Many people think they are notching the MK60 because they defeat them from long range, but they are in fact only notching the F14's radar before the Mk60 is active. Last TACT match i watched all the kills except one were MK60 kills while there were only 2 F14's per team. (it was 6v6) And this may be personal but to me it's just not fun to these un-notchable and un-outrunnable long range shots hit.

It will fit on the board np. But will it fit in your case ? Because it does stick out about 5 to 10cm past your motherboard depending on what 3090 you are going to get. Even if it does just fit, it produces a lot of heat so you might want to have some breathing room in there.

DLSS might work very excellent even. The way i understand it works with very high res 'screenshots' which are uploaded in advance and then the algorithm predicts what a scene should look like instead of rendering it all. Considering that the scenes in DCS are very repetitive (same trees, houses, same everything actually) this could immensely increase performance with basically no negative graphical impact. I'm probably completely wrong though :d

So the no-RWR thing is still not fixed. QUote: I don't know if I am the first person to discover it since I discovered it while playing around with the Tomcat in late May of 2021 but here's how it goes. You first STT lock someone with the radar and get in range for a TCS acquisition or manually slew the TCS over to the target (which wont give them the warning of course) then you switch the TCS slave to INDEP (or TCS) then switch the WCS to standby. Then you change the TCS slave to TCS/slave the radar to it (if you didn't do it already) and fire a missile (which you can still do with the WCS on standby). The target that you've fired at cannot evade through normal means to defeat a radar missile. Think of it of a TCS guided Fox 1 with the perks of a Fox 2 with the only problem being the gimbal limits. Here's an example I recorded with my friend when I was multicrewing in a PvP server: https://streamable.com/hfypvb. This of course has no place to be used in the competitive scene as it just is unsportsmanlike to exploit something of this nature. Feel free to hit me up if you need more info on this.

So this works not only on FC3 aircraft. How is it check-able if people are not only ruining other people's fun on casual servers but also using it in matches ? Also thanks for not sharing this earlier @DSplayer I mean why would you not post this somewhere the second when you (presumably -_-) find it out ? And you specifically mentioning that you 'only' found this out 3 months ago makes me think you knew much longer but whatever. g*ddamned i hate the F14 so much these things just keep piling up .

From what i read it no longer occurs since this wednesday , altough i still see plenty of migs and su27's never react to 80nm phoenixes in tacview for some reason. Probably one of many desync exploits.

Does your mission have insane strong winds or something ? It shouldn't be that difficult to land the F16 . Yes it's a bit more twitchy than FC3 aircraft but pretty easy. You don't have to keep the nose off the ground, and you can slam the brakes as soon as you touch down. But yes you do need to apply some rudder. Make sure nose wheel steering is off, untill you feel you can't rudder enough anymore and need the nosewheel.

I heard DCS has no lag compensation like most online games ? At these ranges and speeds .... https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1054208330?t=03h10m40s Shooter was going mach 0.97. What happens if he goes mach 1.x ?

FC3 aircraft still are not getting RWR from phoenix so they get hurt everyday >_<

Developers might lose incentive to produce modules.

Maybe already mentioned, but i think i've read multiple times that the Unreal engine is not really suited for huge terrains.

What does "close enough" even mean? I'm guessing "close enough" has just been widened or something? I'm curious. Or does the missile just track fluently now even though there is no radar lock ? As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target. What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough (??) together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide. It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik

Why, is it a secret how they've done it ? Maybe you can explain it to me ?

Why ? First they say they can't do it. Then suddenly it's 'fixed'. And i see triple the amount of MK60 kills i normally see on the server. Why can't i ask how they did something they said they couldn't do ?

[quote]As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target. What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide. It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik.[/quote] So how is this done ? Fix for AIM-54 not going active on held tracks. Did you make the 'box' bigger, or did you make the 'held track' do some magic ? Just a bit worried that you made it into a 80 nm > fire > turn around > always magic track missile, again.

oh dear god :d

"ED is aware and working" on it ? No i was not, where have you read that ? Can you link it ?