rayrayblues

Helicopters SH-60B and Sh-53 are just as bad.

WOW, how did you even start it with no mags?

I have made just a few alterations to your settings and now I am running smooth and stable. Thank you so much for pointing me in the right direction.

Me too. Remember the complaints of water looking "too tropical" when The Channel map was released? The Channel, Caucasus, and Normandy now look more realistic. More tropical would be right for PG and I'm not sure what Syrian waters are supposed to look like, so I dunno. If they could have dark water where it really is dark and clear more tropical water in PG and the upcoming Marianas, but I guess that would be asking too much. Pacific Island waters are clean & clear, almost like glass. European waters are more polluted with industrial runoff and therefore murky and dark. I kinda like the way it is right now, (I think it's more realistic than 2.5.6) but ED is still working on it, like the clouds and weather engine. It's all WIP. Be patient.

So can I assume that this is for MP only? Any hope of one for SP?

There is an easier way. Open the main game folder, then bin and the updater is right there.

The biggest issue that I I have is that the landing gear seems to be made of glass. I practice all the time and it's rare when I succeed without bending or breaking the gear. As for the Mustang, I can drop it on a dime and give you nine cents change. Very rare to bend or break the gear.

or F10 and F7 views either.

I agree that the water is a little too featureless. With a 10 kn wind there should be slightly higher waves and a few but not too many white caps. I do like the darker color though especially on the Channel, Caucasus and Normandy maps. When The Channel map first came out, one of the biggest complaints was that the water was "too tropical looking." The bluer and clearer water was perfect for The Persian Gulf though. If they could keep the clearer and more tropical water on PG and also the upcoming Marianas map and the darker water for the others, that would add to the immersion.

Now we need player aircraft to be able to ditch in the water. I too saw the Ju-88 ditch and float for several minutes before sinking in a mission I created trying out torpedo runs on ships. Water ditching would be a nice (and more realistic) feature for players.

Thanks buddy, they are pretty much the same as what I am running now. I re-did my settings again after we talked and also added an OC to my card. In game now I am running 2040 MHZ on the core (1895 before) and 6801 MHZ (6001 before) on the memory. Looking good so far, but I will still give your settings a try since you are the only one that I know with a 1660. Is it a Ti? BTW, have you seen prices nowadays. I paid $289.00 when it first came out. I saw one the other day, a Ti like mine for $1499.00. YIKES!

Yeah, thanks. I couldn't find them either.

Anyone know where the newly added V1 launch sites are located?

Thank you. This is especially helpful on grass airfields like Hawkinge and Lympne. The "takeoff from runway" option starts the plane a little too far forward with barely enough room to get up to takeoff speed. Usually I would turn around and go back to the fence line to give myself more room to takeoff. Now I can just place my plane by the fence and not have to do the turn around thing. Another thing, When I fly over to France and do my thing, I often find myself running low on fuel and unable to make it back to England to gas up. I used to use the invisible FARP feature to set up a station in a field somewhere, hide the trucks under some trees and rearm/refuel without having to fly all the way back to England. Now I can actually start at one of these FARPs. Gives me a lot of new options. Thanks again for this useful feature.

Normally I would say DM, however, there's a lot of people that I think could use the info.

Cool Man, do it.

I would kill for 60 to 90. That's what I had before the patch.

If you're having issues with a top of the line 3090, what chance do I have with my lowly 1660Ti?

Do you mean uninstalling the windows update?

@BIGNEWYThank you very much for your reply. I'm glad to hear that you and the team are still working on it. Like I said, since many of the people reporting problems have much better machines than I do, I have kept out of the conversation. Please let me know if someone comes up with a solution. I have given up on all of the other games that I have played. DCS is all I do now. You have a wonderful product and I trust that the team will come up with something. Ray

Seriously?? C'mon Flappie, are you and the team just going to throw up your hands and leave us in the dust? There is another thread saying that their experience is great. Seven replies on one page. This thread is nine pages long! and yet you and BN say that most people report an increase in FPS. One page vs nine pages doesn't sound like most to me. Most of the people having problems have much better machines than I do, so that's why I have so far not posted about my issues. I have been following this thread hoping that someone would come up with something that I could use. One common theme that everyone seems to agree on is that the loss is about 30%. For those of us who normally run 60 to 90 frames, a 30% loss is absolutely unplayable. As soon as things start heating up, firing guns, rockets, missiles, or being near any explosions, we expect frames to drop momentarily, but 2 to 5 frames is a slideshow. On one mission I have has a big formation of B-17's dropping on a target area. If I am in the vicinity with 2.5.6, my frames would drop to about 10 to 15 for a few seconds. Yesterday, I was over 10 miles away from the target area and my frames dropped to 1 and stayed there for almost 4 minutes. It wasn't a slide show, it was a photograph. There has to be a magic ingredient that those people on the other thread have that the rest of us don't, or there is something wrong at your end. I know that you are just a volunteer and not an employee of ED and I thank you for that. You have helped me and many others in the past. I don't follow DCS on FB or Reddit so I can't comment on that, but it seems that a large number of people are having a major problem. @BIGNEWY said: seems about right with the feedback we have been getting also. I appreciate those of you having performance issues, we know you are not making it up, PC's can be a mystery sometimes, I have said before I have seen the same machines perform differently for no apparent reason and it can be frustrating. We will continue to optimise and look at individual cases, try to help where we can. thanks I have spent hundreds of dollars on this sim and for most others it's been thousands. Now all of a sudden 15% of us can't play. 15% is a lot of people and a lot of money. I like many others have been spending more time making adjustments than actually playing. Nothing seems to work. Something has got to be wrong at your end. Please, I beg you. Don't give up trying to help us. This is not a "Dead End." Telling us to just play 2.5.6 stable and miss out on all the good stuff coming is just wrong. Thanks, Ray

There are already 8 pages of folks who have lost FPS and I'm sure there's more to come.

So.....why did you take the video down?

I agree and especially on The Channel, the water used to look clear and more tropical. Now it looks like the real Channel waters, grey and more opaque.

I agree that under cloud is too dark, but what I am seeing is more of a fogginess. Things are dim, hazy and somewhat out of focus. Raising gamma helps, but is too much for daylight scenes.