Jump to content

Cepacol

Members
  • Posts

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cepacol

  1. On 12/11/2023 at 6:49 PM, Tusk.V said:

    i7 13700KF @ 5.5, 64Gb RAM, RTX 4090, Pimax Crystal

    For me I didn't notice a difference. My setup is much more modest than yours. RTX 3060 i5-14600KF 64GB I'm using a 1440p screen with the settings maxed out and I rarely go below 60FPS. Typically between 80 and 100.
    I'll test again with and without the mod

  2. When creating an AI-controlled ground-attack flight package, if they are armed with guided bombs, the F-15E simply flies and does not carry out the attack. If they are armed with Dumb Bombs, CBUs, the attack is successful. I did the same test with the LGBs on other AI controlled planes, like the other old F-15E, the F-16C, F/A-18C, AV-8B, A-10C, etc... guided on their targets, except the F-15E and specifically with LGB. The same happens when I send a wingman to attack a target designated by the mission editor or vehicles with LGBs. Anyone else had this kind of problem?

    • Like 1
  3. 1 hour ago, currenthill said:

    Thank you!

    There are two main reasons making my assets more resource intensive than DCS core assets. 

    1) Polygon count. My assets are a lot heavier in general, a lot more polygons for DCS to keep track of. This could be improved by making lighter assets for when zoomed out (level of detail - LOD). I could also optimize my meshes to reduce polys. Unfortunately, both these options take more time, which I rather spend on new assets. 

    2) Textures. My assets run pretty heavy 4K textures, and a lot of them. I could reduce texture sizes for smaller parts of the assets to make them less texture heavy. I could also have fewer textures (less detail per texture). But I kind of like the nice textures so I'll probably keep them pretty heavy. Lately I have been optimizing them a bit by using different texture resolution depending on the size of the object they are used for. This makes a lot of difference both in loading and in actual storage space. 

    So, for you guys out there running very low spec, I'm sorry, but it is what it is. I'm a one man operation. Fortunately the MT version seem to (at least for me) improve these issues a lot. For reference, I run both development and DCS in 2160p on a 13700K with 64 GB and a RTX 3080. 

    Thanks for the answer! I asked out of curiosity. I keep using these mods as they are wonderful. As a reference 95% of the time using your mods I can keep 60fps (Vsync on).

     

    For some reason I have the same performance in MT as in the normal version. What about the S-300 SAM, any chance?

  4. 3 hours ago, currenthill said:

    image.pngT-90M MBT 1.0.1 released!
    Changelog Version 1.0.1

    • Fixed missing track textures

    Thanks, but they can also be green.

    Skärmbild 2023-05-07 133922.jpg

    Thank you very much! I hardly ever comment on the forums, but I'm following along and you're an incredible talent and I need to thank you for your dedication to making DCS richer and more immersive!


    I wanted to make a comment and I don't know if other people noticed that when I use the mods the FPS drops in relation to the units of the dcs itself (I noticed this comparing Patriot and Patriot PAC 3)

     

    And now a request, and also a suggestion... would it be possible to make some version of the S-300?

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...