Bephott

Here are some through the lens videos with msfs at the end. Based on the videos where Pico 4 is mentioned, Quest 3 looks to be only a bit better, but the 3.5 jack, and the fact that Meta PCVR through USB was always better, makes me think about moving to this from Pico 4. What do you guys think?

Seeing all these benchmark results, I'm starting to think that the best value for the price card for DCS in VR is a used 3090... 4080 and XTX are good, better than the 3090, but not so much better that it would worth... 4090 is way better, yes, but (here) you have to pay 3-4x the price of a good condition 3090... It's not 3-4x faster, and if (when) you get CPU limited, it doesn't even matter... Maybe I'll just skip this generation, go with a 3090, and upgrade the CPU instead...

Any update on this? Will this be fixed in the future? Any promises? The skills of Petrovich make the Hind just anoying... And it's not only that he can't see in the morning, even when every enemy is shooting at us. Sometimes I hover at a fair distance from a stationary target, and he just can't hit it... And I hold the hover so perfectly that an MBT can shoot back at me, and down us... Why Petrovich, why? Most missions where I want him to shoot stuff ends up with me running in and killing some enemies with unguided rockets and MG, until they shoot us down... I feel like the Mi-24 is just neglected, because the AH-64 makes more money

Yes you can! In the official video at 1:37 you can see a nut with a volume-like marking above it, that is used to set the damping effect. With that turned to the lowest position you get no damping, the pedals are simply pushed back to center position, so you clearly feel the spring (which can also be replaced with a harder one if you want more spring load). I tried with older jets, like the Mig-15, as the accuracy of your pedal movements have more significant effect there. I would say it feels like I have much better control over the plane. In a dogfight for example it is very significant.

So I've been using these rudders in the past one week every day for a few hours, here are my short term experiences: First of all I'm a helo pilot mostly, and as such, I totally don't miss the brakes, but actually several planes also don't have them, so since I have these there was no need to switch back to the old set. The quality is above excellent. Thick metal everywhere, excelent machining, simply fantastic. I used plastic rudders before, and well... now I have higher standards... After unboxing the unit, it looked surprisingly small, I was not sure if I'll be able to extend it enough for my needs, but I was wrong. Setting every dimension to the max it was even way too big for me (I'm 183 cm tall), so I could easily find the best settings for myself. As I was playing with the dimensions I started experimenting with the different springs, the extra centering mechanism and the damper mechanism. And well, this is where the real strength of this is. You can tune it to a very wide variety of settings, my favorite is the no-center machanism with the soft spring. With a tuning of the damper I could easily find a configuration where you almost don't have resistance when pushing the pedals, but it returns to it's normal position very fast when you release them. It just feels so natural, feels so easy to operate! The result: aiming unguided rockets or MG with the Mi-24P just got so much easier, it is way more fun with these pedals...

it's me right now

Ok, i pre ordered too... Please Ugra, make it be fast in VR! :)

Before I buy it, can someone confirm that this map is VR friendly unlike the Channel?

I have both, and almost never use the Nevada map. The Gulf map looks amazing, especially after 2.5.6. If you want a map for training only, you can use any of them. But if you want realistic scenarios, like intercepting Iranian planes with the F-18, PG is the map for you. I'm sure you will find much more user missions for this map than for Nevada.

Ok, I removed and reinstalled the campaign just to be sure it's not an old version or something. The same happened again... None of these, I didn't even get to the power station when I exploded. This time it happened when we got close to the first bridge. Before we get there, at a turn Wolf 1 climbs a bit higher (50 feet maybe), I followed him, and the same as before: Carl Vinson: "...descend to assigned altitude..." and I exploded... Before this, the last time I tried, I got to the power station, Wolf 1 said he will land or something, I gained some altitude, Carl Vinson: "...descend to assigned altitude..." and I exploded... And every time before these two: CV warned me to desced, and I blow up... I guess it's intentional then. Could you please tell me what I do wrong? I see that many others could go past this mission, but not knowing what goes wrong it is pretty hard... And to be honest doing the hover check and following Wolf 1 over the sea for the 7th time is geting borring too...

This happened to me too! Not now, with 2.5.6, but last year when i tried this campaign first. I tried it 3-4 times, flew the same route again and again, but at some point I just exploded for no reason. I got so angry I gave up then, and decided to retry it later (thinking this is bug to be fixed) Today I tried it again and guess what, I exploded. BTW I use 2.5.5, so not the 2.5.6 causes the problem. Could someone just explain what trigger is activated? I also think it is connected to the altitude given by CV, I also get the same warnings even when I'm behind the mountains, on a different radio freq, following Wolf 1 to higher altitudes.

Seems like i posted the pic only, not the text. So i was just wondering what could be a real milestone... :) also fits the 'fly a legend'

Me 262 maybe?

Finally! Thank you!

I would play it as if it was Vietnam :)

I was not really interested in the supercarrier idea, thanks to this topic now I am. Hope it arrives soon!

+1! I also suggested this in another topic, playing Cuban Missile Crisis scenarios would be great!

"Us" is anyone who is willing to give his/her opinion. I'm sure more users would vote if it would take only a click than a comment on a forum topic.

As a developer I have to disagree. You can give a rough estimation about each development item in weeks at least.

I think more open communication and frequent needs assessment would solve many of the problems listed. Communication was discussed already, so I can only repeat: please talk to us! If you explain something like a delay with a bugfix, we will understand. If you don't, we will think that ED is just ignoring us. I think we have a good community here so ED can talk to us openly. On the other hand I think ED should also ask us about our requirements! It could be a much simpler way for figuring out where to focus next. I mean a simple voting system for example. ED sould just list 5 development items (or modules, or maps) that take similar time to implement, and let us decide which we want.

I'll just leave this here...

I would not jump from the P-51 to the F-18, the contrast between them is too large. After an analogue airplane you get a flyable computer. The F-86 is a good idea! Simple, easy to learn, fun to fly. If you want something more complicated, I higly recomend the F-5E! Actually this is one of my favorite planes recently. Russian planes are a bit harder to fly.

Is there any way to give AI gunners direct fire commands instead of changing the firing mode (hold/return fire/free fire)? If not, it would be a nice addition! I'm making a VoiceAttack profile for the Huey, and looping through the firing modes is lame, it would be better if I could order them to shoot or to hold...

I highly recomend this mission: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3305576/