Vakarian

Yes there is, hover on their name, click ignore and there you go

Oh yeah, F4U seems very odd in this regard. Some switches go up with left click, some go down. So not even that's standardized. Also, a lot of rotary style controls don't function on mousewheel but you have to click and drag like they do in pretty much all other modules

At least in the Tiny Tim tutorial, they aren't even loaded so that's the issue. As for the HVAR, make sure you have correct controls bound. For some reason there's rocket release and weapon release. I could launch HVARs on the training mission

What happened is exactly what it says underneath the timer...

As a workaround if you have e.g. Button1 for RESET and Button2 for ARM, you could set Button1_OFF and Button2_OFF bindings to the OFF position, that way it might trigger the OFF position first and then go to the "other" position. Haven't tried it though so I'm unsure on the timings.

null

Oh yeah, I've learned to ignore it. However it would be nice to know that this is intended to get fixed eventually. Tagging @NineLine as you did respond in this thread If there's more data needed just let us know. Seems we have people willing to deliver what's needed to try and get this demonstrated as quickly and easily as possible so it could be fixed soon:tm:

As promised earlier today, here's the video demonstrating cloud rendering issues. The "pixelation" effect is more visible when moving very fast, however the clouds "bouncing" is much more easily spotted. Northstar mentioned in his post that the zooming has an affect on the issue so I've demonstrated that as well. When zoomed in (low FoV values) the clouds remain almost completely still, however when zooming back out to the default values I get when entering the cockpit (I have no snapviews btw) the clouds bounce up/down like crazy when there is movement of the aircraft. Interestingly though, if you move in F11 mode, clouds don't seem to bounce. Additionally, I deliberately made mission with clouds and fog. Fog doesn't seem to show any of the issues that the clouds show. Also, when comparing fog and the clouds, the clouds seem to have this rigid grid-like rendering, it's really easy to spot in the first half of the video where the camera movement is quite fast, while the fog isn't anything like that. The fog is just... fog. Smooth and uniform and feels like the fog should feel. Clouds on the other hand do break the feeling that they are clouds with the bouncing and the pixelation. cloudIssuesDemo.miz options.lua

Skimmed through but it's boils down to "get the best HW possible, if you can't then decease these and these settings". Not applicable here as the core issue here is the rendering of the clouds, not the user settings. Third party proprietary technology shouldn't have anything to do with the native rendering of the clouds. More so as I have the same issues on AMD GPU meaning all of the DLSS/DLAA "stuff" is completely meaningless to me. I will record the videos tonight when I get home in hopes of this getting some more traction with ED.

Whaaaaat? He has 60 FPS locked in VSYNC, no way the settings have anything to do with it. The clouds behave like that since they released

Can you like not spread that subreddit?

Don't you think that the developer of the C-130 knows which one is the latest? And that he was hinting to the one posted in this thread?

Yes, basically what Dangerzone said. IDK how the ISPs are at your country, but here if you mention to them that you have to host some services for business/work or something like that, they give you no hassle and just remove you from CGN. They tend not to if you just complain about the gaming as the CGN is one way of solving the age old issue of lack of the IPv4 addresses and in their minds hosting game servers from your home is not high in their list of priorities.

How long should they continue to support the module for free? Until the end of yours/their life? The amount of money everyone paid for it way back when is long gone. At some point you got to be realistic. If they are going to work on a Fishbed, it's not gonna be free.

Remove this "originating IP" entry and the checkbox. Basically, with this you are telling your router that if something comes to it on a port 10308 it should go to the "Server IP". As mentioned before verify you don't have firewall blocking the traffic. Once you've done both you can go to some web service like port checker and see if the port is opened. If it's still showing that it's closed it might be worth talking with your ISP to check if you are behind a CG-NAT because if you are then the chances of it working are dropping close to 0.

First of all, massive thanks to ED for not burying this under carpet and continuing to improve it. We all wish it was done sooner, but hell, I understand you have a million and more projects running in concurrence so it is what it is. Now, on the risk of sounding like a "entitled whiner", why couldn't this be the first iteration of voice chat? Finally got to try it out in my group and it worked perfectly out of the box. One member had to restart DCS because the VC for some odd reason didn't wanna go in the radio mode, it stayed in the room mode, but for the rest of us it was as simple as start up the aircraft, tune the desired frequency, press the PTT and it worked! None of the "did you try this, is the mic set like that, one aircraft works, the other doesn't...". That member who had to restart DCS jumped in the bird, started it, tuned radio and it worked for him as well without any hassle. If this were the first iteration, the acceptance would have been far greater. Please, don't stop working on it, it has the potential to be great but it needs those few rough edges ironed out. --- Now onto the gripes with it. 1. Right off the bat, the Hornet guys complained about the lack of MIDS Voice radios, that's a dealbreaker for them. 2. Compared to the SRS, there's no option to set the e.g. radio1 to the left ear, radio2 to the right ear. 3. Also compared to the SRS, there's no option to route the mic input to a separate audio channel. This works wonders for the video editing as then the captured track only has the voice going through the radio and none of the dogs in the background, breathing, bumping into stuff... So far, that's it. In my group those were "the bad sides" we wish could be improved, but as far as the functionality goes it's many miles better now than it was all the way since launch until this update.

These issues only happen on resolutions that aren't 16:9 aspect ratio, it has been reported a while back... Maybe this gets it more traction

Thanks @Mistermann for the tip, can confirm as well that adding the template from the sidebar works. So now we have a workaround and a very good hint what the devs should check out to see why it's broken when selected from the dropdown menu in "edit" section. Been doing missions for a while now, didn't even know that this was also available in the sidebar

Yep, same thing here. Did a full slow repair, but still can't place them. I can try to get dcs.log tonight, unsure what else is needed for debugging. Btw, it could be useful to merge these two topics as they are about the same thing.

MAR is not a fixed number...

I'm gonna shamelessly ping both @BIGNEWY and @NineLine so this gets the proper traction it deserves. Nicely investigated with a fix provided. Nice job @drPhibes

ATIS would be useful, however only if we get dynamic weather as well (not necessarily real-time, but it has to change over time). If the weather is static then there's basically 0 usability for the ATIS as what's in the briefing screen will not change until the mission file changes Nevertheless, having both in DCS one day would be a very welcome addition

If you have physical 64GB RAM and you require page file, something is very wrong. Is the whole map trying to get loaded in RAM? Having large page file is not a requirement, the page file is the offload for when there is not enough RAM. That helps when you have 8-16GB RAM, sometimes even with 32GB if what you're doing is very resource intensive, but there is no requirement to have a page file size = x2 of your physical RAM, that just doesn't make any sense.

There is no real reason

Thanks @NineLine that are some wonderful news. Fingers crossed it all goes well. Pass thanks to the team for perservering and looking into the problem.