Vakarian

I've been trying to troubleshoot the issues my uncle is having for a few hours and couldn't come up with a solution. Problems: 1. Control surfaces moving sporadically. Horizontal stabilizers twitch from normal symmetrical position to the weird left ~20% more deflection than right one, without any inputs from the user 2. When trying to trim (just a small nudge), trim continues to move until interrupted What we tried: 1. Repair 2. Nuke saved games folder and let it rebuild 3. Unplug all peripherals except mouse and keyboard 4. Ensured FFB checkmark in F-15 Special options and in Misc tab is not checked as I suspected FFB might be the cause. After all these steps, we couldn't get trim to behave like outlined in a problem, but he told me it's not happening all the time. As for the stabilizers being off, that's readily reproduced in two tracks we made. First one was just after nuking saved games folder, second is after repair and sometime at the end of the track all peripherals got unplugged. Even after all were unplugged, I tried moving control surfaces with keyboard commands, and they still spasmed in some weird position without me or him touching any control. Does anyone have any clue what might be happening? trimBehaviour.trk trimBehaviour2.trk

Trigger half action + TDC controls radar elevation in WSO station

I for one don't think that it has anything to do with the F-15E, but rather with the "spamming". Since that thread is somewhat of a collection of "what's coming to DCS" (between now and heat death of the universe), I don't like seeing everyone's and their mother's tutorials posted there, devs posting million of the screenshots showing they textured yet another 9cm2 of the cockpit... It's cool for someone, but does it need to be in a roadmap thread? I think that thread is very useful for getting insights when something meaningful is mentioned. Like, new modules getting announced, devs and moderators commenting on meaningful topics (I guess not a lot of people monitor russian-speaking part of the forum which can be gold mine of information), you know, things that are roadmap worthy. If people want every single mention of anything there, you can just close the rest of the forum and have one big mess of the thread. That thread is one of the few I have on my watch list, but it's kinda disappointing to get a notification for it, only to see a tutorial video posted on million places already

It literally took you longer to type this and original post out than it would take you to upload the track file (which is honestly not needed in this case). Real nice attitude you have there

Highly doubt that

6

Just because I posted something on the RB discord today and didn't really feel confident in my post, I went ahead and tested. Did numerous drops today with my brother doing drops in the Harrier. I literally just told him how to release the bomb in the Harrier, all the lasing was done by me in A-10. I had T-90 on the Holy Kobuleti "X" site and I deliberately aimed a bit off the T-90 as the mission was one with 0 winds, designation point was on T-90 so I wanted to eliminate the possibility of the bomb just free falling on the T-90 instead following the laser. This is the farthest I've managed to guide it in, past roughly 15.5 nautical mile slant range, bomb has issues picking up the laser.

No performance loss on my side. Testing case: MP with few players, down low on Caucasus forests in Apache.

Would like to add my observations. Playing on 3440x1440 resolution and I've always struggled with finding stuff that's close to me. I refuse to use zoom as I find it immersion breaking and just use the default FOV and zoom settings when you hop into the cockpit. With this mod I'm now able to track other aircraft in the pattern around airfield, I can quite easily now track other aircraft in a dogfight and in general, stuff that's close to me (<5-ish NM) is now a lot easier to see which I like and honestly expect. I often drive by local airport on my way to home and I can easily spot A320 size passenger jets coming in to land from ~10 km, but without this mod I've struggled to find KC-130s when coming in for an AAR and only spotting them ~2 NM when actively watching TCN for the positioning. One downside that I noticed is for example, AIM-54s have gotten the same treatment (I guess other missiles too, I've only tested with 54s) so some refinement would be nice. I honestly thing ED should take some time, see what this mod brings to the table and basically add its functionalities to default DCS installation after they lock the file behind IC (right decision to do, btw). It really makes no sense at all that the higher resolution you have (because you want better visuals, who doesn't), the worst spotting you get due to way how objects are currently rendered.

It also clearly says no fight until merge, but who has time to read the mission briefing...

Well, you have other games for "watered down" experience. It's admirable that ED is trying to get as close as they can/should/are willing to the real thing. That includes all the goodies (capabilities) and the baddies (limitations, exceptions, ...). I hate to speak for others, but I'm willing to bet that most people join DCS community and keep flying here because they want to get as close to the thing they most of the time aren't able in real life. If you just want to shoot stuff without caring for weapon and/or aircraft parameters and safe employment envelopes, than you should seek other games than DCS.

Yeah, because false positives are not happening and AV softwares are working perfectly in determining what is a "virus" and what isn't... /s

@Captain Orso Why argue with a troll? Just ignore him. On the other hand, interesting suggestion. I've only used one modifier so far so haven't run into that issue, but if you use them frequently I can easily see how knowing which button on what device is used as a modifier can be handy.

But you can. Check controls for the IR gain and IR level controls

Well, yeah. Your GPU is already working as hard as it can. Throwing more stuff at it won't make it run faster

Nope. IIRC the discussion on the Discord, rocket motor burned off while still in the launcher tube

Hey @Flappie I've used the track "ifvsDisapperingV2.trk" from couple of posts up and I can still reproduce the issue on latest OB. Initially IFVs are shown, but when I hop in the A-10 and look at the ship through the TGP they start disappearing... All I've done is let the track replay, haven't taken command at any point.

A very good suggestion, hoping it gets noted by ED

I trialed FC3 to help my uncle get in the game with the F-15. After my trial run expired I started to get that "Authorization is valid for..." message. All good, I know why its there, I'm just lazy to uninstall it. What I noticed few days afterwards is that every time I start DCS, I always get the message that authorization is valid for 3 days. It's not running its expiration counter and every time I get that same 3 day warning. The main thing is, FC3 is properly disabled in-game and I have no access to FC3 pack (as intended). Screenshots with DCS popup and system date are included. System time is correct, no other issue with authorization or usage of other modules have been noticed. To conclude, what I'm aiming at with this bug report is, after the 3 day expiration period when module actually gets disabled, users shouldn't be getting that "Authorization is valid for..." message as it's not true.

Which mission are you testing this in? Track would have helped. There is a way to prevent external views in the mission, so option could be checked if it didn't work for you in some MP servers

Thanks for being so open to suggestions. That's all I can ask. If you can make it work, great. If not, no harm done.

First of all, thank you a lot for adding these elements to the map, it will certainly add a lot to the diversity and complexity to the map I would like to ask if there is a possibility to extend this a bit in a way to add couple of these berms, emplacements and elevated positions as standalone placeable object withing mission editor? For example, take this circular berm, make it as "Static Object" and then we can place it somewhere on the map, and then add some tanks, ATGM carriers inside, make improvised "pillbox", ... Imagination is the limit and will enrich experience in all custom missions people would be making. For now IIRC we have to resort to using mods that add those kind of berms. It would be really nice and highly appreciated if it could be added in the core. In my group we use those kind of objects a lot when making missions so this inquiry/request/asking nicely is from us all, and I'm sure there are a lot of other people that would like this.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I do understand how this can be perceived as issue, I was using VR couple of years ago and MFD readability was always the thing I've struggled with. I'm just stating that it looks more real to me now than before. Does that make it harder to read, yes, I can see how that can be a thing, especially for VR users. Maybe it could be made a special option? As to why it's applied at MFD level, well that makes more sense to me. You have an MFD, set how thing are going to be rendered on it and then all underlying pages use same exact settings. That makes it much easier to maintain (speaking from programming point of view).

Am I the only one who thinks that current A-10 MFDs look more realistic, as in more like a screen now? Previously all the text was too sharp, too "good" IMO and I kinda prefer how it looks now.

It's a "bug" but in a way it should not allow this loadout