Limaro

you are right. However, I am now happy using TAA, looks good for me and performance is much better.

Only one word can describe my feelings: Wow! So this is my newest and last data. Only compared to last tests with multi threaded 2.8.8 and my tracks I use (attached in very first thread) Trackfile Beirut 4_2 : 2.9.0 84.9 FPS (2.8.8 72.1 FPS) Trackfile Beirut 4_3 : 2.9.0 120.0 FPS (2.8.8 100.2 FPS) Unfortunately the 4_3 does not ply until the end, as the F16 crashes now... ich guess something changed in the responsiveness of the inputs, so the flight ends a little earlier.. but the values speak clear language. EDIT: 2.9.0 4_2: 70.5 FPS, no further tests. as in comment after this post, I missed the default settings changes

These are my two Tracks I use to measure to have a reliable comparison. Described in Initial Post but meanwhile a little far away from this one You can still compare performance, just use a second installed instance of old Version.

Very last Update. 2.8.8 Beirut 4_2 MT: 72.1 FPS Beirut 4_3 MT: 100.2 FPS As you can see no interesting changes. I guess we'll have to accept this loss. I just hope, that we do not get another drop with 2.9.

This would be great. To get a possibility to let DCS read the message (in radio message sound style), with some few voices. This would save a lot of work doing this on external tools and import a audio file. Also when changing text, this would dynamically do the job. Would be nice and easy way to make missions more emersive with less effort.

For a train, it's not possible to add a waypoint action with "set Option" (I hope that's the term in english localization). My goal is, to set the action to not let the train react to threats. But the option is not available. Furthermore, when selecting the "set options" on another unit, it works. But when then switching back to the train, the secondary menu does not even open.

Currently the trains make smoke, but only seams to be visible from less than a mile away. For WW2 missions this is very sad, as iin reality trains had the issue to be visible from far away. Pleaaaaase increase it to be like normal smoke.

New Version, new hope. I've separated ST from MT, for clearer view. Beirut 4_2 ST: 2.7.18 74.9 FPS 2.8.0 65.8 FPS 2.8.1 66.4 FPS 2.8.3 ST 68.0 FPS 2.8.4 ST 65.4 FPS 2.8.6 ST 65.9 FPS 2.8.7 ST 67.4 FPS Beirut 4_2 MT: 2.8.3 MT 73.8 FPS 2.8.4 MT 70.3 FPS 2.8.6 MT 71.2 FPS 2.8.7 MT 71.4 FPS Beirut 4_3 ST: 2.7.18 100.9 FPS 2.8.0 88.1 FPS 2.8.3 ST 92.3 FPS 2.8.4 ST 89.3 FPS 2.8.6 ST 88.6 FPS 2.8.7 ST 90.0 FPS Beirut 4_3 MT: 2.8.3 MT: 103.4 FPS 2.8.4 MT 102.1 FPS 2.8.6 MT 99.9 FPS 2.8.7 MT 104.5 FPS Small Reminder, my 4_3 replay is recorded at good weather in Beirut. There, it seams that we gained some FPS again using MT. But always to remember that I changed CPU meanwhile. But with cloudy day (4_2) it's still a big loss. I'd still whish a nice benchmarking tool for DCS to get easy reproducable performance values.

That was it! thanks to you two!!

Hi, I've tried to led the B-17 drop all the bombs. But without success. I've tried so many things, but they drop one, then leave. Can someone help me on that? Attached my current last try WWII_Amiens.miz

Hi, I am thinking about buying VR equipment. But not sure yet. Is there a way to run DCS with specific VR settings (2*2160² for Reverb G2 or 2*2880² for Pimax Crystal) without having one? Rendered to some virtual device or anything like that? Regards

It would be great to be able to set names and national flags for ships. Espacially for WW2 it would make sense for identification missions.

It's a tool. And you a re right, you would be able to do unrealstic scenarios. So what? Nobody is forced to do so. Currently you can set a wind speed, which led you land the F18 on the Heli-Pad in Dubay. That's in the same way unrealistic. With this feature whish, I see to achieve two things: - It's a low hanging fruit for ED, as both features, wind and waves, already exist. - Let us doing what we need/want for realistic scenarios. And please read my second post. How could a simulator simulate, that you've got strong wind yesterday, or a storm somewhere else.

Hello ED, and hello to the community, as an avid player of DCS, I have thoroughly enjoyed the engaging gameplay it offers. However, I would like to address the color associations currently present in the game, particularly in relation to the "Combined Joint Task Forces" concept. The two opposing factions are represented by the colors red and blue. While I understand that these colors are commonly associated with opposing sides, I would like to suggest the inclusion of optional color schemes that players can choose from. By introducing alternative colors that are less connected to specific real-world associations, players would be able to engage with the game in a manner that focuses solely on the strategic elements and immersive gameplay DCS creates. This adjustment would help prevent any unintended connections with contemporary conflicts, political situations, or potentially sensitive topics that could distract players from the intended gaming experience. Best regards Limaro

I did not write much, but I guess the point is clear. There are just too many factors, which a game can hardly consider. - Current wind - Wind of the last couple of days - Stronger wind somewhere else (yes, waves are traveling). - Deepness of water (black sea, vs. pacific. The just behave totally different) - "Size of open water" (fiord vs. open sea) - Underground geografical situation (google portual, nazare, thats not wind) So to simplify things for us and ED (and let marianas water not look like the flat water of a swimming pool) we just wish this feature to be separated. Yes ok, maybe with checkbox to couple settings if whished.

TL DR we simply want separate settings for wind and for wave. Just because of having different water. The black sea has by default less waves than atlantic or pacific. I don't want ED to make perfekt wind-to-wave settings. to many variables. just two more slides. One for what you call swell-waves and one for wind waves.

Update with 2.8.6. Meanwhile AMD Adrenalin 23.5.2. Seams a small drop again, but this can be due to measurement inaccuracy. Beirut 4_2: 2.7.18 74.9 FPS 2.8.0 65.8 FPS 2.8.1 66.4 FPS 2.8.3 ST 68.0 FPS 2.8.3 MT 73.8 FPS 2.8.4 ST 65.4 FPS 2.8.4 MT 70.3 FPS 2.8.6 ST 65.9 FPS 2.8.6 MT 71.2 FPS Beirut 4_3: 2.7.18 100.9 FPS 2.8.0 88.1 FPS 2.8.3 ST 92.3 FPS 2.8.3 MT: 103.4 FPS 2.8.4 ST 89.3 FPS 2.8.4 MT 102.1 FPS 2.8.6 ST 88.6 FPS 2.8.6 MT 99.9 FPS Still performance is not back on 2.7.18 level comparing single thread versions. Hope when we get back this, MT will be even greater

Hi Flappie, not this did not help. also clearing metashader or fxo not. I also restarted PC. I have to adjust the STR. WHen it fails, it fails. I hade to change some parameters like time and some aircrafts, before it worked again. attached both mission. Working vs non-working. WWII_Mixed_Combat_Works.miz WWII_Mixed_Combat_Fails.miz

Hi, currently I am building some WWII missions. In all, I observed, that the bombers, Ju88 and B17 starts some kind of driftings. Not sure if it is WWII specific, or Bomber, but I never had that in other missions. Or it did totally oversaw that. Check the track file The "Luft-12-2" Unit does it at 09:13:40 enomously. Here a sample video of another situation and other mission: B17Driftking.trk WWII_Mixed_Combat.miz dcs.log

Hi ED I have reproducable crashes with my attached mission. It may just be related to the map, however, the steps seam not very map specific. The Mission: - Normandie 2.0 - Some flying Bombers - Many Client Slots (Parking slot) - On last added client starting from Runway (then problems begun). - DCS/2.8.4.39731 STR: Start the attached mission Us the client "Luft-14xx". Start up. Not sure if needed, i guess not. Midair, restart mission Shift+R. Current result: Crash When loading mission from ME again, It crashes in load screen. For me, it it works again only, when I change the mission, like moving the plane to another airfield. Note: It happens in ST and in MT. Attached also the crash log. WWII_Mixed_Combat.miz dcs.log-20230507-144646.zip

I think it's hard to get a good opinion of evaluating if it's worth spending that amount of money. There are just too many factors. However, here is what I do, to get a clearer view of things before buying something: 1. 40 FPS is not enough to play, I agree. But you mentioned middle details. Can you set them that low, so that you get what you want as target? (60 or 90 for example). But do not make inacceptable compromises (resolution, or too bad textures is cockpit, you should still be able to read everything). 2.a) Can't you reach your target FPS: Yes, then It worth maybe really. 2.b) You reached the target FPS you want. Now look at how the world looks like. 3. Compare to how it would look like having a 4090 with 90FPS. (use Forum data from user with compareble setup) This is what you should compare. The visual details you get for a fixed target fps. Are these details worth buying the 4090? Regards

Web Browser ME? Where to find this? Sound interesing to me

Thats what i guessed. However, Not knowing how ED evaluates necessarity of Features, i wanted top Push this. IT hinders me a Lot, doing more Missions.

Update with 2.8.4 Beirut 4_2: 2.7.18 74.9 FPS 2.8.0 65.8 FPS 2.8.1 66.4 FPS 2.8.3 ST 68.0 FPS 2.8.3 MT 73.8 FPS 2.8.4 ST 65.4 FPS 2.8.4 MT 70.3 FPS Beirut 4_3: 2.7.18 100.9 FPS 2.8.0 88.1 FPS 2.8.3 ST 92.3 FPS 2.8.3 MT: 103.4 FPS 2.8.4 ST 89.3 FPS 2.8.4 MT 102.1 FPS Looks like we lost a bit of performance.

I mena to rename them, by that, they shall be disabled as they wont be found any more. Then just try DCS MT if it's working better.