Pikey

Hi thanks for this, i didnt notice there was a response, feel free to mention me, the forum tool works well for that. For the question, thanks for the detail. Slightly different from how I imagined it. I couldnt say what this is I need to dig in.

In addition to my 2017 answer you could theoretically delete all missiles launched after firing. Just not before it happens or by any other means though.

@Bungo I believe changing the health pool would make this unit sink more realistically. I've noticed in your mod and TPaps the health is 7000+ which is more harpoons than in a Nimitz inventory -------------- GT.life = 800; -------------- Worked for about 4-5 harpoons. It's very unlikely a ship or carrier would be doing anything else in a conflict after being hit by a single weapon, and its going to take quite a while before the next iteration of damage modelling reaches ships... YMMV

Whilst a bomber might be cool, the most important part of a F117 would be its low RCS. So it ends up a high altitude night attack profile with little to no interaction with any enemy (if it goes well). So, assuming you are simming it right, the operation of one of these would be less interesting and engaging than a tanker module. This is a case of not giving people what they think they want, just keep giving them what they need. I'd suggest anyone with a hankering for sitting in a confined space in the dark for 16 hours with very little to do, could be buried alive until they decide its not for them.

Hey Bungo, I test, this tested very well, It's a ship that hits so many periods and nations. I'm absolutely certain she's in the top ten mods of all time for DCS, even if its a classic pick. Your expertise is absolutely demonstrated. If you are ever feeling low, or dejected about DCS modding, come to me, I will make you feel better about your efforts, you are forever the sunshine of the DCS modding community. Stay happy! Mike.

looks great! AI A-4 hooked and then stopped in mid air on the cat launch, ive seen that somewhere else before. With both versions.

It's well known that the G1 Reverb has a "silly" cabling design choice, that puts strain on the connectors, of which there are 3 points of contact - the GPU, the Headset and a joint between. What happened to me was over a few days, maybe a week. First, little black screen "blinks". This often happens when moving or touching the cable. In retrospect I was reproducing this way before now, any kind of pressure on the cabling could get the HMD to switch off as if unpowered. Note this is not the same as the USB powering issue which is a seperate and equally annoying thing for which you need to ensure your USB is set to a powered hub and you have a power plan that does not shut down USB. The black blinking got worse over a day before messing with the connector, fiddling and such finally rendered it unuseable. The way to tell if a black flicker is the cable connector going is the way in which it goes black. This black is an unpowered black. You can have a "Powered blackness" which is a lot lighter, under different circumstances. You can also have a blue screen. The screen image came after reconnecting by manipulating the cable from off to on by fiddling. Just static. Just FYI in case someone was searching for symptoms and they didnt know what they were.

no no, you missed the point . The OP complains of blurry aliasing for quite some time and concluded it was the headset. However the video mirror on the desktop shows the actual graphics rendering to a point where you can tell if you are not seeing what you think you should be, without the guesswork. The idea is that, avoid these very long efforts at describing the intangible, because its often the case that the explanations are too difficult and subjective to make it easy for soemone else to help. There's a lot of poeple trying VR who get paralysed by the headset being out of focus, can't rearrange it, forget they need their glasses because they assume you dont need them, etc etc. Reverb especially has sensitive sweetspots, etc. Mobile phones dont do a bad job but I reckon you custom made rifle scope might be interesting. Additionally there are similar apparatus for viewing and taking pictures of microscopes, telescopes with mobiles, adapters...

4 pages on a thread about over aliasing and not one mirror screenshot? You could rule out 4m of cable, a HMD and a human from the equation pretty quickly!

Looks like something broken in the DM where being 'on fire' doesnt move on to the next phase of damage like explosion, engine stopping, pilot death. Not sure from the first video if the other planes can have the same happen to them in the same way. DM is pretty complex stuff and unique to some airframes. Normally that pilot woudl have a red screen and pass out and it goes black within 30seconds or so, at least did when I tested last. They are tweaking these all the time, its pretty difficult to troubleshoot though, lets see whats in 2.7.

There is a points system per unit destroyed, the points per unit are in their lua files, not sure what the rank thresholds are though, probably around the same place in the files, the luas are easy to read, if you are interested have a look. You can of course simply change them to suit.

Ever since we got labels that could look through clouds...

Since October there's been multiple versions and I tried beta last year to find horrendous performance issues and realised beta for steamvr is not a good place to be so never went back. You need to try it on a per case basis. Last I heard was quite mixed. Also nvidia dirver versions over new year were quite bad - all told should be good right now. Not had a black screen for two weeks but Im not playing actively right now so its not valid feedback.

I think it could be a good opportunity to explain the end to end bug resolution process, why tracks are so important, how reporting bugs in a good way helps them be understood by the developers. People mostly don't get that and it can cause a lot of wasted time, circling and assumption loops that cause frustration.

This is completely offtopic because Shaders mod is about making DCS run smoother not making it suddenly able to read text or whatever your principle complaint is (which is difficult to tell). If you cant read text with a G2 its an eyesight defect or you are not wearing the HMD correctly, it's well known for its visual clarity. That might seem offensive but its meant sincerely, there are a large number of people out there who believe you dont need glasses for VR, or who have reached that age of 40 and their eyesight is changing as is normal. I correct my vision, I downsample to 1.2 in SSS and use medium or low textures and can read everything with corrected vision. Errors during compiling of the new textures are expected and normal. After the instlalation there is a long time of bedding in during compiling and you should attempt to run DCS and as many misisons with different objects as possible in order to provoke the compilation process so that you can finally benefit from smoother texture loading, but this process takes longer than people think.

ehhh. Don't like this advice. Setting specific swapfilesis fruitless and I challenge anyone to find any data that DCS runs better with a specifically set pagefile. Why would read/write IO to a file not on the system or DCS disk actually delay anything that DCS was going to use anyway? Why would a specific size help if it doesnt change the fact that IO is happening anyway and you just need to remove the contention point? My own advice is based off common sense and a simple fact: Windows expects a pagefile wether we like it or not, that is the way the code is written. It uses as much or as little as it likes according to code that you will never understand, so go with it. Stick your page file on an NVMe, remove any disk IO from the NVMe and leave it be to self inflate and deflate as it likes. It's not a SQL index that requires pre allocation, its a swap file. If you want a windows setting that actually does something try the monitor preallocation or something you can measure in gain visibly. Most of these are placebo.

No I wouldnt expect so, one of the main statements in favour of wholesale replacement was that you dont see them in cockpits, mostly large exterior pieces. But the sorting is also a stumbling factor. As Taz said, he optimised his, tested it and liked what he saw. Yet there is an element of "manual" about the testing and specific about the type (A-10C II). I dont think a single answer fits all. And it was pointed out that the A-10C was in fact an anomaly, and that was also used for much of the OP's testing. So its not such an easy topic to wholesale provide answers to. One question i would have is to the people producing textures with the modules, how hard is it to be more selective about what you target for what bit size? Is this all about process and saving time?

If I can summarise my last four months since trying to get a better understanding of it, the SteamVR crash still occurs, it's not often, it is annoying, its 100% a Steam VR crash and often needs a reboot to clear up, I dont use VR for anything else other than DCS but we know DCS is demanding, so we could say that DCS's hardware demand might be the cause without being too inaccurate (I dont subscribe to saying its DCS fault entirely, if it's a timeout, the middleware could still be tweaked to have more tolerance in its values). I found the issue was often with the F-14, often involving the F10 map, but neither was required and all SteamVR crashes are preceeded by a state of being laggy, low FPS and then a pause and then the headset goes black, SteamVR shows it crashed, DCS continues in a choppy unplayable (but alive) state. Steam cannot then find the headset (not everyone has specificied that).The errors are in SteamVR and iirc relate to a timeout. The issue never happens immediately, always after 15 minutes (for me) and requires a mission with CPU load. Multiplayer could help exacerbate this, although I suspect MP is just a CPU load and its more about the CPU than actually MP. You can defintiely get there sooner swapping planes, and defintiely zooming on the F10 map will bring it sooner. It also cannot be purely CPU based because you can stretch CPU usage (loading screens) and the tracking can stop completely but the applicaiton and VR is perfectly fine once it recovers... its something other than pure CPU. I did consider power draw and USB. I moved my Headsets USB to a powered hub from the onboard and this reduced the issues occurence anecdotally - who knows probably placebo? I dont have HAGS enabled, by default its off, so I dont think we can say its a cause, unless the work that MS did to put it into Windows changed something. Not sure I want to turn it on. My gut feeling based on the evidence but not being able to tie the evidence to the root cause, is that the timeout is caused by the graphics handling, especially the texture loading and unloading of DCS, under stress, which is caused by extremely large textures in DCS and limits on Graphics cards, which is noted in this link for which we are still in an endless loop of not being able to explain that there is actually an issue that needs to be addressed: But I dont think I should have offered a partially substantiated conclusion based on thin evidence. I desperately would love to hear the views of Steam VR developers on DCS, its really time for us users to begone from pseudo science and have developers work this out.

I think @twistkingmakes a good summary. In a bubble, having quality is the most important to an artist but that bubble doesnt extend to cover the user bases needs. User perspective: We see examples in some cases where there doesnt seem to be a gain from such large textures, and in fact these are hurting performance with no gain. Artist perspective: There are specific cases of rounded materials and shiny surfaces where we must use the 32bit normals to achieve good quality And ideally we would live in the intersection of both the artists and the users needs, but we appear to be living only in the artists and this ignores issues of optimisation and good performance. I think there is a disconnect, I think the perspective of the user is missed or diregarded because the line between 32bit texture size and GPU performance in the average consumers machine is not publically and absolutely proven to create performance issues. And I beleive myself that there is a problem and it's evidenced by mine, and others simulations running badly and performing badly because we play the game, we don't test it in these bubbles. I don't know what else there is to do but keep showing the link between performance and texture size. It's not easily done. I think it causes this: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/246886-dcs-causing-steamvr-fail-description-evidence-and-how-to-replicate/page/6/?tab=comments and this https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/264164-extensive-vr-bug-my-research-around-it-f10-other-view-changes-kicks-you-out-of-vr/ which looks like this which is explained by this post and also this post: And I evidence it with reproducing more often with textures set to high than textures set to low. But if I'm wrong, then how is this proven that I am wrong? Because it seems that the burden of proof shows there is an issue with large textures and they are causing poor simulation performance, especially for VR users. Obviously these texture sizes hit VR players harder - symptoms of issues are not correlating to VR users because of the relatively low proportion of the user base comapred to the 2D folks. This is the extent of my subjectivity on this matter, I've been judged for trying to keep people data driven, but I know for a fact if you offer subjectivity, anecdotes and no data, you will get mocked in this forum, hence I've kept my final conclusions away from posts like this. I dont have the knowledge to link the symptom to the data, not many people do. But I can offer my experience as data, and my experience is in general agreement that textures are the root of quite severe issue in performance that can cause the entire sim to stop functioning normally.

Questions of which modules develop seem imo to fall behind the simpler deficiencies of AI planes, AI behaviour and tweaks to the periods on the maps we have and the ones in the future. The last list of the Asset packs contents falls quite short, its not rounded enough on both sides - its not just what you fly, but what you fight. As long as the list of opponents is small, the periods are tight and the AI does predictable behaviour, we are stuck asking for more depth of modules and can only fly them in the case of Normandy, between 3 months of a year or in the case of the Channel, specifically late war post Manston paved and so on... It's restricting. Whilst modern air combat was this companies bread and butter, the WW2 community are much more demanding with their accuracy and keep ED to account on facts quite fastidiously. I'd rather focus time on getting the bedrock in, the ability to produce module variants faster, more AI bombers, ships, technology... You just know all the clamour of a far east conflict and Pacific era will produce other standalone modules lost in time and space as ED tries to please everyone and the inevitable happens.

Actually that was what prompted me to ask, but after I researched and went to that Discord, I found it was not released just being used there for a video or something.

Did we miss a release?

I wish for one in the Spit specifically. It's conspicuous by its absence. The flood lamps do not allow you to see many of the switches for manipulating them. Its a matter of moving the mouse around until it changes colour when in the dark. And I know the thing didnt do night stuff but starting pre-dawn is reasonable.

I asked a community manager to ask to have a developer look again at the thread. ED are on a long weekend right now. We are aware that a reason provided was due to artefacts and you cna see the example in the link I posted. Whilst one set of people might say that unit not supporting 32bit is a good argument for not needing it, another set of people might say the post indicates a desire to have for better appearance. And the question revolves around the percieved performance vs the percieved quality(or specific issue since there doesnt seem to be many downsides)

They might be, but the data cannot be easy to come across, unless you know otherwise?