Pikey

I do beleive that the MT patch made most of this thread dated, i used a very heavy mission to test and get 55FPS with non flat shadows but otherwise the same as above on a 4080. The only config I use outside of mostly high settings is of course the OpenXR tools NIS SS set to 120%. Bottom line is that I don't feel the need to change it much whereas when the thread was created, VR was way less optimised and it probably was a harder chase.

There's a lot of interest right now, the top few servers are full and its not even prime time. I expect it would calm down, but a graceful way of handling this without dumping the problem on the community to fix would be appreciated. You can block slots, I know people aren't releasing anything mainstream and servers seem to compete a little for IP, but there's no reason it cannot be coded right now by allowing 70 players in, but only opening 65 slots with whatever logic you like in between to return those five queued in Spectators.

I have been doing a lot of benchmarking over the last 4 months and I did come across a little gem accidentally on storage considerations. I was comparing two different DCS builds on their own hard disks. I coudlnt understand why I was getting quite different figures on the same settings. Then I discovered one build was on an Samsung 980 NVMe and the other was on a Samsung 870 SSD. There was nearly 20% difference in frames delivered on a very heavy mission track we were using. This might have been exagerated by having only 8GB textures on my GPU so lots of disk IOPS and a setting with not much preload distance and maybe even the VR causing the stress to begin with, but nonetheless, under certain configurations, your disk can cost you a lot of frames. I can only enthusiastically endorse the advise to get NVMe's of high quality on that DCS drive, move off the pagefile and OS elsewhere to remove contention. It's the way to go.

2 years on, you have to wonder what happened.

I've invested the last 5 years as a Moose evangelist, learned the lua scripting language from no prior experience, and even I think the Mission Editor should have this feature! If we have to show folks 2 lines of scripting every time this topic arises then we aren't making headway with what people REALLY want. I play other games that use lua like CMANO, but do i touch scripting there? No. There's so much to learn that's not anything to do with the lua itself like the API. I dont want to invest. SO I think its reasonable that view is shared and its my experience that people will refuse, DCS is hard enough. The model i propose would be the same way MOOSE has it setup, that there is a template or several possible template groups, that they can spawn randomly in zones or in situ, that they can keep duplicating up to a limit on a schedule, and so on https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/Core.Spawn.html

Or what about drop the menu system entirely, use a flyout wheel that can use top level menu item slots that you can actually keybind to and can be customised!! Imagine having your favourite keys on the menu system supported by your HOTAS as a hot key item? Insane. Program a scripting item even, have it launched from HOTAS. Not only could you get rid of the cumbersome 11 menu item limitation, you could surface some to the level above the F10>Other limitation.

Yep, this kindda ties into the in game voice comms, we need an API to use it. Right now we can mission script into the Google, MS and Azure TTS as much as we like but only via Ciribobs SRS External Audio executable, for which you need to disable the default sanitization for OS module in Lua in your missionscripting.lua file. If you want to go further you can avoid that with plugins, which are even more invasive globally and have a low level maintenance attached to check they are installed, updated and supported, rather than a mission by mission approach. Not using the TTS capabilities in the cloud is not an option to me, the voices of the paid tier are so good and so immersive and you can write text for them whatever way you want that it was the best innovation of 2021 as far as I am concerned with DCS. It's basically free on demand voice acting that you can assemble sentences from via scripting. Just insanely powerful and cool. No need to ever hear Wags's "Hey what are you doing" voice again.

I agree. Trouble is when ED implement a new trigger action in the ME its usually to support DLC and often just doesnt work on a server (case in point cockpit params). There needs to be parity with server vs single player trigger actions and scripting events for this to happen. Scripting usage is limited in DLC, ED don't want it being used. I remember entering a competition years back that had this excellent little 3 zone tug of war you could play in multiplayer and was told because it had scripting, its a no.

Its going to take less than a few minutes, there's none there! Or have you not read your PDF!!

Omg, you are serious. So we've gone from a suggestion to turning the pilot death scene into something rather than nothing to medical advice on what the difference between death and high G is like to experience. I bow to your experience, let's keep the slot kick to spectators, it reminds us there is intelligent life out there. (bookmarked this post, it's amazing)

You aren't saying here that blacking out is different to losing consciousness (prior to death), just that there needs to be a differentiator for a game, right? The death in ww2 planes has a breathing effect, but its quite similar, so im not sure if the argument they cannot be similar outlasts the current examples, they are similar.

It's not my logic, I'm not dying on this hill. I don't agree with anything that prevents a customer from having exactly the experience they want and yes I have found the map restrictions ridiculous for years because it's not just the beacon issue for all types of beacons but the lighting, the PCL limits, whatever else can be reasonably mentioned like if even the airfield existed and in what shape because we all know that's pretty whacky for Caucasus, Falklands and so on. These are the cards we have been dealt and developers tend to be really specific with the time of the map setting much to anyone's disappointment otherwise. So if you ask a dev to get realistic, damn that's all the Lorenz and AFN-2 out the window for Normandy and we gained nothing except restrictions. Thus, best to have ways to work around the limitations and that's on ED to give us those options, like the TACAN they gave us after years of asking.

Actually, I agree, VR violent deaths are pretty jarring, I often jump if I am not expecting it and its not because the missile hit unexpectedly, its being moved to an exterior view and the volume increase. I wouldn't mind the inverse of the current death, in that it was managed by a volume change and fade of the screen instead of the 'spectators dump'. Ejections are pretty good actually in VR, I think it could be massively improved by a little masque and G pull effect. I think there are already WW2 effects for burning and such which I found awesome, I have to be honest I completely agree that this could be an area where a little improvement would go a long way.

Yes, easy to explain. The map is based on a time period of specifically two weeks before Paris fell, 'August to mid August' based on the ALG's that are present. The PDF you provided shows that there isn't a Luftwaffe airfield on the map that is applicable. What good is the Luftwaffe approach system on Evreux when the RAF are using it that month? Its the age old issue of when the map is based on. And, regardless of if customer A wants this time or customer B wants that time, not everyone can be satisfied by the point in time the developers sets. If you put down beacons on the map the AFN-2 on two thirds of the DCS module Luftwaffe planes that were never there in the first place would not be able to use it anyway because the airfields are being dismantled and abandoned. Hence having the ability to ignore these constraints is optimal. I'd rather have the ability to ignore the constraints of the map than live with the map that has no beacons. Historical accuracy cannot be used as an argument for having Lorenz, its an argument for not having them on the Post invasion Normandy map. SO I think you'll find we are in agreement about wanting something that wasn't there but the route to getting that is not via Ugra.

So its an ils in game but we cant put ils down with the me. I think we need to get back to ed.

For the German birds I have had no luck with the navigation needles on anywhere except caucasus, I believe this is an ED problem. For landing system radios and Lorenz I actually don't think there is any implementation in game, I've been waiting. The beacons.lua of Cacuasus should provide the answer, it may be moddable witha few lines of text, not IC compliant though.

I looked for data on broadcasting stations and the location of beacons and radio stations and I found there was not that much information, so I preferred to make my own. If you find anything its easy enough to create a template for mission editors with a very alive radio for Mosquito back seat fun, however I think the time of the war was quite restrictive on navigation beacons pointing to airfields.

Can confirm after testing this and hearing of it that I got 5/5 crashes with "Always on". DIsabled is fine. To be fair, Auto (Default) was not crashing (or doing what it said) but another user said it crashed on Auto so I would advise setting it off for now. This is kindda important and hidden.

Thank you for these answers! Yes, very helpful. So typically I head to OpenXR tools for WMR and reduce the number there first to save the pixels being pushed which is the largest FPS gain, then make up the image quality in game with the upscaling toolkit. First one starts making the image jaggy, second blurs a bit? Is this roughly it for the layperson? Please correct me if I misunderstood! Cheers!

Hi, I am trying to understand the methods to tune VR scaling (everything works already) using OXR and HP Reverb 1. I need some help with some basics, specifically the interaction between: OpenXR Tools for Windows Mixed Reality | Customised render scale (as per screenshot) OpenXR Toolkit | Upscaling/Sharpening NIS | Size (as per screenshot) QUESTIONS 1. Is the render scale on OpenXR Tools for WMR applied before the OpenXR NIS upscaling? 2. Which direction of render scale does what effect? I read on Reddit that 100% is auto adjusted based on GPU RAM but is this 100% of the GPU memory adjusted figure? i.e. is 100% the same resolution for everyone? 3. In VR headset the NIS upscaling "Size" setting requires the user to increase the number to reduce the screen resolution to improve the performance. Is this AFTER the Customised render scale or does it Overwrite that scale or something else? 4. I see NIS, FSR, CAS. CAS has no resolution size. What helps me pick one, what should be better for DCS? I can't really tell easily in game as I have to restart between and it seems no different. 5. Is the DCS VR setting, is Pixel Density applied after or before any of these and does any figure other than '1.0' help? 6. How will any of this be affected by Nvidia DLSS 2? Applied before, after, in the middle somewhere or not at all? 7. When either tool says to Restart VR to take effect, does this mean you need to close WM Portal mirror screen? I'm sorry for these questions, good answers will help choose which slider to set before another and save hours of testing

nullThe OP asked about the core game files, without conflating module and game files, which are seperate for good reasons Note that I never said 'lazy'. Don't put words in my mouth. I said 'didn't look'. Let's look then: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/ It's the fifth question. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/documentation/ Beautiful tiled wall of module documentation ready for selection. From Google, its got the answer right there, it's even got a video with 5400 views. I maintain, this is not looking for the documentation. So the last thing to wrap up is why negativity was attracted to this post. Let's see, someone writes a sarcastic topic title: Why is DCS documentation so darned SPECTACULAR?nullnull Where not once but several times they state they can write a better manual than ED, proclaiming that if it were not a fail and was more prominent then they would be able to find out how to use a Windows dialogue box to save their campaign. Yes, the question was, where does it need to be saved. And the answer is that it is completely irrelevant. So we gotta go to the forums to be sarcastic because that's how adults behave, instead of simply asking the question "Does it matter where I save my campaign file?" without all the sarcasm and ranting. And folks wonder why, after years of seeing this behaviour (and the repeat quesitons) why we cannot hold people accountable to acting like adults and thus being treated like adults. It's simply a matter of how you ask attracts the answer in the format you asked it. That's why this happens and it shouldn't be a mystery!

Not to the same screen (anymore), but some displays can be exported to other screens and you can use multimonitor https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/Exporting_MFCD_Displays for exports too. There was some software that allowed some resizable export windows but I don't think it is developed anymore.

Yes Rudel most likely has it. If you have two networks separated by two different routers they are naturally unaware of each other, Networking isn't plug and play, each router is creating an internal network and its going to require some configuring that goes way beyond a forum post that includes how you configure your wiring, default gateways, subnet masks and DHCP. Luckily there are videos on the topic so you should find what you need. Good luck.

The Campaign editor works on a linear "did you achieve the set goals or not" basis. Yes>proceed to mission 2, No> refly. It's what all the DLC is based on, so you could review those or some of the existing campaigns that come with modules to see some ideas. To 'get the most out of the mission builder' you would generally not use the campaign builder and would use Lua scripting using the Simulator Scripting Engine which might be out of scope for you, I can't tell, but its not a mainstream activity. There are some off the shelf scripts that have very little configuration that can extend your play. You might like to try a bit more like DSMC and leave your PC on to keep coming back, or servers. But for the vanilla ME the depth is not in the campaign builder, but in the extensibility of the scripting.

So this is a thread about not finding the manual that changed to why the products manual aren't in the same place as the purchased modules and eventually ending up in some casual moaning about how much they are advertised to the surface. The part that irks me is when folks don't look and make the assumptions based on what they could see without looking first, then backtrack to find anything else to moan at to cover the fact they were in error and should not depart from that path with a simple "Ignore me, i found it, thanks for your help". Having written manuals, and being a techical writer with access to the analytics that show who reads them, I know exactly where the problem is. So when people say that ED needs a good <expletive> manual, I disagree. With evidence.