Qiou87

Indeed. Having been in the Mi-24P in similar situations, the lock on any ATGM guided by Petrovich gets lost as soon as you maneuver aggressively. You can even "screw up" the aim if you maneuver without storing the visor beforehand (Ask Petrovich to stop targeting). I also was hit from the rear by a friend flying the AH-64D firing 114L at me (he said "Oh, a butterfly!" then proceeded to fire ) and I had no warning of incoming missile either from RWR or Petrovich (the shot came from my 6 o'clock at around 5km). So the module works fine when flown by a human in the described situations. You describe issues with the AI behavior, which is probably not specific to the Mi-24. I remember seeing planes like MiG-21 flaring when I approach from their 6, radar off, and firing a Fox2. I don't think those older planes have MWS. The AI in the game just has less limitations than human pilots.

I would like a few more enthousiastic voice lines when I perform aerobatics or just generally manage to land the helicopter without VRS. This is definitely a feat worth of praise and Petrovich should earn his place by giving me an ego boost in such situations. WSOs and RIOs are sometimes referred to as high-speed cheerleaders by single-seater pilots, I'd love me a low-speed cheerleader. Some woohoo's, oh yeah!'s and awesome job captain, that was unbelievable! would be appreciated.

Impressive work and a huge thank you. I really enjoyed my first playthrough of your campaign and now, with an updated F-5E, I get to enjoy it a second time. Kudos!

Fly helos! Helos are great, and you get some nice REDFOR stuff. The Mi-24P is awesome once you master it, the Ka-50 III is so advanced it is basically futuristic... Plenty to love here.

I also voted for Syria. In MP I prefer to fly on it, my mates too. Why? It is big, it has a huge terrain variety (mountains, open desert, coastline, island...), the level of detail is very high (great for helo ops) and it is extremely relevant in terms of scenarios both cold war and modern. I feel like you get multiple maps in one, it never gets boring to me because of the size and different types of terrain.

Had a great time yesterday actually, I recovered at ground level after doing a 90° climb with pedal turn at the top (testing the edge cases ) and my OH-58D slid across the apron over more than 100m. It was laughably funny, I was spinning and sliding (because I had about 80% collective as well). When I dropped the collective the helo stopped. Another time I tried to land with a very slight lateral drift and toppled over. My habits from the Mi-24 need to change for these skids, it seems. So yes, definitely some stuff to iron out, part of it has to do with ED. Also had a case of the blades not impacting the ground when I was on the side (they were spinning through). But the FM, for all intents and purposes, was doing a fine job making me believe I was flying a light recon helicopter. Don't know why people always expect flying to be so damn hard especially in modern or relatively modern machinery ; with FBW, stability augmentation systems and the likes, modern stuff flies on rails or almost.

Given the avatar this sure looks like a reliable source. Are you trying to answer my point, regarding the fact that the OP has no real-life reference to evaluate if the FM feels right, with some comment from some guy on the internet? In that case, thank you very much for such a valuable contribution to the conversation. I wonder how we could have done without it. Edge cases are not what is discussed here, OP just said "I took off and hovered, it's easy, therefore the FM could be wrong, I question if it is a sim".

The Apache is known to still need work on the FM. Let me get this straight: Casmo has flown the KW for years and says "yep, this is pretty much as good as it gets for helo flight models in DCS", yet you doubt based on no flight experience? Simulation doesn't mean hard especially when aircrafts are equipped with systems like SCAS. Sometimes it is good to listen to experts instead of some misguided belief.

Double middle-mouse click to disable the clickable cockpit will make your mouse control the M4 and the mouse button to shoot. Works well in VR for me. And I agree: the M4 is a hoot.

Hi, I have SRS like most people but if it isn't connected (like in singleplayer) it is not active I believe. I don't use other mods, only some asset packs.

Hi, I don't think this was on the controller frequency (R-863), I heard them regardless of the channel I was on (9 or 10). Since I typically turn on all radios when I power the helo, I must have had one on 127,5 by default as well. Could be a DCS bug that AI doesn't respect the "don't report waypoints" command? You might also try to set them to a stupid frequency like 111.11 so there is no chance of hearing them. All in all, not a huge issue, more of a quality-of-life improvement. Thanks for your hard work.

Ok so I solved that one, it was user error. In M06 (CSAR) I encountered a small issue. The AI Mi-8s (Enfield 1-1) keep giving their position on the radio. This is very annoying as it is interfering with the voice-overs ; I missed a couple of instructions due to that and found the enemy only by doing a grid search. I would recommend setting them to not report their position.

It's a recon helo with some light attack capabilities ; in that sense it is most similar to the Gazelle, and has nothing to do with attack helos like Hind or Apache, or indeed a heavy transport helo like the Hip. Although it does have some external weapons, it won't carry as many missiles or rockets compared to a true attack helicopter. However it should be much more nimble, allowing you to sneak behind buildings or trees and make use of the optics on top of the mast to spot targets. It is more modern than the Gazelle, including optics and sensors as well as a digital cockpit, so that might be of interest to you. It was also built as a complement to the Apache, in a kind of hunter-killer kind of way, and I am looking forward to seeing how this can be reflected in DCS gameplay with the light, nimble Kiowa finding the targets for the big Apache and it's standoff missiles. In my eyes it provides some new and interesting features we don't have in game at the moment, and should certainly offer a lot of fun to those who buy it. I'm very happy to hear that it's out in "Two weeks"

I thought the R-828 was used by setting the switch to VHF, not P-828? I found that in a tutorial but could be obsolete/wrong of course. Yesterday in M03 I set it (Channel 2 on R-828, pressing "Auto-tuner" until the light goes out) then set the main selector switch (as in the picture) to VHF. I had the text from the controller, but no sound. Volume on the R-828 was checked and at the maximum. I heard the other (R-863) communications just fine.

I feel bad that no one has posted here yet! I have only played the first two missions due to time constraints but this was thoroughly enjoyable. The Mi-24 is my favorite module to fly, I really enjoy the flight model. Both missions have taken full advantage of this module’s strength with some tricky landings and beautiful flying in hilly terrain. I will come back once I finish the campaign. But so far, all I can say is that I am having a great time when I play it. Thank you Stone Sky!

This is very exciting. I would love a teaser/trailer for the campaign! You can count on me to buy it, my favorite module on my favorite map from a highly regarded campaign maker, that sounds exactly like what I was looking for. Thank you for all the hard work!

I feel like I should give my 2 cents at the risk of being seen as an inferior pilot. I've been called worse things anyway so it's fine. Let me say upfront that the work you did for this campaign is nothing short of excellent. Definitely up there with the best campaign makers, the immersion, the briefings, kneeboards, variety of missions, you did a fantastic job. It just made me realize something. I love the simplicity of the F-16C usually, it's an aircraft I know quite well and have almost 200h in. Most of those hours in multiplayer, either A-A or A-G. However, and this is important, I almost exclusively use Harms, AGMs, CBUs and GBUs with this aircraft. I just never got bothered by the Mavericks and this has clearly let me down in your campaign. In our large multiplayer engagements, I will perform SEAD/DEAD happily, but exclusively with the weapons I mentioned. I play at the end of a long workday and once kids are asleep, therefore having to sit and wait 5min for those damn missiles to warm up so I can boresight them is tedious. Then if I don't do it perfectly, once at 10,000ft and 8nm away from a target it won't line up perfectly and the maverick won't lock, needing some fiddling about manually... and there goes the "Missile! Missile!" warning. It's just a very tedious weapon to use compared to any of the other ones where you find the target (with HAD, TPOD or Radar), lock the target with a simple TMS up and shoot. The extra hand-off and alignment step makes it especially annoying, and I'd love to just be able to lob a GBU-38 at the damn SA-8 instead. I understand that by training I could eventually learn to master those damn missiles. They are not really "casual player friendly" though, even though almost everything else in this aircraft is. As a result I found myself failing a couple of missions (shot down) and a bit annoyed. I went as far as mission 9. There is nothing wrong with this campaign, and as the first one for the F-16C, I am happy that I bought it. It is of excellent quality and brought me quite some hours of fun. I am just too poor of a pilot and especially I just hate those Mavs just too damn much to finish it. I have no regret buying this campaign and can only recommend it - but make sure you are comfortable using Mavericks in the F-16C beforehand to avoid the frustration I had.

I would be interested to know if the planned system for the high res assets will also make its way to the WW2 assets pack, with low def versions in game by default and paying customers seeing high res ones. It would be a game changer for WW2 if the assets weren’t a barrier to entry anymore.

Reprojection is similar, in concept, to DLSS frame generation (a.k.a "DLSS 3.0"). What is being discussed here, since people refer to upscaling, is DLSS 2.5 or "Super sampling", which is rendering the game in a lower resolution (to get extra FPS) then applying an upscaling using deep learning to make it look better than normal upscaling. I don't see why reprojection and upscaling wouldn't work together, however I do agree that frame generation and reprojection would potentially cause issues if used simultaneously. But here we would run in other issues, such as the fact that frame generation as implemented today adds latency (you get 100fps but the latency is actually slightly worse than if running at 50fps). Latency in VR is vomit-inducing and overall a big no-no. I am deeply curious how DLSS will be implemented in DCS, and what we get out of it in VR. Will it be better AA through DLAA (let's face it, today's MSAA is difficult to apply for VR as it eats performance too much, and running without adds a ton of shimering), is frame generation even going to be implemented? Will DLSS in VR be less bad than in "the other sim" (my own experience reflects that of others before in this topic : it isn't doing much for framerate and visuals were horrible)? We will see. The issue with DLSS is that it is "cleaning up" the image using deep learning, but probably doing so using standard gameplay on pancake. Once you start to have the player's viewpoint moving on 6 axis at the same time, with unpredictable head movement on all axis simultaneously, it becomes very difficult to predict the next frame and therefore use all those fancy IA techniques...

One thing I didn't see mentioned, but T/W is not a constant. As you fly it will actually continously evolve, as thrust is not the same at all altitudes, atmospheric conditions and flight profiles as has been explained, and weight also varies a lot for a fighter jet depending on configuration and fuel load (T/W will actually slightly improve at sea level as you burn your fuel...). So the T/W ratio of your aircraft upon take-off is changing constantly as you pull the nose up and gain altitude rapidly. This is often misunderstood as websites with limited technical background like to produce baitclick lists of "thrust-to-weight ratios of fighter aircraft" and whatnot, presenting fixed values based on theoretical values from brochures. This sadly propagates a deep misunderstanding among the public and enthousiasts about what to expect from a fighter jet. I would also like to add that our Hornet's flight model has been tested with the help of former Hornet pilots and it seems to be quite a close match. Of course, no simulation is going to be 100% accurate, but if it's close enough for them, it's close enough for me. I'll take their word over my "impressions based on a YT video" anyday.

I like how some people consider their own experience on a first release, early access map, as valid for all "VR users". Your mileage may vary and optimizations will come down the line. I flew 1 hour over Paris and London yesterday, as low as my Mi-24 would go, and it was really smooth. Certainly on par with other large cities in other maps, and a great overall experience. I feel sorry for those with bad FPS despite better rigs than mine. But please don't generalize your personal case for everyone.

I think you need to manage your expectations. DLSS can be tried in VR in the popular civilian sim (it's on their subscription if you just want to try it for a low price and see for yourself) and it basically is a mess at least in my experience but I also saw it reflected in many comments : limited performance improvements (probably due to CPU bottleneck -> this is why we will first have some multithreading in DCS), huge degradation of readability for the dials and screens. I also encountered more artifacts that I do when using DLSS on pancake, which could be related with the fact that the prediction algorithm has a hard time to adapt to multiple axis and constant movement due to head tracking, but also with the fact that some of the scene (cockpit) is static while the world moves, sometimes at high speed, through the cockpit windows. I am eager to try out DLSS in DCS and I sincerely hope their implementation is better. But I will not expect a big improvement for VR based on my experience.

F1EE hopefully. It was announced for "the next OB patch". Don't think multithreading appears in OB until at least end of Q1, optimistically.

Hope it also prevents AI crashing when they fly formation with you and you land. It has happened to me on some occasions that my wingman will follow my approach and forget to go around, simply crashing behind me.

You realize I posted 10 hours BEFORE the newsletter was out, right? Still, the fact they will "investigate" does not explain why they decided to go for DLSS over FSR from the start. DLSS is exclusive to nVidia, whereas FSR would have worked with ALL GPUs. They might have their reasons: I was just curious to know about them.