Whisper

Actually, for features like distance fading and terrain masking, the srs server needs to be installed alongside the dcs server

Fixed skins are actually good gameplay wise, we are able to identify easier in a furball. Currently, "stripes" means Blue team

the value to edit is on the second line of the text #define MASKSIZE 0.525f // change this to adjust the size of the mask, 0.525f seems to be ok for the Vive

anything editing text, like notepad. I use Notepad++

The legend strikes again. Now I have fond memory coming back. Kegetys, you are a hero! :)

Our group discovering the fa18 the first day, doing approximative carrier crashing and other silly stuff. Beware, much fromage et baguette spoken. https://youtu.be/fn3N-Mk3uTIfn3N-Mk3uTI

**GASP** Just seen this message A word of warning : this is going completely OT! Mr jamei_c, there are people actually playing BMS in VR? If so, HOW? I tried so long without success, I really need the magical formula for this one!!! :) back on topic: yes please, VR for CA!

As much as you can, stop your bird as low as possible. Idealy, you stop only on touchdown

Or, very very simply, let us have a lua function SetCargoWeight to transport helicopters. Boom, no need for ED to immediatly implement neat little features in an exact manner (because we all know it will take forever to be implemented and will go through 50 states of buggyness, exactly like what we experimented with troops cargo, I'm not even sure of the proper state of troops cargo currently, and its useability inside scripting engine), and users get the benefit of being able to realistically simulation cargo operations. Which gives time for ED to do things properly. Best of both words

First, I really hope that is not the technical reason for ditching visibility LOD scaling. Engines as old as Operation Flashpoint back in 2001 used different LODs for different functions, so that changing the LOD responsible for building 3D objects in the world does not affect the LOD responsible for Damage Model or Physical interaction. I see no reason why a visibility LOD must be used as RCS LOD. Second, much blabla here but I've not see any argument stating why VR users are limited by ED to a lower max zoom level than flat screen users, by a VERY significant margin. This is the core of the issue. Not that Flat screen users max zoom is too high, or if zom is inhenrently needed. That's not the point of the OP. Question remains : Why the max zoom is even different for both population?

Thanks a lot

Problem is this decision, now, is nonsensical when you know they are also pushing for VR. They either don't do VR and push for DS heavily, or keep touting DCS as a VR product and DON'T kill VR in their product with DS. Doing both makes NO SENSE, whatever blabbling about evolving technologies. When you push 2 "non compatible" (in terms of performance) technologies at the same time, you're doing something stupid.

Isn't VR PD downscaling ALSO bringing performance problems in the same order of magnitude than Spatial AA ? (As far as I understood the algorithms used to downscale are very akin to Spatial AA). In which case this very choice to force usage of DF is a killer for VR users and I don't understand the decision.

Very low saturation helps a lot

Hello, I stumbled on this bug recently, but I had not set up test on preceding version, so this bug may be there for a while. When using AI Command TransmitMessage (via LUA script, not tested via ME trigger)) with a subtitle "xxxx" and a subtitleDuration of several seconds (like 30), it's working fine in SP (message is displayed for 30 seconds) but the message is only displayed for a few seconds on MP clients (that have the correct frequency selected, of course), whatever SubtitleDuration is put in the script. It makes realistic radio system pretty difficult to script :)

Personally ,I'd say DCS did a very good job on VR implementation, but their engine is doing so much that it takes a big toll FPS-wise. Doesn't mean VR is non-functional. At least, it's not going always downhill. I had worst FPS some patches ago than now.

I gave up, personally. Their latest performance on the EU stock was the last stroke, I took your advice and have gone to the Other Option. Too late, as the price reduction on their side just had gone. In a way, VKB cost me half a hundred € ;)

And that's the problem, DCS is not really on top for these "feels and sound" things. The "state of the plane by sound", for example, I don't get as much as I get it in "that other sim". Impossible for me to describe why. I think really it's a sound thing, "that other sim" is less subtle I guess. I think ED should boost up the "woossh" and "clangs" when sudden movements occur, as well as the airflow sound change when speed goes up. That could help tremendously. Sometimes the awesome level of DCS FM is lost to the user because of the tiniest thing.

Apparently, everybody stopped caring and testing :)

Well, for those few of us still under Win7, Core is not really useable, and twitch2dcs is very usefull

Sure you're not talking about the 109, Phil?

Yes, of course. But was the same in 1.5.8

Like Zimmerdylan, I've not been able to do it. The menu is there, I land nearby the troops, use the F6 (I think it's F6) menu to permit "group X" to come aboard, there's some kind of movement from the troops but they don't embark

The most important part in Art-J message is here : "The plane doesn't require any rudder input when flown at cruise settings (auto prop, 1.05-1.1 ATA, nose heavy trim)" The plane is trimmed for specific regimes. With auto prop activated, aim for 1.15ATA or 1.35ATA, they are the 2 values that give me the most stable aircraft

With the state of bomb / rockets blast effect simulation in DCS right now, I'm not quite sure hw usefull bomb spit could be.... I'd say, ED must implement proper bombs before adding them to WWII stuff