Jump to content

SharpeXB

Members
  • Posts

    3782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SharpeXB

  1. Yeah it gets ridiculous but I’ve become good at outlooping the AI. They need some different moves for sure.
  2. A good option for a modern jet which is rather simple to operate is the M-2000C It only has limited A2G systems which are rather simple only has two missile types does have an English cockpit mod if your French is lacking but it is really capable in A2A combat, very maneuverable and it’s weapons are very good. it has some great campaigns available. you’ll need the Chucks guide because the manual is a bit out of date and the plane has received a lot of improvements.
  3. Certainly makes sense. It doesn’t make the JSOW a very effective weapon to carry though. Sure. I guess the point is if somebody is going to design a campaign mission with these (Serpents Head 2…) maybe put it into a realistic scenario.
  4. According to the ever authoritative Wikipedia “The AGM-154A is usually used for Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses missions” What good would a weapon be in this role if it gets shot down by the SAMs it’s trying to suppress?
  5. The “challenge” you’re trying to create is arcade-game style and not like what should be in a sim. If there are flight restrictions they should correspond to reality like a hard deck, no-fire zones, air corridors or national borders etc. And they should all be described in a kneeboard map. The weapons used here aren’t being employed realistically since I suppose a JSOW would need a coordinated SEAD strike to be effective. But the VR limits you’re planning around mean flights of one or two aircraft, apparently having the tanker spawned in is too much for VR to handle. In another campaign which is designed better, I have a wingman since in reality I don’t think there are any combat ops you’d fly alone, if I didn’t manage to destroy the target I can order my wingman to attack. You’re just making an arcade game of a single plane obeying gamey game stuff to pass the mission. And limiting it due to VR capability.
  6. Ok so why does the briefing say 40? See you’re making up invisible arbitrary pass/fail gamey hoops for the player to jump through. There’s no reason not to bring the tank. It’s empty and jettisoned by the time I reach WP3.
  7. The “activation zone” is secret and gamey. It seems to be greater than the 40 miles in the briefing. The idea of this “zone” is gamey and doesn’t seem to correspond to anything real world like a ground spike from the radar which the player can perceive. At FL40 I am barely able to get a single JSOW launched without straying into the gamey 40 mile zone. Literally by seconds.
  8. The entire scene is drawn twice, once for each eye, including the background etc otherwise you wouldn’t see it as 3D. The “3x” factor is a rough order of magnitude considering the stereo rendering and higher frame rate.
  9. Since the AGM-154 is supposed to be a stand-off weapon meant to attack from outside the range of air defenses, does it make sense that the bomb itself can be targeted and destroyed by enemy SAMs?
  10. I was probably 50 mi away at about FL40 you have too many silly limits and triggers and criteria in this campaign. I think this isn’t my cup of tea. I’m all up for realistic things like ROEs etc. but your criteria is gamey and hidden from the player. Another issue with this mission is fuel. I added a tank to the load-out (which you should include by default) Even with that I’m barely able to get to the targets climbing to 40,000’ with 4 JSOWs and after a big fight with the MiGs. Then the tanker is nowhere to be seen because your VR friendly strategy keeps it un-spawned.
  11. My last JSOW was shot down by SAMs at the last target even though I released it behind the 40 mile limit. This is just a bad idea for a mission. JSOWs in DCS are pretty useless. It would be best for the campaign to add a skip feature so it can be bypassed.
  12. I’m all aware of what single thread means to DCS. But games are always going to have performance “problems” or limits no matter what their features are. There are other flight sims using Vulkan and multi core and they’re just as demanding to run as DCS.
  13. That’s just the circle of life for long lived games like this: game becomes better —> game becomes more demanding —>game becomes better —> game becomes more demanding etc etc. Incorporating improvements like Vulkan won’t change this reality. If anything Vulkan will just permit the game to become better and thus more demanding and the cycle continues.
  14. You know you can just turn the graphic settings down, right? There’s no reason you can’t run DCS on a mid level system.
  15. The training voiceover stops after dropping the fuel tank track file https://www.dropbox.com/s/72k9vguhyu24lqa/PCN trouble.zip?dl=0
  16. Well a 3080 isn’t required to run DCS. It runs just fine on older GPUs
  17. But even after adopting multi-core, the game is going to continue to evolve and grow to be ever more demanding. And it’s always going to be easier to generate one image than two. Since the majority of players are running 2D then that’s what will set the performance. Imagining that multi core will triple the games performance and yet the game development remains frozen in version 2.8 or whatever while hardware continues to get stronger isn’t realistic. If the game engine becomes capable of more then the game will keep using it to do more.
  18. You’re not just rendering more pixels, you’re drawing two separate images. And needing to do that at a faster consistent frame rate.
  19. That’s basically impossible. 3D is roughy 3x as demanding as 2D. So you’d be short changing 2D by 3x or overloading VR by 3x Any performance benefit gained byVulkan etc will just go towards making the 2D game better but still more demanding. There’s no way for 3D to catch up to 2D unless the game just halted it’s development but that won’t happen. Games only ever evolve to be more and more demanding and that limit is defined as what will run at 2D since that’s the majority of users. I don’t know what “15 years ago…” means but I don’t think we want 15 year old graphics.
  20. The best solution for DCS would be to have a VR-specific version of the sim. There is no good way to make a game perform equally in 2D and 3D. You’d be hampering one version or overwhelming the other. And it doesn’t seem feasible to have such a wide range of graphics options to accommodate both.
  21. Figures something had changed. It would be great if the manuals or videos were updated to reflect this.
  22. I failed the mission again because although I destroyed the targets at WP4-6 I was never given the coordinates to attack the extra target.
  23. The PCN does not accept coordinates when doing a cold start. Track file here https://www.dropbox.com/s/72k9vguhyu24lqa/PCN trouble.zip?dl=0
  24. Cloud cover over Syria… Seriously the weather could be dialed back a bit. Gotta use JDAMs instead.
  25. Have you tried just using the zoom view? Depending on your screen size or resolution that might be necessary. The default FOV is quite fisheyed, it’s possible to reduce that to something normal of about 60-70d
×
×
  • Create New...