Returning Player with Questions

Hi

Just returning to DCS after a longish break.

I can run 1.5.8 with no issues, but 2.5 is "borderline"...with current rig. I can run it at 50 or so fps but only really with limited units. Any decent mission grinds it to a halt sadly. Such is the price of progress as it does look amazing.

So my questions are:

1. Is there any way of downloading 2.2 engine from somewhere? ie to be able to use the NTTR I bought when it first came out and ran for ages, rather than using the 2.5 engine? 1.5 was made a legacy download which is great as I can run that with everything up. I could run 2.2 the same way back in the day, so have been searching for a way to get it back but no luck so far....I'm not holding out much hope.

2. If that's not an option, can i still buy new modules(obviously ignoring ones specifically label as requiring 2.5 such as the Hornet) and use them in 1.5? There`s only a few I`ve got my eye on currently such as the F-5 and the Sabre but wanted to make sure they were still compatible with older engine?

2. If that's not an option, can i still buy new modules(obviously ignoring ones specifically label as requiring 2.5 such as the Hornet) and use them in 1.5? There`s only a few I`ve got my eye on currently such as the F-5 and the Sabre but wanted to make sure they were still compatible with older engine?

I highly doubt it... unless they existed at the time of the release of the exact engine version.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114030

Should find what you need here

And i would be interested to hear if you are successful at downloading modules to 1.58 . Don't see much point in ED offering the engine download if you can't get modules for it .

If you can bear the visuals you can turn the resolution down a lot.

I highly doubt it... unless they existed at the time of the release of the exact engine version.

That's wrong. You can switch to ANY previous version using the DCS updater. The link that Svsmokey provided explains how it can be done.

I tried using the updater application that's shown in that post, and tried rolling back to the last version of 2.2 but it said that it wasn't found. Either I'm using it incorrectly, or it's simply not available. However I'll try they more manual method to see if that works.

Failing that I'll reduce settings or simply run smaller missions (I can only do SP anyway, no MP for me)

I tried using the updater application that's shown in that post, and tried rolling back to the last version of 2.2 but it said that it wasn't found. Either I'm using it incorrectly, or it's simply not available. However I'll try they more manual method to see if that works.

 

Failing that I'll reduce settings or simply run smaller missions (I can only do SP anyway, no MP for me)

Hmm, that's bad news. They might have taken that version off their server then :(

Are you using the full version number?

 

The Current 2.0 Alpha Legacy Build Version is: 2.2.0.12843

Yes the last release of the 2.2 but again I may have done it incorrectly. I'll try the manual command prompt method and see if that works.

Followed the method using CMD prompt but still saying "Version 2.2.0.12843 is not available" so it looks like I`m out of luck with rolling back.

Strange, as that's the last "old" engine build, you`d think it was available somewhere to roll back to.

DCS 2.5 will run well on a wide variety of rigs.

Posting your system specs in your sig makes it much, much easier for us to sort things like this out. You probably don't have to go back to 1.5 unless you have a really archaic system, in which case you're done for even with 1.5 :)

AD

DCS 2.5 will run well on a wide variety of rigs.

 

 

Posting your system specs in your sig makes it much, much easier for us to sort things like this out. You probably don't have to go back to 1.5 unless you have a really archaic system, in which case you're done for even with 1.5 :)

 

 

AD

I can actually run 2.5, both in Caucasus and Nevada but I have to realistically turn settings down (especially the AA) to get it to run with a decent FPS ~60 most times, but dips to 35-40 during larger engagements, and it looking worse and ugly shimmering seems a step back.

Granted, EDGE looks a million miles better than old engine, but i can run 1.5 with over 100 FPS with dozens of units at a time - on 2.5 same type of mission, it is stuttering and looking borderline crap...hence why i wanted to roll it back to at least use the NTTR again.

At least until a PC upgrade can be sorted ( My rig is at end of life i think ;) )

Your big issue is your gfx card, a 970 is going to struggle with 2.5 for sure. Maybe look for a used 1070 or 1080 on eBay. Could be a relatively cheap upgrade, after that I’d find 32GB of RAM and that should also give you a big performance improvement as well.

At least until a PC upgrade can be sorted ( My rig is at end of life i think ;) )

Well, it doesn't look bad at all to me, you just forgot to tell if you use VR and/or what resolution your screen is. We all used to run version 1.5 with High settings and MSAA but unless you have a top-shelf PC, you must bow to the 2.5 with Low settings and go from there. Remember when upgrading that DCS will eat any rig you put against it.

I currently enjoy the game with G4560/16GB/GTX660/SSD/1650x1050/TiR.

Well, it doesn't look bad at all to me, you just forgot to tell if you use VR and/or what resolution your screen is. We all used to run version 1.5 with High settings and MSAA but unless you have a top-shelf PC, you must bow to the 2.5 with Low settings and go from there. Remember when upgrading that DCS will eat any rig you put against it.

I currently enjoy the game with G4560/16GB/GTX660/SSD/1650x1050/TiR.

No VR, don't think my 970 would handle that, but running at 1920 res with head tracking. Think I've manged now to find sweet spot in settings to allow me to run it at decent fps. Just wish there was something to do about the jaggies /shimmering on shadows and terrain and

the occasional stuttering, but just have to deal with it at the moment. Always got 1.5 to fall back on if it annoys me too much.

Was quite funny though as it maxed out my 8GB of RAM so when I doubled it, it basically said I'll have that too and now it's running at around 12GB usage.... :smilewink:

Nah, there's no coming back to 1.5. So much has changed, never look back.

Try shadows high... or flat... or none at all.

I used to have 8GB few months before - anything more than solo flight was painful.

I can actually run 2.5, both in Caucasus and Nevada but I have to realistically turn settings down (especially the AA) to get it to run with a decent FPS ~60 most times, but dips to 35-40 during larger engagements, and it looking worse and ugly shimmering seems a step back.

60 FPS? :shocking:

I play DCS with average FPS between 25 and 40 (depending on terrain and the mission) and I'm totally fine with that (all settings on ultra though).

60 FPS? :shocking:

I play DCS with average FPS between 25 and 40 (depending on terrain and the mission) and I'm totally fine with that (all settings on ultra though).

Yeh I'm definitely not running it on Ultra :)

Only x2 with FXAA through Nvidia inspector. Shadows low, trees at 70%. So it doesn't look that good but I prefer running at consistent 55-60 as it seems to help with head tracking smoothness. Again I'd love to run with all the bells and whistles on as EDGE does look fantastic but I'm realistic in my expectations... Including zero multiplayer enjoyment sadly.

Yeh I'm definitely not running it on Ultra :)

 

Only x2 with FXAA through Nvidia inspector. Shadows low, trees at 70%. So it doesn't look that good but I prefer running at consistent 55-60 as it seems to help with head tracking smoothness. Again I'd love to run with all the bells and whistles on as EDGE does look fantastic but I'm realistic in my expectations... Including zero multiplayer enjoyment sadly.

Well, if I were you with your hardware I would see a lot of potential for increasing the graphics settings without changing the hardware, as 60 fps is twice as much as I would need to happy. But tastes are different and if you prefer having more FPS instead of better graphics, then that is as it is :)

Well, if I were you with your hardware I would see a lot of potential for increasing the graphics settings without changing the hardware, as 60 fps is twice as much as I would need to happy. But tastes are different and if you prefer having more FPS instead of better graphics, then that is as it is :)

I did crank everything up for a laugh... It looked stunning... My 970 and CPU temps weren't so stunning :smilewink:toasty warm.... Sounded like a vacuum cleaner...

I did crank everything up for a laugh... It looked stunning... My 970 and CPU temps weren't so stunning :smilewink:toasty warm.... Sounded like a vacuum cleaner...

They're not supposed to be cold and unemployed. Actually their temps are allowed to be pretty high, make them work for you, they're there for a reason. Change the coolers if you can't manage the noise.

Also the trees are easy - set them to 100% and forgedaboutit.