Jump to content

DCS World Patch Notes Discussion Thread


BIGNEWY

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Havremonster said:

Takes forever to load The Channel map after todays update. Have not tryed the others yet.

Normally does the first time a map has been downloaded or updated.  Try reloading it a couple of times and it should be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Phantom453 said:

Normally does the first time a map has been downloaded or updated.  Try reloading it a couple of times and it should be fine.

I have reloaded a lot of time. I have also taken a slow repair of the game. But the loading time are very long , spesial on The Channel map. At least ten times longer than before. And the game also have a lot of lagg now after the update. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2021 at 6:18 PM, Nealius said:

No mention of the new bullet impact effects. Was hoping those got in giving the Mossie's A2G role and the unrealistic water explosions caused by everything down to 9mm. 

When can we expect the new effects to be in? Next OB Update? Maybe Hotfix? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DCSoping said:

wow they did not just tweak the F16 radar a little bit. Feels like they just -50% it's performance. 

It hurts 😞

That's how OP it was.

  • Like 2

🖥️ i3-10100F 3.6-4.3GHz, 16GB DDR4 2666, GTX970 4GB, SSD SATA3   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B   🚢 Supercarrier    🌍 NTTR, PG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DCSoping said:

says who

Everyone who knows the real aircraft, and/or has access to the real technical manuals.

  • Like 7

 

Spoiler

Ryzen 9 5900X | 64GB G.Skill TridentZ 3600MHz CL16 | Gigabyte RX6900XT | ASUS ROG Strix X570-E GAMING | Samsung 960Pro NVMe 1TB | HP Reverb G2
Pro Flight Trainer Puma | VIRPIL MT-50CM2 base/grip with 200 mm S-curve extension + CM3 throttle + CP2 + FSSB R3L + VPC Rotor TCS Plus base with SharKa-50 grip mounted on Monstertech MFC-1 | TPR rudder pedals

My in-game DCS settings (PD 1.0 SteamSS 76%):

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS 2.7.6.12852 Open Beta
AN/APG-68(V)5 detection and tracking ranges have been adjusted/reduced to match publicly available data.

 

@BIGNEWYMy question: where are these "publicly available data" from? I assume, that ED or you, have no problem with showing us the source of it.

Thanks very much.

These are values for V5 version of radar - I found publicly available:

APG-68 V5 (F-16 C/D)
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target:   6~7 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target:   18~22 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target:   32~40 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target:   50~60 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 60~72 km+

 

And these values are now in DCS- approx 45% better:

For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: ~9,6 km (5,3 nm)
For RCS 0.01 m2 class target:    ~30 km (17 nm)
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target:      ~54 km (30 nm)
For RCS 3.0 m2 class target:      ~71 km (40 nm) (JF-17)
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target:      ~81 km (45 nm)
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target:    ~96 km (54 nm)

For RCS 100 m2 class target:   ~140 km (77 nm) .. should be 95nm - but some magic knife cut max range same way as for APG-73 at Hornet, with same max detection range for RCS 100 m2.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, any radar performance change should be done across whole DCS, or at least among most user popular fighter planes. Experiencing one or more radars OP while others are "tuned", - I'm not saying fixed, it's not good for anyone. I hope that fixing JF-17 radar will come next patch 😂. Oh, I forgot, that it's performance is based on some Pakistani pilot talk - I'm just kidding 🤞🏻, or not?


Edited by GumidekCZ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if one radar is OP than the other as long as it is realistic. Radars can't be even in performance, some military manufacturers have one and others have other radar specs and techs.

In my opinion radar performance change shouldn't come across whole DCS, but per specific radar, we are not here for balance but realism.


Edited by Furiz
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Furiz said:

It doesn't matter if one radar is OP than the other as long as it is realistic. Radars can't be even in performance, some military manufacturers have one and others have other radar specs and techs.

In my opinion radar performance change shouldn't come across whole DCS, but per specific radar, we are not here for balance but realism.

 

Realism? For radar performance? You are just kidding 😅 where you want to find realistic data, if the DCS radar core calculation (RCS, aspect, materials, weather,..) is not properly simulated... I'm aware that this can't be done by just thinking about hardware we have available. Show me one single radar in DCS which have published detection ranges for exact RCS at given PRF by its manufacturer.

Trying to keep performances close to what is publicly know is good thing. Also thinking of compare each radar and it's limits is good thing for wide base of multiplayer community, which is growing every day.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from actual viper pilot

"it was and is impossible that the 120c would have outranged our radar. We were always able to see and track at least at our max missile envelope, which is way bejond 40nm"

 

Now you can not even reliably track a HOT aspect 20k alt. fighter at half that distance. 

Always the knee-jerk adjustments, go with LITTLE increments first and see how that goes first please 😞 


Edited by DCSoping
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GumidekCZ said:

Also thinking of compare each radar and it's limits is good thing for wide base of multiplayer community, which is growing every day.

 

What do you mean by this? Balance them out so you can have PvP?

Balance is not what ED is going for.

 

5 minutes ago, GumidekCZ said:

Show me one single radar in DCS which have published detection ranges for exact RCS at given PRF by its manufacturer.

 

You are asking this because you know even if I had those I couldn't bring them up, but that doesn't make you right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Furiz said:

It doesn't matter if one radar is OP than the other as long as it is realistic.

 

True, but I think what GumidekCZ was getting at is to adjust all RADARs at once (those that need correcting anyway) instead of doing them one at a time, which may lead to a mismatch. Though not sure now on second thoughts.

 

Though so long as they all end up being as realistic as possible, I'll be happy, though there's plenty of things DCS doesn't account for yet in its RADAR modelling.


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV-2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, CA, NS430, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas, Caucasus

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bG9bBc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I was trying to say, that goal should be to achieve maximum realism, but keep in mind that this is just Holly grail, which never can be achieved fully. I never said a word about balancing. What I want to see is maximum radars and weapon systems throughout the DCS and all modules, where somebody(specialist) controls performances of such systems and compare available paper data with what could be physically achieved at RW. One example, already done, and controlled is SD-10 Chinese missile...I hope that someone will check more systems in near future.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They sure overdid it. 

What the hell i just tried again. 

 

So it just dumps bugs randomly up to 15nm . (To try and emulate "shitness" or something?) 

 

By that time, if you try to re-bug you get that weird thing where the cursor SKIPS OVER your target and you can't bug with TWS at all. 

 

The F16 is now basically reduced to a WVR (10nm) range aircraft only. I shit you not. 

 

EDIT*  > Apparently this is due to a bug with the automatic radar elevation , it is inder investigation 


Edited by DCSoping
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DCSoping said:

They sure overdid it. 

What the hell i just tried again. 

 

So it just dumps bugs randomly up to 15nm . (To try and emulate "shitness" or something?) 

 

By that time, if you try to re-bug you get that weird thing where the cursor SKIPS OVER your target and you can't bug with TWS at all. 

 

The F16 is now basically reduced to a WVR (10nm) range aircraft only. I shit you not. 

 

Why always these knee-jerk reactions holy shit i'm actually a bit pissed off at this stupidity.

 

If it's more realistic, that's all that matters, though there does seem to be a few bugs that were introduced.


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 2

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV-2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, CA, NS430, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas, Caucasus

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bG9bBc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, DCSoping said:

They sure overdid it. 

What the hell i just tried again. 

 

So it just dumps bugs randomly up to 15nm . (To try and emulate "shitness" or something?) 

 

By that time, if you try to re-bug you get that weird thing where the cursor SKIPS OVER your target and you can't bug with TWS at all. 

 

The F16 is now basically reduced to a WVR (10nm) range aircraft only. I shit you not. 

 

Why always these knee-jerk reactions holy shit i'm actually a bit pissed off at this stupidity. 

 

 

Try Stabe Release, is you are playing in Open Beta expect bugs, that's why OB version is out so that they can run it through the community, it is the cheapest and fastest way of figuring out bugs.

And when you notice that something is bugged you can report it so they can fix it.


Edited by Furiz
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, DCSoping said:

They sure overdid it. 

What the hell i just tried again. 

 

So it just dumps bugs randomly up to 15nm . (To try and emulate "shitness" or something?) 

 

By that time, if you try to re-bug you get that weird thing where the cursor SKIPS OVER your target and you can't bug with TWS at all. 

 

The F16 is now basically reduced to a WVR (10nm) range aircraft only. I shit you not. 

 

Why always these knee-jerk reactions holy shit i'm actually a bit pissed off at this stupidity. 

 

 

Maybe it's related to this?

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Win10 64, Asus Maximus VIII Formula, i5 6600K, Geforce 980 GTX Ti, 32 GB Ram, Samsung EVO SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me...

 

Vulkan  

 

 

giphy.gif?cid=790b7611cb668864333bdc7cdf

 


Edited by Sr.
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Ryzen R5 5600X | 64GB DDR4 3600| ASRock Radeon RX 6900 XT  | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB NVME | HP Reverb G2 | Logitech X-56 throttle/VKB NXT Premium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just noticed that since the last patch I now have the JF-17 available in the mission editor... (I don't own it nor have I tested it) I can only jump in when it's it client mode and it seems to be lacking a cockpit.... Unless it has one of those see through HMDs like an f35.... 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...