|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Picked up FC3 on the Steam sale and holy poo poo how is it bringing my R290 to its knees? I think it's really CPU heavy
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 19:26 |
|
|
Chuck Tanner posted:I think it's really CPU heavy drat. I've got one of the newest i5s, but I guess that ain't enough. I was hoping to use the Rift DK2 with this when it finally arrives, but considering that thing needs 75FPS to function I guess that ain't happening...
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Reminder that BMS continues tomorrow. 2pm EST, 11am PST, 9pm GMT+2. If you need a tutorial before that, now is the time to ask. I can help you, but the badic buttons in the Second, Falcon, OP should be done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Propagandist posted:How is the campaign solo? Enjoyable still? Best ever made, IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Best ever made, IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
The problem with DCS's engine isn't that its CPU heavy its that its CPU bound. A large number of rendering tasks are calculated CPU side before being kicked off to the video card when it really outta be done on the video card. Shadow generation for example. They're also submitting an unholy fuckton number of draw calls each frame which is also completely unnecessary on modern (last ten years) hardware and in current 3D APIs (Direct3D/OpenGL) draw calls are expensive wastes of the CPU's time. Things like AMD's Mantle and Apple's Metal APIs are an attempt to eliminate draw call overhead, but even regular plain old Direct3D/OpenGL can massively cut down on draw calls by using certain techniques that have been available in video hardware for the past decade. The way ED is doing it is mental. The video card spends a lot of time sitting around waiting for the CPU to get back to it. On top of that the engine is completely single threaded, so while the CPU is spending time figuring out how to draw a shadow it also needs to go and update all the game state and sound state and input/output to the database and so forth, which you CPU can chew through without problem but the video card is still standing there tapping its foot waiting for the CPU to get its poo poo done. A big part of modern rendering techniques is setting it up so that you don't need the CPU to tell the GPU what to do. You set it up in advance with massive memory buffers filled with your assets, an initial state, and shader programs telling it how to draw all that poo poo, then just give it small updates on camera position or the odd shader parameter change and let the video card run autonomously on its own while the CPU sits back with a Corona and lime. A mission without to much in it, no big deal; but every non-static unit you add has causes an appreciable dip in frame times. ED has been dangling this "EDGE" engine carrot in the faces of its fans for a few years now that is supposed to fix all that but there's been no sign of it anywhere. I imagine it will only be released (assuming its even being developed at all) whenever ED's military contract funds run low. Sauer fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
This 'edge' poo poo is so annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Yeah it is. They claim its gonna be in 1.3 now, and we're at 1.2.8. So hope they arent FIBBING...
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
We supposedly the F-86 requires 'Edge' or whatever for it's better metal reflection properties, i believe MiG-21 has also been delayed until 1.3. Honestly it's pretty shut because they claim it's ED's call to release MiG-21 but they have been "two weeks"ing it for two months now so it's a big whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Apparently they're skipping 1.2.9 and the next release will be 1.3 with EDGE. Edit: Am I the only one who doesn't care about DCS: Utility Chopper, DCS: Obsolete Fighter, or DCS: Unarmed Trainer? Just release a full featured DCS: F-15 and Su-27 or Mig-29 and cash in my monies! INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Apparently they're skipping 1.2.9 and the next release will be 1.3 with EDGE. There are alot of dumbfucks over there on the ED forums who see one type of fighter they're a fan of, and stick to it like there's going to be a whole line of planes following suit. The random WWII stuff for instance, and especially the trainers. Come, fellow spergs. Come. Lets make an obligatory "Hey DCS should make this poo poo instead" list based on nationality. Behold, my list. USA --- 1) AH-1F Cobra, or AH-1W Super Cobra 2) F/A-18C Hornet 3) F-16C Block 52 Falcon USSR/RU --- 1) Mi-24 Hind (later variant preferable, V would be great tyty) 2) Su-30 3) MiG-27K That is my list, because IDK why the hell I even made one. ENJOY! Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Finish up FC3 crafts. Add Strike Eagle. We have a good nineties war, they just need to build on that. And dynamic MP campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
DCS: Obsolete Fighter looks pretty neat, but DCS: Krautmobile and DCS: Dumb Trainer don't really interest me at all because holy poo poo I'm playing a simulator already I don't really need to fly a trainer, right? Also if I wanted to fly a Fw-190 I could play Il-2 1946 and actually have fun. The F-86 Sabre looks pretty alright aswell but it'll probably suffer from the same lack of depth the P-51 has for the last however long it's been. The Mi-8 is kind of neat and I really enjoy flying it but I think their priorities should be finishing all the Flaming Cliffs planes and doing some kind of dynamic campaign. e: Strike Eagle would surely be the easiest plane to implement, they already have a high fidelity model and weapons so all they really need to do is the cockpit and polishing the whole experience. We can already switch seats in the Mi-8 and whatever so I really don't understand why there is such a hangup on it. Also MiG-29 is still an ancient model and frankly brings the whole experience down. Recoome fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Leo Showers posted:Also if I wanted to fly a Fw-190 I could play Il-2 1946 and actually have fun. Agreed 100%. Except the "have fun" part because I keep loving up the mod installs  They're just making a plane that they're going to remake for another game, or releasing it early for a game in which it doesnt fit and then having to model an appropriate enemy for it. Either way, its poo poo. Obsolete Fighter is cool though, I give it a pass because it shakes like crazy on takeoff according to the vid and looks genuinely exciting to fly. Never thought about the Strike Eagle honestly due to two cockpits. I figure from a dev standpoint, they could just wave it away with claiming thats too much work for too little gain
Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
The Uh-1H and the Mi-8 both have multiple crew positions, for the UH-1H I believe you can be pilot, copilot and both gunner sides. The Mi-8 is the Pilot Commander, Pilot Navigator and Flight Engineer. At least in the Mi-8 you can beep boop most of the buttons as pilot commander but there are a few awkward buttons and dials that only the pilot navigator can see, for example the fuel gauge. I'd think flying a multi-person plane would be easier then flying a multi-person helicopter, you've really only got to worry about rate of climb and airspeed, with the helicopter it feels a bit more awkward. The missiles right now are probably the worst part of DCS because it forms such a large part of the air combat 'game'. The AI is beyond dumb so there really is a ton of room for improvement even before you get to the "release new module" part.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
You'd think with their origins in the Flanker series, a high fidelity Su-27 would be high on their priority list. I mean they probably have access to the technical manuals being that they're from Russia and all. Plus I want to see the sperg lords cry about whether it's unrealistic to use English cockpit labels.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Does anyone have a good X52 profile for BMS? I'm gonna give it a try tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
http://wiki.hoggit.us/view/Falcon_BMS_Setup#X52_Pro.2FNonPro
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/577900900818217706/F47CEFD86C829658BDB417583CD76549EBA8119A/ This was hard as gently caress, got drat. I should tune my stick curve I think. I flew the connectin using trim mainly, but it was the holding speed that was the worst.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
BMS starts in about 13 hours. It is early morning on third day, so we might start with some strikes at the dawn. Get your asses ready.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSPT-tConPs
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
What is the russian reason for that common blue paint?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
No clue if it's true, but I've always heard that it's the best color for eye strain relief or something to that effect. Supposedly the Soviets did some research or some junk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:BMS starts in about 13 hours. It is early morning on third day, so we might start with some strikes at the dawn. I'll be there this time!
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Picked up FC3 on the Steam sale and holy poo poo how is it bringing my R290 to its knees? Runs fine on a 560Ti. DCS is more CPU intensive. Edit: Was explained up above, in detail that fmr was awesome. Thank you. I knew it was a CPU hog, didn't know why. I'm running an i7 2600k with 8 gigs of ram, no issues maxxed settings, even in multiplayer. Wh1plash fucked around with this message at 08:11 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:What is the russian reason for that common blue paint? I'm not sure, but if you look at anti-corrosive coatings on commercial jet fuselages, the internals are usually green and the outside is sort of a cyan color. I always assumed that the Russians ended up with a cyan anti corrosion and the Americans an olive green one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 08:18
|
|
|
First landing ever, finally came to a stop here. Didn't think to take screenshots during the approach or rollout, was too busy wallowing all over like a poorly loaded boat, ignoring the tower's multiple waive off commands, and then standing on the brakes and fumbling for the air brake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
Yeeeeeesssssss!!!! I cant wait to pop up and shoot down some F-15's in pubbie servers. We just need a Su-27 or something acting as AWACS to vector the Migs in. I smell some fun in DCS for 3 people. SU-27 keeps the targets on radar, 2 21's use their massive climb performance to pop up and snag a few F-15's and then haul rear end out of there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
Well if it's any consolation the MiG-21 will probably be at least as terrible as an F-15 in a WVR fight, which means you will either have to a) be exeedingly lucky or b) ambush them. You really got to remember that the 21 doesn't carry BVR missiles so the best it can carry are R-60s, usually a comedy option for russians in MP. I've been playing around and the R-60Ms aren't completely terrible, but again it'll be more of a comedy option to pit a swarm of MiG-21s against any amount of F-15s, it's tantamount to suicide.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
Leo Showers posted:Well if it's any consolation the MiG-21 will probably be at least as terrible as an F-15 in a WVR fight, which means you will either have to a) be exeedingly lucky or b) ambush them. You really got to remember that the 21 doesn't carry BVR missiles so the best it can carry are R-60s, usually a comedy option for russians in MP. I am pretty sure it has BVR missiles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Which version is it, because I'm pretty sure there were versions of the Mig-21Bis that could carry R-77s and R-27s
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
The very newer refits of the MiG-21bis such as the Mig-21-93 etc can carry BVR missiles, but the version they are releasing won't. The radar literally has a max range of about 20-30km and can only acquire targets within about 10k or so, depending on weather conditions. It's the RP-22, you can check it out but it's pretty basic. The MiG-21-93 has a smaller version of the MiG-29's radar, which allows it to fire BVR e:The version DCS is getting is the MiG-21bis. It's an older fighter made obsolete by pretty much every fighter in-game. If you want practice on what it's like to fly less than cutting edge, I recommend flying the MiG-29A. It's still okay but it suffers in head on fights, limited range and lack of BVR loadouts. Magnify that experience several times over, but now you have a shittier RWR which doesn't tell you direction once you get locked on, and a radar which only works efficiently above 3km+ AGL due to ground interference. Also you have to press a button to turn on IFF filter, it's not on by default and I sense it will be the cause of a ton of hilarity. Recoome fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Going to be a few minutes late. Slept in a little to much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Come shoot down commies...or bomb their sheds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
poo poo I slept little too late. Server going up now! Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Nov 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Leo Showers posted:The Mi-8 is kind of neat and I really enjoy flying it but I think their priorities should be finishing all the Flaming Cliffs planes and doing some kind of dynamic campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
I like gun fighting in jets and the Sabre is something I would be totally interested in. Its just that its a niche product that doesn't fit in with the rest of the DCS offerings. DCS's world objects and such are made for a 90s era war so the Sabre doesn't have a place where it can be used in that context. So its going to be restricted to dogfighting other Sabres in a sandbox. Not complaining about that but if you're going to make a plane that doesn't fit the existing theater also make a Mig-15/17 for it to go up against. Can't wait for EDGE to be a full price rerelease of all the content we currently have but with a different rendering engine. If the BMS Dev's promise to have a completely refurbished carrier ops and an F-18 pit that's as detailed as the Viper comes true in the next version I will have to install a toilet next to my desk because I am never leaving the Hornet pit ever again. As for Falcon 4. We had a rough day today with dude's sleeping in, myself included, and our original campaign is corrupted and crashes the server. IVC also went to hell which was probably caused by having the server crash a bunch. The newly started campaign worked quite smoothly but the Tiger Spirit campaign is supposed to simulate ROK/US forces successfully repelling the initial DPRK assault and now pushing north to the Chinese border. Its a quick easy skill level campaign that has lots of very long flights. Its kind of dull. The Iron Fortress campaign on the other hand simulates the DPRK successfully executing a surprise attack again the ROK and pushing us back to the Pusan line. There's action also immediately after takeoff and if you don't deal with certain bridges early in the game you'll eventually have enemy forces firing on Kunsan a few hours into the game. Which is pretty exciting stuff. If you like Air-to-Air, the wall of Migs in Iron Fortress is even more intense than the usual campaign. Highly recommend it for multiplayer, reasonably short flight times with lots of action. Vaha suggested making Wednesday dogfight day with quick goon-on-goon violence that requires considerably less time investment than Sunday campaign day. I think that's a good idea and gives folks a chance to just dive in and start shooting things up without knowing all the comms and other switchology stuff. Participation has dropped off a lot which I imagine is because of how long it takes to get things going. Wednesday Fight Night would be a good way to come back to Falcon 4 without spending an hour fragging flights. Might want to restrict the usage of AIM-120s though, they just result in everyone blowing up seconds into the game and push the starting distance out to 20 miles or so. I'm going to see about making some 8-12 man "Tactical Engagement" missions as well. They're quick one shot missions similar to the way its done in DCS. The best way to make sure the dynamic campaign doesn't get hosed up is to never use more than 8x time acceleration. Its completely nonsensical since our modern PCs can easily handle simulating every aggregated object in the game world with ease but that's not how the campaign engine works. The campaign was designed to use as little as 5% of the available CPU time back when the game was released and they did that by allowing a certain number of game time "ticks" to be devoted to doing campaign calculations. That hasn't changed. The dynamic campaign is one area where the devs haven't made any real changes at all because its some of the most fragile code in the engine. When you use 16x or greater time acceleration the engine doesn't have enough time to properly update all the object in the map and will skip some to make up for it. This can result in dead objects not being cleaned up properly and corrupting the object database. This wasn't much of an issue when the game was released because the object database was considerably smaller than it is now. Modifications to the various Korean campaigns over the year have added shitloads more units to the map than there ever was and increased the size of the aggregation bubbles and blah, blah, blah, nerd poo poo. Use speeds higher than 8x sparingly and things shouldn't get hosed up. We don't need to frag flights that are an hour in advance, its very easy to make flights that takeoff at anytime we want, you just lock the "Takeoff Time" in the package window and unlock the "Time on Target". The host can stop the game clock and we can frag flights that will takeoff six minutes from "now", edit our loadouts and steerpoints and all that stuff then start the clock again. The clock doesn't need to be running to mess around with your flight's business. Now I need to figure out why I wasn't able to place multiple flights in the same package. Being able to Datalink with other flights is very useful. Edit: For some reason I can't seem to copy and paste out of the PDF this came from. Its from the Realism Patch 5 manual which is BMS's grand-daddy. The campaign engine has not changed since RP5. 
Sauer fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
I think I figured out why my Mavericks didn't hit anything. It helps when you turn them on and let them calibrate. Also turning the camera on and giving them a target helps.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Yup. You can press the CNTL button on the Maverick's weapon MFD page and set them to automatically turn on at a certain steerpoint if you like. The Maverick guides by locking on to differences in contrast in its video display. You can use your radar to slew the maverick's seeker to a particular spot when the MAV is in PRE mode, but you still need to actually designate something with the MAV's own seeker before you fire it. You can tell you have a target lock when the seeker snaps to a target and the cross in the seeker's display starts blinking. Be sure to uncage the seeker prior to trying to do anything with it or you just get a blank screen. Uncage is the 'U' button by default.
Sauer fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 19:26 |
|
|
Flying DCS:F15C, and have a MiG29 dodge/evade FOUR AIM-120's within 10 miles. Its ok, I also easily evaded an AA-12 at 7 miles. gently caress these missile flight models, shits a joke.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 00:42
|
|