Yeah, unfortunately that happens automatically for me with every new module; I have a dozen axis all fighting for pitch and roll!
Well, I can pretty much use the wheel brakes the same as any other aircraft; although braking is only apportioned to the left or right with a rudder application, if I apply either brake without corresponding rudder the brake is applied to both equally. If I apply both brake pedals at the same time, the sim sees the highest value of the two toe brakes. Works pretty well, and I do it the same way in the Spitfire since I don’t have an analogue paddle. YMMV, but it seems to be a decent work-around.
I’d consider getting decent pedals. R/L pilots seem to dig MFG crosswinds.
The less expensive VKB sticks are a great value.
Flight sims demand a lot of CPU horsepower. The newer AMD chips work well with no overclocking, usually less expensive too. Go for fewer cores and faster (boost) clocks.
G2 is a fine headset but a pain in the gonads to set up and you are gonna have a LOT of pixels to drive, I wouldn’t go there with anything less than a 3080
MSFS is probably better for training than DCS. You can do a fair amount with the C101 on the NTTR map, we even did some basic IFR work with it. But with MSFS you can plan and pre-fly your training flights which has its advantages
So where do DCS folks land when it comes to big curved monitors (and perhaps TrackIR) versus the VR route (Reverb G2)? Is this a personal preference thing or is one clearly a standout?
And related to the L-39 modification stuff above, we ran the TFE731-5BR engined plane down the runway for a few acceleration passes. It was 15% quicker than our best -3 installation which is good given the -5BR is restricted by the stock L-39 inlets. Finally after two and a half years I got an inlet diffuser design to work
That said, the VR difference is night and day. You’re no longer sitting in front of your PC playing a game, you’re in the aircraft. I don’t know how else to say it. The depth perception, sense of scale, the airplane around you when you look out, it’s just so natural and real feeling. It’s pretty cool.
Keep in mind I only have about 55hrs so this is the perspective of having been in training. I made extensive use of MSFS on flat screen during training, didn’t get into VR until much later but the difference is night and day. It’s just not possible to fly the pattern well in flat screen mode. In VR there’s a great sensation of depth, for example you can perceive your sink rate with your peripheral vision. I dunno how people practice formation flying in flat screen.
Not a ton of difference between using visual references and instruments in flat screen mode. Seems like both horizons are artificial. Much more noticeable (and disorienting) transition from visual to instruments if you venture into a cloud in VR.
Never got to try trackIR but question how well it helps you build a world model in your noggin.
Clearly, for training VR is superior to flat screen, not even close.
Are there better choices on monitor resolution that hold hands with the Reverb G2 screen(s) resolution?
There was some mention of AMD compatibility problems with the G2 early on and yet many have commented that the AMD approach to architecture is better suited to the VR workload. Is the Risen the best choice?
On the video card side, I’ve seen reviews for a bunch of 30x0 series of cards some with ix or similar designations. How do you go about picking the best match when your focus is on VR?
Sorry to ask so many questions that have likely been asked before. The lesser expensive items (HOTAS, etc.) are ones I am comfortable taking a chance on as the penalty for noob mistakes is low. On the higher end elements, I’d prefer to overkill and not regret.
VR goggles are overrated I had one and returned it. it wasnt worth it imo. I experienced lack-of-motion sickness - as there is obviously no body motion in seated VR unless you buy also some moving platform. I am RL pilot and I have no problem with motion sickness, never had. I can even read books in the back of the car without experiencing any weird feelings. only that VR lack-of-motion sickness was weird to me
for siming I have 55" 4K TV capable of 4K resolution [3840x2160pixels] in 120Hz. I am more than happy. and you can still go higher with the inches 60-65-70-… they manufacture gaming TVs these days for console gamers, all with 4K resolutions and 120Hz and small latency. LG and Samsung are the bigger brands here (there are also other manufacturers). I have Samsung.
I believe that coming from 27" pancake screen to VR goggles is quite a difference. I just didnt appreciate that coming from 55" pancake.
So, my perspective is that VR is an absolute game changer. To the extent that I choose not to fly using my 40” flat screen any more (and it is flat, not curved).
That said, I’m making some serious tradeoffs with visual quality to get frame rate (and even then it isn’t great). Tradeoffs that I wouldn’t have to make on the monitor.
I still prefer the flat screen for shooters and things like Arma where I’m going to transition from operating on foot to operating a vehicle. But for flight sims and racing, VR all the way and I’m not looking back!
I was hoping @NEVO would chime in.
I am one of those who flies VR exclusively, for reasons detailed above by others, but am not sure if I would recommend it for someone just starting out with DCS or flight sims.
For some people, VR stays nauseating even after the first few days.
On top of that, there are other reasons why specifically for people getting started in DCS, I would not recommend it.
I detailed those here a few days ago:
I didn’t even mention the lowering of graphics settings and the software complexity which results in being tempted to do a lot of tweaking.
As for AMD vs Intel: they are on the same level so it doesn’t make much of a difference which one you choose at the moment.
The early AMD USB issues are long solved.
AMD’s Ryzen 5000 series outperformed Intel 11th gen in every way, but Intel has caught up with 12th gen, mostly.
On the lower end, i5-12400f vs Ryzen 5 5600X, Intel has slightly better single-core performance, and higher energy efficiency at single core loads and idle. AMD is much more performant and efficient at multi-threaded tasks.
Currently, Intel is slightly cheaper here (B660 mobo + i5) so I would recommend that over B550 + Ryzen 5600X.
On the higher end, Intel is also slightly better at the single-threaded loads, which are important for us, but don’t get the i9 as that one comes at a huge cost in energy and thermals compared to the AMD equivalents.
I’ve heard good things about the new i7 but haven’t looked in detaik at how it stacks up against the Ryzen 7 5800X3D
I’ve been flying DCS exclusively in VR for over two years now . Having said that , i do find Freak’s observation that DCS is better learned in pancake compelling .
As to which gpu for vr , it’s simple . Get the best one you can’t really afford !
I had one and returned it. it wasnt worth it imo. I experienced lack-of-motion sickness - as there is obviously no body motion in seated VR unless you buy also some moving platform. I am RL pilot and I have no problem with motion sickness, never had. I can even read books in the back of the car without experiencing any weird feelings. only that VR lack-of-motion sickness was weird to me 
Don’t count on it