(not addressing @Phantom88. I don’t know why the software does that.)
Just so no one panics from Gunny’s post. 
3 Likes
Aaaah, ok.
That’s more sensical.
No fix yet for the “quicksand FARPs”? Bummer.
1 Like
The Issue only Affected AMD CPU’s K10 and Older (Phenom II and Older) as they didnt have SSE4.1.
I have my Ryzen and FX CPU’s still running DCS without issues.
Issue was also fixed today w/ Hotfix.
2 Likes
I am an idiot!!!
Today’s minipatch did wonders for performance on my potato rig. Feels reaal good mon! 
2 Likes
Thought I would follow up on the Metashaders/FXO deal.
I took a screenshot a while back when I had an artifact issue - the runway lights would become brighter than the sun:
Others ones I have had includes a black wall partway down the map, that was only visible by looking directly at it and tire skid marks that go up into the sky. All resolved by closing DCS, purging those folders and going back in.
3 Likes
Actually it turns out I’m not. 
So I tried it on my Intel® machine and got the same think - everything just sinks through the surface of the FARP - vehicles and static objects. Is it because I originally used an AMD when I developed with ME? That doesn’t seem to make sense but what do I know.
1 Like
I … doubt that? That would be very, very weird.
2 Likes
That’s what I thought too. Tomorrow I’ll try some more stuff and see what happens…I guess that’s why its a Beta.
1 Like
Create another mission with a similar setup.
We had an instance where one of @WreckingCrew’s missions when updated in 2.5.6 went haywire and myself and @Franze tried to repair it by unpacking the internal files (.miz is just a .zip in disguise) without much luck. Went back to an older version to repair it.
Using a clean slate will help determine if the setup triggers a bug, or that mission file is corrupt somehow at least.
1 Like
So how is DCS for single player stuff? I’m relatively new to flight sims but have loved my time in X-Plane 11 so far (doing both FSE and AH2). In X-Plane, I’ve grabbed the REP versions for both the 172 and Baron 58 as I rather like how much more realistic it is. So I definitely feel interested in DCS. I especially love the thought of either flying older planes with my HOTAS, or getting the experience of landing on aircraft carriers :).
If DCS is good for single player, I’m curious about which plane to invest in. I know the included planes aren’t nearly as complex as other planes you can get. So I’m not sure whether to stick with the Mustang, or get a more complex sim (needing checklists and all) of the Warhog or a faster plane like the Viper or Hornet. I think I’ve heard good things about the JF-17 Thunder too? Ugh, I see a lot of money spending in my future if I get into this :).
Frankly, quite poor. The AI straddles between “UFO flight mode” and “dumber than a bag of hammers.” Scenarios are often weak and boring, most campaigns have little draw or inspiration, and there’s little narrative to keep things going. As a mission creator, I’ve struggled with creating a good narrative that would be appealing for players due to the lack of effective tools like cutscenes, briefings, and so on.
I’ll add the caveat that if you like creating your own scenarios and challenges, then it can pay off. But overall, DCS works better as a multiplayer game than it does as a singleplayer one.
4 Likes
Maybe the F-14 would be something for you. You get that real stick-and-rudder experience older planes offer while still getting the carrier ops experience. Her BVR nature alleviates some of the issues Franze mentioned, unless you push for the merge.
1 Like
Heh. Unlike my mate @Franze I find DCS perfectly satisfying as a single player experience.
From learning the planes with interactive training missions (harrier has the best, followed by A-10 and mirage) to campaigns that can be fun, well written and engaging enough. From personal experience I can rate Museum Relic (MiG-15/F-86), Enemy Within (A-10) and the one that comes with the mirage very highly.
Note how the hornet and harrier are absent there. That’s because they are too much in a state of flux for campaign builders to rely on them yet. They both are really fun rides however, with endless potential for shenanigans. Theres some fine sp missions and even campaigns written for them.
From dearth of experience I can’t speak for the quality of the sp content for tomcat, viggen, MiG-21, etc.
7 Likes
I agree with @schurem here, I have been almost exclusively flying DCS offline since 2011 and having fun with it.
It kinda depends on what you do with it.
1 Like
I have my good days and bad days with it. Like today, after hours of fiddling with settings to get decent VR frames out of the Supercarrier, I go to do some practice bombing in the Hornet just to deal with:
- Waypoints were 5~10nm away from where they should be (carrier movement during alignment causing drift?)
- First pass, AUTO BFL fails to appear (may have forgotten to designate but that isn’t necessary in most other jets using LITENING?)
- Second pass, BFL appeared but the target waypoint was 3nm west of where the pod was targeting
- Third pass, a single bomb comes off even though I programmed all 6 to ripple with 75’ spacing
Just to rule out some things already:
- what was the altitude of your target waypoints? If you set them in the ME and don’t edit them, they will float. So if you are not flying very close and/or very high they will point you into the right direction but not toward the ground. I usually set the target WPs to ground level using the UFC, often before launching.
- make sure to designate. Same as in the A-10C, where you have to make your SPI. Your TGP can (and will) look at points you have not designated but the rest of the plane will only care for the designated point.
1 Like
Didn’t even think about that. I’ve been flying the F-16 so long I never needed to mess with waypoint altitudes or designating with the TGP.
Now I just can’t get why only single bombs come off when doing a DTOS. If I stay in the dive they ripple fine.