DCS and X plane need to team up…Just sayin
1 Like
I would hate for any resources that should be focused on getting combat modules/objects finished going towards any kind of civvie work. If you enjoy free flying the combat modules great, but lets keep the development focus on combat and leave the civil aviation to the sims that cater to it. The last thing this sim needs is something to cause more delays in finishing the theaters and modules that we’ve paid and waited years for.
@Grumbles I would argue that it would work out to a matter of both. For the combat portion of DCS: World, the things we’ve been asking for are better terrain detail and mesh, objects (cities, etc), weather, navigation beacons (TACAN, VOR, DME, etc), and ATC. Pretty much all the things that a civilian flight sim developer also does well.
4 Likes
@Navynuke99 - I agree completely. The civil stuff (terrain, infrastructure, vehicles, and objects) can only benefit a combat sim. Never understood the disdain toward being inclusive in that manner…but to each their own… shrug
BeachAV8R
1 Like
I’ll spoiler quote the lot of this, as if you haven’t already seen it then a big part of the fun is finding out yourself.
I am so tempted (as a gag) to raise a NTTR bug, as the serial number on that shuttle is clearly wrong. I won’t because they are probably pretty busy. That’s a Voyager Cochrane-class shuttle [1], while Star Trek canon specifies the ‘Rosewell Incident’ was part of the Deep Space Nine series. I know they took the shuttle to Walker AFB, but still… [2] 
(pushes glasses up nose in the best nerd manner)
Cochrane (Voyager shuttlecraft) | Memory Beta, non-canon Star Trek Wiki | Fandom
1 Like
Correction, per the DS9 episode “Little Green Men,” the ship involved in the “Rosewell Incident” was actually a Ferengi shuttle, named Qwark’s Treasure. It’s still one of my favorite episodes of Deep Space 9. I don’t even remember if the type 9 appeared in DS9, but I really doubt it.
/nerd off
2 Likes
Nope, this is all good stuff for the bug report I’m filing!
1 Like
It was hard work downloading and installing, had to try several times and finally do research to kickstart the download again by using a command line to install … Honestly if we are all expected to do this and I’m very IT and computer literate, its bound to fail … its just stunning how ED ignore Customer feedback, its installed now though. Had a quick fly about on max settings and I’m a bit underwhelmed to be honest.
One of the poorest roll-outs ever IMHO, but thats ED for you. I’m banned there already and can relax in a bit of free speech here now at last, horrible company to deal with, dont get me wrong, some awesome products, but constructive criticism is not part of their vocabulary,
But now that its finally installed and tweak’d as best I can … Its not too bad I suppose, early days yet though, frame rates are good maxed out but I do have high end PC stuff.
Comparing this area to the best FSX add ons can offer, the local terrain and hills and mountains viewed from DCS Las Vegas airport is much better looking and sharper in FSX (with the best local add ons installed) … indeed when I took off to look closer in DCS, those hills and mountains never got sharper as I got closer, bit disappointed to be honest with the quality of surrounding terrain, its poor quality terrain graphics for late 2015 IMHO … what sort of mesh do they use?
The actual LA Airport itself, well it makes you wonder why only one civil operator is allowed to use it … ED might answer licensing issues, but third party FSX traffic company’s seem to circumvent this issue in the 50’000 odd airports that come as stock in FSX and third partys can do more traffic detail … as it stands just now, LA airport in this release from ED looks sterile to me, indeed it reminds me of the movie The Langoliers.
Its definitely not all bad though, poorly rolled out and extremely late and badly implemented for sure but its nice to fly in some new terrain at long last.
Final thoughts, has anyone fully explored DCS Area 51 yet? I think ED take them selves too seriously to include an easter egg here? maybe not … MS did with FSX and it was fun, nothing wrong with a bit of fun 
1 Like
Actually, c0ff and @wagmatt tried to sort out a lot of things, so I think that’s not quite fair. It wasn’t a good experience for sure though. The ‘alpha’ part extended to the updater and the first time they had a 26 GB module and it was painful.
Ah, you see those blurred out posts above
You know what would be great @katana1000s was if this place didn’t become where people come to complain about ED’s forums or support. 95% of your post was great, and about the NTTR (which is this topic) but the last 5% is basically a pain in my ass now.
There is no explicit rule against complaining about other forums or moderators other than we simply don’t want to be a place where that happens all the time. You might be right or wrong, but basically it’s now the Mudspike mods here problem to sort out. The airing of other forum grievances in public and having a public court of opinion (usually lacking lots of info on both sides) just turns us into a Jerry Springer side-show.
Don’t you think that the Mudspike members here that work or volunteer with ED are just going to ignore what you wrote? So taking it to the next logical step, you want to argue with them here while we host that argument? That’s not what we want to do with our free time. I just want to play sims.
We’ve never had to moderate a single comment since we started this forum. That’s basically a miracle on the internet and I would have bet hard money against it happening like it has. I think our thinking on what we want is pretty well summarized here. If we have to start editing things and convincing people to get on, or play kids while mom and dad get divorced then we’ll just stop the forums, none of us really want to do it. We just want to play sims.
Cheers, and do you see where I am coming from on this?
6 Likes
I am ok with the way that the roll-out went. They were/are working on a new distribution method, and yeah there were some problems, but all-in-all this is moving things forward. Problems were found and the community pitched in to help make the experience better. What’s not to appreciate?
Well said @fearlessfrog
There will be absolutely no bringing disagreements with other forums or other forum’s members or admins here. There is no free speech here either, just to be clear. Constructive criticism, even complaints are no problem, but we are sim enthusiasts, not blind to the shortcomings of our hobby, but we won’t dwell endlessly on them either.
Personally, I think ED is a heck of a lot better to deal with than Razorworks or MicroProse or Jane’s Combat Simulations. 
BeachAV8R
9 Likes
I’m really happy with how it holds up in MP. I hosted the NTTR for 7 hours before bad things happened (It crashed when weird things happend with the L-39 Multicockpit - not sure exactly what was going on there).
I had 15 people on at some point. If only my upload speed was better I could support more players. Even with just 15 it was at the limit.
Sure, there is some still lag when players enter new aircraft but overall it runs extremely smooth.
I rippled 6 CBU-87 without noticeable frame drops as I was looking at the explosions. Really nice effect too.
CBU-97 are also fixed. In the past there were problems with the skeets hitting only very few targets in large groups but today I killed a group of 8(!) tanks with a single CBU-97. Last time I tried this in DCS 1.5 I hit maybe 3 out of a much larger group than these 8, if I was lucky.
Worth the wait IMO.
Bonus Pic:
EDIT: 6 CBU’s @60fps 
4 Likes
Beautiful! It is just beautiful! Not only is beautiful but it is very interesting and lends itself to some great scenarios. I had a go at Vegas from the Huey (no better way to see it than in a helo). Then I flew combat in my fav, the -15.
Mission builder is a bit confusing. I have to navigate a little funny to find the instant missions and save them. I’m sure its work in progress. As for the rest… All I can say is ED take a bow. Good Work!
Maico
1 Like
Has there been any improvement in memory usage in 2.0? I’m astounded at how much the new build is using. (on 1.5)
I would say there have been improvements although I have to say that memory usage is actually higher than 1.5.1
The difference is that the memory usage is stable as far as I can tell. On my system it goes up to ~9-10GB total usage and then stays there. I’ve had a single crash so far and that was while hosting a public MP Server after it had been running without problems for almost 7 hours (see my post above regarding multiplayer).
In 1.5.1 multiplayer the usage increases over time until clients start warping around like crazy and then the game crashes. I’ve had my task manager open while I hasted Nevada last weekend and at the time of the crash I had still about 3.5GB of free RAM left and there was only a little stutter and warping when players joined new aircraft.
Oh, well I guess the stability is good, but as someone with only 8 gigs of ram at the moment… kinda unwelcome news lol I crashed out on a small server the other day at 6.5 gb in 1.5.1, having just jumped on the beta the other day the memory usage really startled me. In a way its kinda frustrating cause I’ve noticed quite an improvement when it comes to my graphics card, like running almost 10 degrees cooler in game.
It seems to adjust depending on how much RAM you actually have. I’ve got 12GB RAM and I haven’t seen more than 11GB usage total with 2.0 running and even then it quickly dropped back to below 11GB but I’ve talked to someone with 16GB who had usage around 13GB total.
The most I’ve seen from the 2.0 client has actually been around 8GB for a short period, then it dropped back to around 3GB-5GB.
These are all numbers I observed in multiplayer. I haven’t actually paid much attention to usage in SP
Interesting, I’m doing my best not to panic considering that were looking at alpha and beta builds right now. I know things are in a constant state of change currently.
I’ve got to ask, what were you dropping the -87s on? The CBU-87s effectiveness, or rather lack there of, in DCS has been a constant gripe of mine.