Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Reckoner_

  1. Reckoner_ + BoN 3000$ through all 2020?! That's crazy genearus of you! Thanks!
  2. This is very generous of you 😄 I can only say thank you and merry Christmas to everyone Hope you enjoy my pick for BoN
  3. Sorry geniuin question. Are you a developer of this game to know that there are not enough player/money to add more settings to the game? If not, you should try to read past the second paragraph: But I guess you aren't intrested in making everybody happy.
  4. So, what kind of harm you recive from having 2 optional alternative spotting setting in multiplayer? Do you own a server and it's too coplicated for you to set the settings? Regadless there are still all the people who play single player that might enjoy to have the choice. And if you don't want to dive into the advanced settings the game already provide for two general Difficuly modes.
  5. To everybody who is categorically against this possible addition, why don't you try to discuss with an open mind and try to find a solution that please everybody? This "G-meter" could easliy be an optional difficult setting. Everybody is happy. In multiplayer would be up to sever owner, just like with spotting.
  6. I hope to be proved wrong, but unfortunately the Mission editor lacks the features to create a Combat Box formation and keep it stable over a significant portion of the flight.
  7. U-2VS obviously... Then, both Yak-1b and La-5FN are worth buying, which you'll like the most is down to personal preference.
  8. Hi thanks for the offer 😄 Plane and channel:
  9. Except it was the bottom gunner to actually hit him not the top gunner that had way more time on target. You can increase the gif quality on the bottom right or check the original video here:
  10. This is the episode @SteelFalcon is talking about.
  11. Well how things should be depends entirely on what Devs wants. Devs restricted gun movement speed to simulate the real life physical [human] limitations required to move the gun, just like the restricted the speed at which you can pull the flight controls at high speed, and since this is a simulation title I support this choice. You might not like it and want a more arcade approach, but that's just your personal opinion. As for the look around I agree that could be better. Currently when you are nested in the gun sight looking around with head-tracking feels sluggish and certainly can be improved. Also is not possible to look around when you are "eye balling" the gun.
  12. The only clunkiness I see is when wanting to quickly switching gun from the same station, like in the Ju-88. As for anything else I don't understand what you mean. Mouse aim is the standard when it comes to PC FPS and I think that it works quite well as it is now.
  13. I'm not going to discuss the Historical lethality of gunners since there are countless situations that might lead to battle damage IRL. But saying gunners in game right now are fine? I'm just gonna name few of the issues that comes on top of my head right now: Being able to track the target with no LOS and accurately shot as soon it gets on LOS (i.e attacking a Stuka from below at >45° angle) Being able to accurately return fire during maneuvers as if the gunners body and gun is a single piece with the aircraft Being able to accurately return fire while the plane is being hit (20mm HE exploding at few centimeters of your stations should at least trow off your aim if not making you stop shoting altogether) Excessive accuracy and/or reaction times in difficult conditions (i.e. high lateral closure rate, large distance up to 1.2 km) Gunners were and should be dangerous, but they should not be Superhumans. Right now having an human crew of gunners instead of AIs puts you at a disadvantage. This issues can be easily replicated both being the fighter and trying to replicate the gunner superpowers. I hope my observations are seen as constructive criticism and not hate. Good carefully planed approaches on enemies bombers/attackers should be rewarded, bad approaches should be punished (as they already are now).
  14. It's funny. If you would have read the spec page you'd know that nothing is said about it.
  15. That's your problem. Release the right brake and only apply small corrections to keep it straight. Tail-wheel should be unlocked only when you need to make a tight turn on taxiway.
  16. Generally I'd let this turned on as it might reduced stress on the CPU cores used by the game with other background process.. Anyway that's the theory, but you can test and check what's better. Also is your CPU a K or non-K processor? a bit of overclock always helps since IL-2 is heavily dependent on single core performances, and with that massive cooler you might even try to hit 5GHz. If it is a non-K processors you can try to lock all cores to maximum boost instead of having it jump around.
  17. Can you give us more info on your SSD? Is the game installed on it? Also there seems to be something wrong with the performances of it since from the benchmark you posted it falls in the 33rd lowest percentile.. that might be indicative or either a failing drive or eccessive I/O from another application. Additionally double check that windows power settings is set on Maximum performances. Also if you don't mind can you run and upload your Cpu-Z validator to give more info about your HW?
  18. Nice to see a P-47 campaign, thanks! Also I'm pretty sure that you don't need to own a specific BoX if you want to add just AI planes from that expansions.
  19. Mind posting your specs? You can run the Cpu-Z validator if you wanna make it quick
  20. Hello, I was flying the Bf 110 G-2 for a bit and I noticed that something wasn't quite right with the way the two engines sounds. I have the impressions that the Right and Left engines sounds different. The right engines sound like the on the Bf 109 G-4, while the left engines sounds more like the one on the Bf 109 F-4. This is something that does not happen in the Bf 110 E. Are they supposed to sound different, is it a bug or are just my ears to not work properly? I leave a small clip with the timestaps in the comment to help notice the difference in sound at the different power settings with one engine at idle. Right engine Normal mode 1:00 Left engine Normal mode 1:51 Right engine Combat mode 1:17 Left engine Combat mode 2:19 Right engine Emergency mode 1:27 Left engine Emergency mode 2:29
  21. You can directly delete the files inside the game folder, this is the path: ...\1C Game Studios\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Stalingrad\data\Tracks
  22. Yeah if you wanna find something cheaper, the only difference between the x56xx models is the base clock of the CPU that might help in OC if your motherboard blkc is limited. The extra two cores might help games that are well optimized for multithreading, but the main reason that I picked it up was that i could overclock it at 4Ghz at lower vcore and lower temps than my 920 that was limited at 3.3Ghz. Anyway the program I use is MSI Afterburner. I might wanna check if the GPU usage in other games reach 100%, if not is most cases a CPU bottleneck.
  23. So I tested this mission and unsurprisingly performance in the bomber formation weren't great. Right at start and in all other 22 cameras Performances where pretty good going from 50 fps to 80 fps (I keep my in game lock at 80 since my monitor can't go past 75 hz anyway). In the bomber Fps was going between 30-45 at top. Looking at the hardware telemetries during the bomber views is clear that the GPU is not the bottleneck. However I can't say anything about the CPU usage in this title. The bottleneck might as well be the RAM. What however I really found interesting playing this game is the VRAM / RAM / Pagefile usage. I've never seen the Vram usage going over 4.5 Gb and Ram usage over 8GB, while the page file usage goes up to of about 8 GB over idle (about 8GB at idle). Usually in other games I see first allocating all the Vram and RAM and then filling up the Pagefile. Now mine are just observations, only one of the Engine Devs might investigate and understand if that's normal or not. My specs anyway are the following: Xeon X5670 OC @ 4 Ghz; GTX 1060 6GB; 12 GB DDR3 @ 1333 Mhz Resolution is 2560x1080 Settings: telemetries Little off topic.. You should consider upgrading your CPU to Xeon X56xx as I did with my old 920. You can find them between 20-50$ depending what you pick. They use the same socket and they have no problem in running on the same Mobo you are using and since are more power efficient you can safely OC them to +4Ghz depending how good your Mobo is. It improved my performances massively in many games.
  • Create New...