Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by JG4_Retnek

  1. My rig: Windows 10 Pro Intel i5 2500k @ 4.3 Ghz 16 GB Ram Geforce GTX 1060 6GB 2560x1440 GSync-monitor 144 Hz Before 3.201 I had SP 120 - 150 FPS, MP (mainly depending on distance to server and it's load) 80 - 110 FPS. I tried a lot of graphic settings, from Ultra-all-out to Medium-all-over. Resulting in higher or lower FPS, it remained a question of personal taste ranging from 60 to 144 Hz. ANYtime it remained smooth, NO stutters at all - at least I wasn't able to see any. Imho it was nearly perfect - bucket full of options I was free to choose from. After 3.201 I have SP 90 - 110 FPS, as soon as there are clouds no more than 70 - 85. Stutters in SP are short, but common. Setting the screen FPS in game to 80 nearly stops SP-stutters, except a maybe 5 sec-phase low level near large Rheinland-cities. Settings are "high" without some gimmicks. That's still ok - acceptable for my medium-range rig. Online now it's around 55 - 70 FPS on servers under heavy load (Kota with 70 pilots online f.e.). Frequent heavy stuttering with an in-game limit set to 80. Even setting the limit down to 60 fps there's still well visible stuttering on any map. I think the presence of clouds adds to the stuttering, but I never checked it out consequently. Flying MP I quickly come to my level of no-go. I feel there's no way falling back from 120 FPS to 40 just to avoid stuttering. PS: I do not fly with HUD, can't say if there's an impact. (I'm confident the team - as always - will find an acceptable solution. Take your time!)
  2. For the few flights I had: below 30% fuel she's quite a nice pony. Lot of fuel makes her a bitchy horse.
  3. Not by the authority of Jason, but by my observations: "full" seems to "off" - I wasn't able to see reduced quality. Setting it to "0.5" at least sometimes gave me the impression of reduced quality. Offline flight testing without much performance problems anyhow, never checked it online.
  4. I had this problem once, a few days ago. Never-ever seen that before. First update (a) 3.201 was active for sure, but I can't say if (b)-- or (c)-patch were installed, too. Single player, windowed-pseudo-full-screen-mode (no fps limits, no dynamic resolution), quick mission for a 1:1 dogfight on the Stalingrad map. First flight was ok any time. But pressing "restart" to open a second mission my cockpit exactly looked the way c.a. Jumping outside using "F2": all the textures were fine. "F1" and I was sitting in the blurry mess again. I was able to reproduce it re-opening the whole game - second quick-mission using "restart" and it became blurry. Remained that way even after PC-reboot. Had to quit my tests because of Real Life (tm). One or two days later (sorry, I really can't remember if there was any IL2-BoX-update in-between) I tried re-produce that ... now everything was fine. Never seen that bug again.
  5. Just a note to the mission " Battle_over_Eindhoven_Mar_1945 " - when the engine of the German fuel train was hit, the (rest of the) train remained on the track even when the next trains spawned. The remains of the previous train to made the new trains engine explode, too. I suspect that's not intended. A "delete trigger" might do the job, hopefully it deletes the whole train even if some of the waggons are uncoupled by attacks and remain on the track in different positions.
  6. Is there a problem to install two copies of the game on different PC? Don't ask me for the legal aspects of doing so, but running the mission editor needs no contact to the central authentication server. As long as you use just one copy for flying and the other for missions editing I think that's fair use. The publisher might have some more data traffic that way - you compensate this buying all the add-ons they offer
  7. Interesting - can't see those effect numbers in my table at all. I very much hoped the devs offered some proper electric lights for runways and night operations. Seems we have to stumble on with the camp-fires and AA-gun-searchlights.
  8. Try this: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/49629-3000-steps-condensed-into-one-simple-performance-guide/ Let's see how much the new update changed some settings. But that guide is good AND offers good explanations for the function of all those settings.
  9. That's looking like first class equipment! Without that MOST UGLY "music" it would have been a pleasure to look at it. Would be interesting to find more details on a website free of facebook.
  10. paint-dot-net with dds-plugin already in place is doing fine for me: Luise Rainer right-click the picture, "copy image" (into memory) open paint-dot-net edit -> paste into new image image -> resize -> maintain aspect ratio - the longest dimension = 1024, resolution 300 dpi -> ok image -> canvas size -> by absolute size - width and height 1024 - anchor middle (or whatever is useful if you want to place the picture into a corner good to see in the cockpit) file -> save as -> dds - BC3 - generate mip maps - super sampling (a lot of options seem to be fine here ...) Put her into place! LR_Lw.zip
  11. Not that difficult and quite inadequate ... I very much doubt a Luftwaffe pilot would have chosen her for that purpose ... she definitely was beyond the range of any pilot. I guess choosing that picture meant asking for serious trouble. Anyhow, different times, different conventions - German people often were beyond any convention during that time. Question for the British: I can't image a RAF-pilot would have dared to place a picture of Princess Elizabeth (HRH Princess Elizabeth) into the cockpit, right? Try this, much better option for Lw-pilots with balls: better-choice.zip
  12. @Diggun: Depends on ... I say that as an ambitious reader. There are thousands of rare books practically unavailable just because of the act of printing and distributing. The work is done, the text is ready to read. But at least some (most) of the authors don't want to become product-, PR- and logistics-managers, too. Not to mention all the legal and copyright-stuff one has to care for. Hundreds of hours of bureaucratic pain authors typically aren't interested in (to put it mildly). Classically done book-publishing by publishing houses in our days doesn't care for small batches. High risk for them to make (enough) money with niche products about aviation history. In some cases the publishing houses tend to withhold knowledge from the market. As long as they can't make a good deal with it, there is a first, but for sure no second edition! Even with the 1st edition of 1000 books sold even 20 years ago they still have to wait and see, if the demand for a 2nd ed. might be high enough to take the risk. Don't get me wrong, I see the publishers sorrows, too. Anyhow, I'm a reader and in trouble. Because just a few of the famished public libraries were able to buy a copy of a rare book - if any. I have to wait month to get hands on one of the rare and often well-worn copies - for all time rising interlibrary loans. I very much hope authors writing about niche topics choose the way of digital publishing. If done right they are able to protect their intellectual property against long-term adhesion contracts the publishing houses tend to offer. They can keep the additional charges of publishing low, too. All the forms of "digital protection" imho are fruitless - as soon as there are digital copies there are ways to convert them into unprotected copies, too. Publishing a niche product about aviation I'd trust in the power of reviews spread by all the ways of internet. And a sufficient number of grown-up, honest readers willing to pay 50 € for a book presenting years of an authors life. I think the chances of earning money the "open source way" for niche topics are higher than trying to go old-school with publishing-houses, printing etc pp. From the readers point of view a digital copy is pure heaven: I can get my hands on it within seconds. It's very compact, one can search, mark and cite it, build an index and - if I need that good old paper-feeling - even print it without much problem. I very much hope the libraries see it as their duty to cover the new ways of publishing, too. Looking at the limited, often low quality digital portfolio of German public libraries or the very beginnings of interlibrary loan options ... still a long way to go.
  13. Given the limited mission builder options any BoX-server-setup will remain a struggle for some kind of realism within large scale IL2-BoX-campaigns. Both sides had specific advantages and TAW takes this into account already. The Soviets focussed on "battlefield-aviation" and short-range battlefield interdiction usually no longer than maybe 20 km behind the front lines. IL-2 was the well suited mainstay, but Rata and LaGG-3 fit well into this way of operations, too. They were able to attack any kind of front-line-targets, even spread out moving tank formations. It might be a western preconception, but I read lot's of German sources wondering about the Soviets not (or very rarely) harassing the mostly unprotected German supply lines and rear-depots, at least until mid-1944. 50 km behind the front-line the German usually operated without much trouble except other factors like partisans or generally weak infrastructure. While having and using the means to do an effective close air support, Red Army missed the chance for battlefield interdiction. Anyhow - all in all I find this part of history well presented on TAW. The Luftwaffe in contrast had no effective concept to defeat the Soviet tanks. Dropping bombs didn't really hurt until until a wider introduction of cluster-ammo in 1944. Stukas diving down on tank hordes were often used as a propaganda motive, but finally the German army units had to deal with most of the Soviet armour. Ju-87-gunships and Hs-129 came too late and remained rare birds. But the Stuka was a very effective close-air-support instrument for pin-point attacks against supporting troops (arty, front-line depots, troop concentration etc) and for interdiction against transport infrastructure (bridges, marshalling yards, rail-road stations). Without emergency situations along the front line the Luftwaffe used the medium bombers for battlefield interdiction and deep air support, too. Here the Luftwaffe had an operational advantage. The missing anti-tank-capability of the Luftwaffe imho is visible on the TAW-server, too. But often camouflaged by the usually higher numbers of Blue pilots. Blue on TAW often was able to balance the AT-weakness just by numbers. An option the Luftwaffe on the Eastern Front never had. Locally concentrated Luftwaffe air power came for the price of stripping wide areas from any kind of air support. TAW presents elements like trains, supporting arty-positions and rear depots the Luftwaffe was well suited to deal with, too. My question is: given equal numbers of pilots on both sides: Blue side using the ability to perform more effective (deep) interdiction strikes and Red focussing on superior front line performance - would it end in a draw on TAW?
  14. You're right - for the Luftwaffe there are numbers published, posted here:
  15. Yep, hats off - deleting those 3 columns that quickly was a master-piece of mud moving!
  16. Someone in Youtube pointed on the source, Swedish testing in the late 40s: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x31qqzl
  17. Can confirm this - had some nasty surprise coming back to a "unprotected target" just to find 50% of the AA alive again. First I suspected the mission designers to use some vengefully re-spawning loops. Checking the mission-file confirmed there was no re-spawn. Just my sloppy shooting driving the crew away but leaving the gun intact. With light MGs one has to aim accurately, not always a good idea to conserve cannons ammo.
  18. That's definitely true - and sad, because without trueview the g-force-effect is gone, too. But as you say it - without "trueview" I'm too limited to check six. So that's a no-go.
  19. Thanks for the hint - I finally found that feature and check it out right now!
  20. Hm, hm - the source about General Galland mostly used is a book written by Galland himself ... a good tactic to display a self-chosen picture for the public. Quite commonly done by German leaders of all kind after WW2 and astonishing effective until today. The picture painted that way often was incomplete at least - Galland is one of these cases. I gladly would like to read a critical study about the history of the higher Luftwaffe day fighter command in WW2 - is there any? Is there any substantial biography about Galland, too? (I don't think so) In the meantime one should read the better autobiographies, written by Rall, Krupinski, maybe Steinhoff f.e. Here again a very interesting aspect is what contemporary is ignored by the author. Or just cited because he has been in a position one had to mention somehow. And what persons are explicitly presented as good fellows and / or capable superiors. Those men all went through the same sh.., so veterans are very reluctant with critics or finger-pointing. But they are free to praise and honour.
  • Create New...