Jump to content

Senor_Jefe-6

Members
  • Content Count

    140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Excellent

About Senor_Jefe-6

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

523 profile views
  1. I've read in a few different places that a SS above 150-160% actually blurs the image a bit, so it is recommended to run IL2 anywhere between 130%-150% depending on headset. Not to mention 200% for me is a performance hog. You say you're running Ultra? Is that in MP? I have to use Balanced settings with clouds medium (they seem to kill my performance the most).
  2. This was, at best, a marketing stretch. The U2 is a nich within a nich within a nich, has nearly no use in game. Ju52 was probably a bit better, but only slightly. Early war transport isn't exactly thrilling. I would consider any late-war bomber miles above either of these. And, I would be comfortable assuming the player community largely would agree. I'm not saying the 52 or U2 are bad, but they certainly can't compare to the playability of a B26.
  3. Yeah full of blue spies! (Jk, I forgot about that since there's never been anybody on it in the past)
  4. For those who fly red in US EST evenings, can we get together via discord? There's only 6-8 of us.... I'm down to provide my discord channel if needed, will be on around 20:30 EST
  5. I have to recommend 90hz for the masses. 60 fps (fps and hz interchangeable for my argument) will be smooth, but physiologically you run a much higher risk of getting sick. I've always been of the mindset that you need to do whatever it takes to get to 90fps 24/7, and be prepared to be on the bleeding edge of pc tech. If you can get away with 60fps, then consider yourself blessed and I envy you!
  6. 100% did. That, and I've had a really horrible string of TAW missions so I kept the computer off for a few days in fear of breaking the damn thing. Anyway, i've had to attach a snip-it instead of the actual file due to forum restrictions (sorry!), but you should be able to duplicate pretty easily off of this.
  7. Screenshot of my MSI Mobo Manager my dude: I run at 4.5 at all times unless I'm using VR, then I'll ramp it up. Probably saving a few percent of lifespan in doing so. AVX Offset is 0 You know, surprisingly to me, not as much as I would like it to. I use HUD on minus the markers/compass (Disable the "I" HUD and keep the "H"). It's probably hitting me for 3-5 fps but I'm stable at 90 until you get that MP stutter, which the HUD doesn't hurt it any more than that. I really only use the HUD now for MP chat/notifications.
  8. I'm running similar and have an 850W for enough overhead to add plenty accessories. I'd recommend a 750+. Def bump those gHz numbers up. I'm running i7 9700k @ 5.15 aand I can use all of it in rendering distance.
  9. I'm running an i7 9700k at 5.2gHz, 16gb ram @3200. I'm 100% GPU bound per Steam Advanced VR monitor, MSI overlay and Windows Performance Manager (used separately, because I couldn't believe my 1080ti wasn't cutting it). There seems to be a huge HOWEVER, here though. In single-player, it runs flawlessly. In MP, my GPU takes a shit and is a bottleneck. Don't have that in any other game, and interestingly enough, this is the ONLY game that I have any fps issues on. My FPS issues are limited however, in that they go from 90 on my Odyssey+ to stuttering down to 70fps. While this doesn't seem overly hateful, it's enough for me to materially notice, and make me hate my eyes, especially if it's during an intense fight. You could negate all of this and run ASW full time at 45 fps with reprojection carrying the load, but to me, it looks like doodoo and I'm not willing to sacrifice the visuals 100% of the time for the 15% of the time it's screwy. I do anticipate devs eventually fixing this issue (since it appears to be an engine issue, according to another VR thread with 100s of posts), but I'm not a patient person, so I'll just spend another $1.3k to get a 2080ti and be done with it.
  10. Okay, no problem. I'll try to remember to do it when I get on in a few hours.
  11. At the moment, spotting is easier with all the shimmering and the vr mod zoom. If spotting is your only barrier to getting vr, then pull the trigger. Be aware though, you will need a significantly more powerful rig than 2d. I’d call 1080ti a minimum at this point and you definitely need above 4.5 on the cpu. I've had the Odyssey+ and i7 9700k with 1080ti and I’m still having to sacrifice quality. So I’m going to suck it up and get a 2080ti and be good for another few years.
  12. There's quite a lot of subjectivity and variability in that post to be so matter-of-fact. I think it would be really cool to see stats regarding kill % by gunner skill. Think IF that could be put together on a per-skill (novice, normal, veteran) criteria, you could then argue one way or the other. Could also put a ton of context to this highly-subjective topic.
  13. There's a small aerodynamic advantage, however around the time bubbles became prevalent, the engines got stronger, often negating the advantage. The "protection" I'd argue is negligible, since the only real difference is a thin sheet of aluminum. The armor behind the headrest could still be present with the bubble while still holding the visibility advantage. I think people are hyped because the difference in models is just different enough to be new, and it opens opportunities for more of those planes to play with the eastern front rigs while not being OP. Just a thought
  14. No dog in this fight, but that logic is a 2 way street. See single ship pe2 flights constantly. The "well you shouldn't fly alone" argument doesn't work only for the fighter, yet you'll see then on the losing end 95% of the time.
×
×
  • Create New...