Jump to content

AbortedMan

Members
  • Content Count

    1056
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

634 Excellent

About AbortedMan

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

923 profile views
  1. Can confirm. Foiled two attempts of P51 and a P47 sneaking up on me on two separate occasions last week solely because I heard their engines.
  2. They shouldn't be 100% ball rounds in the first place. I believe this is the question everyone is trying to present. The damage coefficient for .50 cals seems to be extremely low which, in turn, is showing an unrealistic representation of their damage output according to all the IRL documentation that is floating around here on the forum.
  3. If you're conceding to not let people provide data to request a fix for a clear issue with the DM simply because we don't live in a perfect world, then...just...wow. I'm sure this same sentiment would not be coming out of you if Minengeschoß 20mm were modeled as ball ammo. Resolving this does not require a new fuel system since igniting fuel tanks and starting fires elsewere is already modeled in the game. The issue seems to be certain calibers not doing any aerodynamic damage to aircraft upon being hit multiple times. Multiple tests have confirmed this. You've found a
  4. I think Hooves meant API and why does the US only have AP/ball rounds if API was being used during this time? It's a feature that has a pretty significant difference in effect and shouldn't be ignored or a low priority to add since it literally dictates the effective combat power of ~50% of people playing on a server. Trying to play moderator and stunting discussion via new threads isn't going to make the problem go away. If so many people are making so many threads (many with undeniable and thorough test results), then that's pretty indicative of an issue, is it not?
  5. A simple way to prove your interpretation is to take metrics of network output/input on a client machine while AAA is firing once in your assumed culling range and outside of your assumed culling range and see if there is a difference in output/input. Also measure this on the server at the same times. You can do this with Windows Task Manager or any network traffic app. This type of data is something the devs will actually look at and reply to. Also, this is still ignoring the fact that Dserver can't control all of those AI units at the player load this server populates, whethe
  6. I'm trying to help you understand. Player planes are culled from the recording track, not clients in game. Track recordings are not a representation of network traffic. The absence of a method of network transmission (network culling, in this case) is not a bug as if it can be fixed with a quick review of code. Network culling in the context of this thread would have to be added to the game first for it to be a bug.
  7. The bug here is that the track player shouldn't be displaying parachutes and flak so far away outside of the "display bubble". People observing this are mistakenly attributing it to a "network culling bug" when there is no network culling feature in IL2 multiplayer. All of the relevant data from every entity is being sent to each player during gameplay whether it's visible on the track or not. The issue is too many AI entities in the mission and/or dserver can't handle so many AI/player/network operations on one thread. Whoever owns that particular issue is up for debate based on
  8. Online manipulation of gameplay parameters are tested by an independent group of enthusiast players on a monthly/2-monthly basis and are still not seeing any difficult obstacles to prevent aforementioned manipulation using simple and common methods. As I understand, the problem isn’t big enough to dedicate significant resources according to the dev’s actions/updates. Look at scoreboards on certain servers where tracking is available, the surface-level evidence is there as well.
  9. Short answer: Poor. Poor security.
  10. I've got it. I know what it is. Secret sources tell me that 777 have been developing the F18 Hornet and a Strait of Hormuz map and they're going to beat ED/DCS to the punch. Called it. You heard it here first!
  11. I have two GTX970s that I'm looking to get rid of if your first donation falls through.
  12. The trigger required your aircraft to actually fly over the tanks at their actual real time location as they traveled to their objective and "take photographs" for real tangible intel. It would have probably been more feasible to have a radio for a recon flight of this nature in real life, but this mission was created for players that didn't always want to participate in dogfighting or bombing...just provided some variety. I have this function as a module that can be inserted into any mission if any mission makers want to use it.
  13. This guy! This guy gets it. Everyone should watch this video and listen to this man. Well done. Bravo!
×
×
  • Create New...