Jump to content

216th_Jordan

Testers
  • Content Count

    2526
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

942 Excellent

About 216th_Jordan

  • Rank
    Tester

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

3379 profile views
  1. Just leaving this here 😎 its a bit older but...it captures the tenseness quite well.
  2. I did not find the original source but what Gruber describes matches what I kept in mind from the DEV explanation: (now if there is a bug with HE splinters I do not know - I suppose you have reported the findings)
  3. They do. The way it is implemented it doesn't show visually though. How exactly it works - I don't know.
  4. One other problem with the current modelling is that the flight controls stay LOCKED into position once the bail out key is pressed, thats why the planes fly so weird after bailout sometimes. Go full rudder on bail out? Rudder will stay that way. So, as for wishlists 😁 #1 - 1st person bailouts! (the implementation is already there as explained by the padlock example!) #2 - Second command for rip cord! (CFS2 had this - it was awesome!) #3 - make flight controls read 0 inputs after bailout
  5. Well lets just put this into perspective: - 100km draw distance for objects, specifically stating ship-wake observations - Droptanks coming - The team has (IIRC) stated that it has been very lucky regarding data gathering during BP - There is literally a Japanese flag in QMB - There were those kind of hints in ROF before - Pacific in this sim would be a dream come true. (obviously)
  6. They and we did, and 102 other things. If you would have everything released 100% error free and optimized as you'd like it best you would not be playing this sim. In fact you'd be wondering why there are no sims around at all.
  7. So, as I have got absolutely no clue about the current drawing implementations and its limitations, I asked myself how a good implementation for various resolutions and ranges could look like regardless of it: It would be nice if there was a resolution-independent angular size abstraction layer for aircraft drawn. The actual size would then be translated to the pixels (via FOV) and if the size of 1 pixel is not met, then the pixel intensity would be lowered accordingly (using a neighborhood averaging filter), allowing for a fade in and fade out. This layer would also allow for a scaling operator, that would let's say, amplify target size by 1.5 from 15km out and gradually lower to 1 approaching point blank distance. That way a more resolution independent implementation would be possible that would also allow for alternate scaling. In the above model, transitions in LOD Size are gradual instead of step wise.
  8. Because one size doesn't fit all. Not in a sim. You have the split already between icon and non-icon servers and it's never been a problem.
  9. As Han wrote the realistic setting is considered realistic. I do so too and I have private flying experience that proves the Il-2 implementation to be very close to my experiences. Tweak down the 'unrealistic' (alternative) setting in the future? Maybe - but I like my realistic option the way it is and I will probably sometimes like to fly the unrealistic one - there's no shame in that.
  10. You sound like you'd also complain if you won a million dollars. Within 1 (!!!) day under high development pressure a New Feature was introduced that should satisfy people that liked it before and people that liked it afterwards and there is still complaints. You will not ever get more than this in such a short time. Have some praise for the hard work.
  11. Well it's more a personal observation. People play and buy when they get more fun and less frustration. Most people I've shown the sim in private have shown disbelief on how they should be able to spot anything without icons. And icons are too easy for many. As I said, I'm fine with the spotting (my choice is max realism), still would be a welcome option. You have it with the physiology model, why not with spotting too?
  12. So what we have to take away from this is that there are people who like easier unrealistic spotting (fine) and people who like realistic spotting and you cannot bring both parties together. Making this an option would be the best bet and should satisfy 95% of the player base. Apparently right now it's a show stopper for some and also reduces revenue.
  13. Take a look at the shoes please, thats not flying gear. And even if 1% was not flying with g-suits, the other 99% were...and that gave them an edge.
  14. How about starting a well thought out poll with like 4 or 5 options from how it was before visbility increase to after patch to after hotfix and see how that pans out. (maybe include 'my option is not shown here' so people can write what would be missing) That would give you some statistical idea where this is all standing.
×
×
  • Create New...