Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RedKestrel

  1. I think using it when its not necessary does potentially cause minor speed loss. But keeping it at full forward does not result in any damage, turbo damming, or anything like that as far as I've seen. IAFAIK you can't damage it by improperly using it, other than if the RPM gets too high when you are above critical altitude.
  2. "You be careful, or you'll shoot your eye out!"
  3. This is a great summary. I have ignored all this advice at some time or another. It...did not work out well. I will say that while its inadvisable to try and outclimb german fighters, in the P-47 you can usually either keep up with or catch up with the FW-190As on the deck in the climb. I wouldn't trust trying to 'climb away' since your advantage isn't big, and if they are on your six they have a lot of guns and a lot of time to shoot them at you as you toodle away. Really, climbing away from an enemy at a sustained climb is always really risky since you are a slow, unmaneuvering target. Even if you climb twice as good as the enemy they have a long few seconds to hose you with bullets. With aircraft with nose mounted guns with good ballistics its not hard to take long range shots.
  4. Playing on Combat Box last night, on Balanced settings without distant building checked. On that setting, I basically have buildings 'pop in' at a standard render distance, but this only triggers as I get within that visibility bubble, not randomly. The cities in the video look to be close enough that Ultra should render them in without distant buildings checked I think. Unfortunately my rig is such that I doubt I could even test your settings without it bursting into flames, LOL. For the setting I mentioned earlier, Look under normal Game Settings, there is a Terrain Draw distance setting in the top right corner with limits of 20 km, 50 km, and unlimited. Is yours set to unlimited? I have a feeling that this setting sets the initial draw of the buildings on the map. Maybe if this is not set correctly, the buildings pop in like this? Also, do you notice pop in like this when you have distant buildings set to Off?
  5. Just an update for those of you accompanying me on my odyssey of discovering deficiencies in computer hardware: I've done a bit of testing with various methods. The most systematic was running the Remagen benchmark track posted in the thread in the VR forum. I ran it on my normal settings, minus Vsync and the fps target. Average FPS for that test was 85 fps or so, maxing out at 158, seldom going below 60. the GPU was maxed out for quite a bit of the track, its clear that it was the primary limiter of FPS in that track. However, the CPU got up to full usage more than a few times. It used a pretty consistent 6 GB of RAM. Testing on Combat Box, with Vsync on and frame target set to 60 fps, things were little different. The GPU was rarely above 50% and maxed out at 75% - its clear that my settings (balanced, high clouds, medium or normal everything else, 70 km view distance) have head room in the raw GPU processing power department. However, GPU memory usage was at nearly 100% for almost half the time. I'm not sure what this implies - I think it means that the GPU memory usage overflows into the RAM? I wonder if this is the cause of my stutters at times. Anyway, its clear that in some way the 1060 is hamstrung by its 3GB memory...with 6GB I would probably have both processing and memory headroom in the GPU. The CPU, on the other hand, maxed out at 88% overall and two of the cores reached 95%. I think this speaks to live play being more CPU intensive, and mission logic, flight modeling, and AI in a complex MP mission can put a big load on the processor at times (the chart was much spikier, with a lot of ups and downs, for the CPU vs. the GPU). The RAM was always very close to full usage. At its lowest point it was just under 6 GB. For most of the time I was playing it was at 7.5 GB or more. Realistically, some of the RAM is held back so that probably represents use of all the RAM in my system...which means the hard drive was being utilized for some memory stuff. So, TL;DR - conclusions I can draw here: 1. CPU and GPU were not maxed out most of the time in what is normal play for me. 2. GPU has headroom even during intense usage of about 25% - the CPU really does not. 3. the GTX 1060 3GB GPU memory is too small compared to its processing power - it runs out of memory well before it runs out of processing capacity. 4. Memory is almost certainly a bottleneck and may be the cause of the stuttering and problems I have. 5. Il-2 Sturmovik really needs to put 8GB as its minimum system requirements, I was never below 5 GB even when nothing was happening, at pretty modest settings. This all confirms that the memory/motherboard/CPU is the likely bottleneck for normal play. What I really want to know now is what the consequences are of maxing out graphics card memory...more research is needed.
  6. Spit Vb and Hurricane Mk II vs. 109E-7 and F-2/4 would be an interesting matchup, not far off from Spit I/Hurricane I vs. Bf-109E-4. You could even throw in a P-40 if you wanted. For attackers the RAF could have the A-20 against the He-111, Ju-87 and Ju-88. The main problem is that on the allied sides all the remotely appropriate planes are collector planes, and the Hurricane isn't even going to be associated with a specific game package, so it might be pretty rare on line. It would be difficult to populate the allied side with numbers like that. Best chance of something like this happening and working well is a Channel Battle map put on by Combat Box, set in 1943 with Spit Vbs/IXs, P-47D razorbacks, and 1944/ early 44 era 109s and 190s.
  7. Well, I might try the key route when it comes down to it. If it ends up being deactivated or something I guess I just buy Windows outright and I'm not much worse off. Just seems sketchy at first glance.
  8. Gotta teach that kid that 'getting a taste of the game' is not meant to be taken literally. Toddlers are terrible at metaphors.
  9. I think the "destroyed" message is triggered by any damage that is considered a 'kill' on a plane, even if it isn't immediately incapacitated. Anything that destroys the engine is considered killing the plane. I've had a message pop up that my plane was 'destroyed' even while my engine was just running rough after taking MG hits. It took some time for my engine to die but the game considered me 'dead' for quite a while. The guy who shot me up blew past me, I managed to pull up and spray some bullets at him as he cut across my nose. Later on, he crash-landed and I got the kill for it in the logs, even though I only hit him like 3 times and I was technically already dead when I hit him.
  10. Dang, I try to get my hatchling up and flying and she just gives me the Look :/ that one gives to Uncool Dads and then goes back to Minecraft. /I am much cooler on here than in real life //Which should tell you just how cool I am
  11. Has anyone in this thread contacted support? Usually when something like this happens they can fix the wrong email/account thing on their end. Not much that can be done via the forum.
  12. Whenever I see deals like that I just assume its too good to be true. The economics of it just don't make sense. How can someone sell a genuine key to windows for a few bucks when Windows sells it for hundreds? Where are they getting them from?
  13. Probably not something the server can control. I have had the lost connection problem before and I believe it is related to 'spikes' in ping. It seems to me that the netcode became very sensitive to this a little while back. If your ping briefly spikes above a certain threshold, or the server believes it does, the connection gets dropped. There's a bunch of threads in the Technical Issues and Bug Reports section about the 10009 error, there has been lots of discussion and reporting but no solutions as far as I know. I upgraded my Internet and have fewer problems now but still occasionally get it if the server is very full or if I am playing on a high-ping server for me (like KOTA or Berloga). The fairplay index penalty sucks because I never did it intentionally, but it exists to punish the people who can't stand to be shot down and disconnect to avoid it.
  14. Looking into getting Windows on an upgraded machine , apparently there is a way to associate your Windows license to your Microsoft account, so if you replace the motherboard, you can transfer your Windows license over to the new one using that account. BUT that doesn't work if it was an OEM install, which mine is 99% likely to be seeing as I bought the machine pre-assembled, so I am probably hosed there. I'm probably just going to end up buying it from the Windows Store when I get everything ready to go, just so when I upgrade again I don't have the hassle of trying to figure out if my license is correct. Especially since with how invasive Microsoft is getting, its likely that they're going to take more draconian measures at some point to make sure everyone is using a licensed version of the software. I don't want to wake up one night with Cortana standing over the bed holding one of those plasma rifles from Halo.
  15. Here's a potentially stupid question: right now I have 2 x 4 GB RAM in my machine, and the motherboard has 2 slots. Speed is limited to 2133 mhz by the motherboard, but their maximum speed is 2800 mhz (I believe, if I am reading CPU-Z right. If I get a motherboard with 4 RAM slots, I plan to purchase 2 x 8 GB 3200 mhz RAM. Could I put in the 2 x 4 GB RAM in the other slots, or does the RAM all have to match in speed and size chunks?
  16. That's pretty weird. I haven't seen it like that. Sometimes I see aircraft skins pop in and out in a similar way. But I have never tried to run my game at ultra with distant buildings enabled. Hopefully someone with settings like that can see if this is an issue with your setup or a bug.
  17. The game you're playing right now is basically Il-2 1946. That game, and Il-2 Great Battles developed here, are different games with different engines, just sharing a name. The newest version of Il-2 1946 is 4.14, the updated version administered by Team Dadalos, the 'official' mod team that has been updating the main version. There are a huge number of mods out there for the game. Il-2 Great Battles is the newest game. It works well with Windows 10. Il-2 Great Battles updates itself automatically. For most of its features to work, it needs an internet connection. Il-2 1946 is playable on Windows 7 and 10, I have done it, but I never did try and use the mission builder on Windows 10. I did use it a bit on Windows 7. I don't think the operating system makes much of a difference in how the mission builder functions. The mission builder in old Il-2 is supposed to be a little less powerful than the one in new Il-2, but people generally found the mission builder more user friendly. The knowledge base on Mission4Today can be very helpful with tutorials, installation guides, updating the software, and other things. You could also post over there with any issues you are having getting things to work on your setup. http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Knowledge_Base There are guides on installing, patching, mission building etc. You can also post in the Il-2 1946 section of this forum here: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/122-il-2-sturmovik-1946/ They may have more idea on how to help you. If your computer will run Il-2 Great Battles, I would definitely advise you to get into it. The flight models are leaps and bounds better IMO, the graphical detail is much better... in most ways its a better game. That being said, there is nothing wrong with Il-2 1946 - there are tons of planes to fly, lots of maps, and lots of missions and campaigns made by many dedicated people over the years. Now is a great time as there are a lot of things on sale...Battle of Bodenplatte has gone on sale much earlier than expected so if you like late war planes and scenarios its a good buy. As long as you have a computer that will run it well, of course.
  18. There is also a terrain draw distance or something like that elsewhere in the settings, not in the graphics settings but somewhere else. I'm honestly not sure what it does, I haven't touched it. My settings are usually more in the middle - High until recently, then switched to Balanced to handle Bodenplatte better.. I don't notice the city pop in when moving my head, only as I get closer and enter the render distance.
  19. Do you have the distant buildings setting checked? That might help. Also there is a map draw distance setting not under the graphics settings but in another menu, can't remember at the moment, and that might change things too.
  20. Also I think the vanilla La-5 is a collector plane and not in any of the packs.
  21. You can land on them and then get the 'landed' status. I have done it before. I don't recall if it boosted score or not, not that it is recorded anywhere.
  22. Sounds like it could be a guy with extremely high ping. Your shots may appear to you to have landed, but the position you saw was out of sync, so the server registered no hits. Then, if his ping got too high, he would get disconnected and would seem to disappear. If you never landed hits on him then his plane would disappear and count as 'crashed' but you wouldn't get the kill. Did you notice in the chat if anyone got kicked for high ping shortly after? Of course, it could also be a bug or something more sinister. Did you get a track or a recording? Might be worth submitting to the devs if so.
  23. If you are finding P-51s limited, you will likely find the Tempest limited even more, depending on the server. In fact, ironically for this post, one of the biggest downsides of the Tempest is its low availability online. Pros of the Tempest - Fastest plane in the game at mid-altitudes. -Good dive -Good turn rate (better than expected, to be honest). -Excellent armament - 4x Hispano may be the most effective armament in-game at the moment. Cons of the Tempest - REALLY easy to black out at high speeds, as you have no G-suit and very strong elevator response. I have died more often from blacking out in a low-alt dogfight than I have been shot down in the Tempest. -Low ammo count - you don't have a huge amount of trigger time -Climb is only so-so If you are looking for a fighter that is usually unlimited or at least available in large numbers in MP, the Spitfire IX is probably the best bet. It climbs excellently and turns well, but its usually slower than most of its competition unless you have 150 octane fuel as a mod. If you are cruising in a fighter, the exact plane you are flying is largely irrelevant to your cruising altitude IMO. The mission profile dictates the altitude you fly at. If you are covering ground attackers, you must be at an altitude where you can provide cover to them if they are attacked. If you are protecting ground targets, you must be at an altitude where you can intercept enemy ground attackers. If you are doing a free hunt, go as high as is practical, even if your plane is not suited for high altitudes. It doesn't matter if your plane is technically superior at a given altitude to the one that bounces you, energy is more important, you can always try and drag the fight lower if it lasts longer. Given that most combat on MP servers happens below 3000 or 4000 metres (10 to 12000 feet-ish) you probably will rarely find yourself above 15000 to 18000 feet, since if you are too high above the opposition you cannot safely dive on them. Basically, choose your aircraft based on your mission and altitude profile, not the other way around.
  • Create New...