Jump to content

stupor-mundi

Members
  • Content Count

    266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

94 Excellent

About stupor-mundi

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

954 profile views
  1. Hope this isn't a terribly redundant question. I'll be building a PC (not purely gaming, but also), Ryzen (probably Ryzen 7 3700X). I'm thinking of getting a Radeon RX 5700 XT. Is Il-2 GB ok on the current generation of Radeon? ... for 1440p
  2. Hah! I should probably check again, using some more accurate monitoring software. However, assuming this is correct, everything falls into place. It's an ultrabook from end of 2017 IIRC. low wattage core i7. Certainly qualifies as a quite weak cpu in 2019. Thus, assuming the cpu is the bottleneck in multiplayer, i.e. not being able to keep up processing the incoming data from the server, makes sense. In the big thread about multiplayer stutter, Bauemer had suggested to do a fresh install to remove stutters. Since I had done a fresh nvidia driver install, and had gotten a fresh startup.cfg , I doubted doing this would have a big effect in my case. But I did it anyway--Revo uninstaller, wiping entries in the registry, everything... with very interesting results: Even though, in multiplayer, in busy areas where my rig bottlenecks in the client/server comms, my FPS were just as low as before (for instance 15fps in bad cases), they were suddenly devoid of the additional, irritating microstutter. Quite amazing. I wonder what it is that a fresh install does, or that the update process screws up over time... So, low fps don't look nearly as awful as what i had gotten used to, when the stutters are gone. I'd make it part of my routine, after one or 2 updates, if it wasn't for the extreme clunky inconvenience of the fresh install process. Also interesting is that there is the OTHER kind of stutter, which, now that one kind of stutter has disappeared, I can identify, and I believe it's not a multplayer stutter: Even flying offline, on the rhineland map, when flying towards a town, there's that moment of stutters when the buildings are loaded, which the other posters on this thread have mentioned.
  3. I see a number of views on this, but no answers. Is it an exotic issue that others don't have? Is the topic in the wrong section, should I try to get it moved? I'll try to give some background to why I bring up this question: I'm considering: - buying a gaming monitor to get refresh > 60 hz (in this case I would go > 1080p) - building a new gaming PC Yet, I'd be quite content with the fps I get in offline/single player. My 1070 eGpu seems to be sufficient to run Il-2 GB graphics-wise, if it wasn't for the multiplayer / network induced crapness. Equally, if it were clear that my laptop's cpu is too weak, that would resolve the question in favour of building a gaming PC. But in this case I would expect to see at least 1 thread maxed out in a low fps situation, which I don't. I'm not really looking forward to the effort and expense of that, only to maybe find that the bottleneck lay elsewhere. To illustrate, here is a screenshot of resource monitor cpu cores/threads. I took it about 10, 15 seconds after being a 10fps situation on the tank server. None of the threads look maxed out. I'm actually quite surprised at the even load across all 8 threads, I had expected there would be one thread bottlenecking.
  4. I use IL-2 on a laptop with a 1070 eGpu, on a 1080p non-gaming monitor (60hz). Vsync never worked well for me, I get the (relatively) best results by setting graphics to 80 fps, combined with dynamic resolution factor (currently 0.7) Always I had problems with fps and spotting in multiplayer. After the recent update, and MS forcing the 1903 update on me, and performance further degrading, I installed the latest Nvidia driver, moved startup.cfg to another folder, and restarted IL-2, attaining a new startup.cfg, presumed default. I'm trying to understand properly what exactly happens in multiplayer that causes the performance to be so bad. On ultra settings, in single player, I can fly against 8 AIs, have them all around me in immediate vicinity, and get around 60 fps. In multiplayer, I see a strong degradation on the "big" servers, with big maps and many players. My spotting is terrible. So when I fly in multiplayer I usually go on "EU official", which has icons and smaller numbers of players. Even there the fps is much lower (than single player) with additional microstutters, but not as bad as on the 'big' servers. I find it kind of hard to grasp how and why multiplayer even impacts my GPU (i.e. fps and stutter). If it is the multiplayer data transfer ("netcode"), which causes a bottleneck, what is the nature of this bottleneck? I can only imagine it would have to be the cpu. I run on a mobile cpu (4 core, 8 threads), hence weak-ish. Yet when I fly on multiplayer with the resource monitor running, (and I get into a low fps situation), none of the cores shows above 70% load. If none of the threads is even fully loaded, how can the networking impact the FPS negatively?? Clearly it does though. The IL-2 multiplayer settings GUI used to have a field for upload and download limits, I believe. It's disappeared at some point? My new startup.cfg has got these, default, settings: client_download_traflimit = 1024 client_upload_traflimit = 1024 My old startup.cfg had: client_download_traflimit = 4096 Which I had set, based on some info on one of the threads, that you should do a speed test and divide that by roughly four, to determine the setting (or something like that). Is it still advised to edit those settings, even though they've been removed from the GUI? Does that old rule still hold?
  5. This just happened to me again, riding the 'new' T34, and it had happened a few times before, rarely, over a longer period. You ride around sort of recklessly, with the open hatch, and I have the head position adjusted to be as high as possible. Without any audible explosion, and in a location on the map where I know there are no paks etc. suddenly the commander is dead. First I think maybe someone has jumped into the comm. position and check, but no. Then I think maybe I got bombed somehow with the audio dead, so I turn 180 deg. looking for a bomb crater, but nothing. In the end I can't help wondering if maybe some physics of riding around are being modeled, where the commander is injured in the course of looking out of the hatch, while the tank is driving cross country? Did anyone else experience this? I know this sounds dumb, but I'd like to get to the bottom of it, since some possible adjustments/changes might result. For instance, if it were confirmed that commander health is being modeled with respect to the physics of cross country riding, I could adjust the head position and so on. I've often seen the health of crew members reduced when bumping into invisible trees, but usually the damage is more gradual and averaged out, with multiple crew members going yellow, instead of just the commander going red and everybody else green.
  6. I've not tried to run benchmarks. Also I don't have a 'regular' rig which would enable me to do comparisons. Guess I should mention, playing IL-2 wasn't an objective when I decided on buying the laptop/eGpu combo. From reading the various threads, and considering the issues I've had / have , around microstutters/stutters and disappointing fps in multiplayer, I get the impression that beyond the general expected performance hit compared with a normally installed 1070, the graphics issues which have (weirdly, to me) to do with multiplayer data transfer (netcode), seem to be particularly bad with eGpus. I've looked into whether the relatively weak mobile cpu might be the bottleneck but it appears not to be the case, at least according to task manager. So, for running IL-2, I'd advise strongly against getting an eGpu.
  7. Happened to me again, tried the position cycling thing, which fixed it. That's definitely the thing to do! Of course, in many situations, the time lost on this will at least have cost you the opportunity, or you might be dead.
  8. It seems the new system is pretty much like what they had introduced with the 'new' T34's periscope. I guess now all the tanks, and all the sights, get a chance to 'enjoy' that 'feature'. In normal, it seems they've added some useful yellow arrows, which unfortunately we don't get on the tank server. Also it seems they's added more instability, when driving, and after coming to a stop. The guns swings stupidly. I think it's this new feature which Java Keben has described as 'drunk'. It's extremely irritating. I don't know if it's a mechanical gun imbalance which is being simulated here, or the gunner's physiology, of not being able to hold the gun steady after suddenly stopping. At any rate, it's awful. It makes it a lot harder to shoot down the bleeding attack aircraft as well. I wish they'd fix the bloody invisible trees instead of screwing up everybody's aim. Increasingly it feels to me as if I was unknowingly taking part in a psychiatriatric experiment, to add frustration at every update, and determine the player's breaking point. Mine is up soon.
  9. Not yet. Strictly speaking, have not seen it in a KV either, and possibly not in the 'old' T34, not sure. I've only spent a few hours in online missons since the update, and those gun failures have been only a small percentage of that total time. I'm hoping that people who spend more time in German tanks can shed some light on this. It might well be a bug that's confined to the 'new' T34.
  10. On a few missions since the update, I've had stretches of time where I couldn't shoot the main gun. Tried various things like changing ammo which didn't fix it. On some occasions it mysteriously started working again at some point. Obvs I checked whether the gun was considered damaged but everything was green. I hope it's not some new physiology feature where the gunner got seasick from driving around or something.
  11. That, in a nutshell, is the problem. =D
  12. I wonder whether something can be done, in the misson design, regarding winnability, purely by aircraft? I was just on the Seversk (I think) mission, the one with the town bridge and the railroad bridge. I was a very well populated mission, plenty of tanks on both sides. The mission felt like it had just gotten underway--red had got across the bridge initially, then blue got across, but neither of the town bases had been taken by the opposing side yet. The mission seemed to have at least another hour to go until one side would take the opposing town base, and then the back base. Then all of a sudden it was over, because apparently one aircraft (apparently Zommer) had destroyed lots of back base targets. From a tanker's point of view, it felt like a waste of time. When the next mission (a winter mission) came up, most of the tankers (certainly all the red ones) didn't join, apparently just as annoyed as I was. I don't know if the game logic (or mission design logic) makes it possible to avoid such an outcome? Would it be possible to apply a factor (for instance 0.5) to the points caused by aircraft? Or to the points caused by destroying stats? Something like that?
  13. Can player kicking be caused by client software? We all know the different variants of players being kicked from a server due to bad ping. The most common one, one player kicked. Another one, all players kicked. Usually but not always in that case you find that, probably, the server crashed, and a fresh map is up. But it also happens sometimes that everybody got kicked and the map is still there. And you can find, after everybody got kicked, sometimes, the server doesn't show up in the list, which players generally take to mean that the server crashed and is still down. We just had a mission going on with more or less balanced blue/red, and the tide was just turning, with red taking an important base. Then it looked as if everybody got kicked with bad ping, but afterwards I saw the server on the list, re-joined, saw the map was still up, still in the same state, and spawned. I was IMMEDIATELY attacked by a blue plane at spawn which made me deduce that at least some blue players hadn't been kicked. I looked at stats and found I was the only red player. 6 blue players. No red players re-joined, which led me to guess that potentially the server wasn't visible to them, or didn't let them re-join. I continued for a while but no red players joined. Then I quit. This all leads me to wonder--are players using client software that can sabotage the server? Is this technically possible?
×
×
  • Create New...