Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

64 Excellent

About A_S

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    .... :)

Recent Profile Visitors

620 profile views
  1. sometimes it helps to see and to remember.. when visibility was visibility (just stumbled over this video..old days..good days) https://youtu.be/YUeNODK5d1o?t=708
  2. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b710/ec0ee173c78eeddd5348244ac9ef4e6e250c.pdf
  3. I want some of what you have been smoking. You are in a state of self-deception here. I am sorry, if that may sound harsh.. but that big of BS i don´t read often I think you and IL-2 is confusing realistic "spotting distances" with "ID-ability distances" - at least from the products current state it is. You DO understand yes? that realistic size-ing of targets can be done even with changing FOVs, right? I think i need to make a post about this topic, WHY and HOW this can be achieved. Yes. i need to. Image standing on the side of a plane (looking at nose and tail at the same time) - plane is 5 meters from you - plane is 100 meters from you - plane is 2000 meters from you the ANGLE between the straight lines of sight from nose-tip to tail-tip will change, according to distance (milliradian). No matter what FOV you use, or can use inside a game, milliradian must remain true to what it would be in reality, which then results in realistic size/distance. Vio la. Not only is that important for visbility, but also for gunnery and wing-span distance measure-ments. It starts with the question, what IS real FOV in reality .. and how to maintain size-ing true even changing above or below that realistic FOV value (which we do in games due to monitor size etc etc etc). VR has it somewhat right.. accurate scaling however.. does not exist in any sim (exception one) i know of.
  4. funny part.. i just flew on combat box with "balanced" for shits and giggles..and maybe placebo..but visibility was good
  5. Ok.. AGAIN..i see this happening . once noticed in a stream..now again.. The game definitly has a SWAPPING SKINS ISSUE .. changing skins randomly.. nothing to do with "sun reflections" look 5:55min -- (now having seen this on multiple occasions, often even on the parking deck)
  6. I might be wrong here.. but maybe they just took the "LOD swap-distances" and "multiplicators (scalers per LOD level)" from ROF and inherited it. But with faster planes.. higher closures .. more turning-room .. more spatial conversions.. it does not work out so well in ww2 planes? @[DBS]TH0R thanks for finding and sharing this one https://why485.itch.io/smart-scaling-demonstration
  7. Now you are just "google quick searching" and "copy pasting", and making hollow arguments without fully understanding them ..and even adding the assumption !!! BMS pilots are BLIND in IL-2 neh.. it iiiss BS assumption This is not a who is right fight. Clearly IL-2 uses its own method, but it is far faaaaaaar away from perfect, or even tactially, simulation-wise good ! Thus needs re-thinking and re-doing. Period. Example.. two P-51s ..high aspect.. and 280mph (that makes 560mph closure) .. contact pops up with high aspect silhouette at (you tell me..?) 1 or 2km? That makes how many seconds till merge. Furthermore.. meantioned above and importantly saying it again: Visibility consistency within a WVR (within visual range) "Bubble" ? = Non existent. Aspects like sorting, targeting, intercepting, engaging or seperations - especially as flight, wing or package (2-ship or more), almost impossible under currenct visibility conditions. If what all you do is going high and "playstation 4 zooming" for pray.. (or worse "external padlock viewing bandits like possible on BERLOGA) you will be fine..and can further self-celebrate in your stats and dont worry about realism But even you may have had situations, where you commit to a fight (1v1) and missed visually the "OTHERS" being around so close all the time.. jumping on you after having waited for, that someone becomes vulnerable Don´t worry..i can adapt.. but i would prefer doing air-combat instead of exploiding flaws of the game for victory and "scores". .. BTW..is there ANY way to disable ingame AA and enforce it via nVidia gfx control panel in IL-2 ? Help appreciated.
  8. I am not saying that.. i am trying to give, or look at alternative solutions in order to improve OUR beloved IL-2 airspace.
  9. Not true. First of all it uses the classical method (propably similar in IL-2, not sure) of displaying - different detailed 3D models - at different distances called LOD levels. basically, close up you would see a fully rendered jet (many polygons), but at - lets say 10nm - it would only be a tri-angle made of few poylgons. Why that is so? Because of resources. No one needs to render or calculate a Hummvee vehicle i.e at 200.000 polygons at way waay out of the visible range (wink wink DCS). Btw talking about resources.. 2048x2048 (4,194.304 pixes) texture tiles (for skins i.e) are more than enough, but sometimes you have the "more is better" peeps doing 4096x4096 = 16,777,16 !! pixels PER texture tile - and then they wonder about bottleneck, stutter and lag.. and poping up skins.. (side note: the distances at what ranges what models-details "swap" can ruin or make the game often (like outside of 10km nothing rendered at all (sounds familiar??) .. a side-note, because i worked in that area once). Next: Then BMS uses something called "smart-scaling". It is NOT just a PURE x2 factor of the sizes, but an algorythm based on true visibility studies in order to compensate smaller or higher in that sense (unreal) FOVs used on screens. BMS is more concerned about the tactical aspects rather than the "selling hollywood graphics" - so to speak. FIRST - a simulator must FUNCTION in the very purpose it is made for, namely.. tactical useful trainings tools - allowing to recplicate aerial warfare and all its asepcts - maybe simplified in parts - but fundamentally loyal to its goal. The main things often get overlooked in a world of shaders, raytracing, poly-gon details and FX sandboxing... The simplest things are often the hardest.. because a desk-developer may or might not have "aerial warfare aspects" and "principle understanding" in his "smarts". Similar to a Fromula 1 engineer not talking with the driver ... - if that makes sense.
  10. Zoom FOV is out of question to begin with for any benchmark. Things have to be "tactically useable" without game-box or ps4 "tools" (zoom FOV). I know i know..the "excuses" why Zoom FOV is legit compared to real vision are endless. If you ONCE fly Falcon BMS in example.. you KNOW what good visibility simulation IS.
  11. go to 3:22 min .. silver skin .. whoop seconds later dark green skin - same bandit btw ??? sun reflections done wrong? thus disapearing bandits via background?
  12. Disable "external view bandit" please. This is for children.
  13. yeah.. the MOST effective way so far.. no using Antialiasing at all ... pitty
  • Create New...