Jump to content

ACG_PanzerV

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About ACG_PanzerV

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Type of Improvement: Single-player post-mission review improvement Explanation of Proposals: I suggest implementing the more detailed post-mission data available in MP, inside the single-player post-mission debrief. Most multi-player servers permit access to a post-mission sortie log that allows a player to see actions by mission time-stamp. Players see exactly who they shot/were shot by, the level of damage the inflicted/received and against what targets and when in the mission it occurred. I propose you implement this detailed post mission log function inside the base sim for single player use. If used in conjunction with the current SP post mission log that merely depicts action stamps on the map, it will dramatically improve understanding of what occurred in a SP mission. Benefits: MP post mission data is very informative and allows players to more accurately understand what happened in a sortie - who hit what when and/or who hit them when, and how hard. This is particularly important to players on TAW where the 'in-sim' assessment of points and damage against targets is often different from the assessment on the TAW server. My assumption is that the bulk of IL-2 BoX customer base is in fact single player, and enhancing single-player game play likely has the greatest impact on revenue. This would allow players to more accurately assess their actions, learn more quickly (to include MP guys like me trying to improve through SP practice), ramp up their movement to MP, and potentially increase the satisfaction level with single player play. While some aftermarket add-ons like TACVIEW permit SP assessment like this, and players can always review flight replays they record, just giving rapid easy access to the data inside the sim would likely improve the overall SP experience and increase interest in the game for players whose engagement with the product is flagging.
  2. You speak without knowing. Air Combat Group has a weekly mission on our own server that is easily 35 on 35. We have enough members to require multiple shifts to ensure everyone gets in. If you want to see some of it, check out Sheriff's videos. We combine AI bombers and attackers with our own Squadrons of both. Plenty of both to go around. Fighters are focused on doing REAL fighter things - like escorting effectively or penetrating escorts. Bombers are focused on bombing things, avoiding flak and surviving fighters, coordinating comms with escorts, etc... If joining a historical sim group that only flies one mission a week doesn't suit you, join TAW. Its only up about 50% of the time because of the long lag between campaigns, but when it is the overwhelming majority of missions flown in it are ALL ground attack, with fighter ops as a secondary (albeit super aggro) role. The whole campaign depends upon the performance of the ground attack - each side wins or loses almost entirely based on this. Aircraft shot down count, but fighter on fighter is wasted time and energy if the fighter you are after isn't attacking your ground attack guys. Now, perhaps TAW is too hard for you? Yeah, it is pretty much the toughest, most unforgiving, skill oriented server of the bunch. I get quite frustrated with it from time to time, but still love to fly in it. If you want decent bomber / ground attack ops in the join-as-you-please, unlimited spawns, and get your endorphin fix MP servers, I have no help for you. But despite their popularity - and fun factor - these are not the totality of PvP available in this sim, nor are they the true litmus test of pilot skill.
  3. Many aircraft in our sim do not have high multiple flap settings, nor do they have the flexibility in flap controls that you are looking for. While some do have a sliding lever, more have essentially a constant speed electric motor driving the flaps, and a switch (sometimes embedded in a lever) that turns the motor on/off in two directions. A slider for flaps that permits you to just tap forward a bit and forget it, in order to get - say 20% flap extension - would be unrealistic and give a pilot an advantage in combat. The real pilot wishing to deploy flaps has to actually run the flap motor for the needed length of time, then stop it. Other aircraft have flap lever detents intended for takeoff/approach and landing settings. Again - not suitable for a slider. If they let you put flaps on an axis, for the minority of planes it would apply to, how then would everyone react when the axis is disabled and they have to select an up and a down or a toggle set of buttons/keys? With a decent HOTAS there are enough options to make the up/down or toggle the more universally realistic choice, and easily sufficient for the limited role flaps historically played in air combat.
  4. FWIW, I too had a long download time - as well as a surprisingly long install on otherwise blazing fast internet service. Might have taken 15-20min all told (gasp!). Not all broke up about it, just letting folks know. I don't use Steam and all my content is direct from 1C. Initial flights last night were pretty good and look forward to exploring the new spotting dynamics in more detail and hearing about folks' opinions. Haven't checked yet, but also love the idea of mouseover check for MP server settings - that's huge! Looking forward to seeing what the other updates are that almost made this release. Thanks for all your hard work to improve the sim that is our passion. Please hurry the Hurri, as well as the rest of BoN content. What is latest/greatest on the map?
  5. Compare the price of the software to play the game to the price of controllers, rig, internet, desk and everything else... peanuts. Buy them ALL!
  6. More TAW less Tawk! When is the next Campaign! Combat Box has a new recon mission that allows recon designated planes (fixed loadouts in the selection screen) to pinpoint designated targets by flying in large zones on the map, similar to how we find partisans in TAW. We've run them with Bf110s and it works pretty well. I specifically remember needing to pinpoint flotilla locations along a river in the Netherlands portion of the Rheinland map. This would probably be fairly easy to mimic.
  7. I too think that the max g-loads should be increased somewhat, but I want to be clear what I'm talking about. I don't think that instantaneous loads need much adjustment. If a Spitfire or Yak pilot pulls from 1G to 6G in a 1/4 second, he should go to sleep. Conversely, a gradual increase in G-load up to 6 or 7 G was probably tolerable for a well trained or experienced WWII pilot. However, I think that the impact of this should be considered. Planes that are inherently faster will become even more deadly. The ME-262 is currently badly hampered by unrealistic G-limits. The change from a 5ish G limit to a 7ish G limit will have a dramatic effect on overall maneuverability of planes going 600kph, but will have a much more incremental difference for planes doing 450 or less. Just something to bear in mind before we all sign up. The 262 in particular, but also the P-51, P-47, Tempest and (probably) the Mosquito will all benefit more than will the Spit, the Yak or the mid-war 109s. This is mostly supposition and conversation with far more experienced aviators, so I won't debate with anyone on it - not equipped with data to back up my assertions. Ask some of the test wonks if I'm right. But a controlled, tested increase for gradually increased loads makes sense to me.
  8. I too would like to know the real performance bennie here. The price delta between 4000 and 4800 is roughly x 2+. Would want to appreciate a significant performance difference. I could get 32gb of 4200 speed for the price of 16gb of 4800.
  9. Thanks very much for all of this. Very valuable input that I will heed in my process. Your question is mostly also applicable to all modern VR headsets. A more powerfull PC will give you more % of time at full native fps in complex scenarios. We have been studying in the past what are the main factors to obtain better VR performance. The last series of tests was conducted with the Remagen becnhmark, but it doesn´t work anymore with latest game updates with referred rendering (recorded flights became unplayable). Ideally the game could have an always playable recorded flight, so we would be always able to use a common track to measure performance over the same baseline, but it seems it is not on the top priorities of the development plans. I created a poll to know if this is important and people has same opinon than me. With a common benchmark it would be easier to compare performance of different headsets, hardware, software and settings. So all tricks and wisdom would be compiled and we will be able to take the best decissions when acquiring new hardware. @Jason_Williams do you think this would be important for the VR (and non-VR) community? After this intro, let see were is wise to invest money for a PC for the Reverb G2. Assuming you only plays IL-2 VR: 1. Intel vs AMD. In all the test we have done Intel was always the winner. It is true that new AMD CPUs could change this, but current chips don´t. So forget AMD until someone prove the opposite 2. Intel CPU: Overclock is a must, so go for a K version. Forget the "X" chips since they are more difficult to overclock. Current 10th gen is incresing the number of cores but for IL-2 VR you will not need more than 4 cores. So you can go to 10600K, or 10700K or 10900K., all of them have 2Mb cache per core (we suspect that cache plays also a role). Personally I would go to 10600K, having the option to go to higher versions if other demostrate that they are better for IL-2 VR. 3. CPU cooling: Go for a good AIO liquid cooling of 240 or 360mm. They are worth the money. Put it at the top of the case. An inlcude 3 or 4 more fans in the case. 4. RAM: IL-2 VR RAM usage is around 7-8 Mb. So please, don´t spend money on size (32GB) and go for speed. Try to go to 16 (2x8) RAM at 4400MHz (or higher) with lowest Cas Latency (CL). So learnt that frequency (the higher the better) is better than CL. 5. Motherboard: Look for a known brand with capability for high RAM frequencies. And with easy software for overclock (like MSI Command Center). But I think any brand would be OK. 6. GPU: Don´t spend a fortune in the lastest top GPU, probably they are not worth the money. For the G2 I would try first with a 1080Ti or 2080S. You can always upgrade GPU easily. my two cents.
  10. Yeah, I currently have a PCPartPicker build set up, but am constantly monkeying with it. Currently centered around an AMD 3700x and an MSI X570 mobo. Like I said, carrying my RTX 2070 Super forward until I see whether next-gen Nvidia is any real advantage. I think all the case builders will have to make new cases to fit it!
  11. Thanks for the input. What fprVR tool? Is that the name or is there one in particular you use? Any thoughts on the new intel chips - faster, but not as multi-threaded. Built to OC, which is not really my bag, but likely faster on a mild/conservative OC than Ryzen. Is the binding factor CPU speed, cores, threads? Really only flying MP so AI objects is limited issue.
  12. I've pre-ordered the G2 and am going to build a rig to support it around my current GPU - an RTX 2070 Super. I would like more info on the "IL2 is so CPU bound" comment above, and hear thoughts on best CPU for IL2. I am leaning hard towards a Ryzen 3700X, but could potentially be swayed back to Intel - or to a 3900X - if someone presents a compelling explanation. Single core clock speeds vs. unsupported multi-threading for example. Any input appreciated.
  13. Ok, I preordered the G2 and am looking for advice on the rig I'm going to build to run it. I currently have an old I5-4690K pushing 16gb of ram on an Asrock board, Founders RTX 2070 Super, driving a 35" ACER Predator ultrawide monitor at 3440 x 1440. Been using MSAA and no, spotting is not great, but the sim is beautiful. Not sure my FPS, but I have few/zero issues with it. My current plan based on reviewer on MRTV is to carry my 2070S forward. I'll convert my old rig to business-only, and build a new one to run the VR. I can go fairly high end here, per others comments on their hobby budgets, but I don't want to buy stupid. That said, I like buying new hardware as infrequently as possible, so 5 years is my target lifespan for the rig, with a potential GPU upgrade in there. If I overclock, it will be the simplest, most conservative OC I can figure out. I like simple, stable, forget-its-on OC solutions. Would like advice on: CPU selection: 10th Gen Intel I5 / I7 vs. AMD 3700x 3900x Motherboard and Chipset Other considerations Plan is for 32GB of ram regardless and a 2TB SSD and a 750w Gold PSU. I'll put it all in a nice box. Any thoughts, with rationale, appreciated.
  14. Ok, a bit surprised that this TAW campaign went only two missions long. Was told there were a few technical issues at the outset, and it is potentially being re-run in near future for a full campaignj - once again in the Western Theater? Any truth to this?
  15. Most of the online multi-player servers feature post-sortie review pages which allow players to determine exact time-stamp and target designations on damage inflicted / received. This information would be extremely useful in a better learning environment. I frequently go into Quickmission to refine techniques for a particular aircraft, but the rudimentary post-mission results and the map stamp of significant events is less than ideal for learning. I would like to know if this data can somehow be captured/extracted and reviewed? There is some of it in TACVIEW I think - anyone know how to set up TACVIEW to read full post ops? How about engine data, trying to figure out why you fried your engine for example?
×
×
  • Create New...