Jump to content

HunDread

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    537
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

128 Excellent

1 Follower

About HunDread

  • Rank
    Founder

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1070 profile views
  1. Doesn't seem like trolling to me just sharing information with interpretation. Whether they are correct interpretations or not I cannot tell.
  2. Agree. OR even better: People could finally leave each other alone not trying to tell how wrong others are playing this game. This is just in general coming from the past few years of forum experience not specifically addressed to anyone. If I printed all comments calling 'me' names for my choice of side, plane, playstyle (not specifically me, but people like me) I wouldn't have enough wall to put them on. I fly blue - I'm an a$$hole not balancing (I still fly blue if outnumbered. I know it's usually not the case but it happens) I fly alone - I'm an a$$hole not coordinating for glory (I just like to keep my free time the less co-ordinated as possible, do not want to adjust to other people's fee time in my free time) I fly high - I'm an earth orbiting a$$hole not participating in mission objectives (I fly alone, but like to bring the plane home if possible and more altitude is more safety) I often look at my stats and I like to see them improving - I'm a statwhore a$$hole My perspective - I simply have a hobby which I would like to do as I want (of course I'm an egoist a$$hole thinking only about myself) Before starting to search my stats, I don't fly TAW anymore as the conversation on this forum and somtimes on the server is often disgusting and I wouldn't like to be a part of that. Exactly this is the reason that still this forum is the best place for this post. EDIT: I have the me262 since it was released and I have never even tried it, have not even sit in to check the cockpit - I beleive there is finally something I am not an a$$hole for (but others surely are - this is sarcasm, just in case)
  3. Sounds pretty much logical for someone else with zero knowledge like myself.
  4. In my experience FPS drops happen when you look at heavy situations like ground AI defending against planes etc. This is on the CPU as probably ballistic calculations, damage calculations, AI behaviour calculations etc.. have to be done. Same applies to heavy furballs. What I don't understand is why FPS drops when you look at the situation and FPS goes back to normal when looking away. The calculations have to be done anyway if you are at the area no matter where you look. A good example is a bomber formation. We know that FPS drops bacause there are a lot of AI in the planes and not because they are that difficult to draw for the GPU. But in this case why only when we are looking at them? Shouldn't the same AI calculation be done when not looking at them?
  5. That might very well be the problem. I have a 7 slot powered USB hub with on/off switches for each port. The hub is full but I only turn on the devices I actually use. But those are 5 when flight simming so may be too much. Recently I plugged the hub into one of the motherboard's original built in USB 2.0 ports and this seems to have solved the problem. Previously it was in a USB 3.0 extension card built into the MB separately. If the problem returns I'll have to take your advice and try to spread out the devices. I just really like this set up that all my devices are turned off when I am not using them. Apologies everyone for hijacking the Finnish Virtual Pilots thread. To counter it with an on-topic - it's great to see that the server still keeps up the player numbers while TAW is running.
  6. My reson was incorrect usb port for my powered usb hub used for flight sim controls. Kept disconnecting my rudder pedal so I had to disconnect when that happened. Hopefully it's sorted now.
  7. Was a bit boring for me at some points but I'll take boring details 100 times over empty commercial talk so thanks a lot for sharing all this.
  8. Probably you already sent a few people to buy torches and pitchforks with this sentence alone (if they have time between two scientific posts about historical accuracy and immersion)
  9. All you say here is true. I still use the original Rift CV1 and even on that my brain can get used to the low resolution and screen door effect. I know it's not good but it doesn't bother me While flying. But to be honest it's bothering me more and more while reading the news on the newer headsets and I'll replace it at some point if I stay with VR and IL-2. And VR actually has one more aspect your brain has to adapt - the life like 3D image in movement tells your brain you are actually moving while your are not. This can be too much for your brain and body at the beginning which can cause nausea. This hits some more than others but basically almost everyone can get through it. Reaching buttons on your hotas should not be an issue. You'll learn to do it with with muscle memory. IL-2 does not have a horrible number of controls. You may not find the less frequently used too easily at the beginning but you'll get used to it. I don't ever have to take off the headset to find a button (except for typing on chat) and never heard anyone mentioning so far that they cannot do this after a while.
  10. I mean multiplayer where no AI planes should be flying around. This can work the other way too. If it's just that then why it's adding so much to gameplay? I mean it's hard to tell where immersion begins and ends. For me it's more an immersion killer that the computer happened to shoot me down in multiplayer then my eyes without a body is sticked to a random point in the sky where I watch my plane go down and explode. Also, people have been beating each other up for years over rear gun accuracy. Probably just not letting them one-shot the pilot head would have made those (often quite disgusting) debates less severe. And again: if this was done behind the curtain, no one would actually notice for quite a while. I agree that this is a weak point in my arguments. Or strong point against them. Still I think what I think.
  11. I accept RedKestrel's argument on snaphots so let's leave human instant kills out of the discussion and focus on AI instakills. I disagree with the common argument here that this is a war sim so it should simulate that random AI instant kill on multiplayer. 1. If the devs just silently took this away, no one would actually notice. Maybe a few weeks or months later after people talking to each other here or on teamspeak, discord etc, and creating polls it would come out. But this means that it would not take away any pleasure from gameplay only an annoyance. 2. It wouldn't make the game arcade. If anything, letting the computer calculate your chances in a multiplayer environment makes it arcade. Probably I think differently on this as I am coming from simracing. As a comparison, if IRacing had random mechanical failures simulated (they don't), exactly that is what would make it arcade. 3. Many people play multiplayer to survive for as long as possible. Ending these with a randomly calculated AI instant kill is just not fair. I know I know "this is war which is not fair". But in that case, please only those comment on this last part who have never complained in any way about one team outnumbering the other in multiplayer. I would honestly appreciate that.
  12. Hopefully instant-kills are calculated precisely by the game and there is no element of luck from that perspective. Meaning that if a bullet is shot precisely towards the pilot head in a way that there is nothing preventing it reaching the head it is an instant kill, and there is no percentage calculation like if it's close enough it may (or may not) be a head-shot. Hopefully this precise calculation is possible to be performed in multiplayer with people all over the world. With that hoped and said as a baseline, I still think instant kill is an element of luck than anything else in multiplayer. People cannot aim for the head in a dogfight, we aim for the plane and from that point it's a luck vs bad luck situation. With that said, it's just an annoying element rather than anything useful. Most annoying situations: - Dancing with the opponent for minutes when one player pulls the nose on the other for a lucky half second shot .... and - instakill - Rear gunner AI instakill - AI instakill of any type in Multiplayer for that matter - Instakill on high altitude when you have to watch your plane slowly fall to the ground and explode to hell before you can exit the sortie. As if it was not enough that you were instakilled again I would at least stop all kinds of AI instakills on multiplayer. That doesn't make sense to me. Who decides where the bullet is going in that case? It must be kind of a luck calculation of the game. Counter-opinion might be that in this case we could stop all kind of AI damage in multiplayer but I mean I don't mind if AI is shooting me down but dear BOTs, just give me a chance to forfeit and limp back home if your are too many and too strong. If I cannot make it home that's fine, but at least I had some hope. If I continue the attack then shoot my plane to pieces and that's all. I would also tie the instakill possibility to the plane damage. Only after certain amount of plane damage would instakill be possible.
  13. I meant a generic name that can be used for all bridge targets no matter if it's just one bridge or more. I just didnt have a better term. Maybe Bridge(s). Might be too wierd?
×
×
  • Create New...