Jump to content

BrightCandle

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BrightCandle

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I had the bug appear today without the mod installed, took 6 missions or so and then it reappeared. So its a vanilla issue not a mod issue. I'll get a recording for the developers to take a look at.
  2. There has been a bug since the recent update of the game that markers for planes and the waypoint markers would disappear when they ought to be visible, usually through the front pane of the cockpit and near the fuselage but sometimes very wide areas. It is obviously worse on the ground but the base game has that as well, it is when in the air there is a problem. This is in VR by the way, doesn't seem to happen in normal pancake mode. Eventually I got around to removing Migoto with a complete game redownload and found that the problem goes away after the developers suggested it might be the mod. They were indeed right, the mod is the cause of the problem. It is a bit tricky because it manifests different everytime, about 50% of the time things are fine, then the other 50 the problem ranges from small to enormous. So it will take a few tests to ascertain if its fixed.
  3. So what was happening is that AI pilots in the squadron have in their logs sorties in G2 planes but there are no such planes in the equipment. The only time we got a G2 was when it was assigned to one of the players at which point one became available. But most of the AI in their records is showing sorties in G2s but those just aren't available to us to fly with. The problem has disappeared since we have now hit May 15th and been converted to FW190s despite us saying we don't own them, so we likely need to transfers or buy them but something isn't quite right with the equipment assignments/replacements part or alternatively the fake reports that are made for the AI using planes not assigned to the squadron. Date/Config wise G2s should start to become available from the beginning of April but we didn't get any until the 1st of May and it was just the one.
  4. I think there is a problem with the mod and markers. I was having issues with markers disappearing mainly around the front of the place (both plane tracking as well as in air markers) since the recent release of the game. I had assumed it was the game, but I saw the developers respond to the bug report and say they believed there was no issue without the mod so I tested it last night and reproduced it working. So I am fairly certain its caused by 3dmigoto. Reproduction steps: 1. BF109 F4, press I to turn on plane markers. 2. About 50% of the time you start the game markers will be hidden by invisible areas, usually around the front area of view often in the lower part of the windshield. 3. On the ground there is usually no markers at all/occlusion but this is in the base game too. It is fairly reproduceable but its not consistently happening everytime you launch the game.
  5. The BF109s have become available in our campaign, the AI pilots in the wing are showing as flying sorties with the BF109 G2s but all the equipment and our choices for flights are in the BF 109 F4 still. None of the AI pilots in the mission list have G2s, it isn't on the list or in the equipment list for the squadron nor in the luftwaffe intelligence report. So despite the game showing pilot logs in them for the individual pilots (and that is reflected in the config files) we don't actually have G2s available. Seems it hasn't transitioned correctly.
  6. Another potential bug for 7.4.0. When we set the minimum and maximum days to progress the game faster it seems to ignore it and just progress us 1-2 days as usual. We changed the config and saved (and it shows us saved in the json files as well). Then we press mission and it is still progressed a day. Am I missing something like after the mission it has already generated the next date and we have to do one more mission before we see it? We will find out in a day or two and I'll report back if there is no bug here.
  7. We have been playing 7.4.0 since early January on a dedicated coop server and we have run into the following issues: Mission spacing isn't very random, it chooses the next day most of the time where would have expected 1-4 days with a reasonable spread yet 80% of the time it is the next day. Claimed victories regularly gives the player the wrong plane. It isn't just that obvious claims are getting rejected it is that one player claims a couple of PE2s but gets award IL2s they never even shot at, another pilot will have downed IL2s but they didn't. Claimed victories get rejected when it is clear who finished the plane off. I don't know what the algorithm is here but our highest kill player is HATED by command, they deny many of his claims perhaps because he often finishes off planes after the newbies run out of ammo? Regularly coop missions fail to generate with a NullPointerException if I haven't changed the reference player after loading. The default reference is on the right side but it will always exception unless I select someone else. As reported elsewhere the .mission files load very slowly on a dedicated server and really hurt client load performance and we could do with a way to remove/rename the .mission file automatically. Seems to be a dedicated server issue as far as I can tell, wasn't an issue when running from a client.
  8. Yes unfortunately what seems to happen with the dedicated server is even when you select the msbin file it always seems to load the .mission file if its next to it and pass it to the clients. I can't find a way to make the SDS thing just use the binary file. This seems to be different on the client software, if you select the binary file it uses that one and passes that to the joiners, it is AFAIK a unique problem with the dedicated server.
  9. Having recently found the substantial performance difference of the dedicated servers when utilising the binary mission file can I request that alongside the generate binary files option we also have a delete/rename the .mission file as well. This would substantially improve performance on dedicated servers and likely needs to be the default, the difference is 20 seconds load verses 10 minutes and for the clients 20seconds load verses about 15 minutes. For now at least I'll be writing something quick and dirty to just rename any files in there but just want you to be aware my coop performance problem was tracked to this and the fix is known and I think PWCG ought to be the place the fix is executed.
  10. Oh wow that is a major performance uplift nice one thanks so much. I need to request an update to PWCG to delete that mission file as an option because that is a big deal.
  11. Brief description: DServer Coop join performance dramatically lower than peer hosted Detailed description, conditions: With a PWCG mission when that mission is hosted by a player other players join in under a minute. When doing the same thing on a DServer this is taking 15 minutes from selecting the server in the list to getting to the slot screen. Additional assets (videos, screenshots, logs): Your PC config data (OS, drivers, specific software): Server is running Windows 10 1903 and a 3930k CPU with 16GB of RAM. Drivers are latest, it has no GPU.
  12. Statement of the issue We recently setup a Dedicated server for coop missions for our group based on Pat Wilsons Combat Generator. It is producing missions about 12 MB big or so. Performance in loading the missions is pretty poor. PWCG takes a while to generate, the dedicated server takes a really long time to finish loading the mission and register on the master list and then every client takes many minutes to load into the slot up screen. The combination of these 3 together must be nearly 20 minutes or so. When we were doing this without a dedicated server the creation of the server and joining were considerably faster. Reproduction steps 1. Generate mission with PWCG. 2. Start the dedicated server with the SDS containing that mission. 3. All players join the server once it appears. Without a dedicated server 1. was slow but 2 and 3 were seconds to a minute. With a dedicated server 2 and 3 take 15x as long. Am I missing some setup parameter magic here? I increased the bandwidth in the startup.cfg but that doesn't seem to have done much, nor the bandwidth values in the SDS setup and I am running the machine on high performance. It isn't the quickest of boxes, just a 3930k but at the same time it runs the game well it just doesn't load very quick and even doubling the CPU performance I don't think is likely to solve the extent of the weird problem we are seeing unless its instruction based perhaps? I have attached the mission.sds (censored). But if there is something else I should be changing to improve the mission load and/or joining performance to give me something a bit more like the client join experience please let me know. mission.zip
×
×
  • Create New...