Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

562 Excellent

1 Follower

About =EXPEND=Tripwire

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1899 profile views
  1. Yeah this one was a problem for many years, was fixed about 6 months ago but seemingly reintroduced in the 4.0 release
  2. Hopefully there is some update from the Devs soon. I took a month break from flying IL2 due to the frustrating stutters in MP, just tried it again after two patches have dropped since and the issue is still occurring.
  3. This isn't an option for VR. Flying with the stuttering even with the strongest VR legs starts to become tiresome and makes you begin to feel I'll, something I haven't had occur for years now. I've quit IL2 for the last few weeks.
  4. 2014 haha. Yeah that one was well and truely pushing daisies. I do recall this bug though.
  5. This changing colour/contrast effect occurs for me too when zooming in and out on a contact in VR.
  6. I fly fighters, and do well enough. You just have to expect to be bounced more often than our owl neck friends that aren't goggle jockeys like us, as checking 6 is hard work and you get lazy and don't do it as often as you should. Since the last big update though, spotting has become immensely more difficult. (It was already hard in VR).
  7. As a 1st gen VR user, I prefer the normal visibility over alternate. Seeing dots way off in the distance, only to have them disappear within 10km feels wrong. What has changed significantly for the worse is spotting and identifying from 1km to anything less than the original 9.5km range in either mode. It has gone from very hard (and something most VR players had to get used to - some giving up), to incredibly difficult, migoto mod and all.
  8. The title "Lagg 3 Damage Model" describes exactly what the thread intended to discuss. Please save your time. I know as well as any that a 109 can shoot down 5 planes in a sortie. The point of the thread was to discuss particular elements of a planes damage model that seem to be inconsistent. Post up a thread about issues with the 109 loosing half an elevator and still performing optimistically, and I will also support it. Ive got plenty of hours in the 109 and can discuss what I think are problem points there too. The difference here is that you jumped in and started a tit for tat argument rather than just discussing the evidence. No we can't and those are valid points. Only the server operators can see the difference between MG151/20 and MG17. As that detail is hidden we can only go on averages.
  9. Again, completely off topic but really poor examples you selected there. Each of those sorties had 249!! or more hits on enemy planes. 249 hits for 6 kills is actually not a significant return when compared to other armament kill rates. The high number of kills is due to the volume of rounds fired and the high degree of accuracy. Whilst I agree with your statement about showing some consistent damage problems and that not being shown with one video, what I find very amusing is the desire to come in and try deflect/derail it with other rubbish. Ivy posted consistent tests demonstrating 20mm disparity. 2 of which were already damaged. Invisible? C'mon now, that complaint is about 109s from someone trying to defend the Lagg3.
  10. This thread has nothing to do with what you think the planes qualities are as a dogfighter. Again. Wrong thread. Read the title. This is not about the 109, I'm sure there are plenty that you can post your 109 damage model complaints in.
  11. This silly comment has nothing to do with the video that has been presented.. Why even bring it up. Take it to a thread reporting 'invisible planes' if you have problems with this. Did you even watch the video? The tree gets knocked out of the way from the impact (effects from TC). If it was a netcode problem in this instance, the plane would not have taken damage from the impact with the tree. And on each of those passes, the Lagg3 takes damage - as you can see more holes. Nothing to do with netcode.
  12. Whilst I very much disagree with his way of approaching the subject, stating the problem is on everyone else's machine and brushing it aside is also not really helping getting a real fix. Enabling Vsync is masking the problem for you, and while that's great and you can play ok, there are a number still affected, including a lot of people in VR where these workarounds aren't working or can't be used. I suspect that vsync is hiding the problem for you and others that have used it as a workaround, as the rate limit is smoothing out the big variance in frame times when the stuttering issue is occurring. There are many frames that are taking significantly longer to be ready for the display than the average, resulting in the stutters people are reporting.
  13. My findings. For reference here are my graphics settings in the spoiler tags. Machine specs are in my sig. Supersampling is set to 200% in the SteamVR tool. I run VR, a HTC Vive. Offline - Map - Moscow Autumn 1941, 109G14, default load-out, northwestern single plane spawn. QMB, single plane only - clouds vs no clouds is a significant FPS difference. QMB, single plane only + cloudy - clouds set to high results in FPS much lower than on previous releases. There is no stuttering in QMB with only my plane in the sky when viewing from the cockpit. Just reduced FPS due to clouds. Clouds high/cloudy = 12.5ms med/cloudy 9.5ms med/clear 7.0ms high/clear 7.0ms 7ms = 142 fps. 9.5ms = 105fps 12.5ms = 80fps. Multiplayer - Amount of stutters significantly increases with increased player counts. When the map first loads, if you get in early with a low player count there is still some stuttering, but it is reduced. As an example - Berloga was running no clouds yet there was still significant FPS impact and stuttering. Looking again at frametimes in Berloga MP server - Clouds set to high but the map weather is clear, I am seeing the majority of frame times at 7.0ms which matches QMB, but there is significant spikes well over the 11.1ms/90fps limit which is the stuttering visible in the display. As I flew around, it was not consistent, on rare occasions, I could look at a relatively close furball and frametimes stayed at ~7.0ms. Looking back at a contact further away and the stuttering starts, but the stutters were typically always occurring. The hotfixes were in relatively quick succession, but I don't think they were the cause. I recall seeing performance impact right from the main release of the new planes.
  • Create New...