Jump to content

F/JG300_Gruber

Members
  • Content Count

    1084
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

491 Excellent

About F/JG300_Gruber

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1042 profile views
  1. I just noticed that this problem also concerns the KV1-S
  2. I'd rather have a playable BT7, much more fun to drive around in this speedy thing ! For early war scenarios against PzIII it would be a nice addition to the game. Plus they had a longer service life than KV2s and were produced in far superior numbers.
  3. Brief description: T34/76 UVZ incorrect ammo count on certain loadouts Detailed description, conditions: When you select loadouts with two different types of ammo, and chose the one with 67 rounds of one type and 33 of the second type, you end up with only 16 rounds of the second type when in game. I tested a few of them (but not all) and it seems to be affecting all loadouts from #34 to #45 Additional assets (videos, screenshots, logs): Your PC config data (OS, drivers, specific software): N/A
  4. Lucky you ! I didn't even bothered try flying on the map, just driving around in a tank was enough to take the fun out. I'm getting a rock solid 60fps in any open space within the high detail section of the map, but as soon as I get under 100-200m of the buildings (even a few houses at a crossroad) it drops down to 5-10fp when looking around or driving. If I keep the camera steady I get my 60fps back. And for some reason, the phenemenon does NOT get worse when driving in areas with a high concentration of buildings. 5 or 50 houses It is always more or less the same. It feels like nothing at all is stored into the RAM and each time IL2 has to render an object in visual range, it loads it straight up from the hard drive. Never had such an issue on the other maps.
  5. Hi, Just to let you know, I don't know if I'm an isolated case or not, but from what I observed on my throttle I've switched back to the previous version of the firmware until a further, more stable version. My issues with 20190314 : Flickering of the PHYSICAL inputs from T2 and T3 toggle switches (double state input). It doesn't looks like it has an impact on the throttle, but that should definitely not happen. Some logical buttons don't act like they should : in the "normal" mode (delay=0) some randomly turns ON and OFF when kept depressed, even though the physical input looks stable. Happens on physical inputs 8, 9, 10 and 33 on my throttle. Encoders have a much wider range of output length, delay 1 is almost unuseable and will drop a significant number of clicks. A stepback from the previous version. I've rolled back to 20190109 and all the problems are gone. I hope this will be adressed, because the new Toggle ON/OFF functions and the fact that the shift mode now works with the encoders is really a big improvement in functionnality !
  6. Not so long ago I had a frankenlaptop setup and used an unpowered hub (4 slots) on USB 3.0 port with only some minor issues until the day it simply fried...
  7. Brief description: Double input when using keyboard emulator software. Detailed description, conditions: I'm using a keyboard emulator to allow me to use some devices in IL2 and DCS (the saitek switch panel mainly), however IL2 seems to register inputs differently than it should when using ctrl, shift or alt combinations. For example : N : navigation map (full screen) Lshift + N : Nav lights on/off When the panel is sending the Lshift+N input, a regular software (Notepad, Microsoft Word, DCS...) will only register that input, but IL2 will register both N and Lshift+N at the same time. So as a result in IL2 I have both the lights switching on/off and the map opening with a single input. You can reproduce the particular behaviour if IL2 manually (without software) Open windows notepad, and quickly do the following sequence on your keyboard : Sequence 1 - Press Shift - Press N - Release N - Release Shift Sequence 2 - Press Shift - Press N - Release Shift - Release N For the notepad and most games/software, both sequence will be processed in the same way and the output will be identical : a single upper case N However IL2 will register sequence 2 as upper case N and lower case N (N and n) and it will do the same with Ctrl and alt keys. Additionaly it brings the following abnormal behaviors : If I use the same combination as said above (N : navigation map; Lshift + N : Nav lights on/off) Using ctrl+N or Alt+N on the keyboard will also show up the map if the ctrl+N and Alt+N are not binded Maintaining N while pressing shift will trigger both the map and the lights at each press on the shift key. While it is not a big deal, it might cause some compatibility issues with some joystick programing softwares depending on how their code is written. So maybe this might be improved at some point within the code of IL2.
  8. Displaying a hole on the exact location of the point of impact in addition to the generic area damages would also be a good help to analyze your shots, even mid battle if you can see them
  9. What ammo were you using by the way (just out of curiosity) ?
  10. I'm speaking specifically of the opposite case : T34 shooting on a Tiger. Unless I've understood things incorrectly, Athlon is contesting the effectiveness of the Russian gun. But for the opposite case you are talking about, I fly central video is 2 month old and at least 3 updates outdated. So everything has to be redone with the current version if you want to have infos that devs will consider worthy of looking at. I do have the same feeling that the 88mm is performing inconsistently at close range, but some extensive testing has to be done with the current 3.010c version and put in video format.
  11. The numbers given in IL2 (129mm point blank and 90mm at 500m) will still ensure over 100mm up to about 350-400m so nothing suspicious from my games yesterday. Now I don't have time or buddies to set up some extensive testings on a (preferably) laggy server with icons ON for seeing the exact shooting distances, to see how far the damage model holds up until some weird things happens. But if you want to do so, just go for it ! it is the best possible way to put in some accurate and unbiased feedback to help the devs correct anything that might have slipped through beta testing.
  12. After a few hours playing on the red side against player controlled tigers : T34 with APCR : Facing straight front, shooting through the front plate : 1 shot fairly consistently (dead crew) Facing sideways, shooting at the side armour under the middle of the turret : ammo detonation every single time. KV1 with same APCR ammo : Facing front, but tiger angled correctly : not much effect, sometimes a lucky hit through the gunner optics. Facing sideways, same sweet spot as with the T34. Tiger blows off at the first hit. All shot takens from under 500m (probably 200-300 in average), at longer ranges the ammo don't do much against the front armor of the big cat, but his 88mm just ruins your day. For some reasons it feels like I got one shoted more often at long ranges (1+km) by the 88 than at close range, KV1 and T34 alike, but that may only be feelings. So all in all, nothing blatantly wrong with the Tiger armor, just don't underestimated the soviet APCR at close range, because it does the job against the super flat armor (APCR card says 130mm of pen at point blank). Angle correctly, keep your distances and communicate to avoid getting flanked. What might be worth to look upon though is why the 88mm seems less effective at short ranges, if proved that it really is.
  13. Considering the mass difference between the two, IRL the T34 crew would most likely fell unconscious way before the german crew. Unless they put some sekrit compound in their vodka. It's the same as destroying a KV1 by ramming it with an empty Bf109. It works in game because of improper collision mechanism. IRL, no way. On a side note, I'm even a bit surprised that they didn't came with some crazy idea in that flavor, like a long rod with a huge shape charge at the front for ramming heavy panzers Roman style ! On a BT5 or 7, it could have done wonders together with an expendable crew ! After the failure of homing dog landmines, this doesn't sound like a bad idea
  14. The whole website is a fake in itself I which we could keep "Jalapeño" though. ATC conversation would be even more entertaining with chinese crew !
  15. CAS was part of warfare, yes, but I bet tankers more often fought without any airplanes nearby. Especially in small engagements, aviation wasn't omnipresent at all. There was never more than 700 Stukas available to the LW at any given time during the war, with a serviceability of 60% that equals to roughly 400 planes able to get airborne, and split between CAS, dive bombing, anti shipping mission through the whole eastern front. So the image one can have to see Rudel and his panzerknacker geschwader appear in the sky anytime when a T34 was pulled out of it's shelter is nohing but unrealistic. We fly/drive what we like at the moment I agree, but this shouldn't prevent anybody to have fun. This is the same issues as regular TAW/WoL/KOTA side stacking : one part of the player base can't enjoy flying because they get crushed by the sheer number on the other side flying what they want to. As I said above, there are too many issues and limitations with the IA (too dumb, very little autonomous behavior, can see through walls and terrain, cannot be set as "wingmen" when human player is spawning) for this to be a viable solution. Likewise, players also don't have any available AA vehicule to counter the airplane threat themselves. So in the meantime, limiting availability of planes altogether is IMO the preferred way to get an enjoyable experience on tank oriented servers, along with setting realistic flight time to and from the frontline. There are too many pilots only interested in their own fun and statistics to let an "open" map and hope that they will hold themselves for the sake of balance.
×
×
  • Create New...