Jump to content

=IL2AU=ToknMurican

Members
  • Content Count

    157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by =IL2AU=ToknMurican

  1. Seeing as how I experience the problem.. it's not like I don't know it.. but even when I reduce the smoothness to make it stutter like mad it looks about the same as either of the other two recordings anytime I try to record it.. even when using time accel which really makes it choppy even with high smoothness setting. With reduced smoothness, while flying the plane itself.. the jitter is way more dramatic than that.. at least it feels like it to me. But at least it does show his FPS are staying at a steady 59-60 throughout his flight so it's not a performance issue, his machine is running solid. Are you getting FPS drops with your stutters as maps get more populated? I don't seem to experience any slow downs due to high population unless I'm ground level with max everything graphics, and at that point it's fps dips causing my game to run less smoothly.. not just headmovement.
  2. I've witnessed people disconnecting and reconnecting repeatedly on the server.. planes constantly disappearing as they finish flight and evade for 15 seconds. (could be wrong..timer might be from a different server) It's kind of frustrating after you've invested altitude and energy into a target for it to just vanish in thin air, when instead you could have kept your altitude and kept scanning for other targets. Not to mention as soon as you dive on someone you usually pick up 1-2 tails, then they get 1-2 tails themselves. There are airfields near the dogfight area.. I think we should have to land or be blown up to finish flight.. but eh..
  3. I'm glad you feel sorted. I guess I've never booted my pc with the monitor turned off. I haven't checked to see if 2.008 fixed the fullscreen issue but last I had heard fullscreen is locked to 60fps. Dev confirmed they'd be sorting it out eventualy. Windowed borderless has been working fine for me on my Acer x34... just have to ensure g-sync is enabled for windowed mode in NV control panel. Thanks for letting me know to make sure my monitor's always on first if I turn my entire system off over night.
  4. Hosting a discord server is totally free as well. I'll prob click the link at some point. I need to start flying with people. My biggest issue is being awake when normal people are awake.
  5. I didn't want to necro a 2 year old thread on the subject. I recently installed PWCG and it seems like it can pretty much cover my needs for single player in a flight sim. I prefer to fly at lower ranks.. and have no radio commands whatsoever which is understandable since I took the lower rank.. but I ran into a problem on a particularly cloudy mission where all of Stalingrad basically had a cloud ceiling that started at somewhere between 3000/3500m, popping out of them at about 4100m. Anyway my flight of yaks which I was on the tail end of hit these clouds as I was trying to catch up with them in the climb after takeoff.. and I lost site of them. I also mistakenly kept climbing while I was looking for them. In the time that I was climbing above the flight plan altitude, they continued down the flight path. I flew along the flight path checking above and below the clouds unable to find them..but there I was getting radio messages from them about enemy fighter planes. I found myself wishing I could communicate back to them but with some very specific requsts.. like "Flight Location?" "Flight speed?" "Request Pattern hold" "Request nav lights".. something along those lines.. as ww2 pilots with access to radios probably did have the benefit of communicating locations to each other. It would nice to be able to at least get a heading in degrees from me to them somehow someway. I don't know if the mission editor already allows for custom radio messages.. which if the case maybe I should be making the suggestion to Pat Wilson? Unless something like this can be added I feel like the only real way to play PWCG is in normal mode imagining the marks in the sky as clear communication between pilots and ground forces.. or never ever get separated from your flight to begin with.. but that happens.
  6. https://il2sturmovik.com/about/#5 At the bottom of the page the min system specs are listed. for nvidia cards min spec is gtx 660 with 2gb vram. With patch 2.006 they ugpraded the game to run on DX11.. which your card is dx11 compatible but that is a pretty old card. 1gb of vram isn't a lot these days. But you said the issue changed when you updated drivers to the game launcher choosing not to update? So you might still be able to run the game. Did you try clicking "settings" and try d/ling with "prefer web distrubution" checked? If all else fails maybe try a fresh install of IL-2 BoS to see if that gets the launcher working for you. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you. There are about 5 generations of graphics cards out newer than your 560ti however.. even if you do manage to get BoS running I'd say it might be time to save up for a 1070 or at least something newer than a 700 series card. Then again.. how much you might benefit from such might be dependent on the rest of your system specs.
  7. Not sure if there's an option to do so in game, but if you have an nVidia card, you can change which monitor is the primary display. In nVidia Control panel under Display/Set up multiple displays just right click the image and "Make Primary". Not sure if AMD would have similar functionality.
  8. Never had this issue personally.. but the fact that it goes away when you reboot would make me check a few things on my system, especially during the occurrence of your issue. Have you tried launching other games on your systems when this is happening to verify that it's just BoS or not? If it's not just BoS then there's a host of troubleshooting steps to go through that might narrow down your issues. (Not saying it isn't BoS.. seems weird that a resolution change fixes it)
  9. I just tried to record with my phone..and geforce experience again. I can't emphasize enough how the issue just doesn't seem to translate to video. Even your recording of your monitor. Like maybe if I look for them REALLY HARD I can see the slight pauses in motion when you look around.. but with the videos earlier in the thread.. with your video.. with my own videos.. watching them is nothing like what I personally experience in IL-2 BoS and RoF. - going to take back what I said in my earlier post. setting smoothness to 100 mostly eliminates the jerky movements for me.. until I decide to use time acceleration.. and then it's jerky as hell when I look around unless I engage autopilot or disable ffb (which happens when you engage autopilot.) Same exact thing with RoF. I tested it this time in BoS on a quick missions where I spawned zero tanks or enemy or even friendly planes.. at 6000m. My in-game framerates were pinned at 99 at this altitude on an empty map. Looking around did not change that fact.. regardless of whether FFB was on or off. I don't use time accel alot in BoS.. in RoF single player I use it when I feel a need to engage "autopilot" as unrealistic as it may be.. so I am still completely patient regarding this as looking around at normal speed with smoothness 100 is fine for me.. but - hopefully we all do see a fix eventually, however.. as I still need to look around should I decide to speed up time.
  10. BERLOGA - Duel and Dogfight - has locked fuel restrictions. Can either fly with very little fuel or 260L *Edit* - off the topic of fuel, I've been flying the Lagg-3 fitted with 37mm in QMB vs some IL-2's just for fun.. when I'm actually lined up well enough to land a hit.. it just takes one solid connection and BOOM wing flies off.. I landed one directly center of an IL-2's tail and the entire tail blew up and flew off. I mean IRL the 37mm cannon was prone to misfires and the like.. but the pure destructive power makes me giddy.
  11. Have to agree with your mindset. It's already possible to limit modifications and starting fuel on MP servers I thought? For that reason I see no qualms with a high octane fuel mod or something along the lines. But.. then again that might be asking the devs to do a whole lot of work if we start taking into consideration the quality of gasoline in different planes and the effect it would have on their performance.
  12. Let's not turn this thread into a flame war please? I have to disagree with the whole tactic of saying "don't let the door hit you on the way out" as a means of problem solving. I also have to disagree with threatening to play other games instead.. I have several modules in DCS that I enjoy. I have over 200 games on Steam. IL-2 is not the only thing I play. Big whoop. The production/dev team of IL-2 is small compared to other gaming companies out there with anywhere from 100 to thousands of employees. patience is a virtue. The sim community is small compared to other gaming platforms and genres. Should be easier for us to get along and work with each other right? Just flew a quick mission.. Camera smoothness set to 100.. FFB on.. seems fine. Like..totally playable fine. Like.. I don't seem to have a full understanding of what the smoothness setting actually does.. as I only noticed a need to adjust it after I bought my msffb2 off ebay (of which I have purchased a second, that is pretty much in Brand new condition and will likely mod the one that has obvious signs of use) and found this thread after wondering why looking around suddenly felt horrible. . At 90'ish I was feeling a bit of a delay looking around.. at 100 it suddenly feels almost perfect to the point I almost feel silly with my participation and wordiness in this thread. (maybe it's because I recently unchecked "Head Shake" idk.) I'm starting to wonder if I accidentally enabled TrackIR's smoothing profile with the delay I was talking about... but seriously flying around right now with smoothness in game set to 100.. everything seems to feel like it should. Again..not talking about in TrackIR software. In-game menu, next to the head shake option. Will add image when photobucket or imgur decide to work with me. Prior to getting the FFB stick I had never needed to touch this setting.. so somethings weird there for sure but.. should improve your viewing to crank it up.
  13. I think the p-39 appeals to me much for the same reason a bird like the a-10 appeals to me. It was designed around a weapon platform (correct me if I'm wrong)...just instead of serving freedom with a bit of brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt it's more like Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH and you see a wing floating in the air above a smoking ball of fire that might just have been a plane moments earlier. Don't get me wrong.. RL violence horrifies me but, when it comes to internet airplanes or spaceships.. destruction is the true joy. I do enjoy the aesthetics of the plane. I think she's both sleek and mean looking. For some reason when I look at just the shape of it, I think it looks like something designed to cut through air with grace and ease. The bird lacked a 2 stage supercharger (designed for turbocharger that ended up in p-38s later on if i'm not mistaken) and will have a limited service ceiling due to that.. its major downfall. At the same time if it performs as described in the Wings of Fame excerpt I c&p'd a small portion of in the OP, I think I may just have to learn to live at 3000m or lower..and hopefully see planes at higher altitudes before they see me so I can run away, and look for someone with an equal or lesser energy state. Admittedly though I'm a bit of a noob to the simming world (still saying that with about a year or more of various planes/sims under my belt) .. if I'm wrong about anything feel free to mention it. And hey.. if anybody who's keen on this plane wants to throw together an element and have some fun in MP when the plane hits... I need to stop flying alone. I die a lot. I'll probably still die alot with wingmen but it'd probably speed up my learning process heh. Not sure when the p-39 is in the works.. but I do think it'd be fun to go out with a flight of them.
  14. The only time I've ever used TARGET was for Falcon BMS and that was only because it couldn't detect my stick + throttle + pedals. Il-2 BoS, 1946 and DCS World you shouldn't need it at all.
  15. You could have just answered with a period and no words. Your sig says it all I believe.
  16. The Camera menu in the game (not your trackir software but IL-2 BoS) crank up the camera smoothness.
  17. I think my favorite line from this is "You want to treat this airplane like a lady. Don't try to be fast or rough if you want to get along with it." Last video is an earlier video, and probably an earlier model of the P-39.. most likely using the V-1710-35 engine rather than the V-1710-63 that the L-1 was using.
  18. See.. what we really all want is a Simpit 360° (it doesn't exist but there is THIS http://www.simpit.co.nz/index.php). He can figure out if he likes VR vs Monitor vs Projector when it's implemented.
  19. I think we can all agree with that hehe. Just a little patiennnce... yeaaaahhh. The dev's are attempting to do a lot already however, and are keeping us updated as they provide us with updates so this thread is no attempt at rushing them. There is a thread started by a dev showing they're interested in (not promising) a pacific theater in the future if I am remembering things correctly that looked like it was intended to inspire some historical conversation or thoughts. So there is hope. Seeds are planted.. give it time to grow.
  20. More reading on the Airacobra - I'll add it to the OP as well. http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39_Airacobra_Soviet.html
  21. No need to hope.. it's listed in the planes coming with BoK. I'm not some great historian, or a great aviator or anything but I hope the future also provides the P-39Q-5 and maybe even some of the 37mm toting Yaks.. all that mid altitude yumminess with a big ol' 37mm round to give to German planes as presents.
  22. evga z68 sli with i5 2500k overclocked to 4.5ghz, 8gb ddr3 1600, gtx 980ti @ 3440x1440 resolution - in a solo flight i might drop to 85 on ultra settings in the air when different textures come into view when im looking around. Generally stays pinned at 99fps (I set the limiter to 100fps in startup.cfg, and have a monitor with a 100hz refresh rate). On the ground it can get down into the 40's if there's a lot of activity around, so I run the graphics at High instead, even though we're only on the ground for very brief periods. Processor speed seems to have the biggest effect on frames per second in any modern sim I've played where you may find other games to be a little heavier on the GPU. ON a heavily populated MP server my frames can hit 70's in the air on utlra.. until i'm looking forward again where it jumps back up to 99. WIth the limiter turned off i've seen the fps counter state around 128fps at max. If you are running on a 60hz monitor though, 60 fps is all you need/want.
  23. Your 1080 is still a beast I'm with Gambit.. you made your choice 6mo's ago. And it will most likely give you many years of use.
  24. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39K-1_L1_Operating_Instructions.pdf http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39_Airacobra_Soviet.html http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/159314-Whats-with-the-p39-Forums The link to the ubisoft forums I'm pointing to the post from horseback in particular who gave a lengthy excerpt from Wings of Fame Vol. 10 quoting a smaller portion of that here "Meanwhile, new models of the Airacobra were tested at NII VVS. In July 1943, engineer P.S. Opoprienko and test pilot V.Ye. Golofastov put P-39L-1 42-4666 through its paces. They reported that the aircraft was well equipped for bad-weather flying – it was fitted with the MN-26 DF set and had wing, tailplane, and propeller blade de-icing. The P-39L had other improvements too. Combat reports had led to changes in armour protection (armour plate was added to the cockpit and removed from unimportant areas) and the introduction of a stiffened nosewheel fork. The cockpit, oil tank, and armament bay were heated by air from the engine. The 1,150 hp (858 kW) Allison V-1710-35 (E4) powering early P-39 models was replaced by a V-1710-63 (E6) rated at 1,325 hp (988-kW) for take-off. As with most Airacobras delivered in 1943, the P-39L-1 had a 37-mm M-4 cannon firing through the propeller hub, two 12.7-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the nose and four 7.62-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the wings. Unlike earlier and later Cobra tests at NII VVS, the aircraft was filled with US 100-octane avgas and the performance in the take-off mode (i.e., at full military power with turbo pressure increased from 1,070 to 1,150 mm Hg) was also recorded. This boosted speed from 490 km/h (304mph) to 530 km/h (329 mph) at ground level and from 554 km/h (344 mph) to 591 km/h (366 mph) at 3000 m (9,840 ft). At the time, high octane fuel was nowhere to be found in front-line units, so pilots were advised against using full military power. In general, the test reports were deemed satisfactory; the report indicated that at low and medium altitude, the P-39L-1 was almost equal in performance to the current Bf 109G-2 and Fw 190A-4." So.. will we be without high octane fuel? Regardless, I think the first time I unleash that 37mm cannon on a bomber or fighter successfully it will be very very satisifying.
×
×
  • Create New...