DD today?

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

1 hour ago, CanadaOne said:

But it would still take a 1080, wouldn't it?

No, 1440p actually isn't that demanding. A 1070 would be more than enough. 

 

In fact, even a previous-gen card like the GTX 980 can comfortably handle 1440p and stay above 60 fps. 

 

I'd say that the minimum requirement for a nice 1440p result is a 970 or 1060 6GB. Anything above that is great.

[Oubaas]

The "facts" that you can "learn" on the Internet are astounding. Might I suggest that those of you so up-in-arms about the whole FPS discussion take some lessons in ophthalmology and neurology and quit believing the things that you "learn" from your respective countries' military propaganda machine, as well as the advertising copy promulgated by graphics card manufacturers? Although it will upset you as regards the amount that you spent on hardware, you'll understand the situation better the next time that you think about upgrading your PC.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

50 minutes ago, Oubaas said:

The "facts" that you can "learn" on the Internet are astounding. Might I suggest that those of you so up-in-arms about the whole FPS discussion take some lessons in ophthalmology and neurology and quit believing the things that you "learn" from your respective countries' military propaganda machine, as well as the advertising copy promulgated by graphics card manufacturers? Although it will upset you as regards the amount that you spent on hardware, you'll understand the situation better the next time that you think about upgrading your PC.

 

Your 'facts' are the most astounding. One does not need any lessons to know that 50 fps displayed on a 60 Hz monitor can look terrible. The naked eye is enough, no propaganda is necessary.

 

If you really are unable to see these effects yourself, I suggest that you take a look at https://www.blurbusters.com. Their tests of '60 fps vs 120 fps' and its relation to stutter, motion blur, and input lag may be eye-opening. 

Edited March 5, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[CanadaOne]

1 hour ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

No, 1440p actually isn't that demanding. A 1070 would be more than enough. 

 

In fact, even a previous-gen card like the GTX 980 can comfortably handle 1440p and stay above 60 fps. 

 

I'd say that the minimum requirement for a nice 1440p result is a 970 or 1060 6GB. Anything above that is great.

 

I tried my rig (i5-6500/8GB RAM/1060 3GB) on my TV at 1440 and 4K and got the same +/-20FPS with both, which I thought was a bit odd. I'll try it again. At 1080P I set the frame rate at 60 and it never moves, but I've had 100+ when I set it higher, even though my screen is 60Hz.

 

I can live without 4K, but 1440 would be nice. I'd like to get a better card this summer, but if the prices stay insane like they are now it's not going to happen. I'm lucky I got the card I have before the prices went insane. I paid about $265 last October and it's at $500 right now.

[CanadaOne]

1 hour ago, Oubaas said:

The "facts" that you can "learn" on the Internet are astounding. Might I suggest that those of you so up-in-arms about the whole FPS discussion take some lessons in ophthalmology and neurology and quit believing the things that you "learn" from your respective countries' military propaganda machine, as well as the advertising copy promulgated by graphics card manufacturers? Although it will upset you as regards the amount that you spent on hardware, you'll understand the situation better the next time that you think about upgrading your PC.

 

I studied neurology during my coffee break last year and came to the conclusion that BOX is awesome.

[ShamrockOneFive]

I did some tests on frame rates for the different detail settings not too long ago (trying to eliminate that pesky microstutter which becomes a macrostutter in multiplayer sometimes) and I was surprised at how good the game still looks even on the lowest detail settings. Not nearly as good but still quite good even when you take it all the way down.

 

I suspect for many who aren't in the business of making screenshots and videos at Ultra... going down to High would still provide for a very good experience even if the new patch requires more graphics horsepower.

 

I'd love to upgrade but those GPU prices are still frightening!

[w00dy]

12 hours ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

No, 1440p actually isn't that demanding. A 1070 would be more than enough. 

 

In fact, even a previous-gen card like the GTX 980 can comfortably handle 1440p and stay above 60 fps. 

 

I'd say that the minimum requirement for a nice 1440p result is a 970 or 1060 6GB. Anything above that is great.

 

I agree with this, with the experience I have had with my setup.

 

I have 1070 and a 1440p, 144Hz monitor and have everything set to ultra. It seems to be very smooth to me I average about 100fps.

[blitze]

20 minutes ago, w00dy said:

 

I agree with this, with the experience I have had with my setup.

 

I have 1070 and a 1440p, 144Hz monitor and have everything set to ultra. It seems to be very smooth to me I average about 100fps.

The main thing with 1440p is how much AA to use.  If a smaller monitor, sub 27" then 2x or even no AA (which you set from your graphics cards settings panel and have AA turned off in game). 

 

Online fps can vary wildly pending the server you fly on but on most, with my laptop 1070 and i7700HQ, I average 100 at 1440p.  That's with 4x AA via Nvidia control panel.  This running Ultra settings ingame but with SSOA and AA turned off and grass set to normal.  Mirrors and Shadows to Medium.

 

Offline, even with hub on, I hold around 120+ fps on PWCG with heavy ground war and mid level air war.  Just had to bump the smoke volumes down to 40% which I think is more than enough for the effect.  100% feels like you are flying into a black wall.  It's not like they are burning mountains of tires down there right?? ))

 

It will be interesting to see how this setup deals with VR when the time comes.  Would hope for 1440p to the HMD but if to slow, I will settle for 1080p.  Both will be up scaled to 4k per eye by the HMD and I'm hoping Pimax get Brainwarp working well.

[w00dy]

17 minutes ago, blitze said:

The main thing with 1440p is how much AA to use.  If a smaller monitor, sub 27" then 2x or even no AA (which you set from your graphics cards settings panel and have AA turned off in game). 

 

Online fps can vary wildly pending the server you fly on but on most, with my laptop 1070 and i7700HQ, I average 100 at 1440p.  That's with 4x AA via Nvidia control panel.  This running Ultra settings ingame but with SSOA and AA turned off and grass set to normal.  Mirrors and Shadows to Medium.

 

Offline, even with hub on, I hold around 120+ fps on PWCG with heavy ground war and mid level air war.  Just had to bump the smoke volumes down to 40% which I think is more than enough for the effect.  100% feels like you are flying into a black wall.  It's not like they are burning mountains of tires down there right?? ))

 

It will be interesting to see how this setup deals with VR when the time comes.  Would hope for 1440p to the HMD but if to slow, I will settle for 1080p.  Both will be up scaled to 4k per eye by the HMD and I'm hoping Pimax get Brainwarp working well.

 

I have to admint I have no idea how much AA I use with out checking my setting, but I do know I have grass and mirrors all set to the maximun setting. Also only play single player so have no idea about how it would play in MM.

 

I do have a youtube clip showing game play on my system with the fps displayed, If you want to see it?

Edited March 6, 2018 by w00dy

[blitze]

9 minutes ago, w00dy said:

 

I have to admint I have no idea how much AA I use with out checking my setting, but I do know I have grass and mirrors all set to the maximun setting. Also only play single player so have no idea about how it would play in MM.

 

I do have a youtube clip showing game play on my system with the fps displayed, If you want to see it?

 

 

Nah, I'm good.  Think this games runs well at least in Single Play given what it gives us.  It will be interesting to see how the greater view distance gives us and at what cost compared to current. 

 

Dserver for multiplay could do with some love as it seems quite crash happy and server play consistency is varied.  It is nice though online to see people at your airfield and teaming up together for objectives.  Comms though are a problem even though there is Team Speak, it is like a Tower of Babel situation on Team Speak and hard for sides to easily co-ordinate (different language channels and also then separate squad channels all on a single side with lucky to have 6 or 8 people using it).

 

Chat, helps but in a fight it is hard to warn people or have some direction with Chat )).

Edited March 6, 2018 by blitze
error

[Ribbon]

14 hours ago, Oubaas said:

The "facts" that you can "learn" on the Internet are astounding. Might I suggest that those of you so up-in-arms about the whole FPS discussion take some lessons in ophthalmology and neurology and quit believing the things that you "learn" from your respective countries' military propaganda machine, as well as the advertising copy promulgated by graphics card manufacturers? Although it will upset you as regards the amount that you spent on hardware, you'll understand the situation better the next time that you think about upgrading your PC.

You might want to google than difference between movie tech and gaming tech, motion blur and such.

Or at least try out your claims to see they are far from truth.

27fps and 60+ fps are huge difference, not to mention in VR.

Ypu can try setting your cpu integrated graphics as primary, it will dip ypu fps to 25 and compare it to 40,60+fps.

Just try it and you'll see how wrong are you.

[Wedgewood]

15 hours ago, Oubaas said:

The "facts" that you can "learn" on the Internet are astounding. Might I suggest that those of you so up-in-arms about the whole FPS discussion take some lessons in ophthalmology and neurology and quit believing the things that you "learn" from your respective countries' military propaganda machine, as well as the advertising copy promulgated by graphics card manufacturers? Although it will upset you as regards the amount that you spent on hardware, you'll understand the situation better the next time that you think about upgrading your PC.

This is incorrect, and insulting I might add.  We upgrade our systems due to a need that we have, a need for more frames and better performance to better enjoy our gaming experience.  We can see ourselves the difference between high and low framerates and make our purchasing decisions for PC gaming hardware based on this.  What makes you think military propaganda machines tricked us?  Maybe you should lay off of the neuroscience and start learning some common sense.

[1./KG4_OldJames]

Sorry to go off topic, but: dd today, or not?

[Uufflakke]

9 minutes ago, 1./KG4_OldJames said:

Sorry to go off topic, but: dd today, or not?

 

How dare you to go off topic indeed.

 

                     

[Finkeren]

Why today?

 

I'm looking at Friday for the next DD, which I hope will look a bit beyond 3.001, of which we've pretty much seen everything at this point, and maybe show us progress on the Po-2 or some of the early work on the P-47?

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

I cannot agree more ...

[Herne]

2 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

Why today?

 

I'm looking at Friday for the next DD, which I hope will look a bit beyond 3.001, of which we've pretty much seen everything at this point, and maybe show us progress on the Po-2 or some of the early work on the P-47?

 

Didn't they say that either the spit IX or ME 109 G14 would probably be among the first out the door, because they would be easier to model based on the assets we already have ?

 

I agree it would be cool though. That Po-2 will almost be like a teaser for flying circus. Bi Planes + VR is going to be a lot of fun.

[Voidhunger]

Work on g14 and spit has already started and tempest or p47

[Feathered_IV]

3 hours ago, Finkeren said:

Why today?

 

I'm looking at Friday for the next DD, which I hope will look a bit beyond 3.001, of which we've pretty much seen everything at this point, and maybe show us progress on the Po-2 or some of the early work on the P-47?

 

News on other BoK original features like Mods-on mode and Air Marshall would be good.  We haven't heard anything about those.

[CanadaOne]

News on the  Hurricane?

[Missionbug]

8 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

News on the  Hurricane?

 

 

And I.A.R 80/81.          I know, dream on.

Edited March 7, 2018 by Missionbug

[Jade_Monkey]

I wanted to ask about the Odessa map in the last QA with Jason, and it only occurred to me as he started wrapping things up

 

I would love to hear if that's still alive. Both the English and Russian threads have gone pretty quiet.

 

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

News on other BoK original features like Mods-on mode and Air Marshall would be good.  We haven't heard anything about those.

Funny you mention air Marshall, I recently converted a friend to the il2 series, they very much like the feel of flight in the sim.  So, we were taxiing in our pair of stukas to the runway, and as he’s managing not to ground loop and keeping view focused, I was noticing a bf110 full throttle taking off from spawn.  “STOP STOP STOP!!!!!” Was the next thing out of my mouth.  He then stopped and in a panic responded “What?! What did I do??”

only to then see the 110 wing tip barely miss his spinner..

then he mentioned, “isn’t there a controller or something here so people don’t do that???”

 

........,can’t wait for air/ground Marshall, and please people, use taxiways...

[=SqSq=switch201]

Hmm yeah. having air traffic control would be pretty cool indeed, but what power would they have to make people listen to them. and if they do get power, how do you stop people from abusing it. 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

ATC will only really work in sims where it is a big part of the overall experience like fsx. ..

[1_Robert_]

4 hours ago, spartan85 said:

Snip

........,can’t wait for air/ground Marshall, and please people, use taxiways...

 

I respect your opinion and that you are Canadian but personally I feel that of all the things the devs should prioritize, this would have to be close to last. After hundreds of hours of online play I've only ran into one other plane while taxiing and that's when I was first starting out. 

I'm not into playing "airport" where I slowly taxi all around the field with my nav lights on and get lined up perfectly with a runway. I am one of those guys ripping across the field in a mad dash to find the next furball. 

For me, everything before and after the actual dogfight is filler and dead spot. When I start up my engine, I can't get to the next enemy soon enough and I'm sure not playing "taxi" and "AC controller". 

This is just meant to be another perspective and I'm sure if will anger some. But for those folk, all I can say is that I'm never running into anyone and if done properly, both the slow taxier and mad dasher can coexist if done carefully. 

[SJ_Butcher]

25 minutes ago, 19//Rekt said:

 

If only there was a server where we could start in the air and go straight into a dogfight...

 

like the old skies of valor 

[RoteDreizehn]

24 minutes ago, 1_Robert_ said:

 

I respect your opinion and that you are Canadian but personally I feel that of all the things the devs should prioritize, this would have to be close to last. After hundreds of hours of online play I've only ran into one other plane while taxiing and that's when I was first starting out. 

I'm not into playing "airport" where I slowly taxi all around the field with my nav lights on and get lined up perfectly with a runway. I am one of those guys ripping across the field in a mad dash to find the next furball. 

For me, everything before and after the actual dogfight is filler and dead spot. When I start up my engine, I can't get to the next enemy soon enough and I'm sure not playing "taxi" and "AC controller". 

This is just meant to be another perspective and I'm sure if will anger some. But for those folk, all I can say is that I'm never running into anyone and if done properly, both the slow taxier and mad dasher can coexist if done carefully. 

 

>> For me, everything before and after the actual dogfight is filler and dead spot. When I start up my engine, I can't get to the next enemy soon enough and I'm sure not playing "taxi" and "AC >> controller". 

 

In this case  you should really switch to warthunder. Several times I had Collisions with people who are acting like this. This should end in a ban on the Mulitplayer Server for a day.

In real life you did a misconduct  and can dismissed.

 

Hope you wont drive a car without traffic rules. Dont want to insult you.

 

 

 

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

5 hours ago, spartan85 said:

 and please people, use taxiways...

I try to, but they are almost impossible to find when on the ground.

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

While in the cockpit before taking off, we should have a map of the airfield with the location of our plane 

[NN_RugbyGoth]

1 minute ago, PA_Spartan- said:

While in the cockpit before taking off, we should have a map of the airfield with the location of our plane 

In fact if you zoom enough on the map you will have the location of the spawn AND the layout of the airfield...

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

 

1 minute ago, 19//Rekt said:

 

I would love to have outside view available whenever the engine is turned off, or something like that. seems like it would not be that hard to program.

After all the pilots had ground crew to guide them to the runway. A P-47 pilot said the crew chief would ride on the wing to direct the pilot to the runway.

 

3 minutes ago, NN_RugbyGoth said:

In fact if you zoom enough on the map you will have the location of the spawn AND the layout of the airfield...

Rarely does it line up correctly, it is only useful if your plane icon is on the map, and even then you can't zoom in far enough, the plane icon almost covers the airfield. I am starting to learn the layout of certain airfields but when it is difficult to find the runway and "everyone" is just taking off from where they are you are more likely to get into a collision trying to find the runway. If ti was easier to find the runway more people would use it (maybe).

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

30 minutes ago, 19//Rekt said:

 

I would love to have outside view available whenever the engine is turned off, or something like that. seems like it would not be that hard to program.

In IL-2 1946 the full real servers Aces over Europe and Aces over Pacific allowed 3rd person view when the plane was in the ground, very handy to taxi.

[Trooper117]

In CloD they have a publication that shows all airfield layouts and relevant details.

I think someone did something similar here as well, but whether it is up to date or not I'm not sure...

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

 

39 minutes ago, 19//Rekt said:

 

I would love to have outside view available whenever the engine is turned off, or something like that. seems like it would not be that hard to program.

Would like this.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Could not some really good mission builder script that functionality into a mission?

[1_Robert_]

2 hours ago, RoteDreizehn said:

 

>> For me, everything before and after the actual dogfight is filler and dead spot. When I start up my engine, I can't get to the next enemy soon enough and I'm sure not playing "taxi" and "AC >> controller". 

 

In this case  you should really switch to warthunder. Several times I had Collisions with people who are acting like this. This should end in a ban on the Mulitplayer Server for a day.

In real life you did a misconduct  and can dismissed.

 

Hope you wont drive a car without traffic rules. Dont want to insult you.

 

 

 

 

I appreciate your opinion but as I said, after hundreds of hours online, I've only run into one plane on the ground. I'm hardly a liability around any field. I presented my perspective in a respectful manner and was being honest so I'm not sure I understand your response..

 

As for the Warthunder comment, I suppose I could offer you the same suggestion like why don't you switch to FSX or an Air Traffic controller sim? I would have made that suggestion but it wouldn't be respectful and I know that this great game can accommodate us both

 

All the best to you

[FuriousMeow]

For a while some mission builders for servers were setting up boundaries and indicators to taxi to the runway. Worked very well, but seems they stopped because they found their efforts were futile since so many still just take off straight from their spawn not caring about runways or other planes.

 

Some fence objects would be nice, although unrealistic, would prevent the dingleberries taking off straight across whatever direction they want regardless of runway.

Edited March 7, 2018 by FuriousMeow

[Feathered_IV]

Having an Air Marshall able to click on a player who is abusing the ground rules and making them despawn/respawn would be good.  And rather hilarious too.  

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

4 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

Having an Air Marshall able to click on a player who is abusing the ground rules and making them despawn/respawn would be good.  And rather hilarious too.  

Well instead of despawn they could “chock block” them.  Lol.  Forcing them to hold.

 

7 hours ago, 1_Robert_ said:

 

I respect your opinion and that you are Canadian but personally I feel that of all the things the devs should prioritize, this would have to be close to last. After hundreds of hours of online play I've only ran into one other plane while taxiing and that's when I was first starting out. 

I'm not into playing "airport" where I slowly taxi all around the field with my nav lights on and get lined up perfectly with a runway. I am one of those guys ripping across the field in a mad dash to find the next furball. 

For me, everything before and after the actual dogfight is filler and dead spot. When I start up my engine, I can't get to the next enemy soon enough and I'm sure not playing "taxi" and "AC controller". 

This is just meant to be another perspective and I'm sure if will anger some. But for those folk, all I can say is that I'm never running into anyone and if done properly, both the slow taxier and mad dasher can coexist if done carefully. 

Na I get it, my buddy and I just like to keep things close to real as possible in a sim world.  But it’s just frustrating when you are about to line up after wrestling with your rudder and brakes only to be blindsided and having to respawn... 

 

i like the “temp 3rd person” option like in old il2, for those who have a hard time finding taxiways and those who wish to speed things up a bit... 

 

it it all comes down to server rules of course... if there is no taxi restrictions then no worries, but if says to use the taxiways then be respectful of those who are.. especially for the big birds that take a few minutes to start up like the ju52, geez.....

 

i wouldn’t say go play another game if you don’t like the rules of the map, I’d rather keep as many players in our sim as possible, instead, I’d like to figure a compromise so we can all get along!

 

?