BoBP: Knife fight in dark phone booth while driving Ferrari's.

[Alonzo]

On 10/15/2018 at 10:11 AM, Panp said:

In 2001 IL2 would render at 24 K with no problems and distance was able to be set by the server side , seems weird to me that in 2018 we can only see to 10 k bubble and no server adjustible settings on distance.

 

This would seem to be the easiest fix and negate all the arguments -- allow a server-adjustable distance, maybe within certain minimums and maximums, and let server admins tune it to their situation. Maybe a longer distance causes higher dserver load, but that would be up to the server admin to account for and tune.

[Gambit21]

5 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

Then why claim this

 

 

...if you know its not true? No, they're not rendered until you get within 9,5 km no matter how big your screen and resolution are. Thats the whole problem here, the game makes checks of whats in range and what isnt.

 

You can indeed pull back the camera as these calculations are always made from the selected object(usually player aircraft) but that doesnt really help when you're stuck in the cockpit does it?

 

I realize the current limitations, and pointed all of this out above. Again it’s more of an “interesting note” that the render engine CAN render at these distances, even though it currently doesn’t under all circumstances for all users.

 

More clear now?

[Alonzo]

15 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

If you know where to look you can see a 3 pixel (at 4K) Ju-52 being rendered at 20 km... 1 pixel 109 next to it.... forget it.

You can take a screen shot, blow it up in Photoshop and it's a bit easier. So the engine can render it,  but you won't spot it in a fight.

 

It seems like this is a test of the render engine, not necessarily a test of what dserver does for us in multiplayer. Or is this a test on a real server and what you're looking at in replay *is* indicative of dserver "in" vs "out" behavior? (I'm not meaning to be argumentative, am genuinely curious).

[Gambit21]

Just now, Alonzo_ said:

 

It seems like this is a test of the render engine, not necessarily a test of what dserver does for us in multiplayer. Or is this a test on a real server and what you're looking at in replay *is* indicative of dserver "in" vs "out" behavior? (I'm not meaning to be argumentative, am genuinely curious).

 

Offline only - I’m clueless about dserver.

[LeLv76_Erkki]

4 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I realize the current limitations, and pointed all of this out above. Again it’s more of an “interesting note” that the render engine CAN render at these distances, even though it currently doesn’t under all circumstances for all users.

 

More clear now?

 

Yeh, but we do know the engine can render further. Its working as intended, choice made by the devs who are worried about performance on lower end machines. I wish they would increase the range for at least ships and large buildings. And contrails!

[Gambit21]

Ships, wakes do pop severely on my end.

[69th_Panp]

On 10/17/2018 at 9:09 PM, Panp said:

I have never seen any thing rendered at 20 K in this sim,

all I have ever seen was a plane Popping in at 10 K like turning on a light bulb, I have reviewed so man tracks both online and off line tracks and always the same, not there 1 minute then it pops in at 10 k  

 

On 10/17/2018 at 9:22 PM, Gambit21 said:

I’m using a static camera operator. 

So it’s possible that the pilot ‘head’ camera has a different hard-wired setting.

 

 That’s one possible explanation which I haven’t tested.

 

More than likely however you just don’t have the resolution and or it’s a settings issue. The engine is capable of rendering at over 20km however. See above.

 

 

Again see “in/out” caveat.

I think my specs are pretty good 

Asus ROG 348Q 

3440 X 1440

100 hrtz 

32 gigs ram

4790K at 4 .00 water cooled 

4 X intel 730 SSD 

Evga 1080TI  SC hybred 11GB

416.16 drivers 

win 10 64 1809

And I've tried EVERY setting to do with spotting and seeing better in this sim since it was launched, so I'm not a noob here.

I've tried EVERY tweak posted on this forum and many other forum

I've been in flight sims since red baron days and one of my first post in this forum was on the limited viewing distance in comparison to IL2.

I've seen more tweaks by developer since launch,such as gamma/ sharpen 4 X textures to address visibility but none have fixed the 10K bubble online or offline.

This is the point CPT-SIDDY, myself and others are making, the 10K bubble just barely works now, but sure as crap wont work when 750kph aircraft enter the picture.

When you see hundreds of post on this issue from hundreds of people, there is an issue contrary to the one that says there isn't.

One sample with a different outcome out of hundreds is not a valid conclusion, no matter what the test is.

I'm pretty sure there is a issue with your testing methods.  

[Gambit21]

There is no issue with my testing method...read my posts carefully - I'm not going to keep repeating myself and quoting my own posts for clarification.

The ONE system spec of yours that even matters pretty much negates your post.

 

I've spent over a 1200  hours in the editor by now...I sort of know what I'm doing in that department.

The only thing I'm not sure of is the pop "in" distance, which for the moment I'm assuming is the same 10K until I test and determine one way or the other.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 2018 by Gambit21

[69th_Panp]

ok so lets set up a mission that all can duplicate 

quick mission 

select mission at sector 1016 

put 2 flights of JU 52 

4 in 1 and 4 in the other

start at 1000 m

select a yak 9 as your flight

and second flight 2 yak 7 

start on ground and take off heading north at 05 degrees.

have icon on 

ju will pop in at exactly 10 K and start to render at 9.5  while flying and will also pop in on mimi map at same 10 K range.

fly around them at around 9 to 10 k and you will see them come in and go out AT 10 K.

here is 1 part of the track, had to split it up to post it here 

I flew around a found 1 ju that I damaged and heading east and a yak and then went until I hit the distance at which they popped out and back in. 

I zoomed in and you can clearly see at 9.5 they quite rendering.

Dumbed the settings down 3440 x 1440 at 60

no antialiasing in game or in nvidia control panel, just so no one can say AA hid the planes.

run the trac until you hit around 4 minutes till the end.

it's all right there in popping clarity. 

record.2018-10-21_14-27-07_00.rar

. 

part 2

record.2018-10-21_14-27-07_00.rar

Edited October 21, 2018 by Panp
double post

[Gambit21]

FFS - again, read the thread.

If you're not at 4K, you're wasting time.

Not only that, what you're proposing isn't a properly set up test mission with precise markers etc.

I guess with 1200 hours plus in the editor building and testing missions I must not know what I'm doing by now.

 

I feel  like I'm talking to gnats sometimes around here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rolling_Thunder]

2 hours ago, Panp said:

 

And I've tried EVERY setting to do with spotting and seeing better in this sim since it was launched, so I'm not a noob here.

I've tried EVERY tweak posted on this forum and many other forum

I've been in flight sims since red baron days and one of my first post in this forum was on the limited viewing distance in comparison to IL2.

I've seen more tweaks by developer since launch,such as gamma/ sharpen 4 X textures to address visibility but none have fixed the 10K bubble online or offline.

This is the point CPT-SIDDY, myself and others are making, the 10K bubble just barely works now, but sure as crap wont work when 750kph aircraft enter the picture.

When you see hundreds of post on this issue from hundreds of people, there is an issue contrary to the one that says there isn't.

One sample with a different outcome out of hundreds is not a valid conclusion, no matter what the test is.

 

Well how about here then

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/12-suggestions/

"When you see hundreds of post on this issue from hundreds of people" Yet you think this thread will make a difference?

[Sunde]

19 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

FFS - again, read the thread.

If you're not at 4K, you're wasting time.

Not only that, what you're proposing isn't a properly set up test mission with precise markers etc.

I guess with 1200 hours plus in the editor building and testing missions I must not know what I'm doing by now.

 

I feel  like I'm talking to gnats sometimes around here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your obsession with 4k is hillarious.

The fact that people are having these issues at ALL resolutions dont matter to you?
Only "Muh 4k res is relevant"

Odd and useless, the majority of the community does not use 4k, only a VERY small portion in fact.

"read the thread" OP did not state 4k as the single most important factor. 

 

[Gambit21]

 

Exactly RT.

The Devs will make changes/improve when they can.

 

I get annoyed with people who either don't bother to fully read, or cant' comprehend what's already been written in a thread, (how many F'ing times do I need to repeat that YES, you have an  issue, NO, I'm not saying you don't but I'm getting different results at 4K after they pop in, and here's how) then with minimal knowledge and absolutely no testing on anything but their own rig, try and tell me I must be testing incorrectly because of what they witness on their dissimilar system, and I'm not really seeing what I think I'm seeing.

If I could box some ears over the web, I would.

 

"If I'm seeing X issue, then everyone MUST be seeing X issue regardless of their resolution or painstaking testing, because I have a great system therefore your testing is flawwed...blah blah blah"

 

Now, I see a post how I'm "obsessed" with 4K - someone else with reading comprehension issues.

It's the equipment I test on - the end. I post because it's a different set of empirical data, therefore may be of use.

Anyone with half a brain would find that useful/interesting rather than getting offended by it.

 

Like I said...gnats.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 2018 by Gambit21

[Sunde]

Are you serious!?!

"If you're not at 4K, you're wasting time."

Your words bud.

edit:
I dont wanna hijack the thread with personal bickering, seeing as you dont fly online anyway the enviorment in which we fly is wildly different. A lot of people find this issue to be VERY immersion breaking, i dont really care about your 4k monitor, im sure most of these guys dont. WE care about the fact that things are blipping into vision which really sucks. 
I'll state this again. 
"If you're not at 4K, you're wasting time."

 

Edited October 21, 2018 by Miller1

[Gambit21]

Are you?

I simply did a series of tests whereby I noted that the camera stayed on contact with the aircraft while pulling back to just over 20K.

Move to a different camera, then back, contact is lost until the aircraft once again reaches the minimal "pop in" distance...again calling that 10k until I can verify.

My results on my system....the end. I got the same results as you on my old monitor before switching to 4K...that I'm "obsessed" with now.

 

Never minimized anyone elses results or issues on their own system.

I have said that the pop-in distance for me isn't an issue, since they pop in at a single 4K pixel, which is distant and tiny, and that I'd do more tests to confirm some things.

If I do see a reason to post results however, I will keep it to the closed beta forum going forward, as this is like kindergarten around here.

 

10 minutes ago, Miller1 said:

Are you serious!?!

"If you're not at 4K, you're wasting time."

Your words bud.

 

If you're trying to duplicate my results/or post a test to refute my results,  and you're not at 4K...you're wasting your time.....bud.

...and that was the purpose of your test.

10 minutes ago, Miller1 said:

I dont wanna hijack the thread with personal bickering,

 

Good...I support you in that policy.

 

So....lets move on.

 

I realize that my results at 4K are not typical, and even then I see contacts get lost, as I pointed out when switching cameras.

So there's a condition where once acquired the aircraft is visible for a greater distance, but is still is not acquired as soon as it could be.

 

That said I'll say once again that vehicles (at low alt) as well are rendered at a much further distance that I see you guys reporting, and includes approaching them, not just moving away.

So to an extent, those extra pixels are helping. Downside is I'm limited to 60 FPS. So get something here, give it up here.

 

Edited October 21, 2018 by Gambit21

[69th_Panp]

 

Gambit

There's a term for people like you in Oklahoma that I wont use here, but they don't usually make it to puberty around here.   

Edited October 21, 2018 by Panp