Game version 4.007 discussion: Ju 87 D-3 in 4K, new options and camera controls, control rods DM and ect.

[Yogiflight]

5 hours ago, WheelwrightPL said:

I think damage modelling can be awesome in this sim: below is the screenshot of my plane after I had been shot-up in an ambush and forced to land.

I only managed to keep the plane controllable by the skin of my teeth, due to major part of the left-wing blown-off, including aileron and half of its flaps.

The aileron on the right wing is not operable either so I had no roll control.

And all this was beautifully reflected in the cockpit as well because my stick got stuck in the right position and I couldn't move it sideways anymore, so the attention to detail is definitely there and much appreciated.

 

Yes you got your Spitfire really shot to pieces, it almost looks like a 109

[=420=Grumio]

I have zoom in/out bound to a hat on my joystick and ever since the patch I'm finding my zoom in and out is very slow- 3-4 seconds when previously it was fairly fast.

 

My understanding is that none of the old binds/settings were changing, just that new 'snap' options were added. Why might it be so slow to zoom now? I've tried changing all my view speed settings and it hasn't made a difference.

 

Anyone else had the same issue? I don't want to use snap zoom, I want to be able to zoom in or out as much as I need without it taking multiple seconds.

[Atomic_Spaniel]

1 hour ago, [LAME]Grumio said:

I have zoom in/out bound to a hat on my joystick and ever since the patch I'm finding my zoom in and out is very slow- 3-4 seconds when previously it was fairly fast.

 

My understanding is that none of the old binds/settings were changing, just that new 'snap' options were added. Why might it be so slow to zoom now? I've tried changing all my view speed settings and it hasn't made a difference.

 

Anyone else had the same issue? I don't want to use snap zoom, I want to be able to zoom in or out as much as I need without it taking multiple seconds.

 

I have zoom on a hat switch and it still works as before. I'm not at my PC now, but will post up my settings later today for you. 

[Tuninfogliato]

I had the view scroll inside the free cockpit controlled by the hatc above the joystik, after the introduction of the
when patched, the movement is sudden or all the way to the right or all the way to the left or all the way back. to have a clear view I have to use the mouse.

[Eclipse4349]

15 hours ago, Tuninfogliato said:

I had the view scroll inside the free cockpit controlled by the hatc above the joystik, after the introduction of the
when patched, the movement is sudden or all the way to the right or all the way to the left or all the way back. to have a clear view I have to use the mouse.

Check Camera settings and your keybinds. There are two types of view controls - "snap" and "pan". It sounds like you were using pan, but they have changed to snap. 

[JG1_Vonrd]

On 6/18/2020 at 9:46 AM, JG1_Vonrd said:

Those are zips of the track folder which includes TC file,CHS, MSNBIN and all the language files. 

I'm not trying to be difficult and I'm really wanting to help resolving this issue.

It won't allow me to attach the TRK files since they exceed the 5MB limit.

Here's a link to Dropbox with the TRK files.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/m76ts13nlklmyzw/AACxCLMChSEoDX_cgGquVNuza?dl=0

 

Does that work?

How would I do that? I'm not very well versed in the track viewer.

@Jason_Williams Were the tracks acceptable?

Edited June 20, 2020 by JG1_Vonrd

[JG1_Vonrd]

OK, I did some further testing...

I set up a quick mission, 109K vs B25. Set the maximum allowable start separation of 10 km. Labels and GPS on.

The first one was the Arras map and I was getting the same results as before. Even though the in-game label noted 10 km between us, Tacview only showed 4 km.

 

I tried the same scenario on the Stalingrad map and much to my surprise, the Tacview distance matched the in-game label of 10 km! I closed to 1 km and fired at exactly that distance and Tacview confirmed it at 1000 meters.

 

We have just recently started using Tacview as a debriefing tool and this is how we noticed the distance disparity.

 

I'm thinking that Tacview is erroneously recording the distance on the smaller maps. I will check it on Lapino to see if my theory is correct.

 

If you want, I can link the tracks and acmi files but I doubt that you will be able to do much about it. 

 

1st pic is Arras, 2nd is Stalingrad when I started firing at 1 km and the 3rd is the Stalingrad initial distance at 10 km.

 

"I'm thinking that Tacview is erroneously recording the distance on the smaller maps. I will check it on Lapino to see if my theory is correct."

 

Nope... distances are correct on Lapino. It may just be the Arras map.

Edited June 20, 2020 by JG1_Vonrd

[HunDread]

Quote

10. German fighter pilots of the Battle of Moscow, Battle of Stalingrad and Battle of Kuban have a new visual model and a sidearm during Summer (new Winter model, also with a sidearm, will be added later when it is ready). Because of this, the default camera position and user-customizable snapviews (.svc files) were changed on Bf 109-G14, Bf 109-K4, Me 262-A, Fw 190-A3, Fw 190-53, Fw 190-A8 and Fw 190-D9. The updater should overwrite the old files for these planes with the new updated ones for you, but in case this action was blocked by antivirus software on your PC and you see a wrong view in the cockpit of these aircraft in the game, please copy the new default .svc files for these aircraft from \data\LuaScripts\snapviews\defaults to \data\LuaScripts\snapviews manually. If you haven't customized the view positions on other aircraft, you can just copy all the files from  snapviews\defaults to snapviews folder;

 

I have modified snapviews for most of these planes. Is it OK to copy over the snapviews for the affected planes from my old backup? 

 

I tried and it works, I just don't know if I am missing any of the new stuff this way.

 

[jollyjack]

On 6/18/2020 at 9:21 PM, RedKestrel said:

For me it seems after loading the game after a patch it takes a bit longer than normal. Then afterward it loads faster. Always makes me think the patch broke something lol.

 

I now noticed that too ...

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, HunDread said:

 

I have modified snapviews for most of these planes. Is it OK to copy over the snapviews for the affected planes from my old backup? 

 

I tried and it works, I just don't know if I am missing any of the new stuff this way.

 

 

Yes, you should be alright. 

[315_R2r]

I know this is old subject, but there are still invisible trees in the forest - happen today on Finish front not only for me but form others as well, as the location force us to go trough the forest more often then usually...

I hit invisible trees my self 5 times - please try to fix that.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

On 6/21/2020 at 3:33 PM, 315_R2r said:

I know this is old subject, but there are still invisible trees in the forest - happen today on Finish front not only for me but form others as well, as the location force us to go trough the forest more often then usually...

I hit invisible trees my self 5 times - please try to fix that.

Would help with screen shot of map and location. Just telling us doesn’t help us. 

[LLv34_Temuri]

3 hours ago, 71st_AH_Mastiff said:

Would help with screen shot of map and location. Just telling us doesn’t help us. 

Also mission file would help to check if there is something that is blocking you, e.g. a fake_block that we have to use to get some information across to the campaign app.

[[OB]ibastavd]

Hi all,
I have this weird "twin FPS" issue, when I press backspace it shows two FPS counters (see screenshot)
Anyone know why or how to get it back to just one?

 

t's doing my OCD in ?

Thanks in advance!

Mac

[Raven109]

Top one is the FPS counter, bottom one is the Field of View indicator.

Edited June 24, 2020 by Raven109

[KoN_]

On 6/18/2020 at 8:27 AM, airsheep_VR said:

Agreed. 

I just not enjoy this game since the last update. 

In 9 out of 10 cases 'Im dead and watching from outside  my plane rolling to the ground with burning engine. I can't hear a shot, a gunfire, do not see tracers, no damage, simply I got a headshot and I am dead. I can't even notice where is  the plane who shot me.  It is very frustrating. I get pk even when I attack bombers, no gunner shots, no traces, bang, I am dead from hundreds of meters without an injury or damage or warning.

It kills gameplay and with the vr handicap of the last update (zoom, identify planes and vr performance drop) I am very disappointed now. 

I know it is a hard work to create a game like this and the devs make great efforts to fix all bugs, and there is always people who complain ....but I feel I do not want to play in vr because it is pointless now.

 

 

Please post your settings in game , you should be able too see tracers rounds they are so bright it attracts all the flys . 

some thing dont sound right with your settings .

On 6/19/2020 at 5:15 AM, [LAME]Grumio said:

I have zoom in/out bound to a hat on my joystick and ever since the patch I'm finding my zoom in and out is very slow- 3-4 seconds when previously it was fairly fast.

 

My understanding is that none of the old binds/settings were changing, just that new 'snap' options were added. Why might it be so slow to zoom now? I've tried changing all my view speed settings and it hasn't made a difference.

 

Anyone else had the same issue? I don't want to use snap zoom, I want to be able to zoom in or out as much as I need without it taking multiple seconds.

FOV speed in camera options .

play around in camera options . two are set too 47% some thing move to 80%

Who has good spotting in game because i cant see shit anymore . 

What are your settings . !!! 

[RedeyeStorm]

For spotting I always found blurred landscape with sharpen on, the best. The planes have more contrast that way. The price you pay is some shimmering.

 

The rest depends on your rig and mine is on the bottom of the middle these days. I am flying in VR.

Edited June 27, 2020 by [Pb]RedeyeStorm

[PreyStalker]

I got a small improvement in spotting from slightly reducing my FOV. I used to fly with the view fully zoomed out for SA, and then zoom in as necessary to ID and attack.

 

Fully zoomed out is 105 on the new counter and just by making a small change and zooming in to 100, I noticed small distant contacts had a little bit more pop on the screen. I also moved my head position back a tiny bit to compensate for the reduced FOV.

 

I've also gone back to in game MSAA at 4x. I find it's better than FXAA for spotting distant contacts. It misses a lot of edges and some of the jaggies look crap, but it's a trade off for better visibility.

 

It's a shame because I think IL2 BOX used to be visually quite stunning and the visibility was acceptable before the switch to deferred shading. Somebody somewhere obviously thinks it's a good move, but personally, I preferred the old visuals. 

 

On some maps, in certain lighting conditions, the server is full, but you feel like you're the only one flying unless you head directly to a main target or enemy airfield. Then you meet everyone else who are doing the same thing !

 

I'm a "flat screener" @ 1080p 43'TV

[THERION]

37 minutes ago, PreyStalker said:

visibility was acceptable before the switch to deferred shading

 

I don't think it has much to do with the new tech. The spotting issue is much older and if I remember correctly it all started with the discussion whereas the

famous 9 km bubble is realistic or not. There were many honks complaining about this bubble and stated this was completely unrealistic etc.

 

Before the dev team touched this 9 km bubble, spotting was not an issue or at least not that much of an issue as it is today. In German language there is

a saying: "Too many cooks will spoil the porridge". And that's exactly what happened here with the spotting, if you ask me.

[Madov]

The English language equivalent is almost identical, except that we prefer 'broth'.

 

 

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, -=-THERION said:

 

I don't think it has much to do with the new tech. The spotting issue is much older and if I remember correctly it all started with the discussion whereas the

famous 9 km bubble is realistic or not. There were many honks complaining about this bubble and stated this was completely unrealistic etc.

 

Before the dev team touched this 9 km bubble, spotting was not an issue or at least not that much of an issue as it is today. In German language there is

a saying: "Too many cooks will spoil the porridge". And that's exactly what happened here with the spotting, if you ask me.

Well insted just keep visbility like that and extend bubble to 15km for example, they decided they wont to reinvent the wheel and make visability more realistic, so now we have mess of it more wors then before, so it seams its better they dont tuch visability any more as they can only make it even wors then its now i dont belive they understand what players playing video games need of visability in video games played on screens.

Edited June 27, 2020 by CountZero

[Talisman]

I fear that the visibility issues have the potential to put folks off of flying and purchasing combat flight simulators and fewer and fewer folks will support combat flight simulation into the future.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[PreyStalker]

2 hours ago, CountZero said:

Well insted just keep visbility like that and extend bubble to 15km for example, they decided they wont to reinvent the wheel and make visability more realistic, so now we have mess of it more wors then before, so it seams its better they dont tuch visability any more as they can only make it even wors then its now i dont belive they understand what players playing video games need of visability in video games played on screens.

 

Say what you will about IL2 Cliffs of Dover, but one thing it does very well is spotting. It's simple, but effective and it works well in a multiplayer CFS.

 

At about 15k - 13k distance you begin to see a very faint grey/black pixel or dot - Quite hard to see, as it should be. 15k is fine too, no need for more than that.

 

From about 12k and closer you see a distinct black pixel or dot that gradually becomes slightly bigger as it approaches. - Quite easy to track in the sky or on the ground once you spot it, but not too obvious !

 

Colours and shapes only really come into it when the contact is fairly close and you need ID. - That's where they are needed, not at 10k.

 

I'd love to see a similar approach in IL2 GB to finally put the spotting and visibility debate to bed. With today's hardware, how difficult can it be to render a simple black pixel or dot at about 15k ?

 

Come on Devs, sort it out ! Everyone's tired of this old chestnut.

 

But thanks for trying !

?

[ShamrockOneFive]

3 hours ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

I fear that the visibility issues have the potential to put folks off of flying and purchasing combat flight simulators and fewer and fewer folks will support combat flight simulation into the future.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

 

Steam player number charts don't show a negative average downward trend (except if you factor in the brief burst that Sturmovikfest had).

 

Visibility remains an ongoing issue but let's not blow it out of proportion.

[LuftManu]

Actually, I think the visibility thing has improved a lot, and many people has seen that. Not only my opinion. 

 

There is also this placebo effect where you had a bad day with the new patch, and you instantly claim that there is worse visibility on that patch. Of course there is also the option of that dot thing, which is just an icon without letters that dissapears, but I think tech nowadays can do better.

Edited June 27, 2020 by LF_Gallahad

[airsheep_VR]

2 hours ago, PreyStalker said:

 

Say what you will about IL2 Cliffs of Dover, but one thing it does very well is spotting. It's simple, but effective and it works well in a multiplayer CFS.

 

At about 15k - 13k distance you begin to see a very faint grey/black pixel or dot - Quite hard to see, as it should be. 15k is fine too, no need for more than that.

 

From about 12k and closer you see a distinct black pixel or dot that gradually becomes slightly bigger as it approaches. - Quite easy to track in the sky or on the ground once you spot it, but not too obvious !

 

Colours and shapes only really come into it when the contact is fairly close and you need ID. - That's where they are needed, not at 10k.

 

I'd love to see a similar approach in IL2 GB to finally put the spotting and visibility debate to bed. With today's hardware, how difficult can it be to render a simple black pixel or dot at about 15k ?

 

Come on Devs, sort it out ! Everyone's tired of this old chestnut.

 

But thanks for trying !

?

Good point, but Im not sure vr pilots can spot a tiny pixel from that distance as easily as 2d users can. 

[Talon_]

16 hours ago, PreyStalker said:

Come on Devs, sort it out ! Everyone's tired of this old chestnut.

 

Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm perfectly able to spot out to 9km in my Rift S, and that's plenty of time to change position or escape.

[PreyStalker]

3 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

Personally I don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm perfectly able to spot out to 9km in my Rift S, and that's plenty of time to change position or escape.

 

@Talon_ If you're happy in your 9k bubble then good luck to you and I hope you make the correct "Fight or Flight" decision because they are the only 2 options you have. That's a very reactive way to fly.

 

Some people like to conduct air patrols and fighter sweeps or try to suppress airfields, among other things. Activities like these require good spotting at distance which allows you to track targets and actually plan an attack or a course change instead of being forced into it at the last second. 

 

The best thing about good spotting is that mission maps really come alive and become more dynamic. You actually feel like there's an air war happening around you and you see pockets of action happening across the map, not just a big scuffle at one or two locations.

 

I appreciate spotting isn't everyone's priority and they don't understand what the fuss is about. It depends on how you like to fly and what effect the visual changes in 4.006 and 4.007 have had, but I still think improved spotting would benefit the sim as a whole and really bring the mission maps to life. Just my opinion...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[=GW=501Railgun]

On 6/10/2020 at 2:49 AM, Jason_Williams said:

 

This is a Pimax issue. Use PP.

 

Jason

Hi Jason

I have consulted a lot of information these days. PIMAX, STARVR and XTAL can't focus after zooming in. Because these VRs have 2 screens and the screens have angles, they need the support of the game engine to solve this problem.

 

The beta version of Alyx was also out of focus at the beginning, and later the official version reverted because of the addition of the 2 camera system

 

If it is difficult to develop, you can fix this problem in the future, but can you now add a custom camera function to let players manually focus.

Although you can now use "[MOD] VREM: VR" to solve this problem, it will cause many servers to be unable to enter, such as: WOL
 

Thank you

[Ribbon]

Since new rendering tech and it's hotfixes i've got very very blurry terrain squares when on hight alt, in some directions terrain renders normal at far distances while in other at very close ranges (few km) i've got that spiky edges of very very blurred terrain squares.

With further playing with settings i noticed it's up to "landscape distance detail" option, mine is set up to x2 when i got that blurry squares, when setting it up to x4 problem dissapears but that comes at performance cost.

I guess that extremley blurred terrain should be around plane on equal distances in ever dorection instead blurry square on 10 o'clock at 2-5km while at 2'oclock everything is rendering fine at huge distances.

I7 6700k 4.6ghz, rtx2070super, 32gb ram 3200mhz, rift s.

Edited June 29, 2020 by =VARP=Ribbon

[Patricks]

Any way we can split this into VR for those users and 2D for users of standard screens? It's becoming quite confusing and unnecessarily tedious  (to me at least) reading about issues and then finding out they are VR only issues, which I (and i'm sure many others) could care less about until they make a headset that is at least as good as a 4K monitor. Just a thought..

[Jade_Monkey]

5 hours ago, Icer said:

Any way we can split this into VR for those users and 2D for users of standard screens? It's becoming quite confusing and unnecessarily tedious  (to me at least) reading about issues and then finding out they are VR only issues, which I (and i'm sure many others) could care less about until they make a headset that is at least as good as a 4K monitor. Just a thought..

 

Are you referring to the Game update notes, or the discussion in this thread? Nobody is forcing you to read the latter.

[unreasonable]

1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

Are you referring to the Game update notes, or the discussion in this thread? Nobody is forcing you to read the latter.

 

I want to read the discussion about the update, but currently to do that I have to sort through dozens of posts complaining about technical issues with VR before I can find anything else.  It is as though every discussion thread was largely taken over by people discussing the technical details of skin making, for instance.  It is a valid subject, but here it is crowding out everything else.

 

This could be solved by having separate VR discussion threads, or my preferred option, adding a function to the posting software that makes posts about VR only readable by people wearing a VR helmet.    

Edited June 30, 2020 by unreasonable

[RedKestrel]

13 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

I want to read the discussion about the update, but currently to do that I have to sort through dozens of posts complaining about technical issues with VR before I can find anything else.  It is as though every discussion thread was largely taken over by people discussing the technical details of skin making, for instance.  It is a valid subject, but here it is crowding out everything else.

 

This could be solved by having separate VR discussion threads, or my preferred option, adding a function to the posting software that makes posts about VR only readable by people wearing a VR helmet.    

It really is a problem. Posting technical issues in an update thread weeks after the update went live is not going to get much attention from the devs. If only there was a subforum of some kind where people could post Technical Issues and Bug Reports!

[inexus]

3 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

It really is a problem. Posting technical issues in an update thread weeks after the update went live is not going to get much attention from the devs. If only there was a subforum of some kind where people could post Technical Issues and Bug Reports!

 

Why not post technical issues here when they are assumed to be related to the patches?

 

I keep writing about TC issues here in the hope that one day we might get a response. I've used the TC sub forum here (as has many other community members), I tried the Russian patch thread and after asking to move AI talk to another sub thread I wrote over there and stil never any response to whether AI in TC will be looked at any further. 

 

So yeah... still hoping  

 

[HansBlitz]

On 6/27/2020 at 1:19 PM, airsheep_VR said:

Good point, but Im not sure vr pilots can spot a tiny pixel from that distance as easily as 2d users can. 

I use a Rift CV1 for 3 years and much of the time have called out contacts the rest of my flight on comms can't see and those were not always the same friends but all were using a monitor. Not played much lately but the little I have, I've still been spotting contacts as well as usual.

[RedKestrel]

1 hour ago, inexus said:

 

Why not post technical issues here when they are assumed to be related to the patches?

 

I keep writing about TC issues here in the hope that one day we might get a response. I've used the TC sub forum here (as has many other community members), I tried the Russian patch thread and after asking to move AI talk to another sub thread I wrote over there and stil never any response to whether AI in TC will be looked at any further. 

 

So yeah... still hoping  

 

If it’s more than a few days after a hot fix it’s much better to have it in the tech issues forum even if it is from the patch. Rapidus the QA guy is on their regularly. And I trawl through regularly trying to help people with simple stuff. If you have a specific issue a thread of its own is going to get more attention than getting buried in this thread.

[inexus]

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

If it’s more than a few days after a hot fix it’s much better to have it in the tech issues forum even if it is from the patch. Rapidus the QA guy is on their regularly. And I trawl through regularly trying to help people with simple stuff. If you have a specific issue a thread of its own is going to get more attention than getting buried in this thread.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately I've yet to see anybody respond to even specific threads about issues for TC.

 

It does feel sometimes as if TC is the 'poor cousin' to the plane modules  

[=GW=501Railgun]

12 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 

我想阅读有关更新的讨论，但是目前要做的是，我必须整理数十篇抱怨VR技术问题的帖子，然后才能找到其他东西。好像每个讨论线程都在很大程度上由例如讨论皮肤制造技术细节的人们接管。这是一个有效的主题，但在这里它排挤了其他所有内容。

 

这可以通过以下方法解决：单独的VR讨论线程，或者我的首选选项，在发布软件中添加一个功能，使有关VR的帖子只能由戴着VR头盔的人阅读。    

A discussion forum for VR can be opened separately.
The reason why this version complains so much about VR is that after officially supporting zooming, it only supports the zoom function of the old version of the single-screen VR structure in 2016, but it does not support the new dual-screen VR structure with angles. However, the experience of the new VR structure is much stronger than that of the old VR. As a result, I spent a lot of money to buy VR, but I couldn't play my favorite game. Of course it was uncomfortable.
Although the above problems can be solved through community MOD, but because the new version adds the option of whether the server prohibits the use of MOD, players who use MOD to solve the new VR out of focus problem are excluded.
Don’t tell me how to turn on PP, how much the picture quality has decreased after turning on PP, everyone knows.

[Patricks]

18 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

Are you referring to the Game update notes, or the discussion in this thread? Nobody is forcing you to read the latter.

 

To answer your question, it would be the discussions in this thread at the moment, but IMHO the point is valid across the entire board. Unfortunately you do have to read the post to find out it's about a VR problem, hence my asking for a way to  differentiate between VR and 2D posts.  May be as simple as putting "VR" as the lead-in to the post. Not trying to create a "Ryft" between VR and 2D users ?, just an attempt to make the forum a bit more efficient. Add to that many posters assume we know they are talking about VR issues and don't say either way... Again, it was just a thought.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Icer