Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads

Technical threads All discussions about technical issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:56 PM
baronWastelan baronWastelan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: the future home of Starfleet Academy
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by csThor View Post
Not exactly new, either, but any kind of AI flown fighter (even your own aircraft if you activate autopilot) has a messed-up aiming point for the weapons. I've tried this with Hurricanes, Spitfires, 109s and 110s and all of them are aiming slightly above the target -and that means without deflection and with deflection. In the latter case the AI pulls too much lead and frequently misses its target. This way hits become the product of coincidence.
There are different skill levels configurable for AI. Believe it or not it's a feature. Start a thread in Gameplay subforum with your usage questions rather than in a bug reporting thread, please!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-22-2011, 06:45 PM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baronWastelan View Post
There are different skill levels configurable for AI. Believe it or not it's a feature. Start a thread in Gameplay subforum with your usage questions rather than in a bug reporting thread, please!
I am quite aware that the AI can be configured, thank you very much.

My statement stands - even set to Ace with insane shooting skills the AI will aim too high (and often enough above the wingtip) and waste so much ammunition that it ain't fun. A rookie who wouldn't hit a barn from the inside, yes and well, but an ace?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-22-2011, 07:04 PM
AARPRazorbacks AARPRazorbacks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SEC, USA. WPS
Posts: 222
Default

campaign gb Campaign3









MOBO- Gigabyte GA-EP45_UD3P.
CPU-Intel core Duo E8600 @ 3.33GHz.
Ram 4GB.
PSU-(Duel power supply.
500 and 550 watt on the GPU.
550 watt on MOBO.
500 watt on HD and CD/DVD player)
GPU-Video card GTX 470 1280 MB GDDR5.
Internal HD-Seagate Barracuda SATA 1TB/TO 32MB 7200RPM.
External HD-Seagate USB2.00 500 GB 7200RPM.
OS-(Duel partition on Internal HD.
Windows XP Pro 32bit.
Windows 7 PRO 64 bit.)
CFS3 and Expansions on XP 32 bit
CLoD, FSX and RoF in W-7 Pro 64 bit.
MSWFF Pro 2.
2 saitek x52 throttles.
Saitek Pro Flight PZ35 Rudder Pedals
Monitor- HP-19, HP-24 or a VIZIO 42in screen.
Turtle Beach Gaming Headset and Mic.
TIR5.
Fraps.

Last edited by AARPRazorbacks; 06-22-2011 at 07:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-22-2011, 07:21 PM
baronWastelan baronWastelan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: the future home of Starfleet Academy
Posts: 628
Default

@csThor: your subjective observation is not a V.14762 BETA Error. Please stop spamming this thread.

Back ON TOPIC:

I agree with Cpt Farrel on the new aircraft reflections. Even though I understand it is probably "by design", the problem is that the "shinyness" appears to be constant regardless of the amount of weathering. Ideally the "shinyness" would be reduced as the weathering is increased; if that isn't feasable, then I would prefer the new look to be abandoned for now, in favor of the previous look.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-22-2011, 07:31 PM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Thumbs down

You can stow your accusations of spamming. This is a valid issue that needs to be sorted, regardless if it is connected with the current BETA or the gamecode itself. And who gave you any authority here? Thought police, or what?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-23-2011, 01:51 AM
Tiger27 Tiger27 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baronWastelan View Post
@csThor: your subjective observation is not a V.14762 BETA Error. Please stop spamming this thread.

Back ON TOPIC:

I agree with Cpt Farrel on the new aircraft reflections. Even though I understand it is probably "by design", the problem is that the "shinyness" appears to be constant regardless of the amount of weathering. Ideally the "shinyness" would be reduced as the weathering is increased; if that isn't feasable, then I would prefer the new look to be abandoned for now, in favor of the previous look.
Baron, seeing as how you are so keen on trying to keep this thread on topic regarding bugs from 14762, please apply this to yourself, this isnt really a bug but a design choice/preference, in my opinion csThor's comments are more relevant even though not a bug from this Beta it is a bug that needs fixing, the shinyness (sic)is a feature believe it or not and although it may need tweaking it is not a bug.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-23-2011, 01:59 AM
Phazon Phazon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 270
Default

I'm not sure if this is an ongoing bug or intentional.

With all animated cockpit controls assigned to an axis (throttle, joystick etc), their animations are not smooth or 1:1 to the input being recieved. It looks like the animation drops frames and it looks awkward especially when its 60+ FPS.

The funny thing is if I drag a throttle or other control using the mouse, its animation is smooth as I would expect? Why aren't all the animations smooth when using joystick axis controls as it is in other sims with fully 3d cockpits?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-23-2011, 04:08 AM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,715
Default

The FM is the same in both cases because the mirror was not retractable. Turning it off is just for gaining some FPS, similar to IL2:1946.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-23-2011, 04:34 AM
baronWastelan baronWastelan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: the future home of Starfleet Academy
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiger27 View Post
Baron, seeing as how you are so keen on trying to keep this thread on topic regarding bugs from 14762, please apply this to yourself, this isnt really a bug but a design choice/preference, in my opinion csThor's comments are more relevant even though not a bug from this Beta it is a bug that needs fixing, the shinyness (sic)is a feature believe it or not and although it may need tweaking it is not a bug.
Thank you very much for your agreement to keep the thread on topic. Luthier posted:
"V.14762 BETA Errors
Please post your beta errors here"


I didn't say it was a bug, that's your lack of reading comprehension. I stand by the point made by Cpt Farrel that this new reflection visual introduced in 14762 BETA is erroneous in the way it applies a gloss or "shinyness" equally to a 0% weathered A/C as to a 99% weathered A/C. We don't know whether or not it is by design because to my knowledge the feature hasn't been described by luthier. If you have reliable information that shows that RAF would apply several coats of wax to a weather-beaten A/C with paint flaking off in order to polish it up to an "air show finish", then we will all understand that it is not an error and be happy to see the ever-present shinyness.

Additionally we have as many reasons to believe the AI is operating within its design parameters which luthier has already stated is slated for revision. This is clearly not a "bug" [sic] nor an "error" introduced by 14762 BETA.

Thanks again for helping to get this thread back on topic!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.