Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
Yes if you release manual right now before release for the first time in F4 history you will not have to utter RTFM every day upon after release.
LOoooLL . Good idea release manual 2 to 4 falcon weeks before release and im sure that we will have the update 2 to 4 weeks… -
More a question whether this behaviour is correct, actually, but if it’s not, I’d probably come bring it up here anyway, so I’m skipping a step.
During a recent low level flight, we encountered a bit of turbulence, and I noticed that the altitude, wind and airspeed indicators all remained extremely stable. AFAIK, any change of airflow around the pitot tubes and static ports should have an effect on most or all readouts, so especially in turbulent weather, I’d expect it to jump quite a bit? I don’t know if the F-16 (or other flyable aircraft) have any systems to correct for sudden large changes, though.
-
Yes if you release manual right now before release for the first time in F4 history you will not have to utter RTFM every day upon after release.
How would you know since you said it yourself, it was never done before ?
Just assumptions and i’m convinced we still would have to RTFMLOoooLL . Good idea release manual 2 to 4 falcon weeks before release and im sure that we will have the update 2 to 4 weeks…
Beside that would imply that the BMS manual is completed before the release state and if that were the case that development would stop between the moment the BMS manual is made available and the release.
None of the above conditions are realist !! -
Maybe in the title there was a subconscious desire to have I_FF_ included?
Its a reference to the previous thread, which was IFF you could have anything in the next update…
So, more like a conscious desire, Id wager.
-
@Red:
How would you know since you said it yourself, it was never done before ?
Just assumptions and i’m convinced we still would have to RTFMBeside that would imply that the BMS manual is completed before the release state and if that were the case that development would stop between the moment the BMS manual is made available and the release.
None of the above conditions are realist !!Not 100% accurate , the manuall is the summary for what is scheduled to be implemented ,if you know what exactly the update will include then you can make the manual sooner.
I don’t disagree just saying I just make some humor so we can spend our time with more fun . Btw I am vfp ex ehaf member glad to meet you.i spend one month to read your 4.33 manual on my last vacation -
I’ve redone the test with static models the c130 and kc and m2k and I got back to 20 fps.
I removed dofs and switches and dynamic and slots but no change.I done the tests twice just in case…
Strange.
What changed was reboot and enable disable re enable Nvidia surround.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Some BMS 4.34 teaser screenshot or little video
-
An actual integrated iads system and the ability to actually suppress sams and not just kill them all the time.
-
I’ve redone the test with static models the c130 and kc and m2k and I got back to 20 fps.
FYI, I"ve created a TE with 28 of the latest JanHas Vipers in a base, all taxing in the row for take off within 10 minutes window. Some more than 4.2 million poly’s in total for their lod1 models, 50fps average in various camera positions.
-
The addition of gamepad support would be great.
Plus an updated Eurofighter Typhoon model and a fully functional cockpit.
-
FYI, I"ve created a TE with 28 of the latest JanHas Vipers in a base, all taxing in the row for take off within 10 minutes window. Some more than 4.2 million poly’s in total for their lod1 models, 50fps average in various camera positions.
Well various doen’t count. The point is what happens in 3d pit. For me also in external views fps where above 50.
also hw specs? if your pc is super trooper then ok, it wouldnt be an average measurement. -
This post is deleted! -
yes Mortesil the fps difference from internal to external sometimes is double. So it’s an issue.
50+ external going 25 internal on a super pc will end up to 5-10 on a med pc. going lower poly models will double fps to ~20 so u r so and so… -
Plus an updated Eurofighter Typhoon model and a fully functional cockpit.
That would be a dream
-
This post is deleted! -
Perhaps Mav can offer some insight then why the fps is so much worse inside than outside then, since he said he is the only one who really understands it all. It would appear the number of aircraft being rendered doesn’t have nearly as much to do with it as suggested, but more so the manner in which they are being rendered.
u forgot the smilie icon… and the comment:
// Mortesil runs and hides…:lol:
-
Without want to interfere I am not expert only from my little experience always from inside the cockpit FPS are less than external views and my guess is because the 3pit is rendered together with the outside world ,this happens also in dcs but much worse but maybe I am wrong I tell you what I have noticed.
-
Something related has been discussed before and I also did some test for Mav.
External model polycounts or texture number somehow affects FPS more on internal views. Somehow it affects massively below few hundreds ft
-
Something related has been discussed before and I also did some test for Mav.
External model polycounts or texture number somehow affects FPS more on internal views. Somehow it affects massively below few hundreds ft
yeap I believe everyone watched closely this thread… but the info was cut out and no actual final outcome came.
like yeap it’s a pc one user thing, or it’s shadowing or shader or yeap we will optimize it better or anything.
I don’t want to sound like we demand a report or whatever, but I believe we all where left there hanging… waiting for a conclusion…the subject as said was coming to the surface for years now from the OF era. Anyway thanx all in this for their persistence on the subject and analyzing it and trying to get down to it.
Edit: to bless my beard in the OF or 4.32 era I had made it an issue and I kinda had a repetition in the pit when I was zooming in in an area of it… and it was down to the pit and that cause the model was not available nothing could be done if it was a pit thing…
but I didn’t try hard to narrow it down… -
Perhaps Mav can offer some insight then why the fps is so much worse inside than outside then, since he said he is the only one who really understands it all. It would appear the number of aircraft being rendered doesn’t have nearly as much to do with it as suggested, but more so the manner in which they are being rendered.
I’m no expert to Falcon’s 3D models rendering, but I do know 1 or 2 things about rendering. And I think the answer is pretty obvious:
Cockpit has more complicated geometry than what you usually see outside, and also it has heavier textures and many of them. I don’t know exactly how many draw calls we spend on cockpit only, but I bet it’s a pretty high number. That is the simple and probably true explanation to the serious FPS difference. Also, you can check and find that with other cockpits there isn’t such a drop, e.g the F-18 cockpit is much more efficient.Regarding Janhas models, I did a test:
4 F-16Is, external view, airborne, I was flying 1500 feet from them.
FPS difference between stock model and Janhas was IIRC ~35-40%But, more than anything, it is the engine, ladies and gentlemen. The engine is the source of all troubles. Just the fact that we use a draw call for each texture is IMHO crazy. And without sorting that first, we can analyze such cases for years with no efficient conclusions.