StarBucker

I've found that the ground units do have AI, watched it via Youtube. Where I might find Flaming Cliff? When was it released? Is it available on the shelf?

My response to you is very simple based on what you have replied to my accusation.  The game is not ready to be released and there's that I am afraid!!

In retrospect, IL2 was nearly flawless upon its first release and that's professional coding I say.  You can put into the a mission 25-30 planes and the frame rate still holds at around 60 ~70 to this date with my current rig. Those AI planes need indeed as you said huge computations by the CPU before data are passed to the GPU.  If IL2 can make it, why can't WoX?

In fact, WoX is not alone, Jane's F/A 18 is notorious about its performance.  Today's high end computers still cant break the 28FPS barrier clearly illustrates that the game has been badly coded.  Look at Falcon 4.0, My current rig now runs the game with at least 60FPS in the various Campaign in which trilions of compuataions and messages were processed and passed between processes.  And I still believe that Falcon 4 this legendary simulation is made for future CPU and GPU when these multi-cores  technologies  were not even named in Jan 1999 when the game came out!!

To me, still the same, the game needs to be revised about its coding that's it!  Sorry that sounds rude but there it is, I am not whining, just stating out the facts.

I have done an exepriment. This is the spec of my machine:

*****************************************

P5Q Deluxe

Core 2 Duo Q6600 @ 3.2GHz

Cosair XMS 2 2*2048MB DDR2@1066 Mhz

PowerColor LCS HD 4870 1GB DDR5 @780MHz/3.6GHz

VelociRaptor 150GB SATA2 10,000rpm

Cosair TX750W

Asus Silent Knight II CPU cooler

Asus Lightscribe DVD-RW

Cooler Master Praetorian 732 Case

*****************************************

I am running Windows Vista Ultimate 64bits and I dont have SF2. I installed SFP1 and patched it up to Oct 2008. As many of you have experienced, with High settings, the frame rate seems to have been locked at no more than 30 and sometimes I got low 20 and even at one time I got 17FPS!!

I do not know how many of you here are hardcore players and a fanatic of computer graphics. I am. Here is a quote from http://www.guru3d.com and a review of 4870 1GB is here http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4870-review--asus/8. I totally agree with the followings:

<H3 qaOrq="2">A word about "FPS"</H3>

A game's frames per second (FPS) is a measured average of a series of tests. That test often is a time demo, a recorded part of the game which is a 1:1 representation of the actual game and its gameplay experience. After forcing the same image quality settings; this timedemo is then used for all graphics cards so that the actual measuring is as objective as can be.

Frames per secondGameplay<30 FPSvery limited gameplay30-40 FPSaverage yet very playable40-60 FPSgood gameplay>60 FPSbest possible gameplay

• So if a graphics card barely manages less than 30 FPS, then the game is not very playable, we want to avoid that at all cost.
  
• With 30 FPS up-to roughly 40 FPS you'll be very able to play the game with perhaps a tiny stutter at certain graphically intensive parts. Overall a very enjoyable experience. Match the best possible resolution to this result and you'll have the best possible rendering quality versus resolution, hey you want both of them to be as high as possible.
  
• When a graphics card is doing 60 FPS on average or higher then you can rest assured that the game will likely play extremely smoothly at every point in the game, turn on every possible in-game IQ setting.
  
• Over 100 FPS? You have either a MONSTER of graphics card or a very old game.
  

And I recall I read an article back in those days when Voodo cards were dominating 3D graphics card market. Today we called that Anisothrophic Filtering then it was a technology named as FX1. In that article which I canno tlocate on the net now, stated that human eyes cannot perceive image movement with frame rate per second beyond 60. And mpeg movies which we watch on our system runs at 29~30 FPS.

I am therefore quite surprised to hear some body up here saying that they have a smooth running of the game at 30FPS or below!

My exepriment results are a good FPS at 60 under 1680*1050 with Horizontal Distance set to Normal, Mirror set to Off, Mirror Reflection set to Off and Shadow set to Off. But then it never goes higher than 60.

I must provide you with one more piece of information: when I was monitoring using Hardware Montior on the CPU and GPU temeprature, te GPU temperature never rised to 70C or so like it did when Call Of Cuty World At War was run, in fact this game only raised my GPU by a mere 5 degree where CoDW@@ raised it by some 20C! But the CPU was raised by 15C. So I say this game is CPU bound. And to that end, the coding apparently is an issue.

I hope TW games will bring more compettion to other flight sim producers, it has been a while since we have a modern flight simulation game like F/A-18. If only there owuld be a F-22 or a Typhoon sim in the near future.

The future of modern flight simulation games was ended with LOMAC. But if you are not told that these screen shots are taken from TW series, I seriously dount if you can tell the difference.

The future of modern flight simulation is ended?

I didn't merge with WOI. I only did SFP1/WOV and WOE. All planes showed up alright EXCEPT the F-104 when I selected US Silver skin, my wingies are German skinned. This happened in Single Mission. How do I get a work around to this issue?

DO I copy everything in the object folder to the "base" sim's object folder?

Yikes

 

71.4 71.4

POLYS 53024

 

 

43.5 43.5

POLYS 90428

 

frames-1/frames-2 = 1.71

polys-2/polys-1 = 1.64

 

That might be cpu, not grafix card.

 

Is this Correct Thinking?

More than correct! Absolutely right I say!

I can tell you one thing about terrains...it seem to handle the height field differently (I just posted this at the 3W boards, too)

 

2 views of the same bridge, taken in an unpatched and patched installs:

 

unpatched:

 

 

patched:

 

you can still see the flagpole, but the barracks, shack, aaa bunker (and gun!), and the vehicles and bridge itself have 'subsided' below the water line. I guess you can blame earthquake induced liquifaction? Does Korea have quakes like LA gets???

ALL the bridges have done this, so that leads me to belive that the TODs height fields are being 'read' differently. I'll wait for what TK says on the subject.

 

Wrench

kevin stein

Wrench you lost pretty many frames. Droped from 70 to 40 something.

What I am glad about this patch is it doesn't ruin Buyun Weapon pack and we have a new weapon editor which operates nearly the same way as the previous version.

However, I do have noticed some major differences one of which being there are obvious image jaggies which is not very nice.  Before the patch was applied, I was able to obtain pretty good image quality at Medium settings at 1680 X 1050.

Before the patch

After the patch

Also, the add-on MiG-23MK is stuffed. I can't use "Home" key to track air target.

kct, is tht the F-14D you are talking about?  Did that happen in Single Mission or in Campaign?

This is for LOMAC right? Not for TW games am I correct?

I did a little research, 2 persons created nuke effects they are CA_Stary and Lexx_Luthor.  Persoanly, I love both of them for different reasons.

CA_Stary's simulates the ripple wave splashes which does look vibrant and is spectacular if you view vertically from above the blast. Fantastic!

Lexx_Luthor's simulates seconds of brilliance upon detonation of the warhead and more than one ripples blasts off from the centre of explosion.

There are however room for improvement

1) If I am flying out of the blast meaning the explosion is behind my plane, the simulated brilliance of light is all behind me but should it not becovering the airspace in front of my plane as well?

2) The area of destruction is not curcular but squared possibly due to the tile being a sqaured shape object.

3) CA_Stary's kills frame rates but looks good, but the Aerial version doesn't kill frame rate and looks very realistic!

Determines the distance that you want the bomb to go off. Important for airburst bombs and the like.

600m is too high, killed myself when the bomb went off.

What is the function of the fusing distance?

Kill frame rate!

There's only one entry for nuclear fusion. The other is for "nuclear fission".

In a nutshell:

fission = a-bomb

fusion = h-bomb.

Thanks Fubar512!

Guess I didn't read carefully enough. Interesting! Maybe I should find out the difference later tonight.

I have finally make something out. 1000000000000 or 1e+12 exposive mass requires 49,000ft above sea level for a safe drop. When it was increased a thousand time to 1e+15, the radius of destruction increased by 11nm and basically a U-2 at 100,000ft won't survive the blast.

For destroying an airfield, 1e+8 would suffice the need.

PS The best approach would be equip a missile with nuke warhead for standard off pre-emptive strike.

Recoomend to be used as a loding screen!

There are 2 Nuclear Fusion, what are their difference?

Nuclear Fusion

Exactly how is the explosives damage measured? The Explosive parameter can go up to 30,000,000 but when it blasted off, it only destroyed 4 to 6 tanks out of 16 in a column. What is the diameter of explosion for such a value 30,000,000?

Can you slew and move the camera around to light up a target? How it is operated?

I think it is the weather mod. It's the latest snow fall mod. They are good screenies.  Did you ride the MiG or it was an AI?

Hey,

The mod looks promising.

The helo is cool!

It looks like this mod http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autocom=downloads&req=display&code=ss&full=1&id=6121 reflects the real F14A pilot cockpit, I did a research and found this out  http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail-cp-a-pilot-01.htm.

This is my own preference I just dont take the TCS mod.

://http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail...e the TCS mod.