Jump to content
COMBATSIM Forum

theRiddler

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

theRiddler last won the day on November 21 2012

theRiddler had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About theRiddler

  • Rank
    First Lieutenant
  • Birthday 04/01/1983

Profile Information

  • Location
    Azores, Atlantic
  • Interests
    Full time nurse. Part time nerd.
  1. Thank you for the great explanation once again! So the missile range and the time problems are caused by the "non-existence" of a problem.. It's just that, nowadays, the non-real-time problem seems so obvious and it seems so easy to get near-real-time time out of a system (at least for video game applications) that I can't help but think: that's ridiculous! LOL! Pun intended?
  2. What happened to the simple system time query? Was it unavailable in the programing languages of back then? I can't imagine a simulation like TAW not being 100% aware of real-time. On the consumer end, there's always going to be that guy with the newest graphic card and the other guy who will try to finish the game with a computer that is 5 or 10 years old - even if he has to run it at 16 or 20 fps! (<- that's me by the way.. ). However, the whole game seems real enough running either at 2GHz or at 200Mhz (don't mind the 10fps rate), so it must have been slightly aware of real-time so
  3. Maybe. For a company that published a lot of simulations, they must have been aware of these problems. How weird. I fired the dgVoodoo just for curiosity and my limits/caps are exactly the opposite of yours - 32fps for the dgVoodoo - but I've learned lately that my "flawless" F22 simulator is actually quite full of idiosyncrasies.. I'm not going to try to explain them all. On another note, just for kicks, I thought of a quick test. How much time does it take to slow down a completely unloaded F22 from a 100% throttle speed (terminal velocity) of 614kts to 200kts using airbrake and e
  4. Thank you! Since I don't have other sims or games installed I never thought about that. So I downloaded a portable version of a first person shooter and turns out that Fraps was giving me the same FPS as the actual in-game FPS counter. So, off I went to TAW. The 32 to 50 FPS difference happens when I switch from Direct3D/Software to nGlide. If I use the nGlide executable in Software mode, it still gives me 32 FPS though. And now, the new tests. The usual setup with slight changes: medium difficulty, 800x600 high detail, custom combat, desert, midday, F22 vs ZSU23/4, 12x external Maverick
  5. I finally found some time to redo tests with missiles and I was going to do it the proper way - with a FPS counter running - but I stumbled upon something weird. A few weeks ago, my Fraps showed that the F22 TAW would lock FPSs to a maximum of 50. Today I can't get more than 32fps no matter what CPU speed. I didn't change anything on my hardware. Rebooted and tried both TAW 1 and TAW 2.22a. Still 32. I do get less than 32 with very low CPU speeds though. This 32 smells fishy from a binary point of view. Does anyone know of another 3rd party standalone FPS counter for Windows? I just found E
  6. Wombat, you have a hell of job ahead of you if you're going to list all those targets and then put it in a single image. I'm pretty sure I can use Flash to automate the display of that information over a nice clean map image. Flash would also allow for an standalone interactive map with selectable display options. Would that interest you? And those TFXplorer recon shots are looking very nice EDIT: @Wombat: the map would look something like this https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing but with clickable options and all the items you have in that file. However, I have to upgrade my Flash
  7. I will try to arrange some time for that "research" My hands have been tied with stuff from work and family, but I will let you know when I have some more time. That was with the HARM.
  8. I believe so. Each guest computer might be responsible for a lot of calculations regarding its own airplane, mostly stuff that isn't dependent on the other players or the scenery, for example, the flight model and it's response to keyboard/joystick input. For things that are strictly dependent on others, like an impact on the ground or a bullet hitting an enemy, those need to be synchronized between all computers, and the fastest way of doing that is having the server doing it because after each calculation, each player is only one ping/hop away from "real-time". As for the accuracy of your
  9. I don't have much to add right now because I'm away from my usual laptop and can't test the stuff that you're talking about.. but I will say this to Wombat.. with the number of airfields that I believe you'll find, you're going to need a bigger map!
  10. In a quick way, no. Putting a bridge over a road (or vice-versa) would require map editing. The mission file alone wouldn't be enough. I believe you would have to hex-edit the map tiles in order to set both visible geometry and collision geometry. And that, as mikew already said here and if he says so, I bet it would be much harder-er for any of us two to achieve it. We could, however, use Krycztij's TFXplorer to browse the entire TAW map looking for a bridge that goes over a road or something similar..
  11. "Clone" as in "standalone combat flight simulator"? Or just a "TAW simulator"? The first would imply a more realistic and updated simulator which could eventually replace TAW, the second would be just a tool to simulate TAW's world and laws.. you can't, however, get to the standalone simulator unless you had, at least, something like a "TAW simulator".. Is there any work already done on this matter? I wouldn't mind trying to help, although I'm pretty sure that any member from the Order of the 50lb HeadsTM will do in days what I'll take weeks to do.. RIght! Hence the ballistic curve,
  12. Thanks man. But what you really have to admire is Krycztij's post: in a single post he explains why something that I spent several hours and two pages trying to figure out is totally irrelevant.. I hate to be ignorant.. I think we don't need to worry about that. When in MP (at least in TAW) only the host makes the physics calculations, the remaining players' computers are only responsible for rendering what the host is sending them. I noticed this when I tried to hit those ground units with the cannon last sunday: you already knew that I had gunned down a hostile while I was still wond
  13. Well.. I did have to restart TAW every time I changed the wrapper.. whether that would explain some differences, I don't know. Actually, I don't think so since I had to repeat some situations because of their disparity, and the results were consistent THIS morning. I still can't explain how it changes from one day to the other.. I could have something running in the background that could have also influenced the CPU cycles.. can't tell. Anyway. I just heard about the Cheat Engine and I just did a quick and dirty run to see if I could find a "fuel" value for the missile but I had no luck. Wi
  14. ..only if you intend to play a lot of single player missions or be the host of your own multiplayer games. More than once I tried to start understanding that thread, but even Chinese seems easier than grasping those contents..
  15. What an amazing job. Works flawlessly on my Windows XP, either with the original unpacked F22-TAW installation or the Home Fries F22 TAW 2.22a version. Very nice details on the cockpit. I could go on and on with the praising but I would never do justice to the sensation you get when using it. I can't find any rendering flaws when comparing it to the actual game engine. I navigated for only a few minutes and I already saw details on the scenery that I had never seen before! I think everyone should give it try. Even the clouds look pretty! I think I know this "tool" (?) was developed in the c
×
×
  • Create New...