Purg

No idea if it uses PhysX. You just have to look at what both games are modelling under the hood to know why Crysis looks a whole lot prettier than BS. If CPU cycles were unlimited, BS could look just as pretty as Crysis - the difference between the two is emphasis. If you developed a game engine for an FPS that looked like BS in today's market, it would rot on the shelf. More CPU cycles are spent making the engine look pretty in Crysis as there's not much else happening under the hood. BS is modelling a complex flight model, atmospheric conditions, weapons and detection systems that far outweighs that of Crysis (it also can't help having a completely clickable and functioning 3D cockpit supporting 6DOF on the frame counter). CPU cycles in BS are therefore dedicated to modelling these things first. Then compare the size of the respective theatres. If the same game engine were running both, you'd have to wait for the map to reload every couple of minutes of flying time in the KA50 when on ingress. It's just not realistic on today's hardware to expect the same level of graphic detail between an FPS and a combat flight sim. Multicore support, I agree (though the Vista kludge does net me some decent gains on my quadcore) but I believe this is slated in an upcoming version. SLI, pointless - it's not maxxing out one video card as the sim is CPU bound, not graphics bound.

Compared to other titles, absolutely. Compared to other sims, it's lightyears ahead of anything else I own. Possibly for nostalgic reasons, I went ahead and re-installed LOMAC and IL2-1946 - ugly. I remember 1946 being a reasonably pretty looking sim but due to BS, it feels like I'm simming inside a roadrunner cartoon.

Assuming you're running your swap file on the same drive as your OS, you'll likely get better performance running the sim off the HDD that your OS isn't installed on. However, BS doesn't seem particularly I/O intensive during a mission and for a sim, its memory footprint seems small in comparison to other sims so the performance boost could well be negligable. Slave is a PATA term where you'd daisy chain 2 devices to a single port (master/slave) and the devices would have to be configured so the port knew which device was which. No such issue with SATA.

Must be something you're doing wrong. There's a post on SimHQ that broke down how to fire off an ATG missile with pics. Studied it word for word and after 30 minutes I was taking down targets 6km+ with about a 90% success rate.

I'm not that much of a fan of the A10 but if it's modelled to the same degree as the KA-50 then I may become one!

Options -> Gameplay -> Cockpit Language = English. :thumbup:

Mine occassionally does as well, however, if you check the CPU utilisation it will show that only core 0 is being utilised if you touch nothing. I use Affinity II and even though it may show all 4 of my cores selected, if I hit apply with all 4 cores, the CPU shuffles its processes and I get ~10-15fps increase instantly.

Are you sure about that? I found that BS uses ~600MB on my machine, which, for a high fidelity sim is tiny.

Well, yeah.. on an older machine you may get some benefit but unless your machine is starved for resources then it will do little to boost FPS. My machine is a quad core running Vista64 with 8GB memory. Last night I flew with 3 Operating systems running in the background! :music_whistling: (Windows XP, 2008 Enterprise and SUSE 11.1) as well as having email, MSN, Skype, Xfire and a number of other apps running in the backround. They're all resident in memory but are consuming virtually no CPU cycles. So provided you have enough physical memory, the need to be aggressive with shutting things down becomes less beneficial. Looking at my machine now I'm currently using 3262MB of mem. Load up Instant Action and it goes up to 3765MB. BS has a very small memory footprint compared to most other sims.

No strange results here. In fact I can look so far over my shoulder that I can turn and see the other side of the cockpit. Perhaps an exorcism is required on my TIR3...?

I see very little to no gain with software like this these days. In fact, quite often while I play I have another 2 operating systems loaded in the background (an XP machine and a Ubuntu machine) - even if I shut them down as well as a bunch of other apps I get no gain in FPS whatsoever. Perhaps it's because I'm using Vista with multicore enabled. During BS not a single core is running at 100%

You've got to respect Oleg and his crew though. I've played the IL2 series for at least 1000 hours and not a single crash.

I'm not so happy. In fact I'm very annoyed. I downloaded the Russian version because I'm an impatient schmuck and it inspired me to drag my Cougar out of the closet and set up my TIR3 where they've been for the last year or so. Shortly after the English version came out, gleefully downloaded it and installed. Seeing as I had pulled my sticks out and had a nice old romp with BS, I decided to re-install a couple of my older sims, IL2 1946, LOMAC, Allied Force... The quality of BS has caused me to look at the other sims I've owned in a very dim light, the way I see it, DCS has just obsoleted around $1000 of my pre-owned software. If anyone wants to join in on a class-action, email me.. we have a case!! Before you hit reply though, check the dictionary definition of sarcasm.

2nd mission into the grand campaign, my tank plinking took me within range of a taxiing Mig23, made a nice explosion - got a nice shiny medal at the end of it as well. ;)

If that's the case then you don't need to do anything...? I use AffinityII and occassionally when I check it, it has all 4 cores highlighted on that process but my CPU meter is clearly showing only core 0 is being utilised. If I just click apply, whammo.

That's seriously cool. IMO, as innovative as TIR.

I have had a couple of TOW's fired at me. I thought I was safe to go in and mop up, not quite. :(

That's what I thought, thanks for the response. I'll probably stick to game flight model for now as the avionics is a good enough challenge for me at the moment. I'll just assume I'm an expert if flying the bird.. and later on I'll get back and have another crack at the realistic flight model.

At first glance there seems to only be a realistic flight model or easy flight model. I've tried a forum search and checked the FAQ's and can't find anything specific to being able to fine tune the difficulty of the flight model. There was an article on simhq that hinted at the scalability of the difficulty settings, are these buried in an lua? I like a realistic depiction of a battlefield to fly in but I get my enjoyment more out of the avionics being realistically modelled more than the flight model, however, I'm finding easy flight a little too, well.. easy. I'm likely back to front in how I like to learn my sims, learn how to take out a convoy then learn how to get your bird to the convoy in 1 piece. Just learning how to do a circuit around an airfield for hours on end is a recipe for boredom for me, unfortunately. So, is there a way to scale up the flight model or is it game or sim modes only? I'm digging the missions so far and am becoming proficient at getting my weapons on target but I'd like to slowly scale up particular aspects of the flight model as I go from game to sim, not one or the other.

You forgot an f in the thread title there champ. :p

I don't think you'll get much benefit from the card for BS, it's more CPU bound than graphics bound.

I finished a mission a couple of hours ago where the infantry were running away from my chopper when I was about 2 clicks out, up and over a hill - unsure if this was scripted or they actually were fleeing from me. Managed to pick them off with cannon. :D When I hit them they lay down, I wasn't sure if they were ducking for cover or not and I wasn't going to hang around and watch as I was being locked up by a SAM at the time.

May not be compatible would have users with Vista installations ringing for support when it doesn't meet their expectations. Opens pandora's box. So far it's worked my end on Vista64.

Australien?! Sydney.

Probably impatient people like me who only used the Russian version as a flight demo and wanting an indication of how it would run on their rigs. :music_whistling: