Jump to content

Fichtenwald

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

290 profile views

Fichtenwald's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • Collaborator Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

2

Reputation

  1. Interestingly, the "old" GTX 1070 already has 8 GB video RAM and the current RTX 3070 also still has not more than 8 GB. But the new GDDR6 is almost twice as fast of course. Is more video RAM than 8 GB needed for the data? If not, then at least the last 3 generations of GPUs would have sufficient.
  2. Yes, my brother works in the machine learning sector as "data scientist" (also some military related customers), they do a lot of things on the GPUs now. And even have multiple RTX GPU workstations. I believe up to 5 Quadro RTX or normal RTX GPUs per workstation, while having just one single "standard" CPU with 10 cores in such a Multi-GPU workstation. Fully utilizing latest GPU generations would be amazing! One reason, that I can think of (the current annoying price situation aside): It is a easier to upgrade a GPU for us SB players, than upgrading to a new CPU. For a new CPU you also need a new motherboard and possibly other related stuff. A new GPU can (theoretically) be integrated into every system. So everybody could upgrade without having to buy a whole new system, by just buying an appropriate latest generation GPU. So it would maybe not be that bad, if older pre-RTX GPU generations would become slightly "obsolete". Especially since Version 5 will be some time away. And I guess, many SB players (me not being one of them) have good state-of-the-art GPUs anyway for flightsims or games like that? Can AI calculations be done on the GPU as well? I assume, that AI spotting is already done with raytracing on the GPU?
  3. Thank you for the explanation! That is a relief to hear, since I specifically bought this new computer for playing SB online with others. The CPU was quite expensive, but the rest was cheaper/more reasonable, because I tried to hit some kind of "SB Pro sweet spot": - 16 GB DDR4 3600 MHz with CL16 (stock) At 85€ this RAM gives really good performance. And 16GB should be enough for a "pure" SB-player? In some benchmarks it had better performance than twice as expensive 4000 MHz CL17. The most problematic thing was, that something had changed, since I bought the old "Sandy Bridge" Gaming-PC 10 years ago: Nowadays every PC component seems to glow like some kind of Christmas tree, which appears to be completely meaningless to me (to say it mildly)... - GTX 1070 This GPU seems just about right for SB @ 1080p/60hz. I am glad, that I am not a "gamer", who need GPUs for 4K/120hz displays or whatever is the standard nowadays. GPU prices are insane. That is the positive side of playing a CPU-limited simulation. I guess, it puts one in a pretty small "niche" category, having a free-time gaming PC with a CPU that is way more expensive, than the GPU. Looking through a virtual lower-refresh TI sight on a high-refresh monitor would be kind of hilarious anyway... Still sounds very promising. I guess, most will happily "sacrifice" some cores for a higher detail fragmentation effect or blast wave model. Producing thousands of individual fragments per shell upon detonation (in case of the larger ones) and calculating if they connect to some target, must be a huge workload...
  4. I see, thank you. Scenario load times are not that important to me; it is more about performance in the scenario itself. So I guess, it is good to use all 8 cores/ 16 threads for the "certain scenario tasks", that you mentioned. So I went for the wrong CPU... 😐 Some simulation benchmarks noted, that 8 cores are the "sweet spot" for simulation games. And that more cores are only good for simultaneously doing other stuff in the background while gaming (streaming, etc. ...), which I do not do. Still, I directly upgraded from a 10 year old 2600K, so the 11900K is a big performance increase anyway. But I should have asked here, about the future SB Version 5, before buying! So in the future, it is better to have more cores, instead of fewer cores with higher clock speeds (only 8 cores, but up to 5.3GHz on the 11900K)? That seems like a big change for 3D simulation engines, which tended to be "single-core" heavy and only lightly threaded?
  5. Hello! I finally upgraded to a new PC specifically for SB Pro (to be able, to play online with others in the community in the future) and would like to ask a question on performance: How many CPU cores are ideal for SB? I now have an 11900K with 8 cores. If 6 cores (and 12 threads) would be enough for SB, then I would disable 2 cores and OC the rest to 5.3GHz. When looking up the CPU core usage levels of SB, I noticed, that (like other 3D-Simulation-Engines), it mainly "sits" on one core with full usage, and on two other cores with lighter usage. The rest of the cores are at 2% to 5% usage, so it seems, that they are not really necessary: So would it maybe be better, to disable 2 cores and OC the 6 remaining cores for better "single-core"/"lightly-threaded" performance in SB? Thank you for advice!
  6. I am glad, that my country did the right thing, and invested in SB regarding Bundesheer equipment/vehicles. And a very welcome way to use my taxes too.. So, if there will be no MK30-2/ABM, because there will be no Puma/Lynx, then hopefully the Bundesheer will also upgrade the MK30-2 with the ABM module, and something like the Spike. A modernization and "Kampfwertsteigerung" upgrade is said to be planned in the next years. Then the vehicle could be used better (with a lot of limitations of course) as a later version Puma stand-in for Bundeswehr scenarios in SB.
  7. Hello! Yesterday Rheinmetall posted a Lynx video, that shows the interior and the gunners sight (with Leopard 2 sight symbology), with some TP-T rounds going out to a 2.000 metres target. Screenshots (the whole video is attached below): The graphical feedback for position and selected weapon/observation-device on the lower left seems pretty nice and easy to read. Just wanted to post it, because I have never seen the Lynx interior and gunners sight before - and thought, that it would be of interest to other SB players too, who might have missed it. I guess, the Lynx will also not "find its way" to SB, because Rheinmetall sadly has an in-house simulation/training platform for their vehicles? Best regards!
  8. Thanks to everyone for the advices! Yes, I will go for the Thrustmaster T16000. It seems like a reasonable choice for SB in my case: (a) I do not play any other games, it is exclusively for SB (so most of the flight simulator sticks seem too specialized, especially the ones, that come with a H.O.T.A.S. system by default). (b) It is the first joystick that I will have (so I will have to find out, what combination/setup suits me best for SB. What is needed and what not?) (c) Not much time to play currently, so it is not justified to immediately buy a "premium" one - hopefully there will be more time in the near future. Therefore it seems reasonable to me, to go for something on this level first, if I then find out, what exactly I need for SB, then I can still go for something like the above, with higher quality and possibly more specialization. I get the point of course, "authentic" in its strict sense was the wrong word to use (and it also has no comparative degree or superlative), this is why I put it between marks initially. But from an isolated, purely haptic perspective: Isn't a joystick a little "closer" to the real control handles, than a mouse? You hold your hand in a similar position to some of the control handles, the trigger is in a similar position and often some of the additional buttons too. And some of the real control handles seem pretty close (in this isolated regard) to some of the flight simulator joysticks mentioned above, like this one and commander control handles too. The SB two-hand controller from 12Alfa seems also a lot closer in this regard, than using a mouse. This is what I initially meant...
  9. Yes, I am already used to mouse/keyboard in SB; the mouse gives very precise control. But it feels strange, and not „authentic“ at all, to control (for example) a tank gun with a mouse. Because of that, I definitely want to go for a „control handle/joystick“ setup. By "kits for self-assembly" you mean AFV Sim control handles for PE-Version users (= hobby players)? Thank you very much for the explanation! Looking through your products is amazing! Interesting, thanks, it has an "unusual" design. After looking it up: So, it is a "Retro Arcade Machine" control handle replica... . Do you have a button box, because it does not seem to have many buttons? On the price: Only Amazon.com seems to sell those GRS products and the above handle costs (for my region) 265,00 $ + 29,06 $ (Amazon global) + 165,96 (import taxes) = 460,02 $. I am not a gamer and have never bought a joystick before: this is generally not an option for me, such a price is not justified for someone like me, who has not much time to play. I wonder, how much more an AFV Sim two hand control handle would cost... Thanks, so, in your opinion, a one hand control handle (= joystick) is better for SB, because there are so many other things to control with the second, free hand? With a "rare" two hand control handle, this would probably be not so easy. Except when just playing in the position of a gunner and nothing else... It has 12 buttons on the base and 4 (+ 8-way hat switch) on the stick. So more are needed for SB? I come to the "interim result" : it will maybe not be so easy, to find the right control handle/joystick for SB...
  10. Hello! I hope, it is okay to revive this old thread from 2016 (to not create a similar topic again and keep things together). 1) Recommended Joysticks Can someone recommend me a joystick for SB gunnery in 2021? I do not play flight sims and also no other games, only SB, so the stick will be bought exclusively for SB. 2) Thrustmaster T16000M The T16000M was recommended several times above, but it was also noted that the spring tension is too strong. Here is another post about this problem (from another forum), with more details: „T16000M input is really precise and linear, but its weak point is the springs, which are slightly too strong and not adjustable, and above all, the extremely non-linear spring force in the center. It takes a significant force to start moving the joystick from the center. The advantage of this is, that the stick returns very efficiently to a neutral position, without jiggle. The drawback is: it's difficult to control precisely very small movements around the center.“ „There’s also enough spring-back to make you want to adjust the plane’s trim so you don’t have to hold the T16000M in place constantly.“ (a) So maybe holding the joystick in place or moving it over a long period of time (2h in online missions) creates sore forearms? Some users complained about it (related to other games), or is this not the case in your experience with the T16000M? (b) I am also looking for a joystick without a „hump“ when starting to move from the center – for precise and fine targeting. Is this really a problem with the T16000M? 3) Real Control Handles I already tried a borrowed game-controller (from a console) with an analog-stick, but this little analog stick is so bad when it comes to fine movement in SB, that I simply cannot use it. The mouse is actually a lot more precise. Precision seems generally no problem at all with the mouse, but it feels very awkward/strange to control, lets say, a tank gun with a mouse. There seem to be joysticks for every group of „enthusiasts“: tons of flight simulator sticks, driving handles, even farming simulator handles, and also countless science fiction „space simulator“ sticks. But for tank gunnery? Nothing. More lobby work for tank sims needs to be done... The only thing, that I found, and that was also mentioned in posts above, are professional training devices not suited for hobby tank sim players. So, related to real AFV control handles (or such training replicas): How much „tension“/spring-back do they have? For example, here an ERCWS-M gunner's station with a two hand control handle. Or here the one hand control handle for a similar system in another vehicle (commander's position). Does it take a significant force to move those real control handles or to start moving them from the center? Because if yes, then a gaming joystick with strong spring tension might be ok anyway... Thanks a lot for advises! And have a good weekend!
  11. Vielen Dank fĂŒr die schnelle RĂŒckmeldung und die ErlĂ€uterungen zu den einzelnen Punkten! Danke fĂŒr die Info - der Herstellerkatalog verspricht bei Üb-PrĂ€zision also nicht zu viel... Und es ist auch interessant, dass das Bundesheer nicht nur beim realen, sondern scheinbar auch beim virtuellen Ulan teilweise hat sparen mĂŒssen. Schon traurig, dass man dort an allererster Stelle immer mit dem Budget zu kĂ€mpfen hatte bzw. hat. Aber zum GlĂŒck ist das vorhandene Budget damals richtig eingesetzt worden: die Details im virtuellen Ulan sind wirklich toll, besonders das detaillierte RechnerbediengerĂ€t... Dieses Jahr wurde beschlossen, dass endlich wieder in die Panzertruppe investiert wird. Vielleicht fĂŒhrt das ja auch zu „virtuellen“ Kampfwertsteigerungen in SB? So wie es derzeit in SB ist, ist sie leichter zu bedienen – ich habe den Punkt aufgrund der Diskrepanz zur oben genannten Anleitung erwĂ€hnt, wo die andere Methode beschrieben wird. Danke fĂŒr das Beheben der Probleme!
  12. Hallo! Ja, ich wollte nur darauf hinweisen, dass man entweder "alles" auf Speicherplatz 3 verschieben muss und dann am WaffenbediengerĂ€t "3" voreinstellen sollte, oder aber man Ă€ndert einfach die Textur "Nr. Muni. TYPE" und setzt dort MZ auf 2 und ÜB auf 3. So wie es jetzt ist, ist es inkorrekt. Was, wenn man bei manuellem Start als gewissenhafter Kommandant die Voreinstellungen ĂŒberprĂŒft... Ich wollte nicht, dass ballistische Werte fĂŒr gar nicht verwendbare Übungsmunition hinterlegt werden!
  13. Hello! I noticed some issues (Version 4.259) regarding the Ulan IFV and would like to post a report. The report is in German, because I know that eSim Games is half a German company and also because I only really know the German terminology; if an English translation is required, then I will translate it. Probleme: 1) Turmkontrolle (vom RichtschĂŒtzenplatz aus bedient): Das Display ist defekt. Neue Displayinhalte (z.B. beim DrĂŒcken von „BIT NEXT“ oder „TURM EIN/AUS“) ĂŒberlagern die vorhergehenden Inhalte: Hinweis: Das Problem tritt nicht auf, wenn die Turmkontrolle vom Kommandantenplatz aus bedient wird. 2) Turmkontrolle: Bei ausgeschalteter Stabilisierungsanlage kann mit der Taste „STAB EIN/AUS“ die Stabilisierung nicht wieder eingeschaltet werden. 3) WaffenbediengerĂ€t (Kommandant): An den Daumenradschaltern am WaffenbediengerĂ€t des Kommandanten ist fĂŒr „30 R.Z.“ die falsche Munitionsart voreingestellt. Laut Liste sollte „3“ fĂŒr MZ am rechten Daumenradschalter voreingestellt sein: (Standardbewaffnung A) Derzeit ist jedoch „2“ voreingestellt. Laut Liste greift man damit auf die fĂŒr Übungsmunition gespeicherten Werte zurĂŒck: 4) RechnerbediengerĂ€te (Kommandant und RichtschĂŒtze): Auf Speicherplatz 2 sollten die Werte fĂŒr Übungsmunition gespeichert sein, auf Speicherplatz 3 hingegen die Werte fĂŒr MZ. Es sind allerdings auf Platz 2 die Werte fĂŒr MZ gespeichert und Speicherplatz 3 ist ĂŒberhaupt leer. Bug 3 und 4 heben sich somit gegenseitig auf. 5) Laser- und Vorhaltetaste: Nach DrĂŒcken der Taste wird die Richtgeschwindigkeit gemessen und erst beim Loslassen der Taste der Laser abgefeuert. Wurde ein Vorhalt gemessen, dann sollte, bei erneutem BetĂ€tigen und sofortigem Loslassen der Taste, die vorherige Vorhaltmessung beibehalten und nur eine aktualisierende Laserentfernungsmessung durchgefĂŒhrt werden. Dazu auch die SB-Anleitung: „In the case of entering a new range via lasing, the lase button must be held for at least one second to dump lead, otherwise the new lase is simply adjusting the range on the previous lead calculation.“ [1] Bug: In SB allerdings, wird auch bei kĂŒrzest möglichem BetĂ€tigen und sofortigem Loslassen der Taste, die Vorhaltmessung verworfen. (FĂŒr mich am besten zu beobachten, wenn man die Stabilisierungsanlage ausschaltet, da dann jede Vorhalt-Änderung sofort am „Sprung“ der Strichplatte erkennbar wird.) 6) WaffenbediengerĂ€t (Kommandant): Die Taste „FST LAENGE“ funktioniert bei Übersteuerung durch den Kommandanten nicht. Ohne Übersteuerung scheint sie wegen des KI-RichtschĂŒtzen in SB absichtlich “gesperrt” zu sein. Bei Ausfall des KI-RichtschĂŒtzen funktioniert die Taste nĂ€mlich in beiden FĂ€llen, mit und ohne DrĂŒcken des Handballenschalters. Minimale "Bugs" (spielerisch vollkommen irrelevant): 7) RechnerbediengerĂ€te (Kommandant und RichtschĂŒtze): UnabhĂ€ngig davon welche Munitionsart fĂŒr „30 L.Z.“ und „30 R.Z.“ an den Daumenradschaltern des WaffenbediengerĂ€ts voreingestellt ist: Wird an den Waffenwahlschaltern „30 L.Z.“ oder „30 R.Z.“ gewĂ€hlt, dann wird am RechnerbediengerĂ€t immer KE fĂŒr „30 L.Z.“ und MZ fĂŒr „30 R.Z.“ angezeigt (im Fall “Standardbewaffnung A”). Beispiel: Beide Daumenradschalter sind hier auf „6“ fĂŒr KE. In diesem Fall werden zwar fĂŒr „30 L.Z.“ und „30 R.Z.“ korrekt die ballistischen Werte fĂŒr KE geladen; am RechnerbediengerĂ€t wird allerdings bei Einstellung „30 R.Z.“ die Munitionsart „MZ“ angezeigt. Beweisfoto fĂŒr diesen Bug (V0 von KE, aber MZ leuchtet): 8 ) Laserentfernungsmesser: EmpfĂ€ngt der Laserentfernungsmesser kein Echo dann wird in SB “9995” angezeigt. Sollte nicht “0000” angezeigt werden? Oder wurde der Fehlercode spĂ€ter geĂ€ndert? Sollte der "Bug Report" auf Englisch benötigt werden, wĂŒrde ich ihn - wie oben schon geschrieben - natĂŒrlich ĂŒbersetzen! Danke!
  14. May I ask two questions: 1. Is there still a German manual for SB Pro 4.1? The shop page only says "manual" without any hint on the language. (I still have the German "Benutzerhandbuch" from 2007, but it may be a little outdated now...) 2. Can the digital version of the manual be downloaded somewhere without downloading the whole SB Pro package? I am on a tiny office laptop right now and I would just like to download the manual and read it, without having to download the whole program. This will be done on my PC, when I come back to it next month. Thank you very much!
×
×
  • Create New...