tank gunner precision

jakeobryan · Post by **jakeobryan** » 2008-04-24 18:31

Hi! haven't found it in the forums yet so this is what still bothers me:
when aiming a target far away, just before the fog limit, the precision is very bad (like rasterization). I know this effect occured with all the sniper rifles as well and were fixed in 0.7, so would it be possible to fix this effect in all tanks as well to have a smoother turn? looks like some float32 or double enhancement. don't know how difficult it will be

cheers

squall6677 · Post by **squall6677** » 2008-04-25 11:58

good point, a challenger tank can hit a dart board from a mile away, a warrior from 2km and as90 from just over 2km so why cant we? is it that in the game a mile looks alot closer than it actually is? this need to be addressed, and quickly. its a small issue and not high priority i know but still it loses alot of realism through small things like fog limit(which for one needs to be removed altogether).

Reddish Red · Post by **Reddish Red** » 2008-04-25 16:06

squall6677 wrote:good point, a challenger tank can hit a dart board from a mile away, a warrior from 2km and as90 from just over 2km so why cant we? is it that in the game a mile looks alot closer than it actually is? this need to be addressed, and quickly. its a small issue and not high priority i know but still it loses alot of realism through small things like fog limit(which for one needs to be removed altogether).

Removing fog limit = more lag AFAIK.

squall6677 · Post by **squall6677** » 2008-04-25 16:15

Reddish Red wrote:Removing fog limit = more lag AFAIK.

maybe not such a good idea yet then. until the world gets this mysterious superfast internet connection

"howard_hopkinso
01-04-2005, 07:05 AM
Please see the following article taken from Internetnews.com.

September 2, 2004
Scientists Set Internet2 Speed Record
By Susan Kuchinskas

Scientists at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) and the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) set a new land-speed record for Internet2, a second-generation network serving universities and research institutes.

The team, which included folks from AMD (Quote, Chart), Cisco (Quote, Chart), Microsoft Research, Newisys, and S2io, transferred 859 gigabytes of data in less than 17 minutes. It did so at a rate of 6.63 gigabits per second (define) between the CERN facility in Geneva, Switzerland, and Caltech in Pasadena, Calif., a distance of more than 15,766 kilometers, or approximately 9,800 miles."

jakeobryan · Post by **jakeobryan** » 2008-04-25 16:28

about the fog: we need fog due to performance reasons, but this is not the problem to be discussed here.

about internet2:
the funny thing is that this is not new. universities do that since a decade now at this rate and even higher.
most people think that ping and connection speed sinks linear whith each mile... the truth is that i.e. the connection from london to new york takes about 3-5 milliseconds. the only problem is the connection from your ISP to your home-router, which is much higher (around 20-30 milliseconds) in assemble and disassemble (remote ISP to project reality game server). So a single connection from europe to the united states takes over 100 milliseconds due to the given arguments...

the main problem is politics and capitalism. without it, most likely everyone would have fiber to the home since years.

Post by **Deadfast** » 2008-04-25 16:37

squall6677 wrote:maybe not such a good idea yet then. until the world gets this mysterious superfast internet connection

Red meant graphical lag, not connection lag

Post by **LeadMagnet** » 2008-04-25 16:49

Seems to work just fine for me. You just have to learn to adjust for range.

squall6677 · Post by **squall6677** » 2008-04-25 17:14

Deadfast wrote:Red meant graphical lag, not connection lag

my bad, didn't realize, (i call it choppy rather than laggy when this happens).

just lower your terrain settings should do the trick there,

as for the shaking (i know this happens) it does need to be sourced though. maybe its the mouse? e.g. try pointing 1 2m pole a certain point for 10 minutes you will find your hands shake the pole more at the tip due to a flexible pole which suffers from every minor twitch (normally at a ratio of 1:61

amplifying this "wave" at the tip because it is not supported.

could this be effecting our aim? e.g. the mouse being the base of our pole and the start of the fog the end of our pole? hang on a minute! anyone know of a way to test this theory?

jakeobryan · Post by **jakeobryan** » 2008-04-25 17:29

squall6677 wrote:my bad, didn't realize, (i call it choppy rather than laggy when this happens).

just lower your terrain settings should do the trick there,

as for the shaking (i know this happens) it does need to be sourced though. maybe its the mouse? e.g. try pointing 1 2m pole a certain point for 10 minutes you will find your hands shake the pole more at the tip due to a flexible pole which suffers from every minor twitch (normally at a ratio of 1:61 amplifying this "wave" at the tip because it is not supported.

could this be effecting our aim? e.g. the mouse being the base of our pole and the start of the fog the end of our pole? hang on a minute! anyone know of a way to test this theory?

sorry i dont understand a single word...

@LeadMagnet: to whom was this post referred?

squall6677 · Post by **squall6677** » 2008-04-25 18:37

jakeobryan wrote:sorry i dont understand a single word...

@LeadMagnet: to whom was this post referred?

um quote reffers to first line, and the rest to topic.

PlatinumA1 · Post by **PlatinumA1** » 2008-04-26 01:05

Increasing the (fog) view distance is not going to lag your computer , just really old outdated ones which i really doubt the majority have