Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Chupacabras84]

First time I hit java wall was in CUP WaW part 8 and I had to make set of lightened air.ini's to keep playing.
With B.A.T performance is so bad I have to make another set, the problem is, my old air.ini's dont cut it anymore with number of stuff in B.A.T.

I imagine there are other objects that contribute another brick in the java wall but I dont really know which ones.
Could I get some clues at which objects contributes to java wall apart from planes and if there is a way to disable them as easy as it was with planes?

[SAS~Storebror]

So far all reports from BAT are that it performs extraordinary well.
Much better than CUP.
No signs of Java wall.

The modularization also contributes to this:
The parts are way smaller than e.g. DBW or UP3 ever were.

As long as you're not running a 1990's PC, I'd suspect that something's wrong with your system.

Best regards - Mike

[vpmedia]

It's important to post you hardware config (processor, ram, graphics card) with such error reports. Average fps in the Black Death track is quite useful too (shif+tab, then type fps SHOW START).

[sniperton]

A typical gaming PC recommendation from 1999:

Operating System: Windows 98 Second Edition
Monitor: CRT (Any Size)
Processor: At Least 500 MHz
RAM: At least 128MB
Video Card: AGP Video Card With At Least 32MB of Memory
Hard Drive: At Least 10GB
Sound Card: Windows 98 SE Compatible

I had something like that when I first played Il-2

[Chupacabras84]

@vpmedia
Its not really an error report, my PC is fairly weak atm but it was still enough to play regular modded game or Ultrapack and DBW with fps like its a stock game.
With CUP and WAW I first encountered extremely bad performance which was linked to number of planes loaded at startup, storebror explains it here
Also fps comparison is here or in that one or on the second post of lightened air.ini topic, in fact whole lightened air.ini thread is major discussion on the issue with people posting builds and performance benchmarks.

In the end there is no point doing more tests and fps comparisons because I've done those already, its probably my PC not enough to play BAT, I just hoped there is something I could do.
I guess I try to dabble a bit but will probably go back to Ultrapack untill I get myself a better PC.
My current necrobuild please dont laugh

Athlon 64 x2 4000+
3GB Ram
Nvidia 630GT
Windows XP

[SAS~Storebror]

The Jet Age is 275 planes, compared to 620 in UP3/DBW.
If your game can handle UP3/DBW then BAT is not an issue in itself.
WAW is huge, but you can split the air.ini in parts if that really helps.

Other than that, it might be something completely unrelated to the "Java Wall" which I never saw kicking in at the number of planes available in any BAT module.

Best regards - Mike

[Chupacabras84]

Yes, I think only WaW module give me such bad fps, I'll try to mess with ini's, the problem is I need to really cut them to bring fps back.
In your previous post you said that its mostly plane classes bring fps down so hard but loading same ini that gave me good fps previously, seems dont matter in WaW any more, it looks like there is some other objects that affects this.

Wonder what exactly on my PC that cant handle WaW at this moment, CPU or OS.

[SAS~Storebror]

Most probably it's both the CPU and the OS
You might also want to check how much free physical RAM there is when you start IL-2.
The "Java Wall" hits you when Java's Garbage Collector starts to dump objects endlessly in a loop.
The smaller the RAM is for IL-2, the sooner it kicks in.

Concerning a "lightened" air.ini: If you kick out all that fancy crazy stuff like the "Dragonfly" planes plus the many trainers and scout planes you're probably never gonna use, you should be much better off already.

Best regards - Mike

[vpmedia]

The whole idea behind knowing the Black Death average fps is to first do the measurement in BAT and then in the stock game and the difference of the two numbers is the actual performance impact of BAT which we dont know yet since it was just released.

[TheOligopolist]

I've always had trouble with performance in CUP and BAT (BAT has been better) in missions with more than 20 or so planes.
So just to clarify, this isn't the norm and there is possibly something a miss with my configuration?
My system has:
i7-3820
GTX670
16Gigs DDR3

[SAS~Storebror]

Since your System's performance is better than mine CPU-wise, I'd expect that if any of us would have to face such problems it was me, and I don't.

Best regards - Mike

[vpmedia]

I'm not a BAT user but I can confirm that the game engine is capable of running missions with 100+ planes and even more on a modest system (i3, gtx550, 8RAM, 1440*900).

This is the mission I'm building right now, called bomber run and has 124 planes on the Berlin map, almost 60 minutes of constant fighter attack terror Since there are 40*B-17, I'm pretty sure that I could make single engine fighter mission with 200+ planes.