Jump to content

Inkompetent

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    294
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Inkompetent

  1. Thank you! I've actually been working on the P-47 to get some simple transcribing instead of having to translate. Got punched in the face by the engine operating tables and take-off/landing charts though, but I'm getting there. Took a quite long hiatus from the project for a while, but it's definitely not dead.
  2. Stop making sense. You confuse them! 🧐
  3. Hardly pointless since many still live with quite stringent monthly data limits, even in supposedly developed countries (Looking at for example you two, USA and Canada), but understandably pretty cumbersome for the developers to have available for those that need one.
  4. "Should" and "is" are two completely different things. Right now the damage models are so bad and inconsistent that I've stopped flying, both in SP and MP. Single-hit wing-offs by defensive guns, and then I need to land 20+ 20mm shells on a fighter when shooting it down in a fight. Pilot-snipes with .30 cals through armoured glass, and I dunno what. I like the idea with the 3.008+ damage models, but they are so horribly bugged/faulty/inconsistent that I wish they just reverted to the old system until the new one is fixed =(
  5. Right now I dunno if armoured glass is worth it. It's mostly useful against bombers, but with the 3.008-3.009 damage models single turret-fired machine gun bullets cut entire wings off, and killing pilots through the armoured glass is easy peasy for them. Other than that I prefer an armoured windscreen though. But like many others I don't even understand what the question is: Why not use both? Why would I need to skip the armour just because I use a bubble? Not like we have bubble canopies that look like the one on an F-16.
  6. I think that the last part is unfair. Yes, it is true that some are chronic complainers, but those can usually be counted on the fingers of a single hand. The larger group in the "regularly complaining" minority are guys who seek perfection. They do not expect perfection however. They just seek it. At least if we look at the "complainers" who have anything to come with other than a complete lack of sources outside of the Dogfights TV show. Just because something works fine we shouldn't stop asking how it could be made better. If that was the case we'd still be living in caves, without fire, and hitting each other with sticks and throwing poop at each other. Of course it must be tiring to not have the resources to work on all the things that people would like to see improved, and if anything having to be very selective with where the development work goes, but if anything it is the sim community's desire to seek absolute realism - even if presented in a simplified form, like for example the plane interaction in IL-2 - that is its driving force. A large part (most? all?) of the sim community are where they are because they want to immerse themselves in something authentic. I'm having issues on all servers currently, and in singleplayer. I like what the 3.008 damage model strives to achieve, but when I for example have to pelt a AI-controlled Yak-1 with 20+ rounds with my MG 151/20 for them to finally go down, then something is awry. I can't say what is wrong because I'm not sitting with the code or even decent debug feedback, but I can tell that when that isn't a unique thing but happens in almost every fight, then it doesn't match any factual analysis of WW2 air combat that I've ever come across/had presented to me.
  7. So how is damage in multiplayer ever supposed to become "correct" if we can't even bug-report it, because what we see in MP doesn't happen, since MP doesn't count?
  8. Unfortunately it appears as if the changes to gun damage this patch is the extreme opposite of the prior patch. Now things die AT ONCE. Wings are shot off an instant, entire planes disappear into molecules from a single 25mm AA hit, tails are shot off left and right, engines are ruined by single .30 cal hits, etc. The increased toughness in the previous patch felt a bit over the top in that direction, but it was far better than the current state 😕
  9. Probably not even remotely as easily as we do it in-game when you are up at > 250-300 kph speeds (you still have to keep your plane flying straight while tugging on a heavy-to-close canopy), but then again we also got much too easy operation of trim wheels and such too, so falls into the same category of "really only in a flight sim but not done IRL" (like adjusting trim mid-manoeuvre).
  10. Do you and your friends have any personal test data to show that the speed isn't reduced (i.e. any source data to give a reason for this thread to exist at all), considering several people in the thread are stating the opposite and showing numbers?
  11. Why would you move around channels? As a Guest on the TeamSpeak server you should have user permissions to create temporary channels, btw (it was added maybe half a year ago), so that ought to make organizing into groups under a certain language parent channel easier.
  12. Now THIS is what I love seeing! Looks like we might actually a multiplayer lobby with as much functionality as Half-Life 1 from 1998 after all. Better 20 years late than never! 😄
  13. Our crosshairs are so bright/saturated in the game and don't get dimmed so much by the sun that the sun filter is of much use, unfortunately.
  14. It's about coordinating with others. Sure, if I only fly with 3 other guys and don't give a damn about what anyone else is doing I don't need any effective communication other than those guys. Then Discord is fine, or a single channel in TS3. Text can be used for a modicum of communication with others in-game, but it's not effective/responsive, it's not always you CAN write when flying, and afaik VR-users have troubles reading chat? If you want to coordinate effectively among multiple people (say a group of bombers/attackers and their escorts, or two separate fighter groups), then being in the same room/channel in Discord or TS3 becomes an absolute, useless mess, and being in separate channels require either manually jump in and out of channels, or to have whisper-lists where you can whisper to an entire channel (and you also need a TS3 server where you at all have those user rights). So no. TS3 or Discord don't "work fine". Not outside of small groups of people accepting that their interaction with the rest of the team will be limited at best.
  15. And if the above system that EmerlistDavjack listed isn't feasible to solve with in-game VoIP, then it would be nice if it at least was possible to do in TS3 without having to go through the hassle of creating custom whisper-lists for each and every server and arranging people into the correct group on that server, etc, etc. If you can squeeze 40 people into one channel in TS3, but they can only talk to those who is on their "channel"/"frequency" in-game, then that'll work. However I guess that the people advocating straight-up use of TS3 and Discord think that putting 40 people into the same channel works fine, since "there are no problems" with it.
  16. I'd love the Winter War. It'd offer some new, fun planes like the Tupolev TB-3, Polikarpov I-15 and I-153, Tupolev SB-2M, Bristol Blenheim, M.S. 406, Brewster Buffalo, Gloster Gladiator... Would be awesome. The collector's Po-2 also fits the scenario perfectly. Sure, it might be an odd scenario since Finland had extremely few planes, but it'd be a really fun setup.
  17. We really need channel-based communication, and TS3 alone is unfortunately no good answer, since one has to set up whisper lists, and Channel Commander if at all having permissions for that. Discord of course doesn't solve it either. What is needed is either a mod or native in-game communication based around selectable channels (say 10-20 channels per side) so that it is easy to coordinate people into preset channels. Somewhat akin to the radio mod for DCS. If the game would allow jacking into its sound engine something like a TS3 plugin could be used, like in the ACRE mod for ArmA, where everyone is in the same channel in TS3, but they can only hear the people on their own channel/frequency. In ArmA it was done by hijacking an unused DirectX DLL file, but not sure if that option exists for IL-2. Of course this option also requires someone kind'a skilled in programming to write it.
  18. Unfortunately getting the below error message
  19. Really nice skins! If I may make a request though, could you please make a compilation of your skins? It'll make it easier for everyone to download them
  20. Really nice skins! If I may make a request though, could you please make a compilation of your skins? It'll take ages to download them all individually
  21. If I could make a wish: Could you please make a compilation with all your skins? It'll take a darn week to download them all individually =/
  22. Think that actually was me. When you inverted to pull down from your climb you just... didn't pull! I didn't account for you flying straight so body-slammed your wing. Engine died instantly though and I had my face full of oil. Had to ditch nearby.
  23. Personally I use it for the Russian/Spitfire wheel brakes.
  24. Were the tanks attacked in the mission before that one? The tank column existed in mission #201 as well. If it was seriously weakened it might not have got enough new tanks to be strong enough to take the airfield.
  25. Uhm... Dunno about that, dude. Had my 110 instantly wing-clipped by a 61-K, Sheriff got sniped at 5.5 km by an 85mm in the AA's opening salvo, and I've been attacking Pe-2s and IL-2s who attacked an airfield, basically without attacking the AA, having 20 mm guns shooting at them for MINUTES without more than maybe 1 kill on 3+ planes.
×
×
  • Create New...