Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

91 Excellent


About HE111H6ismissingtailMG17

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1258 profile views
  1. Regarding the A-stand... This is the A stand on an H6 in IL2. You cannot really tell but I have it with the default MG15. Now this is the A-stand for (most likely an early) Heinkel. The 'bulge' is more apparent on this gondola. This is the Ikaria GD-A 1114 aka the one that can rotate because the gun mount area looks just like the one in your video. This Ikaria gondola is mentioned numerous times in the book He-111 in Action by George Punka. I've included few segments from that book to illustrate my point. Now look at this gondola. I don't know the name of this gondola. We can deduce that this is most likely a later variant of the Heinkel since the engine instruments can be see on the right side of the pilot like in the H16. Looking at the gondola, you notice its not protruding as much. There is also two "flaps" on both sides of the mount. The mount is also much bigger (prob since this was gondola was meant for the MG FF. This is the variant that does NOT ROTATE. The MG FF, as we know, fires a heavier 20mm round and also has a lot more recoil. The amount of recoil necessitated that the gondola be bolted down hence why we have the two variants. Despite the H6 being defaulted with a MG 15, the developers chose to only make 1 gondola version (you can guess which) to save time and resource. In short, the ingame version isn't "inaccurate" because that later version of the gondola could not rotate and the devs just chose to use that one even for the tiny MG 15. My guess is that the GD A 1114 is best identified from the inside for having the handles from which to rotate the ball. The later variant is identified for its LACK of this and also having a square mount. Here is a view of the gondola from the inside that can be found from the most unlikeliest of sources.
  2. It should also be mentioned that the Heinkel in game is missing the tail MG17 that is controlled by the dorsal turret.
  3. anyone been getting disconnected a lot lately? Cannot complete a single sortie. I tried WOL and could play for hours with no issue.
  4. The numbers provided were extracted from v4.005d (most recent version) of the game. I don't know if practicing in game is an accurate source. Variations in testing may have been possible due to inconsistent testing factors thus making the SC1000 seem more destructive than the 1800 or 2500. Yes, I think you are right. I looked at older versions of the game (v3.012) and these lines remain "//" out. Maybe its dead lines from the RoF times? Who knows. Yeah it's weird how those two are nearly identical in terms of blast radius. I have heard the amount of TNT packed in these two bombs were really not that far apart. The huge weight difference was to allow the bombs to penetrate hard bunkers and stuff of similar builds (I am not certain of this though). Still, the 2500 should be bigger right?
  5. The document this photo comes from Terminal Ballistics Data, Volume III, Bombs, Artillery, Mortar Fire & Rockets (1944) makes sure to actually explain the targets they tested on to achieve these results. Since this is before the bombing of Japan, the document notes they don’t currently have data on Japanese targets (which are different construction than Germans). It notes that the results from this document (including the photo) were tested against ‘Typical German Load Bearing Walls’ and that effects “may be up to 5x greater” against “Japanese soft targets.” ^ the photo I’m referring to
  6. ever so slightly yes. FAB250 has 75.4 FAB100 has 76.4
  7. FAB100 Radius increased from 45 to 76.4 Shrapnel Quantity increased from 2800 to 8994
  8. I've been looking at the game files recently to understand this and my guess is the difference is there, but because it's so minor it's hard to notice. You would probably need to run 15 of the exact same tests to notice the difference. The difference is far more noticeable with heavy bombs like the SC1000 or SC2500. Because the Soviets don't have anything heavier than the FAB500s, there was not much of a difference to notice in the small to medium bombs. From v4.004 to v4.005... SC250/FAB250 radius increased from 56 to 75.4 Shrapnel Quanitity increased from 4800 to16432 SC500/FAB500 radius dropped from 100 to 91.6 Shrpanel quantity increased from 10400 to 22952 SC1000 radius dropped from 160 to 120.2 Shrapnel quantity increased from 18800 to 23732
  9. FINDINGS: The recent patch made changes not just to aircraft ammunition but also bombs. Some of the changes caught me by surprise. Without source material for every single bomb, I assumed IL2 always had accurate information regarding the effects of bombs, but this new patch introduced huge changes to how bombs work making me question not just which (v4.004 or v4.005) is more accurate. For those wondering how bombs have changed since v4.004 to v4.005, this is what I have found. The following findings were found in the game files: LW and USSR's equivalent bombs use exact same files for explosions. i.e SC250 = FAB250. It is a 1:1 copy inside. Only difference is the 3D model of the bomb. SC50 radius increased from 40 to 56.0 Shrapnel quantity increased from 770 to 6452 SC250 (FAB250) radius increased from 56 to 75.4 Shrapnel Quanitity increased from 4800 to16432 SC500 (FAB500) radius dropped from 100 to 91.6 Shrpanel quantity increased from 10400 to 22952 SC1000 radius dropped from 160 to 120.2 Shrapnel quantity increased from 18800 to 23732 SC1800 radius dropped from 200 to 119.6 Shrapnel quantity increased from 32400 to 36391 SC2500 radius dropped from 200 to 133.9 Shrapnel quantity increased from 19080 to 22780 It is surprising to see such dramatic changes in the blast radius of some bombs such as the SC2500 and huge increases in shrapnel quantity across the board. There are many more variables mentioned in each of these files, but many of which I don't understand which leads us to the next part. QUESTIONS: How does IL2 calculate bomb damage? Is it a combination of layers and a shrapnel spraying in multiple directions like a real bomb explosion would have? I assume first of all, there are a few layers, each with a set radius and damage output. Then, I think there is the shrapnel. If I understand correctly, v4.005 introduced shrapnels to explosions meaning if you are really unlucky, you could be hit far away by a stray piece of shrapnel, however, I have no proof this actually exists, just pure speculation. Looking at v4.004's files, a "ShrapnelQuantity" also exists. Attached below is the raw "explosive" data of a German SC2500 in v4.005 and v4.004 (scroll down). There are a few lines I can't seem to make sense of: I have no coding experience so I don't know if any of this is some basic basic coding info. Some of the lines I can make out their meaning but because most of the explanatory texts are in Russian (I used Google Translate to English), I can't exactly understand what it is it's trying to explain. //Ranges - what do these lines mean? Radius - Blast radius in Meters TNT - Amount of TNT in Kilograms ArmorFoug - ??? ShrapnelQuantity - Amount of Shrapnel produced by explosion FragmentMass - Mass of each shrapnel framgent. ArmorShr - ???
  10. Well, it depends which targets you hit. Defenses? Airfield? Depot? All have different Durability values. I have not tested Soviet bombs, more specifically, I haven't tested bombs smaller than a 500kg. If you dissect the game files though, both German and Soviet 250/500kg bombs actually use the exact same parameters. A 1:1 copy of of one another so to speak. In short, no differences exist between a German 500kg vs a Soviet 500kg aside from the appearance of the bomb. If you hit defenses in these past couple days, you won't notice much difference from the pre v4.005 results. This is because Kathon lowered the Durability of ALL the objects in a defense position. However, you should have noticed a increase in Ground Kills from Map #3 (between April 12-20) results which was when we were stuck in the weak bomb phase of this TAW. p.s. can LW have access to all bombs now? SC1800 and SC2500s?
  11. Seems only the defense targets durability was lowered. From 15000 to 2000 or 500 (depending on target). Airfield and Depots remained unchanged. Still 15000. 1000kg continues to be ineffective against these targets because of their high durability values. Dropped a 1000kg into 6x6 barracks spaced 30m apart. They overlap because they are long buildings. Durability = 15000 (current depot setting). Only 6 buildings destroyed. For comparison: This is the result with 5000 Durability 11 Buildings Much more believable. At Durability 2000, it was 18 Buildings. This is just one of many ground targets in TAW and one of many that will require rework under this new patch.
  12. It is. It shouldn't be like that. If my target was a long convoy then 32x50s makes sense over the 2x1000. However, if my target is now a dense pack of buildings like a depot, the 2x1000 ought to be the more effective option, not still the 32x50s like it is right now. There was a time when Durability of these buildings were 50000 (right now it's 15000 under new DM) and as such, the number of bombs one could carry effectively became the SOLE determinant of how many GK one could achieve, not the size of the bomb. Seems we are going back to that right now. I'm surprised this isn't known by more people. I had to drop the durability down to 1000 in the editor to achieve desired results (initial tests), I know then people will start complaining it's 'too easy' and they're not wrong. At 1000 durability, the buildings could be strafed to death by a Fw190 which then begs to ask, as massive as the 1000kg's explosion is, how much damage is actually being put out? Maybe a 1000kg is simply only worth 20 Cannon rounds by in game engine.
  13. Thanks for sharing this. However, I am not sure I share the same conclusions as you. First off, let's get a few things straight: The bombs have gotten weaker Level bombing is practically useless Where our conclusions seems to differ is regarding the lethality of bombs in single player and in multiplayer. I tested targets in Single Player and achieved the same results I got in Multiplayer. I do not see any difference between single player and multiplayer bomb performance. Was this video filmed using the older durability values? Kathon updated TAW to use the newer durability values last Saturday, that's why I ask. An ongoing discussion of Durability values covered this issue recently indicating that durability values were changed with v4.005 but unfortunately, this failed to be mentioned anywhere in the patch notes or subsequent hotfixes leading to confusion/frustration amongst map makers. Conclusion: The lethality of a bomb therefore would be ENTIRELY dependent on the durability of the 'Block' object. I am fiddling with this right now in the editor to find a setting that produces 'believable' results from each bomb. Note: Since there is no way to test or examine how bomb blasts work in this game, I assume v4.005 has "fixed" it. Meaning they now have the same level of blast radius as their real life counterparts. I will also assume the destructive force is also 'historically accurate' (I couldn't find any primary sources on German Explosive Ordnances of WWII). I am no explosive expert but this... Makes little sense... Those are all 250kg bombs. Truck survives. This took place under Kathon's new durability values from 18 April 2020 (which looks like he simply transferred the values provided by the devs into the objects in TAW.) Something needs to be changed. Either the bombs need to buffed or the Durability of objects needs to be tweaked and nerfed.
  14. That was certainly taken into account. Issue is not as dismissive as it seems. After patch v4.005, I do not see durability being much of a factor anymore regardless of what the map maker chooses. Because there are multiple IL2 versions mentioned, I have listed all version in question and their release dates just for clarification. IL2 v4.005 (April 8 ) IL2 v4.005b (April 9) IL2 v4.005c (April 15) IL2 v4.005d (April 18) I started noticing the issue after v4.005. Since v4.005 and its subsequent hotfixes, nothing has been mentioned about this issue which has drastically reduced effectiveness of bombs. Observations were gathered (between today and last night) from multiple servers which each have different "Durability" variables that Mission Designers can edit. Conclusion is consistent across the board: Bombs are much weaker than before. Currently there is almost little to no blast radius. Trucks are extremely resilient. The following examples were gathered from 4 different servers listed below. The version of IL2 they are running at the time of testing is listed in parentheses. TAW (v4.005c) Combat Box Training and Dogfight 0.2.0 (v4.005d) WOL (v4.005d) Custom map (v4.005d) Case 1: TAW (v4.005c) Target Durability: 20000 The red crosses mark where the 2x250kg landed. As you can see, everything survived. Nothing in the picture was killed. Juxtaposed Case 2: Combat Box Training and Dogfight 0.2.0 (v4.005d) Target 1: Durability of right group of barracks is 12000 Durability of left group of barracks is 15000 1000kg lands in a group of barracks. Only nets 2 barracks in the right. Juxtaposed Target 2: Durability of Dugouts is 15000 1x1000kg dropped 1 dugout is destroyed. Juxtaposed Case 3: WOL (v4.005d) Durability of Dugouts is 6000 1x1000kg dropped 2 dugouts destoyed. Juxtaposed Case 4: Custom Map (v4.005d) 5 trucks lined astern Note: vehicles do not have "Durability" factors like static objects. 1x1000kg dropped 2 trucks destroyed Juxtaposed V4.005c fixed the exploit where 20mms could kill buildings, but these bombs continue to be underwhelming. At the moment, the most effective one can be on the battlefield is almost entirely dependent on the number of bombs he carries (no longer the type/size of bomb he carries.). This is assuming both examples will be attacking the same densely packed target of multiple objects. A single 50kg has a 1:1 building to bomb ratio. This assumes bomb was direct hit. Kills with blast radius has no chance. A single 1000kg has a 2 or 3:1 building to bomb ratio (on average.) This assumes bomb was within ~20m of building. Kills with Blast radius have very short 'kill range' If I was flying a Bf110G2, it is more effective if I carry 12x50s instead of 2x500 or 1x1000. The lower the durability factor, the more favorable the results. WOL has the lowest durability factor of all servers tested and in Case 3, my 1x1000kg only netted 2 dugouts. Unless the devs can explain how quickly a bomb's blast energy is dissipated, this recent patch just seems to make bomb destructiveness too far fetched from reality. If this is true then one of these bombs is incorrectly modeled. One is too overpowered or too underpowered. Assuming the target is a dense concentration of wooden barracks... A single 50kg can destroy a building with a direct hit. Indirect hits are useless. A single 1000kg can destroy 2-3 buildings with a direct hit. Indirect hits will probably net 50-75% more destroyed.
  • Create New...