Jump to content

MiamiHorror

Members
  • Content Count

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

93 Excellent

2 Followers

About MiamiHorror

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1357 profile views
  1. Are the German bombers going to get separate crew models? Meanwhile the fighters get....
  2. I noticed that the new German pilot model has One with the oxygen mask and one without. Will the New German pilot automatically put on his oxygen mask once he reaches a certain altitude?
  3. 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. Look closely and you'll notice that 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, however, 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. Now, compare this gondola to the Ikaria GD-A 1114, you'll notice this one is not protruding as much. There is also two "flaps" on both sides of the mount. This particular mount is also much bigger (prob since this was the gondola 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 the He111 eventually had two different gondolas. It should be noted that I have also seen photos of this later version gondola attached with an MG131 13mm machine gun. Despite the H6 being defaulted with a MG 15, the developers chose to only make 1 gondola version (you can guess which, and I am going to assume this shortcut) was done to save time and resource. In short, the ingame version isn't necessarily "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. In short, the Ikaria GD-A 1114 will be 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 feature and also having a far more pronounced "square" mount. Here is a view of the gondola from the inside that can be found from the most unlikeliest of sources: The Chronicles of Narnia (opening scene)
  4. It should also be mentioned that the Heinkel in game is missing the tail MG17 that is controlled by the dorsal turret.
  5. anyone been getting disconnected a lot lately? Cannot complete a single sortie. I tried WOL and could play for hours with no issue.
  6. 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?
  7. 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
  8. ever so slightly yes. FAB250 has 75.4 FAB100 has 76.4
  9. FAB100 Radius increased from 45 to 76.4 Shrapnel Quantity increased from 2800 to 8994
  10. 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
  11. 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 - ???
  12. 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?
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...