Version 1.107 First Impressions

[9./JG27golani79]

Yeah, gunners aren´t really the brightest ..

 

Also it would be nice if you could order them to stay ready.

open, close, open, close, open, close, open - fire? maybe, close, open, close  ...

 

Spotting and reporting could be a bit better as well.

[=EXPEND=Capt_Yorkshire]

if you have micro stutters try a fresh install fixed it for me and its running  nice

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

There is another very serious problem with gunners maybe people haven't noticed yet.

 

Target priority.

 

I have seen a lot of time gunners tracking a fighter diving away from an attack which gunners failed to open fire because they keep opening and closing their gun nest.

 

So they track the diving fighter and late start to fire on a impossible target. Meanwhile a second fighter can park on bomber six and our clumsy gunner will ignore him because he will keep firing on the first fighter.

 

Thus we will have a never ending cycle of no effective defense on the active attacker until the gunners die or bomber is destroyed.

 

Gunner revamp now!!!

[Jade_Monkey]

Ai is not perfect, ideally you would have someone as a gunner on MP or set autolevel and do it yourself like i do.

 

Im sure they will address this eventually.

[Freycinet]

I for one do not understand why the developers introduce slight variances of existing planes when they could be putting their efforts into new planes like a P39. Anyone else feel this way or is it just me?

 

The two aren't really compatible. Of course it takes less effort to make a variant than a whole new plane. It is not as if you would be getting a whole different aircraft instead of the unwanted variant. The work of making a new 109 variant is probably 10% of the work of making a completely different plane. 

[SR-F_Winger]

So what do we have? a F2 that performs worse than the Mig-3 at all altitudes?

Well done and just as expected. LOL

Edited January 29, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[Finkeren]

So what do we have? a F2 that performs worse than the Mig-3 at all altitudes?

Well done and just as expected. LOL

Why don't you test it out yourself?

[F/JG300_Gruber]

Yeah, gunners aren´t really the brightest ..

 

Also it would be nice if you could order them to stay ready.

open, close, open, close, open, close, open - fire? maybe, close, open, close  ...

 

Spotting and reporting could be a bit better as well.

 

True.

 

 

There is another very serious problem with gunners maybe people haven't noticed yet.

 

Target priority.

 

I have seen a lot of time gunners tracking a fighter diving away from an attack which gunners failed to open fire because they keep opening and closing their gun nest.

 

So they track the diving fighter and late start to fire on a impossible target. Meanwhile a second fighter can park on bomber six and our clumsy gunner will ignore him because he will keep firing on the first fighter.

 

Thus we will have a never ending cycle of no effective defense on the active attacker until the gunners die or bomber is destroyed.

 

Gunner revamp now!!!

 

 

Aaaaand true 

[ShamrockOneFive]

So what do we have? a F2 that performs worse than the Mig-3 at all altitudes?

Well done and just as expected. LOL

I spent som time with the F-2 in the last couple of days. You must be flying a different fighter

The two aren't really compatible. Of course it takes less effort to make a variant than a whole new plane. It is not as if you would be getting a whole different aircraft instead of the unwanted variant. The work of making a new 109 variant is probably 10% of the work of making a completely different plane.

 

Completely agree. It's a matter of overall resources available and historical value. Battle of Moscow wouldn't be complete without the F-2. Other types we can afford to take a miss, it's unfortunate but also reality, whereas other types are essential to the battle. I'm glad the devs decided on what they did.

 

It's pretty clear to me that someone at 1CGS has a project management background and possibly a strong business plan. The way they have things laid out is very prescribed and I'm guessing they have a solid timeline (Gant charts!) with costing and revenue all forecasted and planned out. I'm not sure about others but it gives me confidence.

[303_Kwiatek]

Looks for me that 109 F-2 got wrong power settings in BOS.

 

DB601N for 109 F should have  1.25 Ata - climb and combat settings - 1/2 hour limit ,  and 1.35 Ata for emergency power - short duration. At  1.35 Ata -  515 kph at sea level.

 

In BOS there is 1.4 Ata - emergency, and 1.3 Ata - short duration ( 3 minutes? )  for climb and combat settings.

 

E-7 is also wrong.  1.42 Ata should be 1 minute emergency but enabled by button for 1 minut clock count power not by throttle level like now.

[TheElf]

I spent som time with the F-2 in the last couple of days. You must be flying a different fighter

Completely agree. It's a matter of overall resources available and historical value. Battle of Moscow wouldn't be complete without the F-2. Other types we can afford to take a miss, it's unfortunate but also reality, whereas other types are essential to the battle. I'm glad the devs decided on what they did.

 

It's pretty clear to me that someone at 1CGS has a project management background and possibly a strong business plan. The way they have things laid out is very prescribed and I'm guessing they have a solid timeline (Gant charts!) with costing and revenue all forecasted and planned out. I'm not sure about others but it gives me confidence.

 

 

Lol, not even close.  The Devs have no idea what they are doing next.  Its been said...

[ShamrockOneFive]

Lol, not even close.  The Devs have no idea what they are doing next.  Its been said...

 

A bit too literally interpreted. Deciding on the next theatre of operations for the next expansion doesn't mean they don't have a business plan or haven't costed it out.

[TheElf]

A bit too literally interpreted. Deciding on the next theatre of operations for the next expansion doesn't mean they don't have a business plan or haven't costed it out.

 

ok...

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Looks for me that 109 F-2 got wrong power settings in BOS.

 

DB601N for 109 F should have  1.25 Ata - climb and combat settings - 1/2 hour limit ,  and 1.35 Ata for emergency power - short duration. At  1.35 Ata -  515 kph at sea level.

 

In BOS there is 1.4 Ata - emergency, and 1.3 Ata - short duration ( 3 minutes? )  for climb and combat settings.

 

E-7 is also wrong.  1.42 Ata should be 1 minute emergency but enabled by button for 1 minut clock count power not by throttle level like now.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/20785-pe-2-series-35-il-2-m1941-and-bf-109-f-2-operating-notes/?do=findComment&comment=328146

 

1.25 ata and 1.35 ata recommendations were temporarily by 1940 - early 1941. The DB601N just like the DB601a could sustain 1.4 ata by factory standards.

[303_Kwiatek]

I suppose 515 kph at deck in Bos is at 1.4 ata? When irl should be achive at 1.35 ata?

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Actual max performence for 1.42 ata ingame might be a little higher than on this sheet due to 2800RPM power setting. The sheet shows values for 1.42 ata / 2600 RPM and mentiones an temporary increase of RPM to 2800 could provide +15km/h at full pressure altitude (the engine ingame uses a modified Kommandogerät incooperating this increased RPM setting as suggested by Messerschmitt Flugzeugwerke).

[303_Kwiatek]

What about describtion at bottom of page where us about 1.25/1.35 ata? Arent maximum speed values in bracket for 1.35 ata? 1.42 ata was increased emergency which should give aditional power above 1.35 ata. 1.35 ata is 1175 hp at deck which comparing to more draggy Emil should give increase speed at the same power settings so 500 kph for emil corensponded well with 515 kph for F2 at 1.35 ata reached the same power output for sea level. So at 1.42 aditional emergency F2 shouldnt be for a while even faster then 515 kph?

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

No, those values are for 1.3 ata / 2400 RPM and 1.42 ata / 2600 RPM (bracket value).

 

Left line of the left table "Höchsgeschwindigkeit" shows TAS ("Wirklich") and the right line IAS ("Anzeige").

 

Translation of the bottom note: "The manifold pressure values are temporarily reduced to 1.25 ata for combat power and 1.35 ata for takeoff power. (Due to that) The combat power (performence) is reduced by 4.5% and takeoff power by 6%."

[Jade_Monkey]

Lol, not even close. The Devs have no idea what they are doing next. Its been said...

You cant be very sharp if you think they really have no idea.

 

Just because they are not telling us it doesnt mean they haven't planned or even started working on something already.

[I/JG27_Rollo]

the MiG is not gorgeous, the Bf 109 is gorgeous. 

A bit late to the party but let me just add this absolutely established, accepted, unbiased, irrefutable and indubitable truth:

 

The MiG is gorgeous, the Bf 109 is gorgeouserest!

 

 

(And yes, gorgeouserest is a word, even if dictionaries will try to make you believe otherwise )

[Askania]

 

"Ursprünlich, hatte man mit einer Leistungssteigerung auf 1400 PS gerechnet, damit wären jedoch zu weitgreifende Änderungen am Triebwerk selbst notwendig geworden."

Edited February 1, 2016 by Askania

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Sry, but what do you want to point out? The first excerp is not usefull at all as it states max. permitted flightspeed for level flight in turbulent weather. It's not referring to the actual performence of the aircraft at all.

 

What's the intention behind the quote?

Edited February 1, 2016 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Askania]

Soviet trials: Bf 109F-2 W.Nr 9209, 2600 U/min 1.35 ata

 

 

 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

As far as I know the F-2 the russians tested had a damaged compressor that didn't acchieve proper high altitude performence. That would also explain why it's quite accurate on deck while largely different at altitude (4+km).

[Urra]

Haven't started the game yet, but I have noticed a few things already:

- Mission editor crashes a lot more often now. Annoying of course, but one can work around it after developing a CTRL-S compulsion.

- DServer seems to use more CPU. Not necessarily bad, depends on what these cycles are used for.

Have not found this yet, overall its identical for me regarding cpu usage.

[Askania]

 

 

As far as I know the F-2 the russians tested had a damaged compressor that didn't acchieve proper high altitude performence.

 

unfortunately for russians, they realized it too late. btw, the trial results have been used for propaganda.

[TheElf]

@Jade_Monkey

 

Hey man, its not my opinion, just stating what I've heard from the people who know.  Something to do with, "they're concentrating all their effort on putting BoM out and making sure that is a success".  I find that to be believeable since BoM is shaping up to be a huge step in the right direction. 

 

Personal attacks aside, it has nothing to do with how sharp I am.  But I really don't think the bolded part I originally responded to exists based on what I've heard.  Not that you're opinion of my sharpness matters to me in least anyway...though I am pretty sharp...ask around.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

@Jade_Monkey

 

Hey man, its not my opinion, just stating what I've heard from the people who know.  Something to do with, "they're concentrating all their effort on putting BoM out and making sure that is a success".  I find that to be believeable since BoM is shaping up to be a huge step in the right direction. 

 

Personal attacks aside, it has nothing to do with how sharp I am.  But I really don't think the bolded part I originally responded to exists based on what I've heard.  Not that you're opinion of my sharpness matters to me in least anyway...though I am pretty sharp...ask around.

 

[coconut]

Have not found this yet, overall its identical for me regarding cpu usage.

Lucky you 

 

It depends on the content of the mission, I suppose. Are you using lots of AIs, and lots of tanks?

Instability issues with the mission editor resolved themselves since the update day, not a single crash since then. I guess a reboot must have done some good there.

[Urra]

if you have micro stutters try a fresh install fixed it for me and its running  nice

Also, updating from trackir software version 5.2.2 to 5.3 cleared up some major stutters, and gave a few(5-10) extra fps back, when run without vsync.

[AbortedMan]

A bit too literally interpreted. Deciding on the next theatre of operations for the next expansion doesn't mean they don't have a business plan or haven't costed it out.

ok...

You cant be very sharp if you think they really have no idea.

 

Just because they are not telling us it doesnt mean they haven't planned or even started working on something already.

 

Half-Life 3 confirmed.

[[TWB]80hd]

I would just like the AI gunner in the back on my 110 to do as well as the ones on that ground =/

[[TWB]80hd]

Have been noticing a lot of really loud KAPOW! noises from my 110 (and others) when taxiing.

 

I dunno if it's just a sound thing, or if it's really indicating damage... have heard another person mention it as well.

 

Anyone else notice this?

 

I've also had two Yaks smash into my ass end and remove it entirely, or chop the horizontal like it's glass and then just fly home like it's no big deal...

 

 

 

 

Not only knocked my tail off, set me on fire too! Hahahahaha (Though that IS the first time I have seen my AI gunner smoke an enemy, so I do feel quite fortunate for that!)

 

Anyway, I dunno if I am just lucky, but it's the 2nd time it's happened in two days (Them Yaks are eager beavers)

The second one took the entire tail section off (And went home)

 

(I'm not posting this in the bug section because I don't yet have enough data, just seeing if anyone else is noticing any weirdness... very fun plane to fly)

 

[III/JG2Gustav05]

Why don't you test it out yourself?

Today I happened to have time to give a quick test, 

Summer map IAS at 300m.

 

Bf109F2,   max continuous speed 494kph,   3 mins boost 503kph. those data has to be achieved by using manual radiator (60%), slower about 8-12kph with auto-radiator. overheat  message shown up but keep coolant temp less than 110C in this test.

 

Mig3,  35% Rad 35% oil cooler, boost,  overheat show up but no problem at 508kph for 4-5 mins. then enigne start to be damaged, engine stops at  around 8 mins.

 

plus much better acceleration, Mig3 has clear speed advantage at this altitude. 

Edited February 3, 2016 by III/JG2Gustav05

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Do you referr to 1.3 ata or 1.35 with "3 min boost"?

 

I've got similar speeds for the F-2 to yours at 1.3 ata although it's not restricted to 3 min. That would rather be "Erhöhte Kampfleistung" = 1.35 ata.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[III/JG2Gustav05]

Do you referr to 1.3 ata or 1.35 with "3 min boost"?

 

I've got similar speeds for the F-2 to yours at 1.3 ata although it's not restricted to 3 min. That would rather be "Erhöhte Kampfleistung" = 1.35 ata.

I mean 2600 RPM, 1.35 ATA, the boost time-up shown up after 3mins.

[303_Kwiatek]

Shouldnt be 515 kph at 1.35 ata 2600 rpm? Mig3 no problem with faster speeds at deck where it shouldnt be faster then F2 at low alts. I wonder why e7 or f2 got problem and a lot overheating with reach historically max speeds when rusian planes like mig or i16 got faster speeds then historically witout too much problem

[III/JG2Gustav05]

Shouldnt be 515 kph at 1.35 ata 2600 rpm? Mig3 no problem with faster speeds at deck where it shouldnt be faster then F2 at low alts. I wonder why e7 or f2 got problem and a lot overheating with reach historically max speeds when rusian planes like mig or i16 got faster speeds then historically witout too much problem

My data is IAS, so tranfer to TAS,  503kph IAS is about 512kph TAS  in summer map, I think the problem right now is Soviet fighters radiators cooling performance are not impacted by higher temperature in summer like German counterparts.  Look how good the Mig3 dive performance is in this game comparing with which in real life I can image what German side would face to in Bf109G6 vs La5F or LaFN scenario.

[Finkeren]

Today I happened to have time to give a quick test,

Summer map IAS at 300m.

 

Bf109F2, max continuous speed 494kph, 3 mins boost 503kph. those data has to be achieved by using manual radiator (60%), slower about 8-12kph with auto-radiator. overheat message shown up but keep coolant temp less than 110C in this test.

 

Mig3, 35% Rad 35% oil cooler 35%, boost, overheat show up but no problem at 508kph for 4-5 mins. than enigne start to be damaged, engine stops at around 8 mins.

 

plus much better acceleration, Mig3 has clear speed advantage at this altitude.

Ok, I admit. Those speeds seem just a tad too slow for the F2. I agree, there could be an issue here.

 

The MiG seems fine though. If you basically have to destroy the engine in a couple of minutes to make it do just over 500 on the deck, that seems believable. Speed and climb rate data for the MiG are all over the map, I've seen anything from 475 to 505 km/h stated as top speed at SL.

 

The F2 should propably be a bit faster though. But it's important to note, that its slow acceleration is propably accurate. The F2 was somewhat underpowered.

[III/JG2Gustav05]

Ok, I admit. Those speeds seem just a tad too slow for the F2. I agree, there could be an issue here.

 

The MiG seems fine though. If you basically have to destroy the engine in a couple of minutes to make it do just over 500 on the deck, that seems believable. Speed and climb rate data for the MiG are all over the map, I've seen anything from 475 to 505 km/h stated as top speed at SL.

 

The F2 should propably be a bit faster though. But it's important to note, that its slow acceleration is propably accurate. The F2 was somewhat underpowered.

Do you mind to pursuit enemy at 508 for 3mins if you know your engine can sustain 4-5mins at this setting? 508 is IAS corresponding TAS should be about 516.

Edited February 3, 2016 by III/JG2Gustav05