Game version 2.007 discussion: Bf 110 G-2, AI airplanes physics optimization

[tailwheel]

Awesome news on the update. In thanks, I bought the ten days of autumn. (Was going to anyway, but this prompted me to do it now). S!

[Lusekofte]

 

 

Not really. All of the VVS fighters have rockets or bombs. Two versions of the heavily armored IL-2 with rockets, bombs and anti-tank guns. Two versions of the Pe-2.

 

Give that option to the Luftwaffe and see what going to happen,  

 

Well personally I do not think this simulator will produce adequate multiengine airplanes I hoped for. It is a hope that is long gone for me. For me it is frustrating to see that Russian side do not get what the LW side get. I have absolutely no interest in fighters with or without bombs.

Well I think this have played out for me 

[Dutchvdm]

Give that option to the Luftwaffe and see what going to happen,

 

Well personally I do not think this simulator will produce adequate multiengine airplanes I hoped for. It is a hope that is long gone for me. For me it is frustrating to see that Russian side do not get what the LW side get. I have absolutely no interest in fighters with or without bombs.

Well I think this have played out for me 

 

What were you hoping for then? Il-4, SB-2?

 

Grt M

[Trooper117]

A-20 is coming remember

[widgeon]

 

Give that option to the Luftwaffe and see what going to happen,

 

Well personally I do not think this simulator will produce adequate multiengine airplanes I hoped for. It is a hope that is long gone for me. For me it is frustrating to see that Russian side do not get what the LW side get. I have absolutely no interest in fighters with or without bombs.

Well I think this have played out for me

 

Laughed thinking of the following vid.  

Remember, just kidding.... 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTc3zcnIZOw

[ShamrockOneFive]

Give that option to the Luftwaffe and see what going to happen,

 

Well personally I do not think this simulator will produce adequate multiengine airplanes I hoped for. It is a hope that is long gone for me. For me it is frustrating to see that Russian side do not get what the LW side get. I have absolutely no interest in fighters with or without bombs.

Well I think this have played out for me 

 

Which multi-engined aircraft in the Moscow, Stalingrad or Kuban period were you hoping to see?

[Scojo]

I just hope for a A 20 next.

As much as I would like this, isn't the Pe-2 just all around superior except for gunner position armaments? I feel like that would mean it wouldn't do well as a collector plane 

[Dutchvdm]

As much as I would like this, isn't the Pe-2 just all around superior except for gunner position armaments? I feel like that would mean it wouldn't do well as a collector plane 

 

I think the A-20 a little bit faster. Don't know for sure.

 

Grt M

[Scojo]

I think the A-20 a little bit faster. Don't know for sure.

 

Grt M

A quick search through a few sites suggests the Pe-2 is faster by roughly 10-20 mph. It's harder to compare the speeds at different altitudes

[Dutchvdm]

A quick search through a few sites suggests the Pe-2 is faster by roughly 10-20 mph. It's harder to compare the speeds at different altitudes

 

Hmm that's weird. Most sources give the Pe-2 around 530 kph at higher altitudes. The A-20B has 350 mph at altitude. 

 

Grt M

[Scojo]

Hmm that's weird. Most sources give the Pe-2 around 530 kph at higher altitudes. The A-20B has 350 mph at altitude. 

 

Grt M

I just looked at top speed for both. What exactly is "At altitude"? You would need to know the altitude to make a proper comparison.

 

I'm sure each one beats the other at different altitudes. But looking across the board, I would say I'd rather be using a Pe-2, unless I'm flying purely alone. Then I may consider the A-20 over it, but it would depend on what I'm attacking and how I'm attacking it.

 

Havoc:

http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?aircraft_model_id=B113

 

Peshka:

http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?aircraft_model_id=B102

 

For the sake of this being a sim though, I'd love to see both if it doesn't mean delaying something more pertinent!

[Dutchvdm]

I just looked at top speed for both. What exactly is "At altitude"? You would need to know the altitude to make a proper comparison.

 

I'm sure each one beats the other at different altitudes. But looking across the board, I would say I'd rather be using a Pe-2, unless I'm flying purely alone. Then I may consider the A-20 over it, but it would depend on what I'm attacking and how I'm attacking it.

 

Havoc:

http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?aircraft_model_id=B113

 

Peshka:

http://ww2db.com/aircraft_spec.php?aircraft_model_id=B102

 

For the sake of this being a sim though, I'd love to see both if it doesn't mean delaying something more pertinent!

 

That explains a lot. Most sources i found rated the Pe-2 much lower. Our ingame Pe-2 will only do just around 500 kph. So we will have to wait for the A-20.

 

Pe-2 series 35

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Nominal: 434 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 2000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 476 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 5000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 521 km/h

 

Pe-2 series 87

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Nominal: 446 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 2000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 476 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 5000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 498 km/h

 

Grt M

[Scojo]

That explains a lot. Most sources i found rated the Pe-2 much lower. Our ingame Pe-2 will only do just around 500 kph. So we will have to wait for the A-20.

 

Pe-2 series 35

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Nominal: 434 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 2000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 476 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 5000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 521 km/h

 

Pe-2 series 87

Maximum true air speed at sea level, engine mode - Nominal: 446 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 2000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 476 km/h

Maximum true air speed at 5000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 498 km/h

 

Grt M

Ah ok thanks. I guess I didn't find the numbers I found as odd since I always fly the peshka low and without radiators fully closed and throttle fully open.

 

I'll have to hop in one sometime and do a speed run at 5km and see what I get

[Lusekofte]

Another thing is the silence about how well the BF 110 with the 37 mm flies and manoeuvre. The night fighter version could not follow a Lancaster in a corkscrew manoeuvre. The only effect loss it got with the pod is speed as far as I can see. 

It is the most stable gun platform I ever flown. I shot down 4 PE 2 with the cannon in a row. Single shot all of them. I am not saying it is wrong, and fighting against AI do really not say much.

 

What I wish for?

I wish for a similar amount of bombers on red side, and I would not mind a SB 2 , IL 4 , 

[Dakpilot]

It is not always about the 'best performing aircraft' but sometimes about the experience and just enjoyment of different types of aircraft

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv24_Zami]

It is not always about the 'best performing aircraft' but sometimes about the experience and just enjoyment of different types of aircraft

 

Cheers Dakpilot

This

[Scojo]

It is not always about the 'best performing aircraft' but sometimes about the experience and just enjoyment of different types of aircraft

 

Cheers Dakpilot

+1

 

I ran out of upvotes lol

[LukeFF]

 

 

One last thing: the 37mm gondole under fuselage was for ground attacks only and there was never any hope of hitting any flying object with it!

 

Source? 

[LittleJP]

Hey, I once hit a 111 with the Hurricane 57mms in 1946.

[Scojo]

I once dropped a bomb from a medium bomber and it hit a fighter below me

[KoN_]

I-16 has inlet cowls. Like La-5.

Thank you ` So sorry my key bindings were all  mucked up , as i only fly Axis 80% of the time . 

And my wheel breaks were on constantly fixed now . 

Very happy with the 190 . 

[Juri_JS]

 

26. Aircraft bump textures can be edited by users;

 

Is it possible to give a skin its own bump texture file?

[Dakpilot]

Is it possible to give a skin its own bump texture file?

 

"Bumpmaps (or normalmaps) model 3d effects by artificially highlighting parts of a flat texture that normaly would have to be modeled in 3d creating and offset effect. One example for that is the corrugated metal effect on the Ju 52.

Since it's a completely different file you don't have to change anything on your skins. Once put in the folder the new bumpmap will be applied to all skins by default."

 

New bumpmap 4K to take advantage of new 4k FW-190 skins

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27548-all-new-4k-bumpmap-file-fw190-a3-ready-download/?do=findComment&comment=438889

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited February 2, 2017 by Dakpilot

[Thad]

No I don't think so. A lot of people bought in to the idea of this sim when there was nothing but hope and a promise. Considering that the game is maturing at a rapid pace and most issues have been or are being worked out, I feel pretty good knowing I was there in the beginning. The gold bars are a nice little perk for getting on board when others chose to wait and see.

I was just indicating that I could not have taken advantage of the previous early access opportunity because I was not aware of the game until recently.

[Juri_JS]

 

"Bumpmaps (or normalmaps) model 3d effects by artificially highlighting parts of a flat texture that normaly would have to be modeled in 3d creating and offset effect. One example for that is the corrugated metal effect on the Ju 52.

Since it's a completely different file you don't have to change anything on your skins. Once put in the folder the new bumpmap will be applied to all skins by default."

 

New bumpmap 4K to take advantage of new 4k FW-190 skins

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27548-all-new-4k-bumpmap-file-fw190-a3-ready-download/?do=findComment&comment=438889

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Of course I know how bumpmaps work. But when I create a skin with rivets and panel lines that differ from the standard bump texture file the effect looks ugly. That's why having the possibility to give skins their own bump texture would be useful. I am asking this question because I work on a Ju-88D skin, which requires some changes to the underside of the Ju-88A4 fuselage, both in the skin file and in the bump texture file.

Edited February 2, 2017 by Juri_JS

[Dakpilot]

Of course I know how bumpmaps work. But when I create a skin with rivets and panel lines that differ from the standard bump texture file the effect looks ugly. That's why having the possibility to give skins their own bump texture would be useful. I am asking this question because I work on a Ju-88D skin, which requires some changes to the underside of the Ju-88A4 fuselage, both in the skin file and in the bump texture file.

 

See post # 11 in the thread I linked for some discussion on this issue, I think bump maps are treated per aircraft rather than per skin as default

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

It's not possible to assing skins an individual bumpmap. The system does only support 1 bumpmap for all skins.

Edited February 2, 2017 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Freycinet]

Great job devs, you hit this one out of the ballpark! 

[Rjel]

I was just indicating that I could not have taken advantage of the previous early access opportunity because I was not aware of the game until recently.

I understand and I wasn't aiming that at you in particular but there have been a good number of people who have decided to take a wait and see attitude during the course of development cycle. That certainly is their prerogative to do so. I guess having some blind faith in BoX has made it special to a lot of folks here. The little gold bars are a little perk in that respect. No slight was intended towards yourself on my part.

[Thad]

No problem... I am not that thin skinned.
 

[Chief_Mouser]

Well... I hate the Fw190.   I moaned about being included in the first place, I griped about having to buy it just to get at the unlocks, and I damn near refused to fly it.

But I did make myself a skin based on one I had done in Il-2 46, and a few weeks ago took it up for a flight just to see how it looked. The skin was fine, but the plane nothing special; I didn't even have much fun ground-pounding with it  and certainly no luck at dogfighting.

So today I'd thought I'd have another go and see if anything had changed and my goodness - what a difference  . It's an absolute dream and incredibly lethal. Smashing up trains galore, shooting down AI La5s one after another and actually enjoying mucking around in it. I can still stall and spin it but then there's never been a plane that I can't. I just hope that I never see one coming at me whilst flying for the VVS!

 

And no, I don't hate it any more and am pleased to have it in my game. Well done devs.

Cheers.

[dapits]

I very rarily post, but here, i have to :

 

THIS UPDATE IS AWSOME !! :D

 

Thanks a million time to the hard working devs, because the 190 is my favorite plane.

 

I flew a couple of qmb missions with it before i updated just to be sure i would notice the difference.

 

Well... Night and day !

 

And also : The behaviour of ai aircraft is much more believable now.

 

At last the 190 behaves like a fighter.

Doing a simple looping is not a risky adventure anymore.

 

And it feels like going out of a spin is a little bit easier..

 

Thanks A LOT also for fixing the delete bug in the mission builder

 

Oh, and by the way, i am really looking forward for this COOP missions server thing you mentioned for the future,

 

because it might bring me back to multiplayer which i deserted because i was fed up flying lonely in my fighter bomber with no escort and HORDES of wanabe aces chewing my *ss.

 

Too much of a frustrating experience.

 

With REAL attack groups and escorts starting at the same time, even if you are not on teamspeak and part of a virtual squadron is on the way to make a realistic mission experience in my humble opinion.

 

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR MAKING THIS SIM BETTER AND BETTER..

(I didnt expect this update to come so early, you guys are MACHINES !)

Edited February 3, 2017 by dapits

[machtu]

Update info on the 2.007 indicates that the aiming help was reactivated, yet I have not been able to get it to turn on.   Is it active in the system now?

[Saurer]

Update info on the 2.007 indicates that the aiming help was reactivated, yet I have not been able to get it to turn on.   Is it active in the system now?

 

Look in the Quick Mission under Realsim for Aiming Assistant and Bombing Assistant

[daliborsky]

"Aircraft bump textures can be edited by users;"...Hi! ,what is that bump textures?edited? where?something whith skins ? 

something like this (DCS) 

[senseispcc]

Could you please revise the take-off procedure of the Mig 3 that with the new patch is more and more impossible?!

20 try, 20 time my Mig ends with is engine in the ground after some going around in circles on the ground when applying any correction or no correction?!

I start with a wind force 6 and a turbulence 2 m/s in the quick mission build, did anyone try?! Impossible to take off with the Mig 3 the other Soviet planes are difficult but not impossible but this one is impossible?! The second most difficult is the I-16 then the La-5, Lagg-3, P 40, Yak-1 and the easy one like all German ones the Yak- 1b.

Try in, the same conditions before saying you do it with your fingers in your nose!  

​Thank You.

 

[XQ_Lothar29]

this is the rfare effects in the clouds after patch 2.007

 

[Dutchvdm]

Another thing is the silence about how well the BF 110 with the 37 mm flies and manoeuvre. The night fighter version could not follow a Lancaster in a corkscrew manoeuvre. The only effect loss it got with the pod is speed as far as I can see. 

It is the most stable gun platform I ever flown. I shot down 4 PE 2 with the cannon in a row. Single shot all of them. I am not saying it is wrong, and fighting against AI do really not say much.

 

The G4 night fighter can't really be compared to the G2 Zerstorer version. It had a crew of three, extra radar equipment and different armament. 

 

Grt M

[FTC_Karaya]

Yea, the nightfighter weighted almost 1.5 tons more than the dayfighter version. The Bk37 weights a fraction of that (~300kg) which is compensated a bit by the fact that the 20mm cannons and their ammunition are removed at the same time.

Edited February 3, 2017 by JG4_Karaya

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I feel guilty even asking this but is there any timeline for a hotfix on the one-hit-no-guns issue the 110 G-2 currently suffers from?

 

I thought I could manage at first until losing a piece of my tailplane broke all my guns.