Jump to content
Con

Is Axis airframes too easy to bring down .

Recommended Posts

Is the damage modelling nurfed for the axis airframes ``seems to me that any hits on the axis aircraft result in either engine failure from a dead six position . I don`t want this too turning into a arcade shooter.

Many patches ago airframes could take damage and evade and fly defensive but today its seem a few hits and its totally over `even one hit is bring off wings clean off  . And this is happening a lot . 

Are the developers going to look into the damage modelling .???  

Is Armour plating working . ??

 

Edited by II./JG77_Con
  • Haha 3
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Anecdotal experience"

 

"Where are your tests"

 

"VVS has double wing spar"

 

"Look at Vya 23mm round - its so much bigger than minengeshoss"

 

etc. etc.

 

 

Patch notes specify that the load factors were recalculated. Some people said that they felt the VVS aircraft are easier to bring down now. Previous to this patch some people were saying 109 was no longer the glass it used to be...

 

We lack consistent test benches to evaluate all of these changes. And a lot of the effects are opaque and not explained by the devs very well at all.

 

And the thread will devolve into bickering about damage modelling and who has the bigger cannon again.

 

Edit: I honestly don't know what to do here - should the community agree to some standardised testing that people will mostly adhere to?  Any tests that people did before always had someone trying to discredit them "because oh your test is too specific and doesn't reflect real gameplay".... Ideally we would have some tools provided to us that allow consistent and repeatable testing (i.e. external camera able to "shoot" at aircraft with 0 spread weapons of choice, set in console? like those "debug" or "cheat" modes other games have - that will make it super easy to test armour plating and part damage / etc)

Edited by JaffaCake
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very hard to obtain any kind of consistent feeling due to changing two parameters simultaneously: When you change the targets (blue vs red), you also switch guns. 

Therefore its impossible to tell whether one side has better guns or the other one has weaker planes.

 

An objective, static, repeatable test is needed for that, so that the same gun is used on different airframes, counting bullets/shells needed for certain amount of damage, and then comparing the results. Shouldn't be too hard to set up. (EDIT: Jaffa beat me to it :))

 

All this "feelings" and "beliefs" are not going to get anybody anywhere.

Edited by CrazyDuck
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, II./JG77_Con said:

Is the damage modelling nurfed for the axis airframes ``seems to me that any hits on the axis aircraft result in either engine failure from a dead six position . I don`t want this too turning into a arcade shooter.

Many patches ago airframes could take damage and evade and fly defensive but today its seem a few hits and its totally over `even one hit is bring off wings clean off  . And this is happening a lot . 

Are the developers going to look into the damage modelling .???  

Is Armour plating working . ??

 

 

You might want to take this over to the FM discussion area, as there are lots of similar discussions happening there, mate!

Needless to say you are not alone, but only evidence etc etc will work, however, my concern is that if people believe it is becoming like an arcade shooter then they will leave; me included!

 

regards

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Is the damage modelling nurfed for the axis airframes ``seems to me that any hits on the axis aircraft result in either engine failure from a dead six position .

 

The axis do have other aircrafts than the 109 you know. Some of them are actually quite tough.

 

I can agree on that the 109 is quite fragile, but if this is historically correct or not, I do not know.

 

But saying that all axis aircrafts are nerfed is just BS

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chopper said:

The axis do have other aircrafts than the 109 you know. Some of them are actually quite tough.

 

I can agree on that the 109 is quite fragile, but if this is historically correct or not, I do not know.

 

But saying that all axis aircrafts are nerfed is just BS

 

 

He is asking a question, not making a statement!

Therefore, before you start calling BS, perhaps we should all be better informed and understand the issues as calling BS is just as bad perhaps as calling things nerfed!

Whether you believe it is nerfed or BS, it should be based on factual evidence, otherwise the discussion will go nowhere, so at least be respectful to a post that is perhaps seeking guidance/help/assistance!

That said, there is a FM  area, where perhaps this could be better discussed

 

Regards

Edited by Haza
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Haza said:

 

That said, there is a FM  area, where perhaps this could be better discussed

Agreed.

 

 And if you also would include what aircraft it is you want to discuss it would be even better.

 

There is not one damage model for the axis and one for the allies. Each airplane is different.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, 109 as a fragile aircraft as per design.  Just like the Spit or dare I say it, even the Yak.  Try flying the Yak after getting some small caliber holes appearing on any wing.  She turns form lovely flyer to a real handful to keep in the air.

 

Then there is the Pe 2, try flying the Peshka when 1 engine has been killed.  Not the easiest thing to do, better to land or bail unlike the 110 or the Ju88.

 

I have noticed the standard 20mm on the 109 does a great job or taking wings off Il2's and other attack aircraft. Just like the 20mm Hispanos do a lovely job on 110's:biggrin:

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even back then the damage modelling wasn't very good.

Edited by Wedgewood
  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Wedgewood said:

Even back then the damage modelling wasn't very good.

 

 

Looks like all of these are internal ammo explosions (some probably from the MK108s). Do we have this simulated in the sim? I don't think so.

Edited by CrazyDuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CrazyDuck said:

 

 

Looks like all of these are internal ammo explosions (some probably from the MK108s). Do we have this simulated in the sim? I don't think so.

it is.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CrazyDuck said:

 

 

Looks like all of these are internal ammo explosions (some probably from the MK108s). Do we have this simulated in the sim? I don't think so.

 

 

It is simulated - was in one of the dev diaries even. Has nothing to do with the wing falling off due to the damage.

 

Though I don't ever recall seeing such an explosion from ammo rack - may need an improvement on the graphics side of things? (add an effect). Although its difficult to say from the video what the aircraft were and what they were shot with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JaffaCake said:

 

 

It is simulated - was in one of the dev diaries even. Has nothing to do with the wing falling off due to the damage.

 

Though I don't ever recall seeing such an explosion from ammo rack - may need an improvement on the graphics side of things? (add an effect). Although its difficult to say from the video what the aircraft were and what they were shot with.

Here's the video description.

" wing hits on the 20mm ammo in the wing guns, causes the explosians and blow the wings off "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, blitze said:

Yes, 109 as a fragile aircraft as per design.  Just like the Spit or dare I say it, even the Yak.  Try flying the Yak after getting some small caliber holes appearing on any wing.  She turns form lovely flyer to a real handful to keep in the air.

 

Then there is the Pe 2, try flying the Peshka when 1 engine has been killed.  Not the easiest thing to do, better to land or bail unlike the 110 or the Ju88.

 

I have noticed the standard 20mm on the 109 does a great job or taking wings off Il2's and other attack aircraft. Just like the 20mm Hispanos do a lovely job on 110's:biggrin:

 

It's interesting that you mentioned the Spit. I don't know how fragile it was in RL, but in-game it doesn't seem to be. Ok, i don't fly it, but judging from the LW point of view it just seems harder to dispatch compared to Yaks. 

There was a discussion about this a while ago and they said 'it's just as easy to destroy' or 'learn to aim', but i'd rather believe my own eyes, even if it's just subjective impression and not some scientific test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think so. I spent 3/4 of the P-39’s 37mm on a single He-111, and it was still flying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not recognized described behavior but will give it a try this evening. I do however have a feeling that something regarding damage has changed, at least in MP. (yaks tend to go down after 3 Mg151 hits on average now) I've never dewinged soviet planes as easily as I do now, so maybe this affects all planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Spits wings can take a bit of damage unlike the Yak but the Merlin (engine) is a precious unit. 

 

The 109 I have taken engine damage where I'm burning oil and yet I have nursed it 50+ kms to get back to base and land.  Just throttle back to 50 to 60% or under 7 / 8 ATA and open the rads manually to at least half way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had similar results with Ju-88s this weekend, 2-3 hits with 37 mm were necessary to bring it down. On one occasion I had a direct hit in upper part of wingtip. It remained attached and aircraft continued flying. A bit surprising. What was exactly the explosive charge in 37 mm gun P-39 is equipped with ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not experienced any differences in the bf 109 resilience in recent months. I've had F4s riddled with holes, large sections of wing surface gone, engine smoking and still made it home!

Maybe the AI just hit you in the right place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

I had similar results with Ju-88s this weekend, 2-3 hits with 37 mm were necessary to bring it down. On one occasion I had a direct hit in upper part of wingtip. It remained attached and aircraft continued flying. A bit surprising. What was exactly the explosive charge in 37 mm gun P-39 is equipped with ?

 

 

P-39 had 90g HE filler (filler type?)       45-48g of tetryl filler??? (http://p63kingcobra.com/m4_37mm_auto_cannon.html, http://quarryhs.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm)

109-g6 had 85g HE filler (RDX)

 

RE factor for RDX is 1.60, 1.25 for tetryl (and slower detonation speed). Basically mk108 has more explosive filler with better explosive effectiveness and faster detonation speed. P-39 he shell acts via fragmentation mostly from my POV, as size of the HE charge is tiny in comparison to the shell size.

 

A friend of mine who tested 109-g6 mentioned that Pe2 is able to handle multiple mk108 hits and still live to land. So we could be back to HE modelling issue.

Edited by JaffaCake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Wedgewood said:

Even back then the damage modelling wasn't very good.

Options were more limited with DX 2.1 back then :P 

 

This discussion is going nowhere. 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, JaffaCake said:

A friend of mine who tested 109-g6 mentioned that Pe2 is able to handle multiple mk108 hits and still live to land. So we could be back to HE modelling issue.

I've had both oneshots and multiple hits with little effect, but multiple hits and landing fine is a very rare occurance. When you have average numbers for damage, well its just average sometimes you need 10 shells, sometimes 1. Most of the time 4-6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 216th_Jordan said:

I've had both oneshots and multiple hits with little effect, but multiple hits and landing fine is a very rare occurance. When you have average numbers for damage, well its just average sometimes you need 10 shells, sometimes 1. Most of the time 4-6.

 

 

I am surprised you expect a Pe2 to take 4-6 hits on average from mk108 (especially as a tester for il2?). While I only have wiki to back myself up on this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK_108_cannon) they quote average 4 hits against 4-engine heavy bomber (b17 / liberator). Pe2 is anything but a well armoured heavy bomber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recorded a video a few days ago showing a 109 with three I-16s on his tail using 50 cals.  They were lighting him up like firecrackers on Chinese New Year but he was shrugging it all off for a good 60 seconds before finally succumbing.   I have certainly had my fair share of filling 109s, 190s & 110s with holes until they are belching black smoke then breaking off to let them crash then finding they had flown home and landed safely or climbed back up to attack me again.   It is subjective for both sides,  sometimes they die after a half second burst and sometimes they soak up everything you have and fly home.   I  listen to LW pilots complaining that PE2 are impossible to kill and I think to myself 'Why does my PE2 always explode on the  first attack?' :-)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

I recorded a video a few days ago showing a 109 with three I-16s on his tail using 50 cals.  They were lighting him up like firecrackers on Chinese New Year but he was shrugging it all off for a good 60 seconds before finally succumbing.   I have certainly had my fair share of filling 109s, 190s & 110s with holes until they are belching black smoke then breaking off to let them crash then finding they had flown home and landed safely or climbed back up to attack me again.   It is subjective for both sides,  sometimes they die after a half second burst and sometimes they soak up everything you have and fly home.   I  listen to LW pilots complaining that PE2 are impossible to kill and I think to myself 'Why does my PE2 always explode on the  first attack?' :-)

 

 

i-16 type 24 never had 0.50 cal armament .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fundamental flaw of this thread, and the reason everyone’s starting out by calling BS, is the use of the term “Axis airframes”. Instead of presenting a point regarding the damage model of specific aircraft, the OP immediately jumped to a generalization about all aircraft on the Axis side, thereby undermining his own point entirely.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JaffaCake said:

 

 

I am surprised you expect a Pe2 to take 4-6 hits on average from mk108 (especially as a tester for il2?). 

 

What does my status as tester have to do with this? The number btw is not an actual test result but an estimation by me, might be higher, might be lower.

 

But I checked the german wikipedia and there is no mention of 4 hit on average and on the english wikipedia there is not even a source for the 4 shells average statement. Wikipedia once told me german planes were forbidden to enter fights with Yak-9s, while that was an order regarding Yak-3s. (it got deleted later on) Take those sources with a grain if salt. While I do think its possible for as little as 4 shells ob average to destroy a big bomber I'd think that this would mostly be a result of damaged and destroyed systems and fires and then the size is not that important anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 216th_Jordan said:

 

What does my status as tester have to do with this? The number btw is not an actual test result but an estimation by me, might be higher, might be lower.

 

Well, I'd expect testers to have a clear idea of the expected performances and behaviours / interactions of the aircraft, so they can report such issues to developers, and not leave it to the players to find later. I could be wrong about the tester role in il2 development cycle though, so apologies if it is indeed not expected of you to know these things.

 

I agree, I'll have to find a better source than just uncited wiki comment (although I have not heard it from just wiki articles, don't have those sources at the moment unfortunately).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flying career it does seem that the German metal work has started to suffer from field corrosion as it has never felt easier to shred Axis planes in my Mig. Haven't tried from the German perspective as I exclusively fly Allied but certainly it seems that a well placed burst tend to have a wing come off more often now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, blitze said:

The Spits wings can take a bit of damage unlike the Yak but the Merlin (engine) is a precious unit. 

 

The 109 I have taken engine damage where I'm burning oil and yet I have nursed it 50+ kms to get back to base and land.  Just throttle back to 50 to 60% or under 7 / 8 ATA and open the rads manually to at least half way.

I've noticed this as well. I LOVE how they represented the Spit in this game, but it seems like on half my flights the engine gets damaged. Much more than the Russian or German planes. No big deal and it may be historically accurate, just something I've noticed. 

 

The most fragile plane in the game (IMO) is the BF-110. Whether I'm flying it or shooting at it, it just seems to come apart on contact. If I want a turkey shoot I'll load up a bunch of 110's and go at them with a Spit, P-39, or Yak. The HE-111 always has felt pretty durable to me and I don't notice greater fragility with the German single engine fighters compared to Russian. 


The toughest plane in the mix is definitely the IL-2, but then again it was of course heavily armored in real life. Still, I suspect just a bit of extra love was programmed into that bird, as it is the series title after all!

Edited by Porkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Georgio said:

Flying career it does seem that the German metal work has started to suffer from field corrosion as it has never felt easier to shred Axis planes in my Mig. Haven't tried from the German perspective as I exclusively fly Allied but certainly it seems that a well placed burst tend to have a wing come off more often now.

 

In my, rather extensive, experience with the MiG I have never had trouble taken wings off with the UBS, and I can't say that I've noticed any difference after the update. 

 

Could it be, that the AI in career act more like willing target drones than the opponents you're used to, and hence you hit with a larger percentage of the shots you fire?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pass, I don't fly as often as I'd like these days so it would be interesting to see if I felt the same against human opponents that are manoeuvring with gusto on a dogfight server...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JaffaCake said:

 

 

i-16 type 24 never had 0.50 cal armament .

 

Whoops.  I was flying a Mig while that was happening and my aging brain messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

Could it be, that the AI in career act more like willing target drones than the opponents you're used to, and hence you hit with a larger percentage of the shots you fire?  

Could be, but still. I've flown the MiG quite extensively in the old campaign, but killing 109s by ripping off their wing with 2 UBs was a bit of novelty to me in the new campaign. I noticed it as something that I rarely had experienced before. I can't tell if its due to the different flying style of the AI or to some hidden weekness in the DM of the 109, but I actually feel some difference in this regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, II./JG77_Con said:

Is the damage modelling nurfed for the axis airframes ``seems to me that any hits on the axis aircraft result in either engine failure from a dead six position . I don`t want this too turning into a arcade shooter.

Many patches ago airframes could take damage and evade and fly defensive but today its seem a few hits and its totally over `even one hit is bring off wings clean off  . And this is happening a lot . 

Are the developers going to look into the damage modelling .???  

Is Armour plating working . ??

 

 

Good grief, not again... :rolleyes:

 

Tip to the OP: you might be taken more seriously if your posts weren't riddled with spelling and grammar errors.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal durability does not seem to have changed, though, I try to make myself a target as little as possible and a difficult one when necessary. On the other hand, I am de-winging Soviet fighters at a much greater rate than before this patch. I'm pretty sure this is anecdotal and also that Soviet planes are not Axis. Dunno, could be wrong.................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(facepalm Luke)

 
OP: Russian ShVAK cannons are ingame easier to hit with, due to their higher velocity/ROF and tend to cause very critical damage. Flying 109 vs 109 or 190 vs 190 will tell you that 1 click burst are less likely to be fatal, than when facing ShVAK. In general i think the damage model is very good for all aircraft, not perfect but good. 
 

Edited by EAF_T_Sunde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Finkeren said:

Could it be, that the AI in career act more like willing target drones than the opponents you're used to, and hence you hit with a larger percentage of the shots you fire?  

 

Unless difficulty is set to low, I doubt AI act like target drones.  I have had good scraps on both sides with fighters in a fighter.  Then now as a Il2 pilot, I have to watch my back pretty much until I get home.  Cloud hopping seems to help.  No more lawn darting AI either from my experience, can't get them to take up residence in the ground if they are hard on my back and I dive with last minute pullout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Good grief, not again... :rolleyes:

 

Tip to the OP: you might be taken more seriously if your posts weren't riddled with spelling and grammar errors.

As long as people can understand what he's trying to discuss who cares if his spelling or grammar is correct? Instead of insulting the man, why not offer something of value to the discussion?

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These "help! the German planes are nerfed!!" discussion are never of value.

Edited by Gambit21
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...