Bf109 overheating in winter

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

I have noticed that the 109 G series get the overheat techno chat message on wintermaps faily easy when flying at full combat and above 4K. On summer maps this isn’t the case. For me there is no reason why this should be the case.

Has anyone else noticed that?

Edited March 28, 2019 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Its been an issue for a few years now.

 

@E69_geramos109 made a thread about it and posted a video relating to the problem.

 

https://youtu.be/qJuKXXwDEHU

 

 

 

 

[E69_geramos109]

Yes. It happens also even at 1.15 ata on cruising. And on 1.2 ata is easy as well to obtain the overheat. 

I found that the overheat is caused because the oil radiator is not opening.

 

I sent everything to devs. They just answered with an evasive comment like not confirming me the bug. And they just said that they will have a look. But months have passed since that and the bug is still there. 

[Matt]

Will post it on the beta forums. Does it also happen with F and K models?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

Will post it on the beta forums. Does it also happen with F and K models?

I noticed it myself and because topic is hot I recalled it and already posted my findings, but the more the better.

Edited March 28, 2019 by 307_Tomcat

[BubiHUN]

This appears with F-4 too. 

[LColony_Kong]

i just ignore it. iver never seen the engine break because of it. i think its a glitch

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

You were able to ignore it, but since one of the lst patches I think the overheat valve opens and you loose coolant, when this message comes on, which results in even worse cooling

3 hours ago, Matt said:

Will post it on the beta forums. Does it also happen with F and K models?

 

Have not had it in the K4 or the G14 to be honest but cannot confirm... maybe because I use MW50 when in combat then.

Edited March 28, 2019 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[E69_geramos109]

I did not test it on K and F but it happens on every G model (not while using MW50) 

It seems that some glitches are not important for devs but...   what can we do.. At least they have the info and the feedback of the players.

 

I really hope when the BOB is going to be released the devs will make a breack of new content as they anounce to make a big improove on the game because actually it has really big flaws with Fms, limitations like rendering distance and a ton of glitches...

[DEDMANcjp]

10 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

I really hope when the BOB is going to be released the devs will make a breack of new content as they anounce to make a big improove on the game

100% agree with this

[Legioneod]

Agreed, it'd be nice for the Devs to put some time into fixing/improving what we have instead of just adding more content.

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Agreed, it'd be nice for the Devs to put some time into fixing/improving what we have instead of just adding more content.

 

They already do that. 

[LColony_Kong]

19 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

They already do that. 

Ok...they should do it more often then. As was obvious and you were well aware (or should have been), Legioneod's post was merely expressing a general statement. It was obviously unnecessary of him to caveat his statement with what was already taken for granted: that the devs clearly deliver improvements to the existing game that are not totally novel in their nature.

 

It is a major issue within the simulation gaming world that developers spend too much time on new releases than on fixing what already exists. I would be willing to bet that this stems from the fact that it is harder to sell patches than it is to sell new content because the average sim player is a baboon who generally feels entitled to patches and does not want to pay for them. Given this rational fear, and the fact this is ultimately a business where monetary concerns come first,  I think sim developers, in general, can be empathized with. Assuming my guess is true, of course.

 

Endless new content stops being appealing when glaring mistakes are never solved. That new flashy P-XXX or Bf-XXX or Yak-XXX is not something I want to spend money on when I know that there are issues that will screw up the appeal regardless of how well done the specific work is on new content.

 

I'd pay 100 dollars for a patch that improved spotting, engine management issues, flaps issues, and a litany of other things that have been complained about on these forums. Including some that the devs have either stated outright (or implied), they intend to get to when they have the time.

 

[Legioneod]

42 minutes ago, Fumes said:

Ok...they should do it more often then. As was obvious and you were well aware (or should have been), Legioneod's post was merely expressing a general statement. It was obviously unnecessary of him to caveat his statement with what was already taken for granted: that the devs clearly deliver improvements to the existing game that are not totally novel in their nature.

 

It is a major issue within the simulation gaming world that developers spend too much time on new releases than on fixing what already exists. I would be willing to bet that this stems from the fact that it is harder to sell patches than it is to sell new content because the average sim player is a baboon who generally feels entitled to patches and does not want to pay for them. Given this rational fear, and the fact this is ultimately a business where monetary concerns come first,  I think sim developers, in general, can be empathized with. Assuming my guess is true, of course.

 

Endless new content stops being appealing when glaring mistakes are never solved. That new flashy P-XXX or Bf-XXX or Yak-XXX is not something I want to spend money on when I know that there are issues that will screw up the appeal regardless of how well done the specific work is on new content.

 

I'd pay 100 dollars for a patch that improved spotting, engine management issues, flaps issues, and a litany of other things that have been complained about on these forums. Including some that the devs have either stated outright (or implied), they intend to get to when they have the time.

 

 

Agreed. I didn't mean it as an insult to the devs. All I meant was that sometimes fixing/improving what we have is more important than adding new toys to play with.

I understand they need to make money and in order to do that they need more content to sell.

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, Fumes said:

Ok...they should do it more often then.

 

Have you not seen how many patches / updates have been released in the last 4, 6 weeks? I don't want to be redundant, but they are fixing things when they can, with the time and resources they have. Yes, we all wish those things would come faster, but that's just not gonna happen.

 

6 hours ago, Fumes said:

I'd pay 100 dollars for a patch that improved spotting, engine management issues, flaps issues, and a litany of other things that have been complained about on these forums. Including some that the devs have either stated outright (or implied), they intend to get to when they have the time.

 

Which is never going to happen, for reasons that should be obvious to you. It would be a financial disaster for them to try selling something like that - and it has nothing to do with gamers being "baboons." 

[E69_geramos109]

12 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

They already do that. 

Yes they are fixing some small things allways but nothing compared what should be done on the game. [edited]

 

But this is become offtopic. 

Coming back to the radiator bug you @=EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn can send a pm as well. Maybe if they have some pms from various people complaining about the same they will realice that is something worth to solve it.

 

Edited March 29, 2019 by SYN_Haashashin
Watch it...rule 17,19. Second and last warning

[LColony_Kong]

15 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Have you not seen how many patches / updates have been released in the last 4, 6 weeks? I don't want to be redundant, but they are fixing things when they can, with the time and resources they have. Yes, we all wish those things would come faster, but that's just not gonna happen.

 

 

Which is never going to happen, for reasons that should be obvious to you. It would be a financial disaster for them to try selling something like that - and it has nothing to do with gamers being "baboons." 

I have no doubt it won't happen, but it is definitely because the sim community is full of people who want everything for free or at too low a cost.  Broadly speaking gamers at large really. Subscription models for games made certain things possible that are not anymore.  People stopped wanting to pay for it. Subscription models were replaced by the FTP model, which once again, people don't want to pay for. 

 

To your bit about financial disaster: What do you think BOBP and the Pacific are? They are partially new content, and partially a way of paying for all the other excellent work the dev team has to do for this game. You don't explicitly pay for the patches.  What do you think the purpose of pre-ordering is?

 

So while the content added in the last few weeks has been good, I am of the opinion that it is not enough. Few of a really major gripes people have been solved. Although many have been acknowledged. And since BOBP amounts to more than just the price of new content,  I think its completely reasonable to express the direction people would like to see more time devoted to.

 

 

 

 

[LukeFF]

57 minutes ago, Fumes said:

I have no doubt it won't happen, but it is definitely because the sim community is full of people who want everything for free or at too low a cost.  Broadly speaking gamers at large really. Subscription models for games made certain things possible that are not anymore.  People stopped wanting to pay for it. Subscription models were replaced by the FTP model, which once again, people don't want to pay for. 

 

I think you are missing one of the other big problems with a subscription model: if ends up fragmenting the community into those who subscribe and those who don't. The big advantage of the current system is that, no matter how many modules one owns, everyone is on the same version of the game. In a niche genre like this, that's a very big deal. 

[LColony_Kong]

17 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

I think you are missing one of the other big problems with a subscription model: if ends up fragmenting the community into those who subscribe and those who don't. The big advantage of the current system is that, no matter how many modules one owns, everyone is on the same version of the game. In a niche genre like this, that's a very big deal. 

There is always the option of mandatory subscription models, where you sub or you don't play.  I am not saying we need a sub model, but the point is that the sim genre, in general, has an issue where the absurd expectations of their communities lead to less than ideal situations. When a certain other sim released several new maps for 50-90 dollars a piece, I would have been a rich man if I got a penny for every person whining about how X amount of dollars for a "mere map" is too much. Nevermind that the cost of the map subsidizes the general operation of the company.

 

There are many ways to solve this issue. A certain dev I know you are aware of charges 10 dollars for patches to each successive major version of the game. No one loses access to the older versions, they just have to pay for the major patches. You keep what you already paid for. The community of that game hates that method, with much whining about it on their forum. Yet funnily enough, they all still fork out the cash. 

 

The current system that most major sims are using is one where there is a defacto subscription, where new content is released, that happens to usually also hold major adjustments to the game. Or those adjustments come between the releases but are paid for by the expected return down the line.  The disadvantage of this is that it creates problems as it solves them, and generally unfriendly to truly major fixes. 

 

And back to what I said earlier, it is probably in the interest of both parties to make major fixes. Fixes to things like radiators, flaps, engine management, spotting. Changes that require (probably) more than a small patch now and then. New content will stop making sense if the value of that new content is tainted by existing issues. A P-51 is going to be alot less fun it its flaps dont work.  Fixing engine heat modeling (radiators), spotting, etc. Or the major UI changes that DID happen, are examples of changes that make EVERY piece of content added better.

 

And if its ALL better, we are all more likely to keep shelling out for new modules.

 

 

 

Back to radiators: if it is any consolation, I have never seen this overheating message kill my engine. I have seen it many times and I just ignore it. I think its a text bug. 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2019 by Fumes

[Legioneod]

I wouldn't mind a subscription model similar to EVE in order to keep funds flowing. One of the reasons EVE is so successful is because the players continually funded it's development over the years through subscriptions.

 

I do think it' a bit late to implement something like that for Il2 but I'm not opposed to the idea.

[CUJO_1970]

subscription....lol

 

no