Jump to content
Alonzo

Combat Box by Red Flight

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Raven109 said:

 

No doubt.... Playing on the hard side (whichever that may be) is a choice... The quality of life depends on the choices we make.

Don't get me wrong, totally agree with that, however I don't know whether you've ever tried VR so I just don't want people to dismiss the zoom discussion as trying to gain an advantage to compensate for a voluntary choice of hardware; it's actually restricted a lot more than a monitor because the way zoom works in the software.

Personally if I fly in VR I will just adjust my playstyle accordingly, compared to a monitor, and deal with the extra challenge that I've imposed on myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Raven109 said:

 

That is correct.... Users who use smaller displays are also at a disadvantage when compared to the ones who use larger ones. The hardware cannot be equalized, it's always been like that. 

 

Should players who use 23" displays request a mod to bring the perceived zoom to the same level as people who use a 42" display? 

 

It's not about VR vs 2D (not sure who came up with this, but it sounds funny - something similar to PC masterrace...), it's about screen size, and this is nothing new - people who use smaller screens (this is what VR essentially is) will always be at a disadvantage when compared to larger screens.

 

Anyway, probably not the thread to discuss this, so please, carry on....

 

This has nothing to do with hardware. Yes, people with better monitors have an edge. Likewise, people with a better VR headset have an edge over those with poorer ones.

 

BUT 2d players have an inherent _built in_ advantage over VR players: Their zoom is better than the VR zoom.

 

This is how the sim is built: it provides greater Observation capabilities to 2D players over VR players. That's just a fact, and is what the zoom mod rectified. If the mod is not allowed (and let's be clear, we don't know this yet, all we have is hearsay. Lefuneste is still upating the mod), then the game developers are essentially relegating VR players to having objectively worse observation capabilities than 2D players.

 

Again, this has nothing with resolution, VR displays, bigger monitors. NOTHING. It's all about the game providing a better zoom to 2D players than what they grant VR players. No matter how good anyone's hardware is, it will _never_ overcome that fact. Because of this, if the mod that fixes that is not allowed or the zoom imbalance rectified, then VR players will always be relegated to second class.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

 

That's confusing to me, because it's objectively not true. There are a couple of other things that Jason has stated as fact that I think are also incorrect, in other areas of the sim/game. I'm not taking issue with Jason, just pointing out that someone (or multiple people) are feeding him incorrect stuff. He's working from the best info he has, and if that's incorrect info -- for example, VR and in-game zooms are the same -- then it's difficult to fault him making a call that VR users should "just live with it". I'd like to know where the faulty intel is coming from, though, so we could correct it. It's not like Jason should be personally on the hook for testing every aspect of the sim, that's silly. He needs good info from the people around him.

 

Thanks for the write up, Fly. It's nice that Jason joined in on CB. I can see why he doesn't fly that often, though -- previous times he's been instantly mobbed in chat with whatever people's current grievances were, so it's not exactly a low-stress environment for him to join a server and hang out. Plus CB has some pretty lethal opponents...

 

 

I (we) , I think made a point of keeping it civil and calm. Not that a great deal of effort was required to do so.

I think Jason was already "half cocked to pissed off" due to the current climate in the community overall.

Don't think he left angry anyway.. Ask JimTM for anymore details on this exchange. He was on channel also.

 

Share this post


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

I (we) , I think made a point of keeping it civil and calm. Not that a great deal of effort was required to do so.

I think Jason was already "half cocked to pissed off" due to the current climate in the community overall.

Don't think he left angry anyway.. Ask JimTM for anymore details on this exchange. He was on channel also.

 

I think overall this update has been very well received. Certainly a lot of people gushing over the performance improvements (me included). I think the team should feel justifiably proud of what they've delivered and I'm as annoyed as anyone that the anti-VR crowd has created such animosity. Just look at the last few replies -- we've got people who've never flown VR commenting on zoom levels. Sigh.

  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever fix the .50s or 37mm, I will think this graphics stuff is pretty neat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.50s was only a scare tactic of the west.  😉

 

According to history accounts 109 pilots laughed when they saw .50s come by their pits.  😁

 

You can believe me cause I'm a history professor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

.50s was only a scare tactic of the west.  😉

 

According to history accounts 109 pilots laughed when they saw .50s come by their pits.  😁

 

You can believe me cause I'm a history professor.  

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the Internet and tell lies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the .50s I had this absolute gem of a sortie earlier: https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/635182/?tour=22

 

I bounced and hit the first 109 nicely, watched him burst into flames and dive away.  I then found myself wondering how I didn't get a kill from it.  I figured that some sneaky snake must have stolen him on the way down.  Then the next 109 I bounced was Scharfi.  😐  So after the mission ends I check the log and find that no one stole the kill, he just flew 8 minutes back to base and landed on fire with a couple .50 caliber holes in the pilot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KW_1979 said:

Speaking of the .50s I had this absolute gem of a sortie earlier: https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/635182/?tour=22

 

I bounced and hit the first 109 nicely, watched him burst into flames and dive away.  I then found myself wondering how I didn't get a kill from it.  I figured that some sneaky snake must have stolen him on the way down.  Then the next 109 I bounced was Scharfi.  😐  So after the mission ends I check the log and find that no one stole the kill, he just flew 8 minutes back to base and landed on fire with a couple .50 caliber holes in the pilot.

 

One thing we must be sure of is that just because the pilot is wounded doesn't mean you hit them with a projectile. It can be from fragmentation of the plane, glass, etc. Also, fires can be put out in the slipstream if you dive fast enough and the fire isn't too huge. It's rare but it happens. The other day I saw a 110 have a fuel fire, the dove and slipped hard (110 rudder is super effective) and the fire went out. Then they were hit by another plane and the fire started again. This time they couldn't out it out and ended up dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crazy coincidences can happen, I get it.  But I just keep seeing a lot of them, and then there's stuff like this which just happened earlier tonight.  Pretty standard combat, other than it took 189 hits of .50 to down a 109.  No strafing - all the gunfire was at that one aircraft.  Anyway, I'll stop hijacking the server thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KW_1979 said:

Crazy coincidences can happen, I get it.  But I just keep seeing a lot of them, and then there's stuff like this which just happened earlier tonight.  Pretty standard combat, other than it took 189 hits of .50 to down a 109.  No strafing - all the gunfire was at that one aircraft.  Anyway, I'll stop hijacking the server thread.

I took two missions in previous beta QMB with P-51 to test new shader and reflections. At first one I shot down 4 planes, second try 6. What would be a reasonable result in your opinion?

 

And consider this when flying MP: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/61701-game-version-4006-discussion-deferred-shading-yak-9-su-152-new-campaigns-4k-for-4-planes/?do=findComment&comment=942439

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LLv24_Zami said:

I took two missions in previous beta QMB with P-51 to test new shader and reflections. At first one I shot down 4 planes, second try 6. What would be a reasonable result in your opinion?

 

And consider this when flying MP: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/61701-game-version-4006-discussion-deferred-shading-yak-9-su-152-new-campaigns-4k-for-4-planes/?do=findComment&comment=942439

 

 

 

 

 

Very important point. I've recently devoted a lot of effort to investing the effectiveness of various guns and I think there's a good chance it's probably a netcode issue. The 50s offline in SP seem credible to me.  I can't say for sure though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is some room for improvement with the .50's. The punch of the rounds seems about right, maybe a trifle low but not enough to worry about too much. Where they really seem to fall down is in aerodynamic effects. You can take only a few hits from German 131 rounds and the plane will be all over the place but if you hit a 109 with a similar number of M2 rounds in the same general place there is almost no effect on the plane. I've struggled to get 51's home after what looked like minor damage to the outer wing and I've taken 109's home missing all the trailing edge components of a wing with little problem. You might say this is anecdotal, and it is, but that much difference and with the frequency I'm seeing these differences in my sorties have me convinced that there is something to it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, -SF-Disarray said:

I think there is some room for improvement with the .50's. The punch of the rounds seems about right, maybe a trifle low but not enough to worry about too much. Where they really seem to fall down is in aerodynamic effects. You can take only a few hits from German 131 rounds and the plane will be all over the place but if you hit a 109 with a similar number of M2 rounds in the same general place there is almost no effect on the plane. I've struggled to get 51's home after what looked like minor damage to the outer wing and I've taken 109's home missing all the trailing edge components of a wing with little problem. You might say this is anecdotal, and it is, but that much difference and with the frequency I'm seeing these differences in my sorties have me convinced that there is something to it.

 

If I recall correctly, the 131 is using a HE round (in reality it could accommodate HE/HEI/AP - not sure if all are modeled in-game though, especially the HEI).

Edited by Raven109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they do have HE rounds. But the holes made in the plane can be small and few in number but the plane will still be all over the place. Put a similar number of holes in a plane with M2's and the effect on the target plane isn't as bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

Speaking of the .50s I had this absolute gem of a sortie earlier: https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/635182/?tour=22

 

I bounced and hit the first 109 nicely, watched him burst into flames and dive away.  I then found myself wondering how I didn't get a kill from it.  I figured that some sneaky snake must have stolen him on the way down.  Then the next 109 I bounced was Scharfi.  😐  So after the mission ends I check the log and find that no one stole the kill, he just flew 8 minutes back to base and landed on fire with a couple .50 caliber holes in the pilot.

 

There is a bug (maybe it's a feature?) whereby fires mysteriously "go out" very shortly after starting. It's not the kind of thing where people are cutting fuel flow and diving to extinguish it (not sure if that is modeled). Take a look at this: 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I'm new to the game and Combat Box looks great. Problem is every time I connect to the server and select a plane, before I can get the engine started I'm booted and banned for 15 minutes.

Any suggestions anyone???

Thx!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If your in game name is Player-12345 or some combination of numbers after "Player-", then yes you're getting booted. Please link your Steam account and then change your name to something less anonymous.

Edited by Sketch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, -SF-Disarray said:

Yes, they do have HE rounds. But the holes made in the plane can be small and few in number but the plane will still be all over the place. Put a similar number of holes in a plane with M2's and the effect on the target plane isn't as bad.

 

Let us remember that when the new DM update was released that the devs admitted that the damage you see may not be fully representative of the damage you have been dealt. They are working on this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Let us remember that when the new DM update was released that the devs admitted that the damage you see may not be fully representative of the damage you have been dealt. They are working on this issue.

I read they would NOT be revamping the visual representation of damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude! Mitchell's Men - Love it! This is how combat of the Ruhr district took place. Not sure why their are now P-51s, or did I miss them.

Would it be possible download that map for offline play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Would it be possible download that map for offline play?

 

If you flew on Combat Box - or any other servers - you'll find the mission in your game folders;  IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Moscow\data\Multiplayer\Dogfight

In mine it also says Alonso as he's the mission designer.

You can access it via the mission editor if you feel competent enough to fiddle around with it and try and create in effect a single mission out of it.  Or you could simply run it again for yourself by launching it as your own dogfight server.  If you do this however you will loose some of the functionality built into the mission as you will be running it without the Dserver.

 

Or create a single mission using this?

It has a lot of functionality that will allow you to create a high-altitude bomber hunt if you wish.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Let us remember that when the new DM update was released that the devs admitted that the damage you see may not be fully representative of the damage you have been dealt. They are working on this issue.

 

My issue isn't so much the difference between what I am seeing and what I am 'feeling' in the FM/DM; yes it is annoying but it has been identified as a problem and it is something I can wrap my head around. It is the seemingly large discrepancy between what I am feeling between Allied and Axis planes under what should logically be similar damage states. A handful of 13 mm rounds form an Axis plane can render an Allied plane combat ineffective but it often requires significantly more rounds on target to get anything like that kind of effect with Allied .50 rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% - it's just getting absurd out there

 

189 hits on a single 109

160ish hits on a single 109

 

Both of those aircraft were still fighting or trying to flee for most of the fight before crash landing, still under control.  Is it netcode?  If so I'm not sure what can be done about it.  I'm on gigabit fiber on the US West coast playing on Combat Box, seeing 70-80ms pings - I'm not sure what better MP option there could be unless someone starts a server in my city.  Clearly both my PC and the server are seeing the hits.  That being said, results like this can be had in single player as well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, KW_1979 said:

100% - it's just getting absurd out there

Or your aim might not be accurate enough:

http://kotastat.com/en/sortie/86/?tour=1
6 hits, kill. 144 bullets fired. Not a pilot kill either. I know it is not on CB but the fact that i can kill a 109 in 6 shots stands. Not that i do it consitently, but as long as you hit vital parts, you wont waste 200 bullets on a 109. results like that happen in SP aswell. The .50 doesnt do structural damage like HE shells, get over it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Or your aim might not be accurate enough:

http://kotastat.com/en/sortie/86/?tour=1
6 hits, kill. 144 bullets fired. Not a pilot kill either. I know it is not on CB but the fact that i can kill a 109 in 6 shots stands. Not that i do it consitently, but as long as you hit vital parts, you wont waste 200 bullets on a 109. results like that happen in SP aswell. The .50 doesnt do structural damage like HE shells, get over it.

 

Big-time upvote on this comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Any (Dumbass) can get kills......

Doesn't mean it is correct.   

 

https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/615175/?tour=22  5 kill 51

https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/590273/?tour=22 5 kill 1 ass 51

 

Just because I have learnt how to put a bullet through a keyhole, doesn't mean I should have to learn how to put a bullet through a keyhole.  

Edited by VBF-12_Snake9
added dumbass lol
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Or your aim might not be accurate enough:

http://kotastat.com/en/sortie/86/?tour=1
6 hits, kill. 144 bullets fired. Not a pilot kill either. I know it is not on CB but the fact that i can kill a 109 in 6 shots stands. Not that i do it consitently, but as long as you hit vital parts, you wont waste 200 bullets on a 109. results like that happen in SP aswell. The .50 doesnt do structural damage like HE shells, get over it.

 

If I was shooting 4% and only landed 6 hits and didn't get a kill I wouldn't be posting about it.  The fact that you did get one there is amazing, but certainly not close to the norm.  The two cases I posted were both significantly higher accuracy, 20+ times as many hits and had pilot hits.  Maybe try flying it some more post DM update before passing judgement - you've flown 0 P-51 sorties on Combat Box and the 1 you posted above on KOTA since 4.005 was released.  🤷‍♂️

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/23/2020 at 10:32 PM, KW_1979 said:

 

If I was shooting 4% and only landed 6 hits and didn't get a kill I wouldn't be posting about it.  The fact that you did get one there is amazing, but certainly not close to the norm.  The two cases I posted were both significantly higher accuracy, 20+ times as many hits and had pilot hits.  Maybe try flying it some more post DM update before passing judgement - you've flown 0 P-51 sorties on Combat Box and the 1 you posted above on KOTA since 4.005 was released.  🤷‍♂️

I just looked at your 189 sortie....  17.2 hit percentage..... [edited]

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Language
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

17.2 hit percentage

That doesnt mean shit if you spray the .50 all over the place and especially the wings. You can have 100% accuracy, if you dont hit a vital part it‘s not gonna die. Also funny that apparently the only acceptable source you guys can think of is logged sorties on CB. Not that one can fly the p51 litterally anywhere, especially including their CB training server. But yeah, cry some more about the .50s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

100% - it's just getting absurd out there

 

189 hits on a single 109

160ish hits on a single 109

 

Both of those aircraft were still fighting or trying to flee for most of the fight before crash landing, still under control.  Is it netcode?  If so I'm not sure what can be done about it.  I'm on gigabit fiber on the US West coast playing on Combat Box, seeing 70-80ms pings - I'm not sure what better MP option there could be unless someone starts a server in my city.  Clearly both my PC and the server are seeing the hits.  That being said, results like this can be had in single player as well.

 

It's not netcode.  It's that portion of the network in West Bumblefu==, Idaho that's still using television cable from the '90s that your ISP provider conveniently ignores when selling you your "fiber" connection.  I mean, that absolutely has to be the only feasible explanation...

2 hours ago, H_Stiglitz said:

That doesnt mean shit if you spray the .50 all over the place.....  

 

Exactly why the .50 was chosen.  Reduced accuracy requirements in snap shots and spray-and-prays allowing critical hits to be easier to come by.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, H_Stiglitz said:

That doesnt mean shit if you spray the .50 all over the place and especially the wings. You can have 100% accuracy, if you dont hit a vital part it‘s not gonna die. Also funny that apparently the only acceptable source you guys can think of is logged sorties on CB. Not that one can fly the p51 litterally anywhere, especially including their CB training server. But yeah, cry some more about the .50s

You don't even make sense.  17.2 is not spraying anything.  In real life that would be the ace of ace hit percentage.  I feel sorry for you.  You typed before your checked the sortie and now you look like a dumbass.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

You typed before your checked the sortie and now you look like a dumbass.

Funny that you need to repeat yourself with that statement. This qualifies you more than you‘d know. Your issue with my statement amuses me.

also 17.2 % is good, but if you get 17.2 % of all shots and like 90% of the hits are in the wing or tail section, it is still not going down. You need to hit the engine or the pilot. Quote me some more. You‘re simply blinded by numbers without knowing how they originated. 
i can put 400 mgs and 100 20mm into an IL-2 and get 34% accuracy. If i dont hit either the elevator off or set it on fire, it‘s not going down. „But 34% hits need to down a plane“ is a shitty reasoning for abysmal aim. And yes, although it‘s hits, as long as its not vital, it‘s not good aim

Edited by H_Stiglitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, H_Stiglitz said:

Funny that you need to repeat yourself with that statement. This qualifies you more than you‘d know. Your issue with my statement amuses me.

also 17.2 % is good, but if you get 17.2 % of all shots and like 90% of the hits are in the wing or tail section, it is still not going down. You need to hit the engine or the pilot. Quote me some more. You‘re simply blinded by numbers without knowing how they originated. 
i can put 400 mgs and 100 20mm into an IL-2 and get 34% accuracy. If i dont hit either the elevator off or set it on fire, it‘s not going down. „But 34% hits need to down a plane“ is a shitty reasoning for abysmal aim. And yes, although it‘s hits, as long as its not vital, it‘s not good aim

Here's a shovel.   Keep digging.  😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the 50 cal complaints hilarious in light of the number of PK's I've suffered at the front of P-51's while fully evasive recently.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

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...