WOW on Physiology

[Gambit21]

11 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

Cheers and this is closed here for me...

 

...funny I thought you were done a long time ago.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

18 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

As proved, only one spiral roll(barrel roll) with only 400klm is producing an unreasonable blackout.Many other also but this is just enough to tell us that something is over-modeled..

So..no matter how loud you say this “WOW now we have a real game”... the truth is out there,and for some people is clearly enough,for some others not..

Cheers and this is closed here for me,no feather talking is needed..;)

As far as I am aware, no-one has proved anything with any videos.

[KG200_Achilleus]

5 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

...funny I thought you were done a long time ago.

 

dont worry my little noo-bee..

lol

[CUJO_1970]

There is always room for improvement (unless you are a 19 year old Sophia Loren)...but what we have now is pretty damn good.

 

I’m having a blast with it.

[Gambit21]

Just now, CUJO_1970 said:

There is always room for improvement (unless you are a 19 year old Sophia Loren)...but what we have now is pretty damn good.

 

I’m having a blast with it.

 

Ursula Anders - remember her?

[KG200_Achilleus]

2 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

As far as I am aware, no-one has proved anything with any videos.

 

No need any video mate,its very easy to try it by your self.

Even if you cant perform a spiral roll,then i can post a vid for you,,

[CUJO_1970]

Yep, lol.

2 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Ursula Anders - remember her?

 

‘Indeed.

[357th_Dog]

19 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

dont worry my little noo-bee..

lol

Hope you adapt to the new reality in IL-2 soon  

[Darkmouse]

I think the effects of G come on far too soon. I've just read through the dev update talking about physiology and looked at some of the graphs they based the current g effect on. Saying that the 'average pilot' can't take more than a second or two of 6 g is completely inaccurate. That may be true for a man that never pulls g, but for fighter pilots? Not true at all. G tolerance builds with experience and anyone pulling  g day in day out can take 6 g.

 

At the speeds simulated in IL2 it would be extremely difficult to sustain 6 g anyway - you'd have to be in max possible rate turn ie. diving and on the buffet continuously. About the only instance I can see where G-loc would be a problem would be pulling out of a tremendous dive, or a continuous turning fight losing height to maintain speed as you go.

 

It doesn't really matter, but it is not accurate or realistic.

 

The rest of the update is excellent!   

[MaxTurn]

I did another mission (Airfield Mayhem by Jade Monkey) and the effects seemed more realistic (to me). 

[von_Michelstamm]

funny, I'm noticing the G less and less as I know when not to push it. I feel like my gunnery has improved too as I'm better at getting a good vector needing less adjustment before shooting.

Interesting how some planes I used to have to focus on fighting in a 109f before (migs) are easier to get on top of and deal with (once you turn them to vet or ace so they don't suicide), while others I used for target practice (p40s and laggs) now are more of a challenge even on novice with their constant hard turning, requiring more passing shots.

[Requiem]

Something else to consider with these G effects. It's not simply about reaching a particular max G and you blackout. Sure that will happen but you must also consider the RATE at which you're applying G. This is where plenty of people are screwing up right now because they're relying on their muscle memory before this patch. If you apply G at a rate too fast for the cardiovascular system to compensate and keep up enough blood supply you'll see the effects much faster or possibly lose consciousness.

 

If you apply G smoothly you won't have any issues staying awake as your CV system has time to adjust to the extra force required to keep the blood moving.

 

These G effects are excellent imo.

Edited October 8, 2019 by SYN_Requiem
grammar

[KG200_Achilleus]

6 hours ago, Darkmouse said:

 

 

It doesn't really matter, but it is not accurate or realistic.

 

The rest of the update is excellent!   

 

For some people it does..

for some others not,and they are probably the ones who has trouble with their six all time, and now they are glad that they can run away more easily..;)

Like the 109’s engine which sounds like a low rpm pump, Jason stated himself that some fixes needed and will be done,and still some people shouting Wow this is the real thing..

lol

Edited October 8, 2019 by KG200_Achilleus

[357th_Dog]

49 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

For some people it does..

for some others not,and they are probably the ones who has trouble with their six all time, and now they are glad that they can run away more easily..;)

Like the 109’s engine which sounds like a low rpm pump, Jason stated himself that some fixes needed and will be done,and still some people shouting Wow this is the real thing..

lol

 
 

I thought you were done?

[DB605]

1 hour ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

 

Like the 109’s engine which sounds like a low rpm pump, Jason stated himself that some fixes needed and will be done,and still some people shouting Wow this is the real thing..

lol

Take a G14 for example. Set ata to 1.2 or so. Compare that sound to any real 109 onboard record. It is pretty damn close to real sound. It's The supercharger/prop effect that is overdone on higher ata/revs and it masks engine sound too much. Problem is not The actual engine sound Wich is very well done.

[Panzerlang]

11 minutes ago, DB605 said:

Take a G14 for example. Set ata to 1.2 or so. Compare that sound to any real 109 onboard record. It is pretty damn close to real sound. It's The supercharger/prop effect that is overdone on higher ata/revs and it masks engine sound too much. Problem is not The actual engine sound Wich is very well done.

The wind noise is the problem in the WW1 kites and going by in-cockpit footage from a real Dr1 it's clearly overdone. Which is a shame because, as you say, the actual engine sounds are very good.

[Blackhawk_FR]

It's crazy how this guy is sure about him without having any precise numbers and facts... And btw, he probably never experienced Gs IRL. Whatever. 

 

@KG200_Achilleus , about the Red Bull video, there are severals things to take into account: 

- In this sport the pilots have a lot of physical preparation (I mean it's imposed by Red Bull staff).

- In those aircrafts the seat position is very optimized (they are almost lying down instead of a classic sit position).

- They are in good shape and rest a lot before the trainings and the race. 

- Their flights only last few minuts.

- Depending on the track they "only" have 2 10/12G maneuvers per flights, and some turns at 5, 6 or 7G. 

[KG200_Achilleus]

2 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

It's crazy how this guy is sure about him without having any precise numbers and facts... And btw, he probably never experienced Gs IRL. Whatever. 

 

Its crazy how some guys accuse someone else,the same time that they are 100% sure themselves for something that do not have any precise numbers and facts, and never tried or experienced..

And don't tell us that the numbers you have for fact are the 2-3seconds limit at 4-5 Gs for the blackout..;)

let the excuses and see the facts as they are,

the redbull video was posted not to compare it with this game,but to see how hard maneuvering needed to have those Gs..

And once again,for sure this one circle spiral roll isnt a comparison at all with those in this video..

[LLv24_Kuppis]

6 hours ago, SYN_Requiem said:

Something else to consider with these G effects. It's not simply about reaching a particular max G and you blackout. Sure that will happen but you must also consider the RATE at which you're applying G. This is where plenty of people are screwing up right now because they're relying on their muscle memory before this patch. If you apply G at a rate too fast for the cardiovascular system to compensate and keep up enough blood supply you'll see the effects much faster or possibly lose consciousness.

 

If you apply G smoothly you won't have any issues staying awake as your CV system has time to adjust to the extra force required to keep the blood moving.

 

These G effects are excellent imo.

Yes, learnt this the hard way as I tried to initiate roll in high speeding Dora while trying to clear six. I yanked the stick too aggressively, and I lost consciousness and eventually died. But instead of cursing and swearing I just though "wow". You really have to fly more smoothly and carefully from now on. Very welcomed update ?

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

Careful throttle control seems to play into it as well.  No more flat out running around pulling instant 180 degree turns at full bore.  Oh, it can still be done. I've seen AI 109s still pull the "how the hell did he turn like that?" turns.  But if they don't hit the ground, they are obviously blacked out or too weakened to keep the pressure on.  

 

I'm finding that I'm having more fun with the non-G suit planes than I was expecting, and even more than I had with them before the update.  +1 devs!

[Darkmouse]

8 hours ago, SYN_Requiem said:

Something else to consider with these G effects. It's not simply about reaching a particular max G and you blackout. Sure that will happen but you must also consider the RATE at which you're applying G. 

This is true, however I still believe the parameters currently used are wrong. The two occassions that I have come closest to complete g-loc for real were caused by rate of onset (and the fact that I wasn't in control of one - makes a big difference). 

 

As I said above, it matters not, but I thought I'd add my voice to the discussion in the hope that it leads to some tweaking in a more realistic direction. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KG200_Achilleus]

55 minutes ago, Darkmouse said:

This is true, however I still believe the parameters currently used are wrong. The two occassions that I have come closest to complete g-loc for real were caused by rate of onset (and the fact that I wasn't in control of one - makes a big difference). 

 

As I said above, it matters not, but I thought I'd add my voice to the discussion in the hope that it leads to some tweaking in a more realistic direction. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't waste time mate in here,

you will see only answers regarding how really good is this G effect now and how real it has become,as now its a real sim game and it wasn't before..

and of course who ever argues in that,he is nothing else than a chicken or a kid who cries because they destroyed his game..

I am afraid that this is the IQ level we are dealing with,and this will not ever change..

Edited October 8, 2019 by KG200_Achilleus

[HR_Zunzun]

9 hours ago, SYN_Requiem said:

Something else to consider with these G effects. It's not simply about reaching a particular max G and you blackout. Sure that will happen but you must also consider the RATE at which you're applying G. This is where plenty of people are screwing up right now because they're relying on their muscle memory before this patch. If you apply G at a rate too fast for the cardiovascular system to compensate and keep up enough blood supply you'll see the effects much faster or possibly lose consciousness.

 

If you apply G smoothly you won't have any issues staying awake as your CV system has time to adjust to the extra force required to keep the blood moving.

 

These G effects are excellent imo.

 

Agree. I think a reason for that could also because most of us use short stick (so more sensitive to input) and the lack of sensorial feedback (like stiffiness of the stick or "seat of you pants" feeling of building Gs).

The way it is means we have to develop a new muscle memory for the new conditions.

[Darkmouse]

7 minutes ago, HR_Zunzun said:

 

The way it is means we have to develop a new muscle memory for the new conditions.

Fair points, but that doesn't mean it is correct - that graph claiming pilots can't take more than a few seconds of 6g (regardless of rate of onset) is categorically incorrect, and presumably that is the data used to model the effect. 

[HR_Zunzun]

1 minute ago, Darkmouse said:

Fair points, but that doesn't mean it is correct - that graph claiming pilots can't take more than a few seconds of 6g (regardless of rate of onset) is categorically incorrect, and presumably that is the data used to model the effect. 

 

I don´t have a clue whether this is correct or not. Most likely will need tunning. What I think (my feeling), is that is more correct than previous implementation.

[kalbuth]

5 minutes ago, Darkmouse said:

Fair points, but that doesn't mean it is correct - that graph claiming pilots can't take more than a few seconds of 6g (regardless of rate of onset) is categorically incorrect, and presumably that is the data used to model the effect. 

Source of your assertion?

[CountZero]

How they modeled it in game its big + , i like it and only remark is that they could go even harder on up/down movment shown in that devs video so it gets even more disorienting for player when he trys that. But even how its now is mutch better then expected when they first anounced that they will improve it.

[Darkmouse]

18 minutes ago, kalbuth said:

Source of your assertion?

Personal experience and that of a wide number of friends and colleagues who are quite capable of sustaining 6g without g pants. 

 

I don't want to get into an argument, as it seems many people are enjoying the update and everyone will have their own idea of what 'realistic' entails, but in my experience (and opinion) the effects of g are overdone. 

[KG200_Achilleus]

14 hours ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

As far as I am aware, no-one has proved anything with any videos.

 

Bellow its only one of the examples of the over modeled G forces with this "spiral roll"...

with only one roll at 420klm..and all are blacked..

it is in low altitude and in straight line with the river so you can see that no big maneuver is made,almost a simple roll with 10% stik up..

cheers..;)

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by KG200_Achilleus

[Panzerlang]

4 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

Bellow its only one of the examples of the over modeled G forces with this "spiral roll"...

with only one roll at 420klm..and all are blacked..

it is in low altitude and in straight line with the river so you can see that no big maneuver is made,almost a simple roll with 10% stik up..

cheers..;)

 

Wow. Can't really argue that.

[blitze]

12 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

Bellow its only one of the examples of the over modeled G forces with this "spiral roll"...

with only one roll at 420klm..and all are blacked..

it is in low altitude and in straight line with the river so you can see that no big maneuver is made,almost a simple roll with 10% stik up..

cheers..;)

 

 

Strange as I was banging a 109f4 round Kuban seaside mountains flying low along ravines and rolling over villages without such issues.  This without simplified physiology on, just the regular version.  I even did an inverted low level flight with a half loop inverted climb, lost my engine fueling towards the top but she picked back up when I was pointing down again.  I had a red tinged screen but didn't red out.

 

It was a lot of fun.

 

Now for other things in the latest update, cough VR blurriness, cough, desaturated colour palate, cough, crap clouds that eat frames and it seems removal of ground texture bump maps, especially noticeable over Kuban cultivated fields.......?

[kalbuth]

35 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

Bellow its only one of the examples of the over modeled G forces with this "spiral roll"...

with only one roll at 420klm..and all are blacked..

cheers..;)

 

Ah, some source, for a start....

What would help is the corresponding Tacview file, it registers the exact G forces all along the flight, for example. And it shows the preceding conditions (eg showing if you did multiple maneuvre or not, thus reducing global resistance, or if this is the effect of a sudden G load and so only a transient blackout (you end up in the ground, so we can't really know), etc... or if there's no special initial condition).

 

It's pretty simple, the expected behaviour is depicted on page 5, bottom (I don't remember who posted that -- EDIT : posted by RoflSeal), with the in-game resistance graphs and the source material that the sim is aiming for.

 

Either you dispute the target, in which case you should come up with facts and figures showing the figures used as sources are wrong. Facts & figures, not anecdotal evidence like an aerobatic video, or "personal experience" nobody knows anything about.

 

Or you dispute the in-game implementation that gives results different from the target, which seems to be your case. This video helps, but again, more numbers and precise conditions description would really help, and the full Tacview file would contain all that is needed (also, the same not ending on the ground )

 

"It should not be liek that, noobs!" is doing NOTHING usefull....

 

 

EDIT : I'm actually not using Tacview on IL2, I presumed it gives the same result as DCS, ie including info like G load . If that's not the case, then... well... Actual G load is up for guesses.

Edited October 8, 2019 by kalbuth

[JtD]

This roll is about 4-5g over a duration of 5 seconds, with a rapid onset of acceleration. Watch the altimeter. It should result in a blackout, and it does.

[Darkmouse]

11 minutes ago, kalbuth said:

Facts & figures, not anecdotal evidence like an aerobatic video, or "personal experience" nobody knows anything about.

You're right, I don't have any other evidence - but suggesting I can't rely on my own experience to provide feedback is silly. 

 

 

[kalbuth]

You definitely can.

I can't (rely on yours, I mean...), like you wouldn't rely on my own experience without me being precise about it.... Well, I wouldn't recommend you to do so.

Edited October 8, 2019 by kalbuth

[Guest deleted@134347]

i'm not even sure he used the rudder to keep the horizontal axis straight, which resulted in a pretty deep dive that required a serious elevator pull to get out of. Your roll is all messed up here.

[KG200_Achilleus]

38 minutes ago, kalbuth said:

 

 

Or you dispute the in-game implementation that gives results different from the target, which seems to be your case. This video helps, but again, more numbers and precise conditions description would really help, and the full Tacview file would contain all that is needed (also, the same not ending on the ground )

 

 

 

This video shows a simple maneuver, no need for feather explanations i believe..

In fact, if you believe that this video is made for a purpose and you are skeptical about its credibility, then please try to make another like it and show to all us that with a roll like this speeding at 420klm you want black out.. 

6 minutes ago, moosya said:

i'm not even sure he used the rudder to keep the horizontal axis straight, which resulted in a pretty deep dive that required a serious elevator pull to get out of. Your roll is all messed up here.

 

I will say it again,

please, who ever have some doubts about the video or its maneuver credibility, please make a video of yours showing this spiral roll maneuver(barrel roll) speeding at 420klm.(with the same roll speed).

If you cant, then please stop making faulty conclusions..

[Guest deleted@134347]

16 minutes ago, KG200_Achilleus said:

 

If you cant, then please stop making faulty conclusions..

 

you're really quick shutting down folks yet can't take any criticism yourself. You provided a video after 2 pages of constant "you guys are noobs"...

 

give me some time, I'll get you a vid.

[kalbuth]

?

Simple question : how many Gs did you pull for how long in your video? How do you know that you are pulling X or Y G in this video? How do you want to compare your video to the target graphs presented in the DD explaining Physiology?

 

How you fare in your plane, how good you are and and you think we aren't, etc... let's be pretty clear : nobody cares and it doesn't mean sh.t to demonstrate if current implementation fails or not to achieve the Physiology system they wanted to achieve.

They target to follow a graph showing G resistance for X amount of time before blacking out (+ other subtle effects like transient blackout and fatigue effect). It has numbers. I can't compare a video to numbers. Nobody can. You compare numbers to numbers. Simple.

 

And to be clear, I have no belief. The implementation could be good or bad, I simply don't know, so I won't make any video or such, I don't have any claim on this issue. It's just that your vid itself is not helping. It's a guy doing a barrel roll and crashing in the ground. Nothing more. You feel it's pulling too few Gs , somebody else is going to tell it's actually more than you feel.... Too few facts, not enough numbers.... This won't get far.

Edited October 8, 2019 by kalbuth

[Nocke]

Even if numbers are not your thing: We got a real world acrobatics champion here in the forum who said he thinks it is well done. I would value that higher as your opinion, if we keep talking just opinions.