Jump to content
666GIAP_Chimango

A few issues degrading online MP experience on the EASTERN FRONT after last patch

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

The damage you do with 1x20mm combining both AP and HE (Yak-1 ie) is a looong way from what it can do a MG151/20 currently; the LW 20mm HE should be a bit more powerful, but not to the extent we see currently in our sim...

 

Sorry to be a pain in the a*** but on what basis do you claim this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tables posted, gun performance (ammo weight, muzzle velocity, hit power) also comments from people doing those researches; and sorry to be a pain in the ass...but check the video (did you?) i think is more prove of the exaggerated effect of MG151/20 HE.

Do you think  it is OK to get an engine stopped by a 20mm round that hits on the wingtip?. This is making people in online competitions like TAW not willing to fly VVS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your problem is that you focus solely on the MG151/20. That's also a reason why some people consider your views as biased. 

 

You have to view the DM as a whole. In our case, compare all 20mm HE types with at least 1 aircraft of each faction. If tests show that the ShVAK is indeed underperforming compared to other 20mm HE types, than you will see me as a strong supporter to fix it accordingly! So long we we only have indications that there might be an issue. 

 

Another problem is that the german 20mm HE should not be an HE in the first place but a Minengeschoss. So we are comparing apples with oranges to start with, however, a sim can only go so far and it would be a good start if at least the damage effectiveness would compare to historical and scientific sources.

 

IL2 is also not and never will be an e-sport game. Fair competition can only be achieved by mission design and not by balancing aircrafts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not ok, IF tests show that you can reliably reproduce this result and it is not a freak accident. 

 

And again, all you seem to have in mind is nerfing the MG151/20 HE when the DM as a whole needs a big overhaul. The Hispano 20mm HE for example is even more powerful than the MG151/20 but i don't see you mentioning it much because your impressions are only based on your own subjective gaming experience.

 

Test the DM reliably or stop complaining

Edited by Operation_Ivy

Share this post


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

It is not ok, IF tests show that you can reliably reproduce this result and it is not a freak accident. 


It seems that we can; not only me but another user who tested this (SuperEtendar) reached the same conclusions; two different guys, two different tests, two different computers and we both see you can have engines stopped from MG151/20 hits that hit nowhere near the engine.  Then, IS NOT OK and current HE modelling is exagerated. No netcode excuses or anything, tests were offline.

...

 

Edited by 666GIAP_Chimango

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Do you think is OK to have an engine stopped by a round (20mm only) that hits on the wingtip?

 

If you look closely at the video, you'll notice a hit on the engine cowling, before the 20mm impacts the wing tip. From the outside you can see the smoke puff resulting from the cowling impact moving over the canopy.

Edited by Raven109
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to missed a crucial point in my post.

 

Stop cherry picking on the Mg151/20 just because you are mainly flying against it. Make extensive reliable tests with all three 20mm HE rounds and then compare the results. Shooting down a couple of planes offline is hardly that. The problems with it were mentioned before.

 

The Mg151/20 might be very well overperforming right now, but solely focusing on it to try to achieve a "nerf" without considering its relation to other 20mm HE rounds is simply short sighted, biased and not helping the overall DM quality.

 

Edit: Yes the situation is much worse...

 

Also thanks to @Raven109 for proving why things need more accurate testing than real time action reports. It might have been a AP 20mm as well.

Edited by Operation_Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

So you are saying a 7.92mm machine gun bullet can stop an engine? If that's the case, the situation it's even worse

 

I'm not saying anything about what stopped it. I'm saying that the video is inconclusive? It seems that it's not the 20mm that hit the wingtip that stopped it.

 

Do I think that in reality a 2x7.92mm can stop an engine from very close range? I think it's plausible (engines are not armored, they have lots of moving pieces, and sometimes it's enough to hit just one small component to take it out), see videos below.

 

Some other notes, if an enemy is already that close, it's the defenders fault for getting in that position. I also agree that the overall DM needs some tweaking.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Raven109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I not 

On 12/18/2019 at 10:10 AM, SCG_motoadve said:

Exactly my same thought , adapt and modify your flying style, if you dive at 500KPH and pull hard, after experiencing a few blackouts you kind of know how much are you going to able to pull, both in real life and in the sim. 

IMHO pilot physiology is the best feature developers added to the sim.

 

On the other hand, spotting its very bad.

So bad I started to fly SP turning icons ON and OFF, planes are so hard to see at medium distances.

I´m not agree about what are you said, because many times I saw a 109 dive on my 6, I fly at 350km/h, 109 dive from 1.5-2 km higher, his is speed around 500-550km/h, result:

the f4 can follow the turn of my yak(I am almost on black out) with out get black out and pull out and climb again at 1.5km higher than me. That is impossible and if you said that you have the same speed of my yak you can climb 1.5km more in 4 secs. 

I agree on what you said only IF the pilot physiology will be congruent will the reality and the same for all.

And please don´t tell me that LW pilots get anti G breakfast or they are training with superboots that help them to reach 9Gs or -5Gs to 5Gs in 5 secs.

That physiology possibility exits only in the Star Wars movie and now I just tired about the constant dismiss of our post just because you want.

If you thin that I am said is just a stupidity see the next picture and try to explain how many 109s and Fw can go from +G to -G, second part on the right Limits

Take it from:

Flight Surgeon's Manual, Volumen 161,Número 1,Parte 16,  United States. Department of the Air Force

Literally ¨3 G's for 5 seconds is highest tolerance, any negative acceleration over this can cause a permanent injury¨

content?id=UfvKBqRywpgC&hl=es&pg=SA5-PA7

 

You can read this and give you more acknowledge of the effects of Gs

content?id=UfvKBqRywpgC&hl=es&pg=SA5-PA4

content?id=UfvKBqRywpgC&hl=es&pg=SA5-PA5

content?id=UfvKBqRywpgC&hl=es&pg=SA5-PA6

content?id=UfvKBqRywpgC&hl=es&pg=SA5-PA7

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raven109 said:

 

I'm not saying anything about what stopped it. I'm saying that the video is inconclusive? It seems that it's not the 20mm that hit the wingtip that stopped it.


I agree with you after checking the track again, it seems there is a hit on the engine (7.92mm maybe?) so i stand corrected. Proper and more exhaustive testing has to be done.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

I agree on what you said only IF the pilot physiology will be congruent will the reality and the same for all.

And please don´t tell me that LW pilots get anti G breakfast or they are training with superboots that help them to reach 9Gs or -5Gs to 5Gs in 5 secs.

That physiology possibility exits only in the Star Wars movie and now I just tired about the constant dismiss of our post just because you want.

If you thin that I am said is just a stupidity see the next picture and try to explain how many 109s and Fw can go from +G to -G, second part on the right Limits

I`m not sure if I understand you correctly but the pilot physics is the same for all pilots. US pilots have G-suits which is +1G. That is a fact.

Edited by LLv24_Zami
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LLv24_Zami said:

I`m not sure if I understand you correctly but the pilot physics is the same for all pilots. US pilots have G-suits which is +1G. That is a fact.

I´m pretty sure that is not. I fly many times on f4 g2s and never go on black out. As tell LW pilots never go black out after continuous changes on +G and -Gs or diving and turning (BOS BOM BOK planes) you can easily test this..

Edited by 666GIAP_Necathor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

I´m pretty sure that is not. I fly many times on f4 g2s and never go on black out. As tell LW pilots never go black out after continuous changes on +G and -Gs or diving and turning (BOS BOM BOK planes) you can easily test this..

Ok, there`s nothing else that I can tell you. At least I`m blacking out constantly in the 109s. Then I ease the pull. You can test it and present the evidence. Why would the (Russian) devs give tighter limits to the VVS pilots?

Edited by LLv24_Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:


I agree with you after checking the track again, it seems there is a hit on the engine (7.92mm maybe?) so i stand corrected. Proper and more exhaustive testing has to be done.

 

Kudos to you for going back and changing the description of the original video on YT. I agree, situations like this need multiple tests to infer a pattern. One sample can mean anything, just like any test.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://taw.stg2.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=71081&name=[_FLAPS_]RogoRogo

Unlike the impression the log is giving this was a single 20mm hit (witnessed by 2 friendlies right next to my plane) from an intentional PK "specialist" (Berloga trained ?) going for nothing but the armored (and closed) cockpit of my Sturmovik.
The behavior shown does not warrant any further comment while the code behavior does.
This was the first and only impact, no tracers before or after (save for the rest of the F-4s strangely surgical burst missing my wreck spinning away).
Instant PK and instant complete plane destruction, gunner strangely survived completely unharmed (even though the hit was on the armored sections of the cockpit area) and was killed by the "finish mission" bailout into the ground.
While inevitable this will be written off as some statistical outlier by the usual contributors it is nothing but another incident showing anything starting from the necessity of further coding QA to hit registration iteration to damage packet queueing revision to a possible decimal typo somewhere.

 

Edited by [_FLAPS_]RogoRogo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2019 at 2:48 PM, LLv24_Zami said:

. Why would the (Russian) devs give tighter limits to the VVS pilots?

I got my clues about this but that is my personal opinion that I don´t want  to share with everybody.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xd I blacked out a lot with 109s. Is just more manageable because 109 has quite hard controls at speed while on the other planes you pull the stick and you can pull a lot of gs.

Some guy feels something about blue planes: Blyat is just fan boy, he is crying blyat, luftwinner blyat just feelings no facts blyat.

Entire post based on feelings not on facts: Blyat I was on a lot of taws I know what i am talking about they have to consider my claim because experienced player blyat i am not fan boy realistic opinion blyat. 

Edited by E69_geramos109
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

I got my clues about this but that is my personal opinion that I don´t want  to share with everybody

Nethacor, you have made some very good points and research in this thread, but I think you're mistaken in your claim that 109s don't black out as easily as VVS planes. I've flown both types and it seems very equal. I know the situation you refer to but I assure you it happens just as much the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Barnacle, I made some test: 1 follow 109  on a yak and vice versa,  both pilots on coms and the VVS pilots always go black out first. We try to keep the same distance and speed.

After that and many situations with a 109 diving on me and follow my turn or the classical +G/-G movement.  

I put another on your pocket, you fly both sides, please tell me if a wrong or right, I never saw a 109 F4/GX or a FW190 X overheating. Magic radiators? Mars technology?

 

By the way Gerasmos.

We are trying to put our points in the table, if you think these points are pure feeling, well, give facts as you claim or is a pure feeling claim? 

Edited by 666GIAP_Necathor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

, I never saw a 109 F4/GX or a FW190 X overheating. Magic radiators? Mars technology?

 

109 radiators, magic?, no... Automatic? Yes. Set them to manual, close them up and see how it runs once the coolant boils out.

190...  Cowling shutters on the A3 are always 100% open. A5, close them up, and you will overheat and destroy your engine.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think , the main reasson of post is a observation of stats numbers,

 

Edited by 666GIAP_Tumu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

I got my clues about this but that is my personal opinion that I don´t want  to share with everybody.

Fair enough.

 

But if anyone has conspiracy theories or something like that, they really should get a rid of that kind of mindset before making tests. It basicly nullifies credibility of any claims imo.

Edited by LLv24_Zami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

Hello Barnacle, I made some test: 1 follow 109  on a yak and vice versa,  both pilots on coms and the VVS pilots always go black out first. We try to keep the same distance and speed.

After that and many situations with a 109 diving on me and follow my turn or the classical +G/-G movement.  

I put another on your pocket, you fly both sides, please tell me if a wrong or right, I never saw a 109 F4/GX or a FW190 X overheating. Magic radiators? Mars technology?

 

By the way Gerasmos.

We are trying to put our points in the table, if you think these points are pure feeling, well, give facts as you claim or is a pure feeling claim? 

 
Has it crossed your mind that the Russians black out first because they can actually make tighter turns???

 

 

 

 

 

57 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Tumu said:

I think , the main reasson of post is a observation of stats numbers,

 


ok got it, so the reason for your whining is that you got shot down more! So there has to be something wrong with the gam now

case closed

Edited by =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Entire post based on feelings not on facts: Blyat I was o a lot of taws I know what i am talking about they have to consider my claim because experienced player blyat i am not fan boy realistic opinion blyat. 

 

We've shown facts as well, at least to be analyzed. Also feedback about things that have to be tweaked/improved and most MP community agrees on (new spotting, gunners, etc). If you don't see them is because you don't want to, but it's surprising cause reading your first post in this thread you agreed in many -if not most- complaints or observations written here. 

 

6 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Some guy feels something about blue planes: Blyat is just fan boy, he is crying blyat, luftwinner blyat just feelings no facts blyat.


No matter what simulator, the attitude of some fanboys has always been the same.  The term "Luftwhiner" has been around for ages in flightsimming...i wonder why. 

 

On 12/20/2019 at 7:02 PM, Raven109 said:

 

Kudos to you for going back and changing the description of the original video on YT. 


I always try to act in good faith. I don't lie and i can recognize when i'm wrong...and above all is not my intention to damage this sim. So why wouldn't change the video info and edit it? Unfortunately we've seen many unfaithful propaganda coming from some LW fans in this community, they almost have the monopoly of complaints and demands for their beloved experte mounts in this side of the forums, posting disrespectful or damaging videos even with lies, like the one that user Vade uploaded sometime ago complainig about the resistance of il2s and he couldn't shoot down one, but hiding the fact he had shot down 4 planes (2x il2 included) prior to that one. 

Now i'm complaining, more venting than anything else, because the changes during last year and specially after last patch are degrading the fun i used to have in the Eastern Front planesets (VVS side).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

I always try to act in good faith. I don't lie and i can recognize when i'm wrong...and above all is not my intention to damage this sim. So why wouldn't change the video info and edit it?

 

I was just showing my appreciation. It's not often that I see this kind of behavior on-line, especially when it's the "us vs them" debate, hence my reaction.

 

If the 20mm or any other weapon from any faction is causing damage due to bugs, then it should be fixed. However, for this, testing is needed, and one occurrence is not enough to make a case.

 

 Although I feel that the expectations for this game are too big. It's not as detailed as some may want it to be. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I don't think it models damage like gasket leaks, spark-plug failure, compressor failure or other minor details. It just models generic damage based on component HP and random number generators. You can only go so far with these. And it's fine, the target audience is the masses, not the detail obsessed population, since the latter are very few (compared to the former) and catering to them would mean bad business.

 

In reality if you hit some of the smaller components, you can stop the engine, you don't actually have to blow it to bits to stop it.

Edited by Raven109
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G-force modelling really feels strange since they implemented the new modelling. I guess the problem is a lack of proper feedback for red planes with their tighter turning capabilities. In effect, it's much easier in the 109 to not hammer your pilot with unnecessary Gs and also to skirt the border of blackout much tighter. The end result seems to be that a 109 and a Spit end up with the same effective turnrate as it seems capped by blackout rather than plane capabilities (had this experience many times on Berloga, flying both 109s and Spits).

 

That's my personal suspicion of what the situation is. It's a lack of G-force feedback until we already exhausted the pilot and the much more sensitive controls easily causing reds to pull unintended Gs.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

The end result seems to be that a 109 and a Spit end up with the same effective turnrate as it seems capped by blackout rather than plane capabilities (had this experience many times on Berloga, flying both 109s and Spits).

 

At high speeds, yes.

Once those speeds drop though and they usually do, the spitfire's massive turn rate and radius advantages come to bear.

The primary ability that is less feasible now is being able to yank the stick and pull instantaneous and sustained excessive G to avoid being shot, or to pull right in on an adversaries 6 after a merge, both of which I feel were not very realistic representations of WW2 combat.

 

Your other points I agree with, but is probably just a lack of experience of finding the limit. Just like when starting out on a new air frame and trying to find the stall limits.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

Hello Barnacle, I made some test: 1 follow 109  on a yak and vice versa,  both pilots on coms and the VVS pilots always go black out first. We try to keep the same distance and speed.

After that and many situations with a 109 diving on me and follow my turn or the classical +G/-G movement.  

I put another on your pocket, you fly both sides, please tell me if a wrong or right, I never saw a 109 F4/GX or a FW190 X overheating. Magic radiators? Mars technology?

 

By the way Gerasmos.

We are trying to put our points in the table, if you think these points are pure feeling, well, give facts as you claim or is a pure feeling claim? 

That's very interesting and surprising to me. I definitely believe you though, I'm just puzzled what could cause it. Maybe what Mauf above says?

And you are right, it is very difficult to get a 190 to overheat, but I don't think this is bias, as the La5 FN is very difficult to get to overheat too. That said, the La5 series 8 is really easy to overheat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 666GIAP_Necathor said:

 

I put another on your pocket, you fly both sides, please tell me if a wrong or right, I never saw a 109 F4/GX or a FW190 X overheating. Magic radiators? Mars technology?

 

By the way Gerasmos.

We are trying to put our points in the table, if you think these points are pure feeling, well, give facts as you claim or is a pure feeling claim? 

Yes I saw a lot of 109s overheating. Do you want facts? I made an entire post about a bug with the oil radiator not opening and overheaing the plane even at 1.1 Ata suported by video evidence. I can send you the link if you want.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V1CAVIqPKQ&list=PLvChOif2fvUWHshGIx6_w6VzV3WdDoDQb&index=13

 

5 hours ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

 

We've shown facts as well, at least to be analyzed. Also feedback about things that have to be tweaked/improved and most MP community agrees on (new spotting, gunners, etc). If you don't see them is because you don't want to, but it's surprising cause reading your first post in this thread you agreed in many -if not most- complaints or observations written here. 

Yes I Agree with you on a lot of points as I told on my first answer on the video. There are a lot of problems on this game Spotting, gunners etc. I even made some videos about that as well showing how bad visibility is. Invisible planes and did not even bother to make gunner videos because there are just ton of videos about that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Y2nagZVOI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ukv_OEAVm-c&list=PLvChOif2fvUWHshGIx6_w6VzV3WdDoDQb

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_h8BFTeJtg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSKr-Ew6TAw&list=PLvChOif2fvUWHshGIx6_w6VzV3WdDoDQb&index=4

 

But you know. For making claims based on feelings or just experience is because some people are called fan boys etc. 

About the armament i thrust more on reports like the ones from @Operation_Ivy rather than on my feelings because my feelings and experience are telling me that the german 20mm is quite trash as well and I got results quite far from 2 hits per kill and my gunnry i can tell that is quite good so I know what I am talking about as well but I am sure that net code has a lot to do with that and not damage model so I just can not trust on the Online experiences. 

 

Edited by E69_geramos109
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geramos, about your videos i don't really know what to trust...you also made a YT video sometime ago saying "il2 BOX, arcade mode, fly red". Also after being shown as a typical LW fanboy after your never ending demands in the FMs and complaints part of the forums, and also by your constant comments in chat servers "this sim is russian biased" you realized that wasn't good for your demands so you began trying to look more "unbiased", but we know where your love is...how many posts you have demanding revision of the LW planes, and how many about red planes? 😉 

Ivy test? I have to agree with Raven, those few asking for 100% realism are so naive to say the least, pedantic would be a better term, that they y don't realize Il2 Series will never achieve that level of realism and this is a game for a general flightsim crowd, not for 100 hardcore exquisites. The cries for full realism are masturbatory. So, if you have MG151/20 being able, as proven in servers, to shoot down easily 5AK per sortie and reaching up to 8 planes in MP...why you ask for more power? How dare you say "it's the worst 20mm in game". Totally laughable. That people is not thinking about a good MP PvP experience, they just care about excessive advantage, the one that ruins the original concept of IL2 series when they chose on their first patch il2: BOS a planeset focused on parity. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerasmos.

Your video is from July, 2018 more that a year an a half past, an many patchs. Sry but that is not evidence, maybe in that moment could be a problem but now and for this tread no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, =EXPEND=Tripwire said:

 

At high speeds, yes.

Once those speeds drop though and they usually do, the spitfire's massive turn rate and radius advantages come to bear.

The primary ability that is less feasible now is being able to yank the stick and pull instantaneous and sustained excessive G to avoid being shot, or to pull right in on an adversaries 6 after a merge, both of which I feel were not very realistic representations of WW2 combat.

 

Your other points I agree with, but is probably just a lack of experience of finding the limit. Just like when starting out on a new air frame and trying to find the stall limits.

 

 

Even at low speeds it seems to be the case (or, at least in my cases, my pilot was already so exhausted that once low speed was reached, it didn't matter). Point being, once some stamina was drained, effective turn rate was for me limited by blackout border (and well within 109 turn rate at comparable speed). On the Spit side, it was always a death sentence for me (especially with the cannon hits now knocking the pilot unconscious on top of the G blackout strain). Flying the 109, it was quite manageable. Thanks to the much finer controls, I could skirt the border of blackout quite handily and keep what felt like a much more stable and permanent turn rate than my spit and yak opponents (at least the guys I faced off against). Basically, a disadvantage the 109 had turned into an advantage now.

 

Game play wise, that's a big disadvantage the reds now face. We have no feedback on when we're using up the pilot stamina (real pilots at least felt the strain. Pilots huffing from G-forces is no indicator of what the stamina is like. It's kinda a mirror situation of the engine timers now), combined with the control sensitivity just being right for the 109 drivers to edge the maximum out. Currently, I have no good solution to the issue. Going back to the old modelling is not right, the new system does things right according to what devs presented and any sort of G-force meter would be a gamey solution at best. Telling red pilots to just suck it up and "git gud" isn't a solution either, there's nothing to learn on because of lack of feedback. I guess everyone just has to crank the stick curves to the max and hope for the best.

Edited by Mauf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that in the red planes, because they have better instantaneous turn rates they also have a much faster onset of Gs? The faster the onset, the more shocking it is to the pilot, thus it could drain the stamina faster?

Also, because the onset is sharper, that could also lead to having worse control when riding the moment just before the G-Loc.

Edited by Raven109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Ivy test? I have to agree with Raven, those few asking for 100% realism are so naive to say the least, pedantic would be a better term, that they y don't realize Il2 Series will never achieve that level of realism and this is a game for a general flightsim crowd, not for 100 hardcore exquisites. The cries for full realism are masturbatory. So, if you have MG151/20 being able, as proven in servers, to shoot down easily 5AK per sortie and reaching up to 8 planes in MP...why you ask for more power? How dare you say "it's the worst 20mm in game". Totally laughable. That people is not thinking about a good MP PvP experience, they just care about excessive advantage, the one that ruins the original concept of IL2 series when they chose on their first patch il2: BOS a planeset focused on parity. 

 

Again, multiple points:

 

  • calling my test and explanatory post pedantic is far from the truth, especially when you look at some flight model discussions that are focusing on very minor details. In my post however, i suggest to give the Minengeschoss a unique model because it simply works differently than a normal HE round and more importantly, it is used by ~50% of all planes in the game. So it affects a lot of aircrafts. People could just as easily brush off your 20mm HE claims as being pedantic.

 

  • I am also not suggesting full realism. I have said multiple times that the DM can go only so far, however there is simply no reason why there shouldn't be an adjustment to the damage values of the 20mm HE. 

 

  • Based on the test, where the russian and german 20mm HE perform the same on a structural level and the russian 20mm AP being a lot better than the german one, yes, the german 20mm is the worst in the game according to the test. However i don't mind admitting that the result could be different if there would be a way to test for internal damage as well!

 

  • A good MP PvP experience in a sim game should be achieved by mission design, not balancing historical data. A sim game is not about being competitive strictly speaking. This is not an e-sport title, despite what some people on TAW think.
Edited by Operation_Ivy
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

 

Again, multiple points:

 

  • calling my test and explanatory post pedantic is far from the truth, especially when you look at some flight model discussions that are focusing on very minor details. In my post however, i suggest to give the Minengeschoss a unique model because it simply works differently than a normal HE round and more importantly, it is used by ~50% of all planes in the game. So it affects a lot of aircrafts. People could just as easily brush off your 20mm HE claims as being pedantic.

 

  • I am also not suggesting full realism. I have said multiple times that the DM can go only so far, however there is simply no reason why there shouldn't be an adjustment to the damage values of the 20mm HE. 

 

  • Based on the test, where the russian and german 20mm HE perform the same on a structural level and the russian 20mm AP being a lot better than the german one, yes, the german 20mm is the worst in the game according to the test. However i don't mind admitting that the result could be different if there would be a way to test for internal damage as well!

 

  • A good MP PvP experience in a sim game should be achieved by mission design, not balancing historical data. A sim game is not about being competitive strictly speaking. This is not an e-sport title, despite what some people on TAW think.

 

Only two things to consider:

  • separate DM means lots of dev work hours. To really do it justice, you need to implement a completely separate damage model for all aircraft. Dev hours are scarce and they rather throw time at something that will make them money instead of standing still with remodelling what's already there at no gain to keep the lights on.
  • MP PvP Experience and mission design: Totally agreed but slant everything too much and one side won't have people playing anymore (and let's face it, many historical scenarios were one-sided slaughterfests). From my experience, LW already outnumbers reds in most situations because people often don't enjoy playing the underdog. So pick your poison: Enforced ratios (and I'm talking historical here, not just even teams) so many LW pilots won't be able to fly LW side or LW not getting any competition anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mauf said:
  • separate DM means lots of dev work hours. To really do it justice, you need to implement a completely separate damage model for all aircraft. Dev hours are scarce and they rather throw time at something that will make them money instead of standing still with remodelling what's already there at no gain to keep the lights on.

 

I am aware of that but i still consider it worth it when 50% of all planes are using it. However i also wrote in my OP that simple damage adjustments to reflect the historical/research data, i.e. HE= RUS<GER=UK would be good enough for me personally. 

 

But what we really need is a way to test internal damage. I am not a modder but it would be incredible to make it possible somehow in an offline environment.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Operation_Ivy said:
  • A good MP PvP experience in a sim game should be achieved by mission design, not balancing historical data. A sim game is not about being competitive strictly speaking. This is not an e-sport title, despite what some people on TAW think.

 

59 minutes ago, Mauf said:
  • MP PvP Experience and mission design: Totally agreed but slant everything too much and one side won't have people playing anymore (and let's face it, many historical scenarios were one-sided slaughterfests). From my experience, LW already outnumbers reds in most situations because people often don't enjoy playing the underdog. So pick your poison: Enforced ratios (and I'm talking historical here, not just even teams) so many LW pilots won't be able to fly LW side or LW not getting any competition anymore?

 

PvP arena must be somehow balanced to be successful. We have discussed many times the historical vs balanced scenarios and most agree that has to be something in between them to be enjoyable for the general flightsimmers...not for the few historical hardcore weirdos. Those asking to attach to history are very naive and can't see the forest beyond the tree. If you want to go historical, then give LW 20 slots and VVS 60 slots...and let's see how long that campaign keeps people interest. 

You are wrong again Ivy, balance can be also achieved by project development and not only mission design. When il2 Battle Series launched the first BOS patch, they went for balance. See? They didn't choose the Lagg-3 series 1 or 4, they went for the s29...same with Yak, etc. Right now the latest changes have been affecting VVS much more and after last patch we have slaughter fests...maybe devs don't care cause Eastern Front patches are on sale and Western Ones give the bucks..who knows.

 And sorry, but asking your beloved 20mm to be given special treatment is pedantic and self centered, it was a great 20mm and needed no adjustements. Imagine what this would be if all of us asked time after time to be given special treatment to each aspect we find important.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

PvP arena must be somehow balanced to be successful. We have discussed many times the historical vs balanced scenarios and most agree that has to be something in between them to be enjoyable for the general flightsimmers...not for the few historical hardcore weirdos. Those asking to attach to history are very naive and can't see the forest beyond the tree. If you want to go historical, then give LW 20 slots and VVS 60 slots...and let's see how long that campaign keeps people interest.

 

I have never seen this supposed majority but this is besides the point. If your opinion is that aircrafts should be changed/designed despite historical/research data is stating something different for the sake of balance, than we just have to agree to disagree.

 

Quote


And sorry, but asking your beloved 20mm to be given special treatment is pedantic and self centered, it was a great 20mm and needed no adjustements. Imagine what this would be if all of us asked time after time to be given special treatment to each aspect we find important.

 

 

I am voicing my opinion and advocating for a change that i believe will make the game more accurate (remember, i fly both sides). You might call that pedantic and self centered, but you are basically doing the same in this thread, aren't you? 

Everyone should feel encouraged to advocate for something that they think would improve the game. Judging by your postcount and this post, you are doing exactly the same as i do, except for it being in a ranting manner without any actual evidence 🤷‍♂️

Edited by Operation_Ivy

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...