Jump to content
Han

Game version 4.005 discussion: New airframe damage model

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, [=PzG=]-FlyinPinkPanther said:

 

My impression of Jason's comment is not that the topic was inappropriate for the thread just that it was becoming too large. I guess he feels that other issues will be 'drowned out" by the discussion and be missed. 

Yup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DM is pretty awesome. Rifle caliber rounds and HMGs are awarded quicker kills with more accurate rounds to the cockpit/engine area at convergence, cannons do tons of damage but accuracy still matters just significantly less so. I haven't played against online players yet but QMB was what I'd expect and the Moscow MiG-3 career I started was pretty generous with 2 109s, 1 110, and 3 Ju88s across two missions using the default light MG and 1 HMG for the first mission while the second mission had that loadout plus the 2 HMG wing guns.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

DM and sounds are incredible, even during SP missions. I was in the middle of my second mission in Rzhev's scripted campaign (thanks @Juri_JS); I overshot an IL-2 and it fired back at me from my 6;  the sound of the IL-2 gun was quite something, very loud and deep, nothing I've heard before; The rounds that hit my FW190A3 fuselage did not sound as good, but I felt them. The canopy was hit, the sound effect was incredible and I almost felt sucked out of my plane, lol 💀. Kudos guys, good job !! When I post, I generally complain a lot, since SP needs a serious overhaul (still the case btw, even after 4.005), but I really appreciate all the work and effort you put into this update; in those covid days, it is quite something to see that some people stay as focused and motivated as you do. You're a small dev team, you're doing your best and this update just illustrates it. You can't be perfect and you have your priorities. This, I can understand... But, next time... Some focus on SP flaws ?? 

Edited by Beurling
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like the update but i notice a small bug, when i get damage flying and had a fuel leak from two tanks and i could see the leaks but no one else in the group could see the leak and the something happen for someone else who had the same problem and i couldn't see he's leaks either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a light-speed reaction time. Excellent, thank you very much to the dev team. All my static objects are back properly on the ground.

 

Now if I can add a small comment. A fantastic improvement would be if the objects could also be tilted so as to be on the ground but also matching the slope of the ground.

It is a not very simple request. At the moment an object put on a slope will  be partially in the ground and partially in the air. Its geometrical center would be OK. If the slope is small its manageable and visually OK, but if the slope is larger then it is really weird looking. On the other hand some objects like buildings have to stay vertical even in a sloped ground and in this case the present solution is acceptable.

 

The easiest way to solve this is to give us in the editor access to the Y coordinate and the RX,RY,RZ rotation angles of an object. Then we are free to position properly all the objects as we wish and whatever the ground. Maybe one day we may have this "freedom".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

I have a couple of question about the P-51 and it's firing pattern. 

 

Currently, (as best as I can observe) all guns on the wings fire together and re-chamber the next round together.  One of my squad mates has told me that they think the correct way is for the guns to fire is 1,2,3 sequential. So, gun 1 would fire and while 2 was firing, re-chamber. 2 would fire and then re-chamber while 3 was firing. 3 would fire and then re-chamber while 1 was firing, rinse and repeat.   The muzzle flashes would appear to ripple across the 3 guns in each wing.  IIRC he said the pattern was outboard to inboard.  

 

If that's true, it wouldn't change the rate or volume of fire being sent to the target, but it would fill in miniscule 'gaps' along the entire bullet stream.  That might mean that there would be a higher likelihood of being hit by more bullets if the target was to quickly pass through the stream.  It could also mean that either pattern (all simultaneous or 1,2,3, ripple) would be negligible in changes to hit rate.  

 

My question is - Is the current firing pattern correct?  If not does it matter? 

If it does matter, certain shooting angles and scenarios might actually not be hitting at the correct volume. Therefore, it may not be the bullet that's underpowered.  It may be that it's actually hitting less than it should on targets that pass through the stream just ahead of (or just behind) the convergence point.  

 

I take it that this might also relate to the P-47 and possibly the P-40 as well.  I would imagine that the P-38 would probably benefit more with an all-together firing pattern due to its no-convergence setup.   

 

I don't know how the .50 cals worked in real life, or in the game for that matter, but I think you're on to something.

 

I remember we had a similar discussion after the release of the Ace Expansion Pack for IL-2. Some players noticed that the P-51 guns were in perfect sync, which meant there were large gaps between the salvos. This made deflection shots very difficult since an enemy play could fly straight through the volley unscathed. They devs changed the sequence to what I believe was a randomised pattern (IIRC), so the guns fired simultaneously at first but quickly went out of sync.

 

I think it matters, at least to a degree. If I'm not mistaken, the American approach when settling on the .50 was to make a sort of 'garden hose' effect, making it easier to score hits on a fast moving enemy aircraft, even in a quick pass from all sorts of odd angles. The sequenced pattern you describe or a completely randomised pattern make perfect sense then.

Edited by Guster
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the guns would be triggered all at once but then go out of sync pretty quickly due to many factors such as parts tolerances, age, spring tensions. The reason actual synchronised guns meant to fire between the prop blades can keep that synchronization is because they aren't being triggered the same way. A wing gun is fully automatic meaning you just hold the trigger and it keeps firing until you let go. Think of the nose guns as being semi-automatic meaning you have to pull the trigger for each shot. The mechanism connected to the propeller rotation is what will "pull the trigger" so to speak, every time there is a gap. The prop spins so fast that it sounds like a full auto weapon.

 

I think it would be great if they could add some fidelity to the weapons systems as far as the randomness of the rates of fire for individual guns as well as more detailed options for convergence and ammunition configurations. But that is down the road. The last update has set the bar very high in the DM department. It has really transformed the game in a good way. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Some small udpate is coming.


?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

iThe engine should start running hot immediately after the cooling system is perforated irrespective of whether its a fast or slow leak. One of the major factors that influence the cooling capability of a pressurized system is just that; pressure. Once it's gone the coolant will boil at a much lower temperature and turn to steam inside the system. After this happens, catastrophic overheat will occured VERY quickly.

While it will overheat, the water won't all boil instantly, it takes some time and its not just going to evaporate into steam instantly. There is a difference between no water getting to the engine at all and water boiling off over time. One will kill the engine quickly and the other will overheat but it may last a while longer depending on how fast the water boils off.

In both situation the engine will die but it's possible for it to last a while longer if it's just a leak, how long well idk, it just depends but probably no more than 10-20min max imo.

 

We can continue the discussion in below since Jason doesn't want to clutter this thread.

 

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P51 is still a tank in this sim. You need to empty the 30mm gun to bring it down. P47 is almost fragile as it was. Nothing big changed in that regard. But yes, damage is more detailed now.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

P51 is still a tank in this sim. You need to empty the 30mm gun to bring it down. P47 is almost fragile as it was. Nothing big changed in that regard. But yes, damage is more detailed now.

Not really true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

P51 is still a tank in this sim. You need to empty the 30mm gun to bring it down. P47 is almost fragile as it was. Nothing big changed in that regard. But yes, damage is more detailed now.

Nope

Edited by LF_Gallahad
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

I don't know how the .50 cals worked in real life, or in the game for that matter, but I think you're on to something.

 

I remember we had a similar discussion after the release of the Ace Expansion Pack for IL-2. Some players noticed that the P-51 guns were in perfect sync, which meant there were large gaps between the salvos. This made deflection shots very difficult since an enemy play could fly straight through the volley unscathed. They devs changed the sequence to what I believe was a randomised pattern (IIRC), so the guns fired simultaneously at first but quickly went out of sync.

 

I think it matters, at least to a degree. If I'm not mistaken, the American approach when settling on the .50 was to make a sort of 'garden hose' effect, making it easier to score hits on a fast moving enemy aircraft, even in a quick pass from all sorts of odd angles. The sequenced pattern you describe or a completely randomised pattern make perfect sense then.

 

2 hours ago, Danziger said:

Yes the guns would be triggered all at once but then go out of sync pretty quickly due to many factors such as parts tolerances, age, spring tensions. The reason actual synchronised guns meant to fire between the prop blades can keep that synchronization is because they aren't being triggered the same way. A wing gun is fully automatic meaning you just hold the trigger and it keeps firing until you let go. Think of the nose guns as being semi-automatic meaning you have to pull the trigger for each shot. The mechanism connected to the propeller rotation is what will "pull the trigger" so to speak, every time there is a gap. The prop spins so fast that it sounds like a full auto weapon.

 

I think it would be great if they could add some fidelity to the weapons systems as far as the randomness of the rates of fire for individual guns as well as more detailed options for convergence and ammunition configurations. But that is down the road. The last update has set the bar very high in the DM department. It has really transformed the game in a good way. 

 

 

I can definitely see that Danziger's explanation of why the guns desync is the most likely 100% correct.  I would still suggest that the randomness of the desync was a bit of a lucky thing. When it comes to filling in the tiny spaces of each individual volley, the "garden hose effect", as Guster  puts it, may have actually been a contributing factor to the 4, 6 or 8 x .50 cal's effectiveness.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

P51 is still a tank in this sim. You need to empty the 30mm gun to bring it down. P47 is almost fragile as it was. Nothing big changed in that regard. But yes, damage is more detailed now.


Zero probs with 20mm cannon and 13mm MG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

 

 

I can definitely see that Danziger's explanation of why the guns desync is the most likely 100% correct.  I would still suggest that the randomness of the desync was a bit of a lucky thing. When it comes to filling in the tiny spaces of each individual volley, the "garden hose effect", as Guster  puts it, may have actually been a contributing factor to the 4, 6 or 8 x .50 cal's effectiveness.  

Yes I think it could help a lot in the game to have the guns firing at different rates. More detailed options for convergence would help too. Hopefully it will be something that gets a piece of the resource pie sometime in the future.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad update. I was out of rotten tomatoes so I had to throw money at you instead. :crazy:

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Bad update. I was out of rotten tomatoes so I had to throw money at you instead. :crazy:

Care to explain?

Share this post


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

Care to explain?

It means I like this update so much I pre-ordered BON. Just my screwed up humour.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Horna said:

It means I like this update so much I pre-ordered BON. Just my screwed up humour.

Ah, gotcha. I shoulda known with that little emoji. Also didn't read your post clearly, looking back at it it's very obvious what you meant. My bad.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I see a lot of folks complaining about .50 cals not doing any damage and P51's being hard to shoot down and what not.Shooting at an aircraft is not enough to bring it down unless your aim is good and you concentrate the fire power on vital areas, just as it should be.That is the whole point of this DM overhaul.I am by no means a great shot but I can bring down a Mustang without too much trouble flying a 109 and better with a FW 190 provided my rounds hit home where they need to.With the 50 cals , yes it is not as easy as before to dispatch your adversary but again, you need to maximize the damage by getting close to your enemy, being in the correct range so your rounds converge and if possible have some deflection in your shots.When you are turning and burning with an enemy weaving around left and right it is hard to do all this, but thats what we see in the gun cam footage isnt it, lots of debris coming off, sparks everywhere and in time an engine failure/fire or loss of control with the plane going down or the pilot bailing out.Now if you hit all the checkmarks you can set a plane ablaze with a .5s burst and that to me is the biggest indication that this DM improvement is working as it should.

Edited by royraiden
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I see a lot of folks complaining about .50 cals not doing any damage and P51's being hard to shoot down and what not.Shooting at an aircraft is not enough to bring it down unless your aim is good and you concentrate the fire power on vital areas, just as it should be.That is the whole point of this DM overhaul.I am by no means great shot but I can bring down a Mustang with a 109 and better with a FW 190 provided my rounds hit home where they need to.With the 50 cals , yes it is not as easy as before to dispatch your adversary but again, you need to maximize the damage by getting close to your enemy, being in the correct range so your rounds converge and if possible have some deflection in your shots.When you are turning and burning with an enemy weaving around left and right is hard to do all this, but thats what we see in the gun cam footage isnt it, lots of debris coming off, sparks everywhere and in time an engine failure/fire or loss of control with the plane going down or the pilot bailing out.Now if you hit all the checkmarks you can set a plane ablaze with a .5s burst and that to me is the biggest indication that this DM improvement is working as it should.

 

The .50s are the hardest weapon to use imho. Shooting at the convergence is extremely important to do significant damage.

 

I know that personally I shoot too close a lot and miss a lot of shots bc of it.

 

I'm now practicing with the gyro sight, it's a bit harder to use but when it all lines up its devastating.

 

And yes was able to set a 109 ablaze last night with just 19 hits (that felt nice lol)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to add, I never use the Gyro gunsight, only the static one and guesstimate my lead just like with any other aircraft.I think that helps in getting good with deflection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an issue about the P47D which i forgot.

 

The P47D when you reach high altitude and the clyn. Temp rises up, you don't get techno chat messages about it. So it happens that it stops midair. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serious problem in how this translated into Flying Circus.   Took the most highly praises and appreciated aspect of that module (damage model) and took it back ten uears.   Something wrong with either the ammuniton effect or the modeling of wood strength/hitbox strength.  Minor damage litterally few bullets causing catastrophic damage.

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

There is an issue about the P47D which i forgot.

 

The P47D when you reach high altitude and the clyn. Temp rises up, you don't get techno chat messages about it. So it happens that it stops midair. 

 

 

Jesus MeoW, how high was that?  I don't think I've ever seen a plane that high in our sim.  That's low orbit stuff right there. !

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love the new damage model.

But is it normal that 20mm shells from I-16 canons lack smoke trail and tracer rounds?

It makes very difficult to aim now...

 

Il-2 2020-04-10 17-22-02.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, FAW-Tromplamort said:

I do love the new damage model.

But is it normal that 20mm shells from I-16 canons lack smoke trail and tracer rounds?

It makes very difficult to aim now...

 

Il-2 2020-04-10 17-22-02.jpg

IIRC this is because early soviet cannons lacked tracer rounds. It was here before the update too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, FAW-Tromplamort said:

I do love the new damage model.

But is it normal that 20mm shells from I-16 canons lack smoke trail and tracer rounds?

It makes very difficult to aim now...

 

Il-2 2020-04-10 17-22-02.jpg

Yes. It is the same for MiG. They did not have tracer rounds for 20mm at the early stage of the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Astounding to see so many flying the same sim with the same update and yet having completely different perceptions of the changes made. I’d like to see what would happen if the developers released a placebo patch that did absolutely nothing. I’m sure the same folks would still

land squarely withIn their same viewpoints and have the same arguments they have now. 

  • Haha 5
  • Upvote 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy to aim with no smoke or tracers - aim where you need to and if you see bits of airplane falling off - you are on target.  If not then adjust and try again.  Not rocket science. 😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, JG51_Beazil said:

Jesus MeoW, how high was that?  I don't think I've ever seen a plane that high in our sim.  That's low orbit stuff right there. !

 

You saw the server message which says Round ends in 5 minutes? Took me the whole map to climb to that height in a P47D. 😂

  • Haha 5

Share this post


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

Astounding to see so many flying the same sim with the same update and yet having completely different perceptions of the changes made. I’d like to see what would happen if the developers released a placebo patch that did absolutely nothing. I’m sure the same folks would still

land squarely withIn their same viewpoints and have the same arguments they have now. 

They should release an update with no changelog and have a contest for people to guess what changes were made.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Rjel said:

Astounding to see so many flying the same sim with the same update and yet having completely different perceptions of the changes made. I’d like to see what would happen if the developers released a placebo patch that did absolutely nothing. I’m sure the same folks would still

land squarely withIn their same viewpoints and have the same arguments they have now. 

Ok no tracer I understand but no smoke trail?? Come on, did russian had magic powder that left no smoke at all? Whereas every other nation's shells leave a smoke trail in the air?🙃

Edited by FAW-Tromplamort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FAW-Tromplamort said:

Ok no tracer I understand but no smoke trail?? Come on, did russian had magic powder that left no smoke at all? Whereas every other nation's shells leave a smoke trail in the air?🙃

Smokeless powder was invented in the late nineteenth century. Aviation guns used smoke on purpose as a form of tracer. In all the military shooting I've done, I've never seen a .50 cal leave a smoke trail. There is a minimal amount of smoke at the muzzle.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

Yes. It is the same for MiG. They did not have tracer rounds for 20mm at the early stage of the war.

 

And the M41 Il-2.

Share this post


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

Astounding to see so many flying the same sim with the same update and yet having completely different perceptions of the changes made. I’d like to see what would happen if the developers released a placebo patch that did absolutely nothing. I’m sure the same folks would still

land squarely withIn their same viewpoints and have the same arguments they have now. 

 

100% agree.

My favorites are claims of seeing certain features that the devs later confirm do not exist. 

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like most of the posts about Flying Circus are invisible like the D.VIIF. Must be a new bug.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, -332FG-REDMAN said:

Looks like most of the posts about Flying Circus are invisible 

 

Yeah.  Quick message from the Flying Circus part of these boards;

 

Houston, we have a problem:bye:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...