Jump to content

Game version 4.005 discussion: New airframe damage model


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

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

 

Houston, we have a problem:bye:

Have you guys opened a thread in the bug report forum? That would grab the dev attention better I'd say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours 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. 

It was already noticeble in RC5(beta test) the weapons has less tracer than in the past(4.004) b t w.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours 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. 

 

 

 

I was able to reproduce this and recorded a track. Took ~30m, and seems to only happen above a certain altitude. Basically, the system correctly reports cylinder head overheats up to a certain altitude, possibly around 8km, but past that, you can overheat the engine without triggering the overheat icon. At ~10km I could get my engine up to >300F without triggering the tech chat warning at all, though the engine did fail.

 

What was very curious was there was a temperature range where the text warning would trigger, but the overheat icon would not.

 

Also, apparently there is no tech chat for the engine oil over temperature condition. The aircraft was able to cheerfully run the oil at 130C without complaint, and after the frist overheat cycle, I just left the engine oil cooler closed for the entire flight.

 

To reproduce, I'd recommend just spawning in the plane at 10km and running the engine until it hits overheat. Climbing from the ground to that altitude take a rather long time... (the track was ~50mb...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2020 at 1:44 AM, =[TIA]=Stoopy said:

Wow.  Just WOW.

 

Installed the update, rebooted, and then fired it up my Stalingrad Playground mission and spent an hour in VR having a blast!

 

The Gods of Random Spawning saw fit to bestow upon my flight of 3 BF109 F-4's, a group of 4 LaGGs which were dispatched in a variety pf interesting ways, and those buggers fought a hard fight and didn't go down easy.  Used up all my ammo so I landed and parked in the RRR area (SO GLAD that some of the little glitches were addressed in this patch, it's the coolest feature ever), then took off again and dealt with a lone P-51 (actually my wingmen got him) and then we cruised south and stirred up a flight of 4 P-38's.  Got two before running out of ammo again and split for home.  Left one slightly streaming and like others have said the variation in fuel and coolant leaks is subtle but still noticeable.  Most fun I've had in a long time, performance was excellent with no FPS drop or stutters and the damage model(s) just seems great!

 

Kudos to the team!

 

vPAUJJi.jpg

 

Now ain't them some jugs !!!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, Day 2 with version 4.005...

 

Flew about 11.5 hours with the Bodenplatte plane set; 5.5 hrs online & 6 about hrs off-line... my wife is about ready to divorce me.

 

Some online Twitch highlights form last night here:

 - Not pretty... got to the point were the guys I was flying with insisted on switching from Allied to Axis, the switch was a night and day difference to say the least.

 

Off-line in quick mission I flew nearly every aircraft vs every aircraft to test damage modeling... including 109s vs 109s, P-51 vs P-51 etc... main thing I noticed is issues with the damage modeling with particular planes over differences in ballistics.

 

If I may suggest a few suggest a few things from my observations...

- *This is more of an opinion on ballistics; Axis cannons are slightly over powerful (don't notice a big difference between the 30s & 20s when I would single shot targets) ... 0.50 slightly under powered. Just my take from watching footage and reading accounts form pilots and being a history buff on this stuff. I'm not out in my backyard testing these things so save the comments, just an opinion.

Will go through plane by plane:

ALLIED

- P-51: has a bug with the rear elevator damage. Just one little hit from any caliber gun will take it completely off. When shooting at it with another P-51 all I had to do is take a slight deflection angle at the tail, one tiny squirt and there it goes fluttering away and there goes the P-51 straight into the ground... needs fixed.

- P-38: engines catch fire fairly easily and plane will just explode into pieces without much of an effort.

- 47: engine catch fire or seizes extremely easily, it's bad. Just one little squirt down the fuselage every time, don't need any cannons to bring this guy down.

- Spit IX: actually a little on the tough side.. can take a few shot and is hard to catch on fire... the tank of the Allied forces.

- Tempest: good, balanced

AXIS

- 109K & G-14: This is the problem child, a virtual bullet sponge. Just takes massive damage into the fuselage and extremely rarely takes and immediate engine damage. You can even pump several Mk108s into the fuselage on this one. I only got 1x G-14 to catch fire (out of about 30 attempts) and that was only after I ran out of ammo and just followed it for a few minutes while it was steaming white smoke, if finally caught on fire spontaneously. I don't seem to have too much trouble blowing landing gear off it though. You can 'saw-off' wings with good concentrated fire. This one needs fixed!

- A-8: Good, well balanced like the Tempest

- D-9: little on the tough side like the Spit, can take more hits than the A-8 (which is probably backwards) but you can saw some stuff off and it will catch fire.

- 110 G-2: little on the tough side as well structurally but engines will catch fire.

 

That's my take.

 

Also... one other note on sound since the update. The P-51, P-38 & Tempest have loud external sounds (P-38 & Tempest extremely loud) compared to all other aircraft. I can hear a 38 or Tempest from far away and know their position without seeing them. This is a disadvantage when you fly these aircraft. Before the patch I could hear virtually every plane when it is close or whizzing past, liked that immersion, take the mufflers off the rest of the aircraft please... and thank you.

 

Regards,

Mad-Moses

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Beurling said:

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 ?? 

Not that I disagree with, but you might want to be a bit more specific and constructive if you want the devs to pay attention to you. Just saying there are flaws won't really help them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2020 at 5:50 PM, Sybreed said:

Not that I disagree with, but you might want to be a bit more specific and constructive if you want the devs to pay attention to you. Just saying there are flaws won't really help them. 

 

You are right, but I have posted repeatedly about those flaws and they know them : Transfer to another squadron that ruins your career (crash)... FW190A3 BOS with no AI kills... Ground targets that are not registered as destroyed (almost solved...will also affect MP I guess)... Endless circling around waypoints (rarely happens)... Erratic AI behavior, including planes that crash into mountains on BOK maps.... Random crash to desktop after mission completion...Night missions that are considered "completed" even if you are halfway to the target, etc.  The worst problem has to do with careers that begin or end outside predefined boundaries ( after the first chapter / before the last one). What often happens is that your career will be lost at some point (infamous : "proceed next day failed" message, which also happens sometimes with squadron transfer...mostly but not essentially when you fly German planes...)

 

To let you know:  when you're 60-80 missions into a career and it shits in your hands like that.. Well... The vibe is not all that groovy...

 

 

Edited by Beurling
Link to post
Share on other sites

The patch has been out for a few days and I have collected my thoughts.

 

First, I agree with anyone who says the p51 was hurt competitively by this patch. It's still good, and it's still my top choice fighter, but it was hurt. This is in part to how american .50cals function. They can still shred fighters and bombers, but more often than not the pilot needs a continuous spray of between .5 and 2 seconds for a kill. I think that is reasonable, in theory. But what holds it back in game is what I consider to be an old problem- the number of particle FX that designate a hit. more often than not, about a third of the way through a spray, hits stop visually registering. Instead, they ghost through. They still do damage, but I can only tell that by the way the damage texture is changing on my target. This is at it's worst when shooting at bombers over an extended period of time. And this is not just a problem for the American planes. The i16, mc 202, ju 87 & hs 129 with machine gunpods, they all have this issue. I wonder how bad it will be for the hurricane w/ 12 brownings. For the American planes, to compound this, the M2 has the cleanest tracer burn, and is the hardest to visually track.

 

The second problem, and by far the most important, are the new engines. I know these are going to be reworked with an in depth model, but for now they are stupid tanky. Before the update there were two ways I would get kills in the 51; kill the pilot, or kill the engine. The new air frame damage model doesn't change that. Pilots die left and right, engines don't. And in this way, the .50 is only half as good as it used to be. As it is right now, the only way I have killed an engine is to set it on fire. Otherwise that prop will just keep spinning. And this cuts both ways. I don't care when my engine gets damaged, I don't even know most of the time. Unless I can see my rpms shaking, or feel a lack of power from the engine, I'm going to keep fighting. A water leak might kill me in 15 minutes, and oil leak might be annoying (wind screen spatter), but engine damage is nonexistent, and if I have all my engine power then I'm going to power through that fight. I'm also not going to stop shooting at someone unless I see them bail out, catch fire, or break a wing. If this issue is resolved, I will be more likely to search for an exit from a fight when damaged because I want to make it home, and I will be more likely to let a damaged adversary exit a fight because I feel like I've shot him to the point that he won't make it home.

 

Other than the above^ the .50 is still a killer

 

2 hours ago, Mad-Moses said:

- P-51: has a bug with the rear elevator damage. Just one little hit from any caliber gun will take it completely off. When shooting at it with another P-51 all I had to do is take a slight deflection angle at the tail, one tiny squirt and there it goes fluttering away and there goes the P-51 straight into the ground... needs fixed.

I have noticed this also. The elevator becomes shredded very easily (not jammed), and almost completely loses the ability to lift the nose.

 

I have also been recording the damage that heavy machine guns do, and I wonder if there are any discrepancies. I'll mark the gun as 'spoiler.' Convergence was set to 200m for all tests.

20200410192023_1.thumb.jpg.46990d1fe87112224078b78de2ad831c.jpg 

Spoiler

MG 131 (makes sense because it fires HEI)

20200410191813_1.thumb.jpg.1283916acd3c315075a739ba4893bae3.jpg 

Spoiler

BS 12.7 (Huge rips in the skin? Does this also have high explosive filler?)

20200410191914_1.thumb.jpg.a3df51ba0a1d6b556321d89492dfd2b7.jpg 

Spoiler

UB 12.7 (seems to have identical performance to the BS)

20200410192122_1.thumb.jpg.1bf8102e27b813dae7b5d24a06460544.jpg 

Spoiler

Breda 12.7 (lots of small holes, consistent with the new damage model for AP)

20200410192255_1.thumb.jpg.5e9e0675026db81003e29c9c8e3d6430.jpg 

Spoiler

M2 .50 (I shredded the whole plane: 2x water leak, fuel leak, and I took the wing off. Again we see minimal damage to the skin, consistent when the new damage model.)

 

I was curious if anyone else has done their own testing, and if the above feels right.

 

I know it seems like I've written a lot of negative things about the update, but on the whole I think the game is better than before, and I am always excited to see what direction the game is headed in.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding. 50 cals, when I  look at a lot of USAF WWII gun camera footage one of the prevalent things I always noticed is fire and not necessarily aircraft breaking apart. I think this DM update is a massive improvement over what we had before and it makes me appreciate even more, why the luftwaffe were strapping gun pods on their 109's on the eastern Front. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

The screenshots of damage are little help without actually seeing how you are shooting from a video. I always see damage sprites and I'm on a i7 4770k at 4.4Ghz with a 1080ti so I doubt it's lack of processing unless you have fps in the 20s.

 

Most likely not hitting at convergence, or having your sight's center right on the aircraft at close range while most rounds fly past the plane.

 

I set my convergence to 150 and I have to angle my sights half off the 109 to get at least one set of wing guns to hit the fuselage from dead rear when I get closer in than convergence. Still very, very effective though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since 4.005, it seems the P-47 can only link the turbo fully to the thrust lever.

 

The RPM/prop lever can only be linked in one direction, up. Up, but not down, so it remains at the max setting you pushed it to when linked to the throttle when you move the throttle back down again.

 

Is this indended or a bug?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fortis_Leader said:

Since 4.005, it seems the P-47 can only link the turbo fully to the thrust lever.

 

The RPM/prop lever can only be linked in one direction, up. Up, but not down, so it remains at the max setting you pushed it to when linked to the throttle when you move the throttle back down again.

 

Is this indended or a bug?

 

Intended. Apparently that's how it worked in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just experienced something odd in 1v1 QMB Single Player.  P-38 vs. 109K4.  

 

We took a head to head pass.  The K4 flew past my left wing very closely.  I'm 99% sure that we didn't collide and were both undamaged, but my left wingtip broke off during the pass.  

 

Maybe it's nothing, but if anybody else experiences the same with the P-38, maybe it can be confirmed as a bug.   

Edited by 69th_Mobile_BBQ
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =SqSq=Civilprotection said:

The second problem, and by far the most important, are the new engines. I know these are going to be reworked with an in depth model, but for now they are stupid tanky. Before the update there were two ways I would get kills in the 51; kill the pilot, or kill the engine. The new air frame damage model doesn't change that. Pilots die left and right, engines don't. And in this way, the .50 is only half as good as it used to be. As it is right now, the only way I have killed an engine is to set it on fire. Otherwise that prop will just keep spinning. And this cuts both ways. I don't care when my engine gets damaged, I don't even know most of the time. Unless I can see my rpms shaking, or feel a lack of power from the engine, I'm going to keep fighting. A water leak might kill me in 15 minutes, and oil leak might be annoying (wind screen spatter), but engine damage is nonexistent, and if I have all my engine power then I'm going to power through that fight. I'm also not going to stop shooting at someone unless I see them bail out, catch fire, or break a wing. If this issue is resolved, I will be more likely to search for an exit from a fight when damaged because I want to make it home, and I will be more likely to let a damaged adversary exit a fight because I feel like I've shot him to the point that he won't make it home.

 

Engines are tough but they can be killed with a quick burst if you hit them correctly. Each cylinder is modeled and can be damaged, along with the crankcase, oil system, coolant system, etc.

Hitting any one of these systems can bring the engine down quickly if the hit is serious enough but just a few hits may not be enough to bring it down.

A hit to the coolant and oil system is usually a guaranteed kill but it may not be instant. Hitting the crank can cause instant failure if it's hit hard enough, and knocking out the cylinders will cause power loss though I'm not sure if it will always be noticeable on the gauges.

 

I've had occasions where I killed the engine with just a few hits (no more than 5) and I've had occasions where the engine just kept going, it really just depends on how bad you hit it.

 

I'm sure the system will be improved and added to over time, it's best just to be patient and do as much testing as possible to see all the variables.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, FuriousMeow said:

The screenshots of damage are little help without actually seeing how you are shooting from a video. I always see damage sprites and I'm on a i7 4770k at 4.4Ghz with a 1080ti so I doubt it's lack of processing unless you have fps in the 20s.

 

Most likely not hitting at convergence, or having your sight's center right on the aircraft at close range while most rounds fly past the plane.

 

I set my convergence to 150 and I have to angle my sights half off the 109 to get at least one set of wing guns to hit the fuselage from dead rear when I get closer in than convergence. Still very, very effective though.

@FuriousMeowThe images are just there to examine the damage to the aircraft skin and frame. I thought it was odd that the Russian 12.7 should do damage to the skin as if it were firing high explosive.

 

Convergence at 200m is fine, I was typically shooting at 200-300 yards out, which doesn't matter anyway. The damage is there, the visual feedback isn't.

 

I have recorded several videos:

 

Shooting at the ground is the most obvious

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F7qaV2LxW8sC34GIlOPOca8TQEQRNrSs/view?usp=sharing

The first few bullets have an impact FX, but the rest don't.

 

It's also very noticeable shooting into a near stationary target.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19PlkO5ApRcoMpwaybGf6sNrCk42SAIS3/view?usp=sharing

I am constantly doing damage to the il2, but there are very few visual FX to tell me this. I only know that I am hitting the il2 because of the occasional richochet and from large pieces falling off.

 

High speed passes is why this is important.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YMy4WVjUREpKbwLWeW_1ZBmwXz343qQI/view?usp=sharing

Hit FX are only visible when the first couple rounds make contact. I know I am continuing to do damage because the skin texture changes (grey patches) and the right flap falls off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Flying the 109, I'm not sure if it's true with every plane yet.  I've not done extensive testing, but I've noticed that when you take almost any damage to the vertical or horizontal stabilizers the plane becomes what I would think is excessively unstable in the pitch and yaw axis.  I understand the elevators becoming less responsive if they are nothing but shreds.  However, even if the rest of the horizontal stabilizer appears fine, the plane becomes incredibly unstable.

 

Just something I've noticed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lupus said:

Flying the 109, I'm not sure if it's true with every plane yet.  I've not done extensive testing, but I've noticed that when you take almost any damage to the vertical or horizontal stabilizers the plane becomes what I would think is excessively unstable in the pitch and yaw axis.  I understand the elevators becoming less responsive if they are nothing but shreds.  However, even if the rest of the horizontal stabilizer appears fine, the plane becomes incredibly unstable.

 

Just something I've noticed.

I think this is just a case of the visuals not completely matching the actual damage done, but not 100% sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@=SqSq=Civilprotection

I see what you mean now. I can get through a couple hundred rounds and then sprites stop showing up on the ground. Eventually it seems to reset and I again see the sprites (or whatever they're called now). It didn't appear that way air to air as I wasn't getting through enough rounds to notice it.

 

EDIT: And I do believe at least one of the VVS HMGs does have a small HE component to it but not 100% certain.

Edited by FuriousMeow
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2020 at 7:50 PM, Legioneod said:

They aren't. I thought they were as well but I found out from the devs that they aren't modeled as of right now.


i wish if people didnt know positive would not say they were. I have pushed for api and apit for US planes for 10 years.  Why is it so hard to get something as common and important.  I love the new version of IL2.  Dont get me wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

@FuriousMeow Yeah, it's an unfortunate part of the game. For most people flying aircraft with cannons this issue may never come up. You could probably load a FW 190 up with 6x 20mm cannons and not see the problem through the smoke. Knowing the roots of this game in Stalingrad and that plane set, I can see why this could be viewed as a low priority issue. But with more and more machine gun oriented aircraft, I hope this gets addressed. I also noticed that a lot of impact FX double as light sources, so maybe when deferred shading comes around, there will be enough light sources in the scene for more hit FX.

 

@Legioneod I understand the new system and (in theory) it is an amazing improvement. I really am excited to see where it goes. But as it is right now, I can't tell the difference between an inline engine and a radial based on the amount of damage they can take. Sometimes I can feel the power loss, most times I cant, though I sure it's there. My issue with engine performance is the same as my issue with the .50- not enough feedback. With time I'm sure this will be improved.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =SqSq=Civilprotection said:

@FuriousMeowThe images are just there to examine the damage to the aircraft skin and frame. I thought it was odd that the Russian 12.7 should do damage to the skin as if it were firing high explosive.


Yup, the Soviets used HE in the ammo for the 12.7mm Universal Berezin (it's in the game in all it's variants, UBS propeller synchronized, UBT turret mount and UBK wing mount). In fact if I am not mistaken the Americans were the only ones without explosive ammo for their high caliber machine gun (Germans, Russians, Italian, Japanese, Belgian had them).

About engines dying quickly, in single player I got hit by a German 37mm HE directly in the nose of my MiG and the engine stopped immediately, so it's possible if hit hard enough.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this update, its so cool how you can actually aim for specific points. I aimed at a mustangs wing tank with my 30mm and boom, his wing tank caught fire as it should right where i hit him. I love it. I can aim where i need to to do the right damage. No longer have to fire until plane falls apart. Best update ever.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if different ammunition types cause different visual damage? I always thought that the visual damage was a cumulative and just showing the amount of damage done to a certain area rather than what damage was actually done?

 

E.G Cannon round Vs MG. Say they both do 10% damage to a certain part I thought they would both show the same visual damage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing comments on the .50 cal efectiveness, I have to enter in the discussion.

 

Honestly, I find the machineguns doing what the should. It's just an upscaled rifle cartridge, they don't have HE. They will go trough the 109/190 and if they don't find anything to break, they won't.

 

It's hard to take out a plane with a single burst, also with cannons in most cases. That doesn't mean cannons are useless, right? A concentrated burst will be even more efective that one or two cannon shells. The .50 cals will pierce trough in a big chunk of area and destroy everything inside. An engine in all of my tests will last 5 mins if it is hit by a good burst. Convergence and number of weapons make also a great difference. 

 

This is a really complex patch and I think we should discusse it after a month. Less than a week it's too soon to adapt.

 

Edited by LF_Gallahad
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

From my testing mainly with BOBP planes, i noticed that most of the kills are due to lost of control. Short burst to the wings or fuselage and the enemy planes are spinning down. So its nice, that planes are more robust and wings are not breaking, but now its much much easier to shot someone down. Sometimes i was looking for the plane which was only slightly damaged only to see explosion on the ground. And if they are not spinning to the ground immediately they are smoking, leaking coolant,oil, fuel from every part of the plane and flying slowly awaiting coup de grace.

 

Also it seems to me that with every update to the AI, the AI is more and more better with flying, but also toothless. this is for me extremely annoying. There is no fun. Its like shooting ducks. in QMB 4vs4 or 2vs4 against ace AI, enemy didnt shot at me a single time. Not even one bullet. Why there is a veteran or regular AI, when even ace is tragic. Enemy is also unable to shot down my regular or veteran friendly pilots with their numerical superiority.

With this update its even worse than before. To have some challenge you need to fight alone against 4-8 enemy aces.  is it possible to have more agressive AI please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

我的中文版出现了问题,攻击带后射武器的飞机不开火IL2-m43,击落敌机后没有击落飞机数量统计!

 

There is a problem in my Chinese version. Attacking aircraft with backfire does not fire IL2-m43. After shooting down enemy aircraft, there is no statistics on the number of aircraft shot down!

Edited by LukeFF
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SL19711105buhesulong said:

我的中文版出现了问题,攻击带后射武器的飞机不开火IL2-m43,击落敌机后没有击落飞机数量统计!

Exactly. 

  • Haha 6
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mixed feelings about this patch, which i was really looking forward to. While i like the visual effects of hits and the reaction of the plane to different hit placement;  i really don't like how the damage is calculated in some guns. For instance, during  SP testing in QM i loaded a Lagg3 with 37mm and many times after 4x37mm hits at point blank range (inside 100m) the  bombers kept flying. Common thing was bombers taking 2x37mm round at point blank range and they didn't go down. I was really surprised, it really wasn't what i was expecting after such a DM overhaul.

 

So flying mainly VVS planes i see no difference in the ammount of damage they do between this patch and before, they still seem weak compared what we used to have in this sim some time ago, the difference now is what you see when you hit your target with them, and that aspect it's very nice.

Let's wait a while and see what happens after further testing.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Mixed feelings about this patch, which i was really looking forward to. While i like the visual effects of hits and the reaction of the plane to different hit placement;  i really don't like how the damage is calculated in some guns. For instance, during  SP testing in QM i loaded a Lagg3 with 37mm and many times after 4x37mm hits at point blank range (inside 100m) the  bombers kept flying. Common thing was bombers taking 2x37mm round at point blank range and they didn't go down. I was really surprised, it really wasn't what i was expecting after such a DM overhaul.

 

So flying mainly VVS planes i see no difference in the ammount of damage they do between this patch and before, they still seem weak compared what we used to have in this sim some time ago, the difference now is what you see when you hit your target with them, and that aspect it's very nice.

Let's wait a while and see what happens after further testing.

 

I hope you know, the B-25 could survive 10 Mk108 in real life and the B-25 could go home if those 10 hit wasn't critical.
Or example the 20 mm:
If the B-25 got 10 random hits from 20mm-s, there was 20% of chance the plane ll go down in 5 min.

The developers got a very good historical report from 1 beta tester.

I have read it myself, and yes: We are very-very overestiamted the power of the cannons/HMGs. Thanks to the "arcade" games, less realistic games and less historical simulated games(Old IL-2 example) from the past.

If it wasn't true, why the Germans started developing the MG-213C/MK-213 with high rate of fire? After that why, the post war planes started use 4-6-8 HMG/Cannon inside their planes? Or less cannon but very high rate or fire.
UK, French, USA also copied the MG-213C and started use it in post war planes, they also copied the Minengeschoss type of ammunition because it was the most effective HE in the War, still,  sometimes 10 hit WASN't enoguh for a  plane.
The soviets realised this a little bit later in MIG-19.
Today the jets has only 1-2  20mm/30 mm cannon, but with extreme high rate of fire.
Edited by -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SL19711105buhesulong said:

我的中文版出现了问题,攻击带后射武器的飞机不开火IL2-m43,击落敌机后没有击落飞机数量统计!

I don't know how to say it in Chinese but you may want to put this in the bug reports section.

 

Nihaoma.

 

:salute:

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is really sad to see how most of the comments here are so positive...
 
I appreciate the effort of the Dev team and all the new stuff; damage decals and all those new physics and factors taken in account for the damage model and ballistics.
 
The thing is that IMO Soviet planes are still really weak.
 
I understand most Axis pilots are charmed about how devastating are their rounds now ( "funny" to see that there is still people complaining about it saying that they are under powered and that they will uninstall the game or stop breathing if this continues like so...) 
 
Allied pilots, we have been enduring this Axis "empowering" for a very long time.
 
Basically, most Axis fighters hit harder, climb better, dive better, turn better and take/do a lot more damage. I wonder if allies could win the war if it was based on this simulator "realism".
 
Bottom line... Please Devs, whatever you do in the future, try to balance all this and make it fairer for both sides.
 
All the "historical" data provided by the users might be overwhelming and all the people want their fighters and cannons to "perform as they should..." But this is still a game. Needs balance to keep both sides relatively competitive, this is the most important thing in my opinion. Is it easy to achieve...? Obviously it is not.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes yes, give allies health potions and repairbots plz. I think balance is the word that I hate the most, so many games turned into junk where everything is just the same crap with different visuals.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Grajo, this is a simulator.  Where you can have situations where things are NOT balanced.  That is the point.  I think you are missing that entirely.  I think we've all felt what you are feeling at different points, but it is a dead end arguement with no winners at the end. 

You will have situations where your Rata might engage an F4 or a ju 88 vs a Tempest.  There is no balance.                                                                  

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

54 minutes ago, HR_Grajo said:
It is really sad to see how most of the comments here are so positive...
 
I appreciate the effort of the Dev team and all the new stuff; damage decals and all those new physics and factors taken in account for the damage model and ballistics.
 
The thing is that IMO Soviet planes are still really weak.
 
I understand most Axis pilots are charmed about how devastating are their rounds now ( "funny" to see that there is still people complaining about it saying that they are under powered and that they will uninstall the game or stop breathing if this continues like so...) 
 
Allied pilots, we have been enduring this Axis "empowering" for a very long time.
 
Basically, most Axis fighters hit harder, climb better, dive better, turn better and take/do a lot more damage. I wonder if allies could win the war if it was based on this simulator "realism".
 
Bottom line... Please Devs, whatever you do in the future, try to balance all this and make it fairer for both sides.
 
All the "historical" data provided by the users might be overwhelming and all the people want their fighters and cannons to "perform as they should..." But this is still a game. Needs balance to keep both sides relatively competitive, this is the most important thing in my opinion. Is it easy to achieve...? Obviously it is not.

I disagree. The Allies have some pretty devastating aircraft. Like the Tempest V, fast, agile, tough, and well armed with 4x 20mm Hispano cannons, the P51 with 6x .50s, The P47 with 8 etc. I haven't flown the P38, but that sounds awesome too. And let's not forget the IL2 itself

 

Yes the Axis have some heavy hitters like the Fw190, Me109K4 and the devastating Me262. But that's 30mm for you...

 

Edited by Reggie_Mental
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, JG51_Beazil said:

Grajo, this is a simulator. 

Tell that to your friends spent 8 years complaining on how their cannons fails to obliterate the opponents. 
Fact is this is a combat sim and not a flight sim. 
it does not even reflect the combat very well since the numbers, structural strength , fuel and training is not taken 

into account. 
In this environment lw thrives well. Of course you 109 jockeys do not want anything to change. As long as you can blow up those allied zippoes. You are Holding both end of the rope. No wonder SP is the preferred mode for red players.  
I see all the time servers with 40 lw against 8 red and the Hartmans are all happy about it

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 666GIAP_Chimango said:

Mixed feelings about this patch, which i was really looking forward to. While i like the visual effects of hits and the reaction of the plane to different hit placement;  i really don't like how the damage is calculated in some guns. For instance, during  SP testing in QM i loaded a Lagg3 with 37mm and many times after 4x37mm hits at point blank range (inside 100m) the  bombers kept flying. Common thing was bombers taking 2x37mm round at point blank range and they didn't go down. I was really surprised, it really wasn't what i was expecting after such a DM overhaul.

 

So flying mainly VVS planes i see no difference in the ammount of damage they do between this patch and before, they still seem weak compared what we used to have in this sim some time ago, the difference now is what you see when you hit your target with them, and that aspect it's very nice.

Let's wait a while and see what happens after further testing.

 

Heinkel 111s catch fire real easy now after cannon strikes. They used to be able to absorb lots of punishment before. It might be inaccurate but I like the effect.

Edited by Reggie_Mental
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, HR_Grajo said:

Basically, most Axis fighters hit harder, climb better, dive better, turn better and take/do a lot more damage. I wonder if allies could win the war if it was based on this simulator "realism".

few things hit harder than a tempest, dive better than a mustang or turn better than a spit mk 9 - but in real life there might have been other things that lead to the outcome of the war...

numbers, ressources, training, strategy...

1 hour ago, HR_Grajo said:

Bottom line... Please Devs, whatever you do in the future, try to balance all this and make it fairer for both sides.

nope - warthunder is for balanced multiplayer - this beauty is about realism...

 

  • Upvote 2
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...