Jump to content

Game version 4.005 discussion: New airframe damage model


Han
 Share

Recommended Posts

6./ZG26_Custard
17 minutes ago, Valkyrie77 said:

Why does it take hundreds of rounds to bring an enemy aircraft down? 

;)

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Valkyrie77 said:

Why are the .50 Caliber machine guns so ineffective?  Why are the Allied bombs ineffective now? (I don’t bomb anymore it’s not worth it)

why hasn’t the spotting issues been addressed? Why are the spotting issues being ignored. 
Why is the 110 now the best fighter aircraft in the game?  
 

 

I don't play much but could not agree more on the topic of allied bombs... Will not talk about 110 since I did not face more of them since the patch but bombing become ineffective...

1000lbs or 2000lbs apart from direct hit do nothing - ok maybe not nothing but not much at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Valkyrie77 said:

Why does it take hundreds of rounds to bring an enemy aircraft down? 

It doesn’t. I took out a D9 the other night with forty rounds of .50 cal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=SqSq=Civilprotection
4 hours ago, blitze said:

Maybe a hole in a Laminar Flow design wing like the P51 is more of an issue for aerodynamics compared to regular wings?

 

Just a brain fart of mine but the design which was a benefit to the Pony in both range and speed might have a weakness when the surface / system is compromised.😎

The wing is a laminar flow design yes, but was likely never created the flow in mass production

 

Source: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Valkyrie77 said:

Why does it take hundreds of rounds to bring an enemy aircraft down? 

In my experience after the update, it is indeed more difficult shooting outside of convergence, but if you fire at convergence, the damage dealt is similar, if not increased.

 

I hit a 109 with a 90-degree deflection shot (he flew though perpendicular to my line of fire) while flying a P-47 and the results were above satisfactory. He couldn’t have received more than a split-second of fire, but I was at convergence with 8 .50s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kurtj said:

In my experience after the update, it is indeed more difficult shooting outside of convergence, but if you fire at convergence, the damage dealt is similar, if not increased.

 

I hit a 109 with a 90-degree deflection shot (he flew though perpendicular to my line of fire) while flying a P-47 and the results were above satisfactory. He couldn’t have received more than a split-second of fire, but I was at convergence with 8 .50s.

I have had a handful of similar shots to this since the update. High deflection, high closure, at convergence, all in the P-47 and I've had satisfactory results. Hitting at convergence with 8 guns still hits like a truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

216th_Jordan
3 hours ago, Valkyrie77 said:

Why does it take hundreds of rounds to bring an enemy aircraft down? 

 

Depends on the Ammo. 7.62 mm is not going to do much structurally and loses most kinetic energy after short travel.

 

I was able to bring down 4 He-111s and 4 Bf-109 G-14 with the P-51. By any standard thats a lot. I do think some claims on missing effectiveness are a bit over the top here. Is the DM perfect? Surely not, but it's not a dealbreaker regarding specific weapons some sell it to be.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, =SqSq=Civilprotection said:

The wing is a laminar flow design yes, but was likely never created the flow in mass production

 

Source: 

 

OMG... I actually sat here and watched that whole video looking to be enlightened by something.

 

To summarize and save everyone's time... don't call it a Laminar flow wing because no wing can can truly be 100% laminar flow... but yes it was clearly the most drag efficient wing of it's era.

 

... and lets compare a P-51A (very few built an really just used for ground attack) with a Allison engine and single stage supercharger to a BF-109 F-4. "Yes, while the Mustang is some 60mph faster at sea level by the time you reach 20,000 ft the 109 is actually faster." Ya think maybe it had something to do with the engine???

 

OMFG!!! I want those 30 minutes of my life back... 🙄

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mad-Moses said:

OMG... I actually sat here and watched that whole video looking to be enlightened by something.

 

To summarize and save everyone's time... don't call it a Laminar flow wing because no wing can can truly be 100% laminar flow... but yes it was clearly the most drag efficient wing of it's era.

 

... and lets compare a P-51A (very few built an really just used for ground attack) with a Allison engine and single stage supercharger to a BF-109 F-4. "Yes, while the Mustang is some 60mph faster at sea level by the time you reach 20,000 ft the 109 is actually faster." Ya think maybe it had something to do with the engine???

 

OMFG!!! I want those 30 minutes of my life back... 🙄

Did you actually watch the video, or did you just sit there with your mouth open hoping to absorb knowledge through osmosis?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having a blast flying attackers on both sides with the new ways of getting shot down and more importantly surviving some of them.  Getting to ditch after crossing friendly lines is just as rewarding as making it back home.  My duck and I thank you.

Edited by Plurp
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Plurp said:

Having a blast flying attackers on both sides with the new ways of getting shot down and more importantly surviving some of them.  Getting to ditch after crossing friendly lines is just as rewarding as making it back home.  My duck and I thank you.

Yep it has made ground attack career mode really good.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the DM is excellent, in my opinion. And it's a LOT more brutal than before. This observation is based on my multi-player shenanigans with .50 cal and higher ammunition. EVERYONE is a freaking Ace. Which simply means they open fire only when within the 100m range. And when those shots land you're done. That's including the IL2 "tank" as well (getting torn to pieces by the close encounter with E7's 20mm cannons is a serious reality nowadays).

 

Now, as far as the .30 cals, well, those sound like hail (inside the cockpit) :) and for the most part aren't as effective, even at close range. You could still bring down the enemy though, but it'll take several passes and actually is quite fun to do (i16 vs e7 mg).

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if our talented video makers started making GUNCAM videos with the new damage model.It would be a great opportunity to see the new DM improvements and peculiarities with a variety of aircraft .Im sure the results are going to be way more dynamic and unexpected when compared to similar videos made before this patch.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Han said:

Dear friends,

 

Thanks to your help, we have found and addressed a number of issues that needed a quick resolution in this 4.005c hotfix:

 

1. A random problem with AI pilots not engaging each other in QMB has been fixed;

2. Certain buildings (with Entity mission object assigned) are more resistant to aircraft guns;

3. Building blocks durability updated for Career and QMB missions;

4. static_* objects shouldn't instantly disappear at short distances;

5. AIs aim better when strafing ground targets;

6. The remains of a road column will correctly drive around the destroyed column leader;

7. It's harder to immobilize certain simple AI tanks by shooting their tracks from the sides;
8. The visual image of the Bristol Fighter Falcon II airscrew has been corrected;

9. A possible reason of random game crash in QMB has been fixed.

 

Will you look into AIs engaging AAA units and not designated targets in ground attack missions?

Edited by Sybreed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Han said:

2. Certain buildings (with Entity mission object assigned) are more resistant to aircraft guns;

 

3. Building blocks durability updated for Career and QMB missions;

4. static_* objects shouldn't instantly disappear at short distances;

 

Hello! This is great news. As a mission designer, I have sometimes needed to update durability values. I believe maybe BlackSix provided durability values in the past, and I have a script that can do updates. Could you or BlackSix provide an updated list? I can provide the script so everyone can use it if they want.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don`t know, the new DM seems a hit and miss. I was hoping the endless fuel/coolant streaming would be cut down, and still something is wrong on both ends of the weapon spectrum (7mm - 30/37mm). Still the gunners are guarded by invisible armor, which is a big problem when facing Pe2/Boston/IL2 aircraft. Hope once the broader feedback comes in there could be done some tweaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voodoo-BlackDog
18 hours ago, kurtj said:

In my experience after the update, it is indeed more difficult shooting outside of convergence, but if you fire at convergence, the damage dealt is similar, if not increased.

 

I hit a 109 with a 90-degree deflection shot (he flew though perpendicular to my line of fire) while flying a P-47 and the results were above satisfactory. He couldn’t have received more than a split-second of fire, but I was at convergence with 8 .50s.

What convergence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geronimo553

Anyone else having issue with the HE-111 nose gunner not engaging enemy aircraft from the front? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Its perfectlly normal, and pe-2 loses wing after 1x30mm like it should and no german bomber got shot down in ww2 like it should. Game is finaly fixed, if only hispanos are probably to strong 😄 more 262 online also! less Tempest

Aren't you ever getting tired of that whining? I'd imagine life's pretty hard that way. Like a broken record 😀

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Aren't you ever getting tired of that whining? I'd imagine life's pretty hard that way. Like a broken record 😀

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Ala13_UnopaUno_VR said:

Min  14:40 ...not normal---.--

Keep in mind PzGr 40 has absolutely no explosive properties at all and the only damage it does is with a sub-caliber tungsten carbide penetrator and some armor spalling. Doesn't seem weird that it's just zipping through and doing nothing, at least to me. 😄

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

Well, that answers my question.  Why anyone would choose anything less than the 88 HE is beyond me.

 

Side note:  As a decades long aircraft structures mechanic it really should be pointed out that the aircraft skin isn't just a covering for the load bearing structure but an integral part of that load bearing structure, much like a spar web.  However, I do understand the significant difficulty of attempting to produce a damage model for a complex semi-monocoque structure.

Edited by chuter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voodoo-BlackDog

Games broken. One hole in 51 wing and aircraft uncontrollable. Amongst the many other recent problems already discussed in this thread. Losing interest 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1CGS
Jason_Williams
21 hours ago, Cavalier said:

The way I see it is that the damage is being modeled but the visuals for that damage is not. Jason said in at least one of the dev diaries that visual effects of damage will be modeled later. So while we are currently seeing a 30mm hit that looks like a bunch of tiny holes in the wing, It may be modeling a hit that is equivalent to having a gaping jagged hole through the top and leading edge of the wing. We just can't see it because it's hiding beneath the generic damage visual.

 

I'm sure that when the visuals are brought up to par in the future, flying with damage will make a lot more sense when you can look over and see the precise extent of your damage.

 

Sorry the visuals will not be drastically changed. I've said this many times. Please don't set unrealistic expectations.

 

Jason

10 minutes ago, chuter said:

Well, that answers my question.  Why anyone would choose anything less than the 88 HE is beyond me.

 

Side note:  As a decades long aircraft structures mechanic it really should be pointed out that the aircraft skin isn't just a covering for the load bearing structure but an integral part of that load bearing structure, much like a spar web.  However, I do understand the significant difficulty of attempting to produce a damage model for a complex semi-monocoque structure.

 

Not difficult, impossible.

 

Jason

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II/JG17_HerrMurf

All I'm really hoping for in the visuals department is cleaning up of the exsisting decals. I'd like to see the small holes have more chipping and exposed metal around the edges. If a little more simulated 3d bending of the entry and exit holes is possible that would be ideal. Mostly an artistic touch up for the exising decals.

 

For the larger ones I'd like to see the same plus more light let into the interior structure so you can see inside the wing. For a long time we didn't even know there was internal stucture viusally modeled because the shadow inside was so dark. Outside of that, visual damage is not a deal breaker for me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams locked this topic
  • 1CGS
Jason_Williams
1 minute ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

All I'm really hoping for in the visuals department is cleaning up of the exsisting decals. I'd like to see the small holes have more chipping and exposed metal around the edges. If a little more simulated 3d bending of the entry and exit holes is possible that would be ideal. Mostly an artistic touch up for the exising decals.

 

For the larger ones I'd like to see the same plus more light let into the interior structure so you can see inside the wing. For a long time we didn't even know there was internal stucture viusally modeled because the shadow inside was so dark. Outside of that, visual damage is not a deal breaker for me.

 

Sorry, not possible. Not all planes have internal structure. No resources to build structure in all planes and all surfaces.

 

Jason

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

Yesterday I started ny game and it immediately began updating. 

361.51Mb worth.

I have been looking around for some information but haven't found anything.
I know it wasn't just me as the folks I fly with also had an update.  Some, like me, have a version bought from here, others have Steam versions.  Both had updates.

Does anyone know what this update contained?
Did I miss an announcement?  If so could someone please link me to it?

TIA

Edited by Beebop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Arthur.

I was just about to post....

I just found a mention of it in the FC forums but no real info.  There's a link to the 4.005 discussion about airframe damage.  Is this what the update was about?

Never mind.  I finally found the post by Han.  Apparently is has to do with fixing issues found in the 4.005 release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Beebop said:

Thanks Arthur.

I was just about to post....

I just found a mention of it in the FC forums but no real info.  There's a link to the 4.005 discussion about airframe damage.  Is this what the update was about?

Never mind.  I finally found the post by Han.  Apparently is has to do with fixing issues found in the 4.005 release.

Good ol' hotfixes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams unlocked this topic

Developers may want to review the amount of exhaust issued from all the aircraft in Flying Circus.It seems to me that it has gotten a bit excessive since the newest update.The first time I saw an enemy aircraft I thought it had been hit by anti aircraft fire it was smacking so heavily. I believe it was more realistic before the changes I see now....🤨

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, US93_Larner said:

Any word on FC damage model? 

My Russian is not the greatest and the translator sometimes doesn't make sense but over on the Russian forum it seems like Petrovich has said they are taking some time to look at these damage models for FC to see if it is correct or not.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/13303-обсуждение-версии-4005-новая-модель-повреждений-планера-самолёта/?do=findComment&comment=768136

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having flown the newest updates for a few hours now, I can honestly say I really like the new damage model. As others have mentioned, some kills seem very quick, other ones I’ve really had to work at. I’m really only flying the P-51 anymore. That in itself has been a joy. The more learn it, the closer to everything I’ve read about the Mustang seems correct. 
 

I’ve only flown the sim periodically over the last few months and haven’t kept up with new and improved features as much as I should have. I’ve read a lot of comments here though that contradict one another. It’s as if some of us are flying different versions of the game and then offering comparisons. 
 

Last evening and again this morning I’ve had some very enjoyable flights. I’ve flamed several Fw-190A8s and Bf-109G14s. I’m not sure how long this effect has been present but I was quite surprised when I hit an Fw squarely in the nose. It obviously issued dense gray and then black smoke right after it was hit. The plane flew on for maybe 5-10 seconds and then a flicker of flame was visible. Within a couple more seconds it was completely engulfed by flame. I’ve seen it repeated this morning in the 109s. To me, the best part of the effect is it doesn’t happen every time but it is satisfying as Hell when it does. 
 

Nearly all of the kills I’ve gotten were after 3-4 short bursts of a second or two at or slightly less than my convergence setting of 300 yards. Some were dead astern or at a slight angle to the fuselage which presents a larger target to me. Of all these kills, maybe 30 or so, I’ve only pealed a wing off the 109s 2-3 times. One of those was after several hits in the outer part of the wing. That wing broke off where the aileron started as the AI pilot maneuvered. He controlled its flight for a few seconds, then bailed. Other flights ended with the enemy either jumping from a heavily damaged plane or with a PK. One damage feature I’d like to see toned down is the frequency that a tail wheel gets shot off. It happens nearly every time. 

 

I’ve read a lot of recent comments about the AI being brain dead or simply flying in tight circles. I honestly don’t see that on a consistent basis. It happens but I think it the AI’s reaction to my flying in a tight circle trying to get lead on him. The AI flies that maneuver better than I do so I think it recognizes that and continues his tight turn. If I ease my turn and gain a little altitude or drop down to try and cut his circle, I’ve watched the AI break in the other direction. I’ve seen them gain and lose altitude in the right circumstances too. I usually set the AI to random in the QMB so I honestly can’t say at what level the AI is performing. I do feel it gives a realistic fight in a lot of instances and is a big improvement over what we’ve had in the past. 

A big thank you to the developers for continually improving this sim. I only wish I had saved a older version of the game from say, 2015/16, to really get a feel for how much has changed and gotten so much better. 

 

Edited by Rjel
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

US93_Larner
21 minutes ago, Danziger said:

My Russian is not the greatest and the translator sometimes doesn't make sense but over on the Russian forum it seems like Petrovich has said they are taking some time to look at these damage models for FC to see if it is correct or not.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/13303-обсуждение-версии-4005-новая-модель-повреждений-планера-самолёта/?do=findComment&comment=768136


fantastic, welcome news! Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams unpinned this topic

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...