4.006 DM Discussion

[No.23_Triggers]

...It's out, boys! 

No doubt we are all downloading the new update (with the revised new DM) as we speak, so, I thought I'd get this thread set up for us to report our findings and thoughts to @AnPetrovich ! 

For reference, here are the changes as outlined by An Petrovich. 

 

Now, for the sake of the discussion and (hopefully) continuing to have a dialogue and report our thoughts and feedback to the Developers, I'd like to lay down some ground rules for this thread. of course, it's totally up to you if you choose to follow them or not, but I think that they'll be a help to everyone involved  

GROUND RULES: 

1) If you are reporting something you feel is wrong / you are unhappy with / etc, please post some information or observations about your experience in-game, as well as specifically why you think it's wrong! If you are comparing to historical anecdotes, including these might be helpful.  

2) Tying in with No.1, please try to remain generally respectful and objective. It's important to remember that the dev team have put hard work into this, specifically at our request. 

3) Please try to stay reasonably on-topic, so that the Devs can see our thoughts and feedback without having to sift through pages of off-topic stuff! 

4) Take some time and give it a good run through before reporting something you don't like.
(Thanks Gamecock for the #4 suggestion!)

5) If you disagree with the opinion of another poster, PLEASE do so in as objective and neutral a way as possible! Forum arguments will NOT help!!! 

 

A list of FC-Specific  DM changes, as provided by the Developers, can be found in the Spoiler below:
 

Spoiler

56. All Flying Circus airplanes: hitting at the central section of the top wing now also leads to breaking the top wing (its left or right part);

57. The geometry of wing spars of all Flying Circus airplanes has been checked and brought into strict compliance with known sources. In general, now it requires much more bullet hits to break the wings of World War I aircraft;


 

With that out of the way, what do we all think of 4.006? 

 

Edited May 20, 2020 by US93_Larner

[J5_Gamecock]

 I might suggest..

 

 4) Take some time and give it a good run through before reporting something you don't like.

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

Just play and enjoy the game.  You're not getting another DM revision.

[ST_Catchov]

3 hours ago, J5_Gamecock said:

 I might suggest..

 

 4) Take some time and give it a good run through before reporting something you don't like.

 

Yes I agree. Some decorum please gentlemen. But the hordes may not acquiesce.

 

1 hour ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

Just play and enjoy the game.  

 

Wise words.

[JGr2/J5_Baeumer]

One small step for 1C (in the right direction); one giant leap for the Flying Circus community.  Thank you @AnPetrovich , Jason and the crew!

 

It was worth the six hours of updating server, missions and parser!

[No.23_Triggers]

Good suggestion @J5_Gamecock, I'll add it in, cheers.

Did some testing with the boys tonight. Here are my very early(!!!) impressions:

There certainly is a big improvement over 4.005, and all aircraft feel tougher. That being said, from my again, very early impressions, although everything does feel greatly improved, the planes we tested do still feel flimsy, with wing shedding still being an issue in some cases (D.VII being the big exception!) 

 

We (3PG) want to do some extensive PvP testing of all aircraft, which we made a start on tonight with the Albatros and the D.VII. The results are really interesting, and at this early stage they all seem to indicate one thing: 

This is a big step in the right direction by the developers!! I would even say that, to a degree, in regards to 4.005 and pre-4.005. We started at one end of 'the pendulum', and with 4.005 we ended at the other end....now we're swinging back towards that 'sweet spot' in the middle. Maybe we haven't quite got there...but we're definitely getting there! 

 

All this being said, these are my absolute first impressions, and it's well worth giving the new DM time to breathe before coming to any hard conclusions. 

 

I'm initially feeling really positive about the new changes, and thank the Devs and An Petrovich for taking the time to implement them! 
 

Edited May 20, 2020 by US93_Larner

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

So far I've flown d7, phalz and of course the Bristol, All seem to take a lot of hits, I went up against the Bristol in the d7 and have to say the Bristol is a tough bird, was before but now maybe even more, I'm happy about that.  I know the D7 takes a ton of hits to bring down so us entente pilots watch out for that one. So far so good.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Need to check Dolphin because it was disaster before and without enforced (corrected) spars as others have ,I really hope it's better than before by other means mentioned in DD.

Edited May 20, 2020 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[emely]

2 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Need to check Dolphin because it was disaster before and without enforced (corrected) spars as others have ,

Were there any problems with him?

[BMA_Hellbender]

6 minutes ago, emely said:

Were there any problems with him?

 

It's always had terribly weak wings in RoF. Definitely the easiest to pull off in a dive, followed by the S.E.5a.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, emely said:

Were there any problems with him?

Reported weak wings with some good footage, hope the "new  final " version has stronger wings. 

6 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

we're definitely getting there

I hope you are not mistaken and in the future there will be some adjustments based upon feedback from loyal customers 

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

Question - Is there are particular historical or engineering source for the numbers in the graph above? There has been a very large change to the D.VII and the number of rounds required is quite high compared to other planes, including planes thought of as being very robust, such as the Spad XIII and SE5a. I'm not making any argument here - just curious as to the basis for such a large change and (probably more so) such a variation from other aircraft.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Krispy_Duck

[ST_Catchov]

Very quick first impression trying out the first mission of the Entente campaign flying the Camel. (7 kills, protected the Bristols and made it home. It's very good.)

 

• The most glaring change for me is that it's easier to spot planes in the distance. 5-7k's or thereabouts without zoom. Couldn't do that before. They kind of shimmer and flicker now. Or else I'm just getting better at spotting.

 

• Shedding wings is still fairly common particularly when diving and hitting the centre section from above. (as per release note 56). Dr1's are still tough though. Didn't come across D7's. Anyway, I don't mind a bit of wing shedding. Very satisfying and visually impressive. Unless it's me! The Camel hasn't changed and remains relatively fragile if split-arsing about without due care. But it's still the killing king on the Entente side.

 

•  There was something else but it's slipped my mind. Have another drink catch.

 

Overall, I like it so far. But then with any DM you game it a bit by playing to its particular strengths and weaknesses anyway. There'll be a lot of centre section shooting.

 

[J5_Stachel]

Thank you developers!!!!

 

[No.23_Gaylion]

19 minutes ago, catchov said:

There'll be a lot of centre section shooting.

 

Which is what every historical document from the period on gunnery said to do. So I wouldn't say that's gaming the game. 

 

Aiming specifically for the wings because you know they will shed is gaming the game.

[unreasonable]

I think he means centre section of the upper wing, not the centre of mass around pilot/engine area.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Its all same area.

[unreasonable]

It certainly is for me!   

 

I just aim for the middle/front of the blob. Anything that makes deliberately aiming at the wings a poor way to down an aircraft is fine with me. 

[SeaW0lf]

From the graph, does it mean that the Sopwith Camel, Dolphin and the Spad, Halb basically weren't fixed regarding low hit numbers for wing failure? Especially the former two, which did not change at all.

Edited May 20, 2020 by SeaW0lf

[1PL-Sahaj-1Esk]

It would be good to know if the team around Petrovich found some additional sources to check the correct spar size on Sopwith Camel, Dolphin and the Spad, Halb if not then I think the above graph is the ultimate DM which we will have in game.

[SeaW0lf]

Well, it was said about the fix:

 

The geometry of wing spars of all Flying Circus airplanes has been checked and brought into strict compliance with known sources. In general, now it requires much more bullet hits to break the wings of World War I aircraft;

 

So I won't hold my breath. The 'strict compliance' might mean that this is the last fix regarding the damage model. Even though the last sentence appears to be incorrect. If the graph is to be considered, some planes did not change at all?

[No.23_Gaylion]

Go to the dm poll thread. AnPetrovich posted the testing resulting from his tool calculations hits at 90 degrees

[SeaW0lf]

Just now, US93_Talbot said:

Go to the dm poll thread. AnPetrovich posted the testing resulting from his tool calculations hits at 90 degrees

 

Where does the first graph comes? That was quick.

[1PL-Banzai-1Esk]

56. All Flying Circus airplanes: hitting at the central section of the top wing now also leads to breaking the top wing (its left or right part);

 

This is interesting. I always aim for the pilot but depending on the angle and deflection I do hit centre of top wing a lot.

 

Previously these 'missed' shots that went into the top wing instead of the pilot or engine were more less wasted, doing no damage to the wing.

 

I only run some quick tests yesterday but I noticed couple of AI planes (Albs and DVIIs) loosing wings after getting shot in the centre of top wing.

 

Not straight away but after pulling tight turns.

 

I need to do more tests but this is promising.

Edited May 20, 2020 by 1PL-Banzai-1Esk

[No.23_Gaylion]

3 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

Where does the first graph comes? That was quick.

 

 

Here:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/60799-dm-poll/?do=findComment&comment=933629

 

[SeaW0lf]

4 minutes ago, US93_Talbot said:

 

 

Here:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/60799-dm-poll/?do=findComment&comment=933629

 

 

And the one posted a few minutes ago is new?

[No.23_Gaylion]

Yes.

 

First is firing from 6. New is firing at 90 degrees.

 

But key to remember: UNLOADED WING.

Edited May 20, 2020 by US93_Talbot

[SeaW0lf]

6 minutes ago, US93_Talbot said:

Yes.

 

First is firing from 6. New is firing at 90 degrees.

 

But key to remember: UNLOADED WING.

 

Ah, thanks. The firing from 6 is worrisome.

[unreasonable]

12 minutes ago, US93_Talbot said:

 

 

But key to remember: UNLOADED WING.

 

I think this is key. Now we have a G meter it may surprise people to see just how much they are stressing their wings in turns.  An ideal turn in a biplane should be as much about sideways force through the use of the rudder as it is use of the elevator: difficult to get used to if you have been used to the perhaps over-effective ailerons to bank and yank WW2 style especially if you do not have rudder pedals.

[ZachariasX]

56 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

The 'strict compliance' might mean that this is the last fix regarding the damage model.

We had "the last patch" like three patches ago. Can we drop that argument please? It is just as wrong as it is destructive to say such. Also saying that would imply that also the rest of the series will not get any further DM changes. A change to the system alters all content. You WILL get further changes, whether you like it or not.

[Zooropa_Fly]

The bullets hitting one's plane are certainly more noticable, and the Camel seems to be the wing shredder now lol.

 

But seriously, I think this DM business is getting a little obsessive.

The devs must be starting to wonder...

 

We've largely got what was asked for.. again, if we're never going to be happy with the game is it worth playing ?

I for one am satisfied to aim with the fire hose provided.

 

S!

[Tycoon]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 20, 2020 by Tycoon

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

2 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

if we're never going to be happy with the game is it worth playing ?

Are we ever happy? 

[Tycoon]

https://youtu.be/lQCGT4NilFE?t=45

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

3 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

 

Hmmmm that didn't look good, you didn't adjust fuel mixture. Kidding, that looked too simple to take out the camel. Camel should take around 25 hits before collapsing but that looked like 4 or 5.

[HagarTheHorrible]

5 minutes ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

Hmmmm that didn't look good, you didn't adjust fuel mixture. Kidding, that looked too simple to take out the camel. Camel should take around 25 hits before collapsing but that looked like 4 or 5.

 

I have a theory, that hits from the front do extra special damage, so (far) fewer are required.

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

6 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

I have a theory, that hits from the front do extra special damage, so (far) fewer are required.

Well that might take care of the head on,s with the camel anyways, never did like head on,s, this will cure me of that bad habit for sure. 

[Tycoon]

16 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

I have a theory, that hits from the front do extra special damage, so (far) fewer are required.

Are you serious?

 

 

 

 

 

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

It looks like they do extra damage when they hit Tycoon.  

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

Tycoon my suggestion is to fly the Bristol.