.50 cal damage, or lack there of

[poy]

 

 

I don't care how bad you want to consider the gunnery to be, that amount of .50s on the wing roots should have torn the wing off long before he got his second kill.

 

I miss the days of german glass cannons vs more modest guns on more rugged airframes. And I say that as a major German player.

Edited July 26, 2020 by -332FG-poy

[-332FG-Micky-]

How some people can argue that the .50's in this sim are actually effective absolutely slays me. I find it comical considering the fact that I'm a military veteran of 16 years. 15 of those years have been spent in an Airborne Infantry unit with the 82ND and 173RD. I have over 6 years of actual combat time in the mountains and valleys of Afghanistan and all throughout Iraq. Not to mention that I am currently an aviator in the Army. I can unequivocally attest to the overwhelming devastation a single M2 can bare down on the enemy, let alone 6 - 8 guns firing together. There is a reason why I can take a single M2 and fire it at an armored APC with standard Ball ammunition, punch holes in the armor and disable that vehicle with ease. Now we're talking about a little 109 and we upped the ante with 6 or even 8 guns firing together. It's mind boggling how much punishment a 109 can take in this sim and its compounded further when I read peoples comments about how shitty the .50's were in real life. That junk is hilarious. I read one dudes comment that said something to the effect of " if .50's were so good they why did modern jets switch to a single 20mm". Ummm, seriously? Maybe because modern aviation and aerial combat has evolved. How often do you hear fighter pilots talking about how they gunned down their enemy? Everything is done differently now. Hell, even BFM, apect and angles, closure rates, and weapons envelopes have changed. Pilots don't rely on guns anymore (it's a backup). They rely on their sensors, radar, missiles, and battlefield networking to accomplish their mission. I don't know what this dude was talking about, but hes clearly misinformed. Either way, back to m y original point. The M2's in this sim are 100% no accurate and the 109 is made of material from the planet Krypton. -Rant over! 

[-332FG-Reedrick]

1 hour ago, -332FG-Dab said:

How some people can argue that the .50's in this sim are actually effective absolutely slays me. I find it comical considering the fact that I'm a military veteran of 16 years. 15 of those years have been spent in an Airborne Infantry unit with the 82ND and 173RD. I have over 6 years of actual combat time in the mountains and valleys of Afghanistan and all throughout Iraq. Not to mention that I am currently an aviator in the Army. I can unequivocally attest to the overwhelming devastation a single M2 can bare down on the enemy, let alone 6 - 8 guns firing together. There is a reason why I can take a single M2 and fire it at an armored APC with standard Ball ammunition, punch holes in the armor and disable that vehicle with ease. Now we're talking about a little 109 and we upped the ante with 6 or even 8 guns firing together. It's mind boggling how much punishment a 109 can take in this sim and its compounded further when I read peoples comments about how shitty the .50's were in real life. That junk is hilarious. I read one dudes comment that said something to the effect of " if .50's were so good they why did modern jets switch to a single 20mm". Ummm, seriously? Maybe because modern aviation and aerial combat has evolved. How often do you hear fighter pilots talking about how they gunned down their enemy? Everything is done differently now. Hell, even BFM, apect and angles, closure rates, and weapons envelopes have changed. Pilots don't rely on guns anymore (it's a backup). They rely on their sensors, radar, missiles, and battlefield networking to accomplish their mission. I don't know what this dude was talking about, but hes clearly misinformed. Either way, back to m y original point. The M2's in this sim are 100% no accurate and the 109 is made of material from the planet Krypton. -Rant over! 

I +1 this.

50's are broken beyond belief.  How it has gone so long without any type of buff or at least acknowledgement is beyond me.

We had an old saying I heard in the Army pertaining to 50's (Ma Deuce).... "When Ma starts talking you better listen"

[Jack_]

The combination of poor spotting and the .50s being way too weak are the main reasons I barely fly anymore. Something really needs to be done because at this point it's just not very fun

[SCG_motoadve]

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

Edited July 26, 2020 by SCG_motoadve

[-332FG-Buddy]

2 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

It's not the loud minority, no one says anything about arcade guns.  What was given was actually visual evidence of 50 cal's doing nothing to a 109, VISUAL EVIDENCE!......what more is needed? I'm glad u can "Explain" ur whatu did in single player quick mission with out a shred of evidence, yet we show a video (and have much more videos), and u change the narrative and say we are crying for arcade guns?  50s are lethal, but not currently modeled in this game.  I'm sorry bro I'ma believe a video before a comment from u with no evidence, and the fact u see us as a loud minority....

[-332FG-Reedrick]

No one is asking for arcade super .50’s.  We just simply want them to work or be as effective as they should be.  Maybe all that involves is implementing API ammo or tweaking the current damage or a relook at the 109 model.  Cause it’s blatantly obvious that something with it is off

[SCG_motoadve]

10 minutes ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

It's not the loud minority, no one says anything about arcade guns.  What was given was actually visual evidence of 50 cal's doing nothing to a 109, VISUAL EVIDENCE!......what more is needed? I'm glad u can "Explain" ur whatu did in single player quick mission with out a shred of evidence, yet we show a video (and have much more videos), and u change the narrative and say we are crying for arcade guns?  50s are lethal, but not currently modeled in this game.  I'm sorry bro I'ma believe a video before a comment from u with no evidence, and the fact u see us as a loud minority....

Go try it yourself quick mission offline, you can get lots of kills in the P51 and P47 , time after time, no need to watch a video, test it yourself, the problem might be multiplayer though.

[-332FG-Hank_DG]

I'm honestly torn on the .50s.... on some sorties i unload my ammo on a single 109 only to find him making it back home (when that happens it's usually due to me shooting from dead six, which isn't the best angle). Then on the other hand, i have some where i pull some pretty tight snap shots at different angles producing fatal damages. I think this may be something the devs and everyone should be testing vigorously and come up with a conclusion rather than both sides bicker. Obviously, sometimes it's not that easy.

[-332FG-TheAmazingFire]

 

30 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

50.s can kill... However... The fact that they can pilot snipe is no excuse for the lack of aero damage or the lack of incendiary rounds. also the majority of allied players agree with our stance. my stance is either buff the .50s or nerf the 109 damage model. because while the .50s are somewhat underwhelming, the can at least kill fw190s if you are accurate. its virtually impossible to kill a bf109 without killing the pilot. we are not asking for Arcadish .50s just something that feels like a gun, and deals enough damage to take something down without using its entire ammo reserve... 

also your point about testing it with "ACE" AI is pointless. because the AI bail out as soon as they get breathed on. Either you killed their pilots or they bailed as soon as you got one single hit. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by -332FG-TheAmazingFire

[-332FG-Buddy]

Just now, SCG_motoadve said:

Go try it yourself quick mission offline, you can get lots of kills in the P51 and P47 , time after time, no need to watch a video, test it yourself, the problem might be multiplayer though.

Moto.....I don't play single player ....most of my group doesn't.....I don't know what problem it is, what I am telling you is this happens continuously in multiplayer.....not only for me but for my group of 35-40 people, and others we speak to in the community.  The video is what occured for poy, me and more and has been for the past couple months.....I don't see it as a minority alot of people don't want to speak up on the forums because of how toxic it becomes when someone voices an issue, I suggest YOU try it out on multiplayer, if that's not enough we can stream some senerios on berloga so maybe then u can understand what we are saying.  IAM also a military veteran as dab, and my mos was 15s OH-58d Kiowa crew chief.  On that airframe we mounted a single air cooled 50.  That single 50 did a very good amount of damage, that I witnessed on multiple combat tours in Iraq.  That's just my irl experience, what do I know

[-332FG-Micky-]

25 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

This is that junk I'm talking about. The problem is either the .50 not being modeled correctly or the DM/FM of the floppy UFO you call a 109 needs reworking. You cant have it both ways bro. It's like some of you have blinders on, I don't get it. Personally I really don't care wtf happens in this sim as I've moved my time, money and effort over to DCS. To me, this is becoming warthunder like anyway. Some FM don't make sense (109 flopping around the sky like Michael J Fox on crack) and the DM of the 109 is insane (need to dedicate 300 rds for a single ship). posted actual videos of this problem and you still refuse to acknowledge there is a problem. I can get 30 kills also in single player with unlimited ammo too. I spent a lot of money and time in this game and I was more than happy to do so, but not anymore. I'm sick of people with no real experience with these particular weapon systems telling me how it is because they fly in a video game. I appericate you're input but you couldn't be more wrong. Have a good one my dude.

[-332FG-TheAmazingFire]

I'm still with il2. however, that being said. I have played ww2 dcs and its miles ahead of what Il2 has right now. somehow DCS's damage model has managed to out class Il2 in its current state. not to say one is better than the other, but i feel like il2 could easily be beating out DCS ww2. but they arent because of this very reason and other modelling discrepancies similar to this.

[-332FG-Magic_Zach]

39 minutes ago, SCG_motoadve said:

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

Thing is, there seems to be a different experience with .50s between singleplayer and multiplayer.  In MP, it's in fact no small minority that share these opinions.  When shooting at players, they can take quite a bit of .50 and carry my lead back to their home to be recycled and then shot back at me ?.  However, if I go into a place with AI, such as Combat Box training, the experience with .50s is rather significantly different.  Fires happen a lot, I'd say twice more often, as do pilot kills, against the AI.  The issue with .50s I believe is probably mostly in this area....why is the ruggedness of aircraft so much less with AI than with players?
Now, as far as armor piercing capabilities go, I don't have any issues with how .50s are now.  The issues that I, as well as others (go look at CB discord, or Sheriff's, just look around outside of forums) have, is the lack of aerodynamic penalty on 109s when they absorb 150 of my half inchers.  And I can confirm this from both sides of the lines, being shot at as a 109 as well.  As a 109 I can take a lot of hits.  On the flip side, the 13mm from the 109s, are devastating.  And there's only two of them versus the six .50 calibers.
A trend I've also noticed is that 109s can take a lot of damage already, but also more than Antons.  I've shot down A5s and A8s with comparative ease to the 109s.  The issue imo isn't just with .50s, but also the damage model of the 109 specifically.  It's currently more stout than the allegedly rugged Antons.  And since in the online environment, 109s are what we encounter 75% of the time, it may be easy to say the issues are with .50s alone.
Last issue with .50s is the lack of incendiary.  We currently only have AP, ball ammunition for .50s.  I don't expect six .50s to sheer wings and tails off and blow a hole so big it looks like it was hit by a cannonball, but with API, .50s will be more appropriate.  Particularly when fuel tanks are pierced and there is a fuel leak.  Put a couple incendiaries on that spot and while wings might not be torn off like the 30mm, the fire will work.

[Legioneod]

5 hours ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

Moto.....I don't play single player ....most of my group doesn't.....I don't know what problem it is, what I am telling you is this happens continuously in multiplayer.....not only for me but for my group of 35-40 people, and others we speak to in the community.  The video is what occured for poy, me and more and has been for the past couple months.....I don't see it as a minority alot of people don't want to speak up on the forums because of how toxic it becomes when someone voices an issue, I suggest YOU try it out on multiplayer, if that's not enough we can stream some senerios on berloga so maybe then u can understand what we are saying.  IAM also a military veteran as dab, and my mos was 15s OH-58d Kiowa crew chief.  On that airframe we mounted a single air cooled 50.  That single 50 did a very good amount of damage, that I witnessed on multiple combat tours in Iraq.  That's just my irl experience, what do I know

The problem with multiplayer is that you can be getting hits on target but not actually doing any damage, this has to due with netcode/connection and other issues related to multiplayer. So that's why he's saying test it in singleplayer and to compare. I'm not saying it's 100% accurate but just because it is hit or miss in multiplayer doesn't mean it's a DM issue, it could be a multiplayer issue.

I do agree that the 109 does seem to take quite a bit more damage compared to the FW though.

[SAS_Storebror]

I think it's a wild mix of 109s (F and later, E seems reasonable more or less) being made of Adolfinium, netcode issues and AP ammo being nerfed in general.

Yesterday on our sunday FAC session I've peppered a 109F-2 with 1215 (!) hits from my trusty I-16's Shkas AP rounds at about 200 meters distance, few times from touch distance - convergency was set to 200m - with seemingly no results.

Stats reveal that I've managed to wound the pilot two times, but that's it almost:

http://www.sas1946.rocks:8000/en/sortie/22215/?tour=1

 

Visually during the fight, the very first burst already lead to the 109 bleeding like hell (white and yellow/green trails), but any further hits just looked like 109 would lose all kind of small parts, but actually it lost nothing and the Shkas AP rounds bounced off the 109's Adolfinium skin as if they were marshmallows.

Does anyone know the current state of the "indestructable tail" issue on the 109F/G/K?

Feels like the devs don't have that on their screen at all anymore.

 

Attention naysayers, before you start jumping the gun:

I'm not saying you can't down a 109 with an I-16. We did manage to do that.

What I'm trying to say is that AP ammo in general seems to be inept to cause strutural failures.

90% of 109s that I saw going down yesterday were doing so because they crossed the path of an I-16 at almost 90° deflection accidentally, got a burst straight into their engine and went down in flames. The other 10% were pilot kills. Wing losses, tail losses, control surface losses being cause of a 109s death can be summarized to 0 on our yesterday session.

 

And I'm absolutely sure that a handful of people - at least - will come around now telling me that this is exactly how it's supposed to be.

 

Mike

Edited July 27, 2020 by SAS_Storebror

[poy]

Here it is from a Tacview perspective

 

 

[Barnacles]

 

1 hour ago, SAS_Storebror said:

I think it's a wild mix of 109s (F and later, E seems reasonable more or less) being made of Adolfinium, netcode issues and AP ammo being nerfed in general.

Yesterday on our sunday FAC session I've peppered a 109F-2 with 1215 (!) hits from my trusty I-16's Shkas AP rounds at about 200 meters distance, few times from touch distance - convergency was set to 200m - with seemingly no results.

Stats reveal that I've managed to wound the pilot two times, but that's it almost:

http://www.sas1946.rocks:8000/en/sortie/22215/?tour=1

 

Visually during the fight, the very first burst already lead to the 109 bleeding like hell (white and yellow/green trails), but any further hits just looked like 109 would lose all kind of small parts, but actually it lost nothing and the Shkas AP rounds bounced off the 109's Adolfinium skin as if they were marshmallows.

Does anyone know the current state of the "indestructable tail" issue on the 109F/G/K?

Feels like the devs don't have that on their screen at all anymore.

 

Attention naysayers, before you start jumping the gun:

I'm not saying you can't down a 109 with an I-16. We did manage to do that.

What I'm trying to say is that AP ammo in general seems to be inept to cause strutural failures.

90% of 109s that I saw going down yesterday were doing so because they crossed the path of an I-16 at almost 90° deflection accidentally, got a burst straight into their engine and went down in flames. The other 10% were pilot kills. Wing losses, tail losses, control surface losses being cause of a 109s death can be summarized to 0 on our yesterday session.

 

And I'm absolutely sure that a handful of people - at least - will come around now telling me that this is exactly how it's supposed to be.

 

Mike

I think I cut the control cables here.

 

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/sortie/log/5813791/?tour=62

 

It was a 109f4 too, not an e7, so subject to the tail damage thing mentioned by the devs.

[SAS_Storebror]

36 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

I think I cut the control cables here.

Or he just bailed out when you wounded the player. You'll never know. Visually it's almost precisely what we see on every first burst put into such 109: It starts bleeding like hell, but no other serious damage becomes apparent.

 

Mike

 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S! 

 

Regardless of gun: OFFLINE is the ONLY place to test DM. Straight from the devs themselves. Online can cause undesired effects or anomalies. Again from devs.

 

So if the .50cal, or any other weapon, does not seem to work as you want to think/wish/expect, blame online/netcode/bias or whatever. Devs have clearly stated online is NO indication how DM works due too many variables. 

 

 

[Legioneod]

4 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

I think it's a wild mix of 109s (F and later, E seems reasonable more or less) being made of Adolfinium, netcode issues and AP ammo being nerfed in general.

Yesterday on our sunday FAC session I've peppered a 109F-2 with 1215 (!) hits from my trusty I-16's Shkas AP rounds at about 200 meters distance, few times from touch distance - convergency was set to 200m - with seemingly no results.

Stats reveal that I've managed to wound the pilot two times, but that's it almost:

http://www.sas1946.rocks:8000/en/sortie/22215/?tour=1

 

Visually during the fight, the very first burst already lead to the 109 bleeding like hell (white and yellow/green trails), but any further hits just looked like 109 would lose all kind of small parts, but actually it lost nothing and the Shkas AP rounds bounced off the 109's Adolfinium skin as if they were marshmallows.

Does anyone know the current state of the "indestructable tail" issue on the 109F/G/K?

Feels like the devs don't have that on their screen at all anymore.

 

Attention naysayers, before you start jumping the gun:

I'm not saying you can't down a 109 with an I-16. We did manage to do that.

What I'm trying to say is that AP ammo in general seems to be inept to cause strutural failures.

90% of 109s that I saw going down yesterday were doing so because they crossed the path of an I-16 at almost 90° deflection accidentally, got a burst straight into their engine and went down in flames. The other 10% were pilot kills. Wing losses, tail losses, control surface losses being cause of a 109s death can be summarized to 0 on our yesterday session.

 

And I'm absolutely sure that a handful of people - at least - will come around now telling me that this is exactly how it's supposed to be.

 

Mike

Tail damage for the most part is disabled still, you can shoot off rudder and elevators but you cannot detatch the tail completely yet like you can in other aircraft. It has to do with the way the 3d DM is modeled in the 109s, they devs have said they'll fix it eventually iirc but it requires editing the 3d model. If they didnt disable tail separation the 109 would be the easiest aircraft to kill, the tail was coming off at the slightest hit due to the 3d model so thats why we see it disabled currently.

 

AP can certainly cause structural failure but unless you actually damage the structure then nothing is really gonna happen for the most part. Wing spars are modeled iirc so you have to actually do damage to the spars to cause failure. I've taken off 109 wings with .50s so it's certainly possible.

 

I'm under the assumption that damage isn't being registered properly with every round hit, it seems alot of hits go unregistered and do no damage at all.

 

One thing I will say is that overheating needs to be a more serious issue on all liquid cooled engines, currently it doesn't seem to be a factor for the most part.

1 minute ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

S! 

 

Regardless of gun: OFFLINE is the ONLY place to test DM. Straight from the devs themselves. Online can cause undesired effects or anomalies. Again from devs.

 

So if the .50cal, or any other weapon, does not seem to work as you want to think/wish/expect, blame online/netcode/bias or whatever. Devs have clearly stated online is NO indication how DM works due too many variables. 

 

 

 

This.

[-332FG-Buddy]

6 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Tail damage for the most part is disabled still, you can shoot off rudder and elevators but you cannot detatch the tail completely yet like you can in other aircraft. It has to do with the way the 3d DM is modeled in the 109s, they devs have said they'll fix it eventually iirc but it requires editing the 3d model. If they didnt disable tail separation the 109 would be the easiest aircraft to kill, the tail was coming off at the slightest hit due to the 3d model so thats why we see it disabled currently.

 

AP can certainly cause structural failure but unless you actually damage the structure then nothing is really gonna happen for the most part. Wing spars are modeled iirc so you have to actually do damage to the spars to cause failure. I've taken off 109 wings with .50s so it's certainly possible.

 

I'm under the assumption that damage isn't being registered properly with every round hit, it seems alot of hits go unregistered and do no damage at all.

 

One thing I will say is that overheating needs to be a more serious issue on all liquid cooled engines, currently it doesn't seem to be a factor for the most part.

 

This.

i agree with you on the heating issue, so let me get this straight because of a supposed net code glich or whatever the Devs stated they are not going to look at it????

9 minutes ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

S! 

 

Regardless of gun: OFFLINE is the ONLY place to test DM. Straight from the devs themselves. Online can cause undesired effects or anomalies. Again from devs.

 

So if the .50cal, or any other weapon, does not seem to work as you want to think/wish/expect, blame online/netcode/bias or whatever. Devs have clearly stated online is NO indication how DM works due too many variables. 

 

 

again this "does not work as you want to think/wish/expect" comment is not relevant,  its funny you still have that response after a video and tac view were posted?? how about personal experience of an acutal 50 being used in actual combat? bet hell would break loose if they enabled the tail damage for the 109 i bet?... no ones asking for anything special.  Again 50s do more damage then that and if the devs are gonna allow that type of 50 cal performance on multiplayer then whats the point .....

[Legioneod]

Just now, -332FG-Buddy said:

i agree with you on the heating issue, so let me get this straight because of a supposed net code glich or whatever the Devs stated they are not going to look at it????

again this "does not work as you want to think/wish/expect" comment is not relevant,  its funny you still have that response after a video and tac view were posted?? how about personal experience of an acutal 50 being used in actual combat? bet hell would break loose if they enabled the tail damage for the 109 i bet?... no ones asking for anything special.  Again 50s do more damage then that and if the devs are gonna allow that type of 50 cal performance on multiplayer then whats the point .....

If it's only an issue in multiplayer then the devs have to assume its a netcode or multiplayer related issue. If you cannot reproduce the problem in singleplayer then it probably isn't a DM issue.

DM is exactly the same between multiplayer and singleplayer but due to multiplayer problems the DM doesn't always perform as it should but this doesn't mean there is a problem with the dm, it just means multiplayer is causing issues.

 

The DM model was tested for weeks and weeks and we went through all the same discussions during testing. Imo the devs have a pretty good dm currently and i'm certain it will be improved over time, just have to be patient, it took a long time to make the dm we currently have and the devs have alot on their plate with Normandy. Give it time and I'm sure you'll see improvements.

The 109 tail will be fixed eventually but it's not top priority, my assumption is that it'll be looked at when the 109G is being worked on for Normandy. Which honestly makes the most sense development wise.

[-332FG-Eggnog]

42 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

If it's only an issue in multiplayer then the devs have to assume its a netcode or multiplayer related issue. If you cannot reproduce the problem in singleplayer then it probably isn't a DM issue.

DM is exactly the same between multiplayer and singleplayer but due to multiplayer problems the DM doesn't always perform as it should but this doesn't mean there is a problem with the dm, it just means multiplayer is causing issues.

 

The DM model was tested for weeks and weeks and we went through all the same discussions during testing. Imo the devs have a pretty good dm currently and i'm certain it will be improved over time, just have to be patient, it took a long time to make the dm we currently have and the devs have alot on their plate with Normandy. Give it time and I'm sure you'll see improvements.

The 109 tail will be fixed eventually but it's not top priority, my assumption is that it'll be looked at when the 109G is being worked on for Normandy. Which honestly makes the most sense development wise.

 

First off, I appreciate your level-headed response! Curious though, did you watch Poy's Tacview video? It shows a LOT of hits going into that 109, and it just flies along without a care in the world. Poor dogfighting with almost no repercussions. Or did you actually check out SAS_Storebror's sortie report? I agree with you that the damage model overall is in a pretty good spot right now! I think the devs have done some fantastic work on it! And like you, I bet given some time, they will get there with the .50 cals and/or the 109 dm. All we're trying to do is point out that there's some work to do yet. I don't believe you could have watched Poy's Tacview video and disagree on that point. We're not talking about missing when we "think" we're hitting. We're talking about confirmed hits in either Tacview or Combat Box sortie report that are not having the appropriate aero penalties on the 109s in particular.

 

And actually I agree as well that the 109G in Normandy would be a logical time for the devs to look at a fix. That would be somewhat unfortunately far out though, considering the negative impact this having on the experience of those of us who main P-51 / P-47 today. My fingers are crossed that they'll be willing to look into it sooner.

[-332FG-Micky-]

1 hour ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

S! 

 

Regardless of gun: OFFLINE is the ONLY place to test DM. Straight from the devs themselves. Online can cause undesired effects or anomalies. Again from devs.

 

So if the .50cal, or any other weapon, does not seem to work as you want to think/wish/expect, blame online/netcode/bias or whatever. Devs have clearly stated online is NO indication how DM works due too many variables. 

 

 

So I’m sitting here listing to my daughter play the piano, lost in the soothing sounds of some classical music. Open my phone to discover this topic getting some traction. As I read on I’m quickly wondering why I bother reading any of these comments. You understand what you just said sounds a little ludicrous? According to you, And whoever else, online is not the place to test DM in an ONLINE FLIGHT SIM? Seriously guy? Should I buy a car but not test it on the road? Should I buy a gun but not test it at the range? How about the Apache I fly, should I not preflight the thing, warm it up, test the engines ability to build torque, RPM before I take her out? There is a problem someplace and all I’m hearing from people like you is there is no problem. How many Tac Views and videos need to be posted before you and people with the same mind set as you finally decide to admit there is a problem? The first step in any problem is admitting there is a problem. 
 

P.S

Riddle me this Batman. If this is a “net code” issue like you clam. Tell me why there is no problem at all shooting down 190’s which Is arguably a much more rugged platform compared to a 109? ?

Edited July 27, 2020 by -332FG-Dab

[-332FG-Reedrick]

If net code or multiplayer is the root cause of the 109 being the way it is then why is it the only aircraft this applies to between single player and multiplayer?  Every other aircraft seems to perform relatively similar between online and offline to me, and I tend to enjoy some offline PWCG often.

[SAS_Storebror]

2 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Tail damage for the most part is disabled still, you can shoot off rudder and elevators but you cannot detatch the tail completely yet like you can in other aircraft. It has to do with the way the 3d DM is modeled in the 109s, they devs have said they'll fix it eventually iirc but it requires editing the 3d model. If they didnt disable tail separation the 109 would be the easiest aircraft to kill, the tail was coming off at the slightest hit due to the 3d model so thats why we see it disabled currently.

I totally get the reason why tail damage was disabled on the 109s initially.

I do not fully buy the argument about the glassy tail though, as in pre-DM rework times this was no (no big?) issue, so IMHO it would have been a better choice to just leave the regarding 109s with the old DM for the time being, or maybe even just their tail.

In it's current state the 109 tail just swallows all bullet coming from 6 o' clock and it feels like it's got a massive indestructible hitbox down there.

You can even see in @-332FG-poy's video posted before, how the 109 pilot seems to be totally aware of being remotely untouchable from behind, as quite opposite to any normal player, he's just keeping to fly straight at his target regardless the poor bugger that's trying to throw all his ammo at him from behind.

 

Finally, what I don't get at all is how the absolute super-main-majority of fighter planes from one side can be set off all DM limits for such a prolonged time.

I mean it's not just been the last two hotfixes since we got this issue introduced, and there seems to be no priority, no deadline, nothing in sight to fix this.

 

Cover the main blue fighter's tail with Adolfinium and at the same time, nerf the main ammo type of red side.

Perfect receipt for a shitstorm if you ask me.

And then... blame it on netcode and try to get away with it.

Lol? Lol.

 

Mike

Edited July 27, 2020 by SAS_Storebror

[-332FG-Micky-]

14 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

I totally get the reason why tail damage was disabled on the 109s initially.

I do not fully buy the argument about the glassy tail though, as in pre-DM rework times this was no (no big?) issue, so IMHO it would have been a better choice to just leave the regarding 109s with the old DM for the time being, or maybe even just their tail.

In it's current state the 109 tail just swallows all bullet coming from 6 o' clock and it feels like it's got a massive indestructible hitbox down there.

You can even see in @-332FG-poy's video posted before, how the 109 pilot seems to be totally aware of being remotely untouchable from behind, as quite opposite to any normal player, he's just keeping to fly straight at his target regardless the poor bugger that's trying to throw all his ammo at him from behind.

 

Finally, what I don't get at all is how the absolute super-main-majority of fighter planes from one side can be set off all DM limits for such a prolonged time.

I mean it's not just been the last two hotfixes since we got this issue introduced, and there seems to be no priority, no deadline, nothing in sight to fix this.

 

Cover the main blue fighter's tail with Adolfinium and at the same time, nerf the main ammo type of red side.

Perfect receipt for a shitstorm if you ask me.

And then... blame it on netcode and try to get away with it.

Lol? Lol.

 

Mike

Well said. However getting people to take their shades off and see this is not as easy as you or I would think. It’s like arguing with people about the color of the sky. I tell them it’s blue and they said it’s green..??
 

also to your point on the glass tail of the 109. I don’t buy it either because the 51 suffers from this problem right now as seen in The original video posting. I see no movement, talk or whatever on identifying and correcting this issue. 

Edited July 27, 2020 by -332FG-Dab

[Aurora_Stealth]

The majority of people are not replicating your extreme situations. I really recommend you dig deeper into this. Do you use WiFi with a range extender to minimise losses (my net connection went from 35mb to 55mb for ref) between rooms, walls and across 5 to 7+ metres distances? what's your ping on the servers you fly on? have you done a bandwidth test? do you use multiple apps / devices in the background that are taking up bandwidth? are the servers you fly on located in or near your country? do you have numbers on packet loss (have you optimised your data packet size and checked for packet loss - see combat box website for test)... please answer these questions they're important.

 

The server clearly isn't registering many of your hits.

 

Do check these things right now - they are astronomically important for online play and many of us simply cannot relate to your very fringe and extreme situation(s).

 

Regarding people saying its "only" the Bf 109 ... lol the issue does clearly affect others and you have been told this by many people - the '109 is particularly affected by the issue on the tail / rear fuselage but that shouldn't stop you shooting it down.

 

Some of us having been saying this from the start (still being ignored it seems).

 

Please... DO check this, spend some time... investigate and get back to us.

 

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Aurora_Stealth

[-332FG-Buddy]

25 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

I totally get the reason why tail damage was disabled on the 109s initially.

I do not fully buy the argument about the glassy tail though, as in pre-DM rework times this was no (no big?) issue, so IMHO it would have been a better choice to just leave the regarding 109s with the old DM for the time being, or maybe even just their tail.

In it's current state the 109 tail just swallows all bullet coming from 6 o' clock and it feels like it's got a massive indestructible hitbox down there.

You can even see in @-332FG-poy's video posted before, how the 109 pilot seems to be totally aware of being remotely untouchable from behind, as quite opposite to any normal player, he's just keeping to fly straight at his target regardless the poor bugger that's trying to throw all his ammo at him from behind.

 

Finally, what I don't get at all is how the absolute super-main-majority of fighter planes from one side can be set off all DM limits for such a prolonged time.

I mean it's not just been the last two hotfixes since we got this issue introduced, and there seems to be no priority, no deadline, nothing in sight to fix this.

 

Cover the main blue fighter's tail with Adolfinium and at the same time, nerf the main ammo type of red side.

Perfect receipt for a shitstorm if you ask me.

And then... blame it on netcode and try to get away with it.

Lol? Lol.

 

Mike

well said, I hope this satisfying the early comment about a loud minority.  I really hope the DEVs look into this and to point out more of what -332FG- Reedrick said, I have no issues taking down a FW 190 or even a 110.  the only issue i have is with the 109, I failed to realize and mention this earlier. 

[-332FG-Micky-]

17 minutes ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

The majority of people are not replicating your extreme situations. I really recommend you dig deeper into this. Do you use WiFi with a range extender to minimise losses (my net connection went from 35mb to 55mb for ref) between rooms, walls and across 5 to 7+ metres distances? what's your ping on the servers you fly on? have you done a bandwidth test? do you use multiple apps / devices in the background that are taking up bandwidth? are the servers you fly on located in or near your country? do you have numbers on packet loss (have you optimised your data packet size and checked for packet loss - see combat box website for test)... please answer these questions they're important.

 

The server clearly isn't registering many of your hits.

 

Do check these things right now - they are astronomically important for online play and many of us simply cannot relate to your very fringe and extreme situation(s).

 

Regarding people saying its "only" the Bf 109 ... lol the issue does clearly affect others and you have been told this by many people - the '109 is particularly affected by the issue on the tail / rear fuselage but that shouldn't stop you shooting it down.

 

Some of us having been saying this from the start (still being ignored it seems).

 

 

So check it out bro. I don’t use WiFi I’m hardwired in with a gig up and down. I have dedicated connectivity specifically for my rig. My ping times are phenomenal both in IL2 and DCS. I have More than enough FPS to spare and my frame time is about 8-10 MS. The only thing running on my rig and any given time is the flight sim I’m currently flying and SRS. I have a dedicated workstation for everything else. The problem is not my end as I’ve checked, rechecked, and checked again. I know it’s easy to dismiss this thing as client side but I can assure you that there is MANY more people experiencing this issue. Why is it so hard to see there is an issue with one of two thing. Either the .50 is unsuitable OR the DM of the 109 is unsuitable. 
 

to address your comment about shooting down 109’s. Please don’t get it twisted. I can shoot down anything in IL2, we all can. The problem is we all need to pump a full magazine into the 109. All the while he’s going about his merry day. Trucking along eating a Wiener schnitzel. ?

Edited July 27, 2020 by -332FG-Dab

[-332FG-Buddy]

8 minutes ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

The majority of people are not replicating your extreme situations. I really recommend you dig deeper into this. Do you use WiFi with a range extender to minimise losses (my net connection went from 35mb to 55mb for ref) between rooms, walls and across 5 to 7+ metres distances? what's your ping on the servers you fly on? have you done a bandwidth test? do you use multiple apps / devices in the background that are taking up bandwidth? are the servers you fly on located in or near your country? do you have numbers on packet loss (have you optimised your data packet size and checked for packet loss - see combat box website for test)... please answer these questions they're important.

 

The server clearly isn't registering many of your hits.

 

Do check these things right now - they are astronomically important for online play and many of us simply cannot relate to your very fringe and extreme situation(s).

 

Regarding people saying its "only" the Bf 109 ... lol the issue does clearly affect others and you have been told this by many people - the '109 is particularly affected by the issue on the tail / rear fuselage but that shouldn't stop you shooting it down.

 

Some of us having been saying this from the start (still being ignored it seems).

 

Please... DO check this, spend some time... investigate and get back to us.

 

 

The server is not clearly registering hits?  there is a good amount of people replicating these situations.  I have about 30 people in my group alone having issues to this.  we have posted evidence of this and are stating that this has been occuring now since the last major update (a couple months ago).  as for my connection i am personally hardwired in with an ethernet cable and my internet speed is the highest my provider has.  there are no other apps running and again the issue for us is the 109 as shown in the video.  there are more videos that can be posted if you need more evidence.  not trying to be difficult man, its just kinda of like we feel we are not stupid and that we are trying to show you an issue and we are being ignored or being told its something else and to investigate something else more?

[SAS_Storebror]

1 hour ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

I really recommend you dig deeper into this. Do you use WiFi with a range extender to minimise losses (my net connection went from 35mb to 55mb for ref) between rooms, walls and across 5 to 7+ metres distances? what's your ping on the servers you fly on? have you done a bandwidth test? do you use multiple apps / devices in the background that are taking up bandwidth? are the servers you fly on located in or near your country? do you have numbers on packet loss (have you optimised your data packet size and checked for packet loss - see combat box website for test)... please answer these questions they're important.

 

The server clearly isn't registering many of your hits.

 

Do check these things right now - they are astronomically important for online play and many of us simply cannot relate to your very fringe and extreme situation(s).

 

You are seemingly the 100th guy asking that same question and the answer is always the same: No, it's neither a client nor server side network issue.

Wifi: Nope.

Range Extender: Nope.

Internet connection on my Client side is Cable, 100Mbit/s down, 20 Mbit/s up.

Server side is 1GBit/s guaranteed unmetered Intel NIC.

Ping is 20ms, jitter is 0.5ms.

Bandwidth between my client and my server is 94.5 Mbit/s down and 18.8 Mbit/s up. That's roughly the physical limit of my client cable connection and it matches speedtest.net results.

Other apps running in parallel: TeamSpeak.

No packet loss, never ever.

Server is in DE, so am I.

 

Note that the very same happens to multiple players. On sunday we've  been 5 players: 2 from DE, 1 from UK, 1 from UAE, 1 from US. All with the very same issues, all to the very same extent, even though network throughput and ping times clearly were different, there was no difference in the issue being displayed, not at all.

Note that there were absolutely no such issues prior to the dreaded DM "fix" that came with version 4.006 IIRC.

Note that while 109F/G/K are seemingly untouchable, 109E, 190s, Macchis etc. are no problemo (except for the general AP ammo nerfing).

Note that it's easier to down three Heinkel 111s than a single 109F-2. Waaaay easier.

Note that this issue can easily be pinned down to two factors:

1. 109s (F-K)
2. AP ammo

1 hour ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

Some of us having been saying this from the start (still being ignored it seems).

 

Welcome to the club. We've had this "have you checked your network connection?" thing endless times before as well.

 

Mike

[Aurora_Stealth]

Something isn't adding up. That's all I'm saying - the fact this issue doesn't occur in the same way offline for many people is a red-flag.

 

Is this occurring on multiple servers consistently for you guys?

 

Also, are you using mods, have you tried without? it may even be worth doing a reinstall if its this bad.

 

I'm just throwing the suggestion out there - don't bite my head off for asking.

Edited July 27, 2020 by Aurora_Stealth

[-332FG-Buddy]

6 minutes ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

Something isn't adding up. That's all I'm saying - the fact this issue doesn't occur in the same way offline for many people is a red-flag.

 

Is this occurring on multiple servers consistently for you guys?

 

Also, are you using mods, have you tried without? it may even be worth doing a reinstall if its this bad.

 

I'm just throwing the suggestion out there - don't bite my head off for asking.

Is this occurring on multiple servers: yes

mods: no

 

i apologise if you feel we are bitting your head off, you havnt been rude at all, its just fusterating for us to be told the same things over and over when we know there is an issue.  i have said this before too, more people feel this way but do not get on the forums cause of the toxicity it produces.  but yes i agree with you there is a red flag with this issue and it is appreciated that you said that

[Aurora_Stealth]

Okay, fair enough so its a consistent pattern - I appreciate I can't answer this.. just trying to understand for myself and using a process of elimination to think through.

 

Understand the frustration.

[BCI-Nazgul]

20 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

After all the testing and work done to the damage model some people want super powerful arcade guns, I am glad its just a loud minority.

I grabbed  a P47 and shoot down 6 109s on Ace level on a quick missions, time after time, sometimes 5 kills , or even 7 kills

.50s are lethal, get the proper convergence and aim properly but please dont ask for arcadish super powerful .50s that will ruin the game.

Developers please dont change .50s.

I think problem is more related to online play.  They seem to work better offline.

7 hours ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

S! 

 

Regardless of gun: OFFLINE is the ONLY place to test DM. Straight from the devs themselves. Online can cause undesired effects or anomalies. Again from devs.

 

So if the .50cal, or any other weapon, does not seem to work as you want to think/wish/expect, blame online/netcode/bias or whatever. Devs have clearly stated online is NO indication how DM works due too many variables. 

 

 

The netcode issues certainly don't seem to hurt every other HMG in the game.  My guess is that this is related to online play with M2 .50s.   I'm also going to guess it has something to do with the number of rounds in the air.  The firing rate of 6-8 .50s is huge compared to every other weapon in the game.  Maybe the netcode or system being used can't handle a lot of rounds in the air at one time?   That could explain a lot of this.  What a lot of people aren't realizing is that the die hard fans of IL2 play online.  Having that work right is IMPORTANT.

Edited July 27, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[SCG_motoadve]

47 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

The firing rate of 6-8 .50s is huge compared to every other weapon in the game.  Maybe the netcode or system being used can't handle a lot of rounds in the air at one time? 

I think this might be the problem, maybe because of netcode only half the rounds are hitting in MP.

Something that needs to be addressed.

[-332FG-Buddy]

again how is it netcode when there is no issues shooting/damaging Fw190s?????

[poy]

For reference, here is the Log of the BF 109 in question https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/790297/?tour=24

 

He jumped out from being wounded A SECOND TIME

 

His plane was still usable. And apparently there is something in between the guns of the 51s and the pilot that slows down a 12,7mm bullet enough to not cause the limbs to fly off on contact...

Edited July 27, 2020 by -332FG-poy