.50 cal damage, or lack there of

[SCG_motoadve]

6 hours ago, Y-29.Silky said:

This is ridiculous!

It's to the point that even people who fly mainly German aircraft are calling it out. The .50cals DO NOTHING. 

DO THE DEVELOPERS KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW?

And no, "aim better" isn't an answer, and no, "you got the wrong convergence" isn't an answer.

Can we at least get a word from Jason Williams?

 

No one is flying any plane that has .50 cals right now because they're absolutely worthless!

Problem is online, so the fix is not making .50s more powerfull or else will ruin SP.

its a net code issue that needs to be fixed.

maybe too many bullets at high rate of fire cannot be taken into account when flying MP.

in SP .50s are plenty powerful.

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Problem is online, so the fix is not making .50s more powerfull or else will ruin SP.

its a net code issue that needs to be fixed.

maybe too many bullets at high rate of fire cannot be taken into account when flying MP.

in SP .50s are plenty powerful.

Few days ago I flew online and noticed that even though all my hits were counted (about 130+) only 30-40 actually registered as doing any damage.

If the server can count the hits then it can certainly register the damage as well I would think.

 

If I get 130 hits on target then all 130 rounds should do damage of some kind even if it's just to the skin of the aircraft. Something seems to be wrong with the way .50s are doing damage, not all hits seem to be registering as damage even though they are counted as hits.

[cardboard_killer]

12 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

If the server can count the hits then it can certainly register the damage as well I would think.

 

Is this available for single player?

[-332FG-Buddy]

9 hours ago, Y-29.Silky said:

This is ridiculous!

It's to the point that even people who fly mainly German aircraft are calling it out. The .50cals DO NOTHING. 

DO THE DEVELOPERS KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW?

And no, "aim better" isn't an answer, and no, "you got the wrong convergence" isn't an answer.

Can we at least get a word from Jason Williams?

 

No one is flying any plane that has .50 cals right now because they're absolutely worthless!

I have been feeling your pain silky, I'm with you I wished could just hear something about it from the devs!!!

[CountZero]

3 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Few days ago I flew online and noticed that even though all my hits were counted (about 130+) only 30-40 actually registered as doing any damage.

If the server can count the hits then it can certainly register the damage as well I would think.

 

If I get 130 hits on target then all 130 rounds should do damage of some kind even if it's just to the skin of the aircraft. Something seems to be wrong with the way .50s are doing damage, not all hits seem to be registering as damage even though they are counted as hits.

 

If your talking about online stats that Vaal ad Isay created then damage will not show for small amounts of damages as the lines would be taking so many space as it would show also ricosha and so on, so that system only displays in events damage abow certain point. It will corectly count all but just display dmg abow amount set to show. Logs have all damages shown, i think TAW system also shows all dmg no mather how small.

3 hours ago, cardboard_killer said:

 

Is this available for single player?

You can install IL-2 stats on your PC and insted path to your server you just set path to your game and it will read stats from SP missions and display it, this is how i use it for testing and when i was editing that stats for tanks and so on...

Or you can read from logs manualy by enabeling them in conf file, but thats even more complex then instaling whole online stats.

12 hours ago, Y-29.Silky said:

This is ridiculous!

It's to the point that even people who fly mainly German aircraft are calling it out. The .50cals DO NOTHING. 

DO THE DEVELOPERS KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW?

And no, "aim better" isn't an answer, and no, "you got the wrong convergence" isn't an answer.

Can we at least get a word from Jason Williams?

 

No one is flying any plane that has .50 cals right now because they're absolutely worthless!

.50 is not weapon of war, for that you take hispanos game works fine in middle range guns from .50 up to 37mm, .50 is crap 37mm is crap rest do what expected no mather if you forgoth to aim all of sudden after 4.005 patch or net thinks you hit moon insted 109s tail.

15 hours ago, gimpy117 said:

Jason did warn us HE rounds would be way more powerful...but...nobody expected that.

 

Blue only fliers wet dream 

I remenber reading that when they said they reduced AP damages and buffed HE as they were week and AP was to strong, and i was like what game they played all this years it was totaly oposite HE was always strongest and AP was crap, now they just incresed that devide after 4.005, before it only good thing on merican airplanes waz power of .50 cal, and then they had to nerf that also so only good merica airplane is 38 as it has gun that can do proper dmg.

Edited August 9, 2020 by CountZero

[6./ZG26_Custard]

As an exclusively online player flying ground attack aircraft and being on the receiving end of P-51's and P-47's and their 50. cals, they never seem to have any problem ruining my day.

 

Having said that, I think it is important to remember that the developers are continually updated the product. We have all seen hundreds of gun camera footage videos (admittedly they are not something we should use as benchmark )  an awful lot of for those videos show 50 cal equipped aircraft causing fires. 

 

Considering there has been mention of introducing API rounds for the 50's and a more comprehensive fuel system will hopefully be include, It will be very interesting to see what happens then.  

 

 

 

[CountZero]

I was on reciving end of german 20mm before they got buffed and see no problem with them i could get shootdown by them all the time and saw no reason for them to be "fixed". Also i shoot down mayn 109s before they decided to make its tail undestructable and saw no problem with it before and now its somehow tuffest airplane in game to shoot down from 6. Also i had no problems with how .50 worked before they nerf them... strange how this all works.

Edited August 12, 2020 by CountZero

[6./ZG26_Custard]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

strange how this all works

It's called constant development, sometimes things don't go as planned. I can't believe that people actually think that the developers are purposely nerfing or buffing certain aircraft. People were used to aircraft falling apart with the slightest bit of damage prior to the damage model changes. Towards the end of the war .50 cals ammunition loads were almost exclusively made up of API round something that is not currently modelled. I think there will be a big difference to what the .50 cals will do if/when this is placed in the sim. After the hundreds and hundreds of changes and improvements that the developers have implemented over a very short period of time I hope people will be realise that this team don't sit back and do nothing but actually Continue to try and improve and expand on what we have already got. 

[Jack_]

2 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

It's called constant development, sometimes things don't go as planned. I can't believe that people actually think that the developers are purposely nerfing or buffing certain aircraft. People were used to aircraft falling apart with the slightest bit of damage prior to the damage model changes. Towards the end of the war .50 cals ammunition loads were almost exclusively made up of API round something that is not currently modelled. I think there will be a big difference to what the .50 cals will do if/when this is placed in the sim. After the hundreds and hundreds of changes and improvements that the developers have implemented over a very short period of time I hope people will be realise that this team don't sit back and do nothing but actually Continue to try and improve and expand on what we have already got. 

You can't really blame people for being upset. We all paid money for a product that seems to be degrading without any hint that they're fixing the core issues of spotting and the .50s. Honestly I had more fun before the damage update, when 50s could hurt you and you were allowed to fix the horrendous spotting with reshade on every server. 

[6./ZG26_Custard]

3 minutes ago, -332FG-Jack_ said:

You can't really blame people for being upset.

I don't blame people for being upset but maybe some should look at it with a bit more perspective. We have a development team who have not abandoned legacy products and are in fact updating them. A very rare thing in the world of PC gaming. They are also including new features with each major update. All this and moving forward with new products and theatres. Regards the old damage model, aircraft were folding their wings up faster than a dodgy hand of cards even from a slight hit.  I can attest that being shot by. 50 cals in the sim do hurt and cause some significant flight ending damage.  As I said in previous posts let's see what happens when\if API is introduced.

 Regarding spotting, we now have a FOV indicator that can be activated. I would encourage anyone that has the time or inclination to submit bug reports and note the FOV to help with spotting issues they may have. 

[-332FG-Buddy]

15 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I don't blame people for being upset but maybe some should look at it with a bit more perspective. We have a development team who have not abandoned legacy products and are in fact updating them. A very rare thing in the world of PC gaming. They are also including new features with each major update. All this and moving forward with new products and theatres. Regards the old damage model, aircraft were folding their wings up faster than a dodgy hand of cards even from a slight hit.  I can attest that being shot by. 50 cals in the sim do hurt and cause some significant flight ending damage.  As I said in previous posts let's see what happens when\if API is introduced.

 Regarding spotting, we now have a FOV indicator that can be activated. I would encourage anyone that has the time or inclination to submit bug reports and note the FOV to help with spotting issues they may have. 

we are looking at it with a perspective and an opinion.  its great that they are introducing new features but why continue introducing new features when these bugs are game breaking for some of us.  look no one is disrespecting the devs or anyone else who has an opinion, but like it has been said before and before by multiple people in this thread the 50s are an issue.  im glad YOU can attest to being injuried by 50s but alot of use can attest the opposite. also FOV has nothing to do with aircraft disappearing for some of us in game after he last major update.  but with all that said you can have your opinion just dont tell us how to have ours 

Edited August 13, 2020 by -332FG-Buddy

[6./ZG26_Custard]

4 hours ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

im glad YOU can attest to being injuried by 50s but alot of use can attest the opposite.

Then perhaps YOU should make a bug report with tracks or video and send it to the devs then? That might be more helpful and It tends to get more things done.

 

4 hours ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

also FOV has nothing to do with aircraft disappearing for some of us in game after he last major update. 

The FOV indicator was introduced with the intention of trying to discover why some are are experiencing  spotting/disappearing aircraft when bug reports are submitted.

 

4 hours ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

but with all that said you can have your opinion just dont tell us how to have ours

Yes, that's right I can and for the record, I haven't told anyone that they can't have their own opinion. Go right ahead and say what you want and I'll do the same.   

18 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

Stop buying new stuff until old stuff works or they will just continue to push new stuff and laugh at you all the way to the bank.

New stuff enables them to go back and fix old stuff. If we stop buying new stuff we can all laugh while we watch the sim fold.

Edited August 13, 2020 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[Cpt_Siddy]

4 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

 

New stuff enables them to go back and fix old stuff. If we stop buying new stuff we can all laugh while we watch the sim fold.

 

There is stuff as old as the game unfixed or promises unimplemented. 

 

Remember the original business model, it was Warthunder lite. With the unlocks and grind? 

It took colossal rabble rabble from community to remove that, other vice you would have "pay 5 bucks to skip the grind" right now, i have no dobut.

 

The legacy of that mess is still visible on Steam revives to this day.

 

If this product renames itself from *Simulator* to a *Game*, i will instantly shut up. Not until then

Edited August 13, 2020 by Cpt_Siddy

[6./ZG26_Custard]

5 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

There is stuff as old as the game unfixed or promises unimplemented.

Why don't you draw up a list of unfixed promises and I'll draw up a list of all the updated and improvements promised  or otherwise.  

You would have to give me a day or two to list them all though please. 

[-332FG-Buddy]

6 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Why don't you draw up a list of unfixed promises and I'll draw up a list of all the updated and improvements promised  or otherwise.  

You would have to give me a day or two to list them all though please. 

Right now it seems u want to argue.... I'm done replying, cause u just wanna debate.  Ilast I checked this is the complaint thread ....this is "our" complaint, so thanks for recommending bug report but this isn't a bug for some of us.  No u havnt told us not to have our own opinion, u just said we need perspective??? So we don't have perspective cause.....u say so???..there is a 50 cal problem...this is the complaint thread so ...there it is..

Edited August 13, 2020 by -332FG-Buddy

[Cpt_Siddy]

 

15 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Why don't you draw up a list of unfixed promises and I'll draw up a list of all the updated and improvements promised  or otherwise.  

You would have to give me a day or two to list them all though please. 

 

I can also dig up all the posts where there is huge complain about fixed issues from community, remember my post how the 10km visibility was not ok?

 

Remember all the [EDITED] that defended the 10km visibility in that thread?

 

I bet, if the 50 cals get a fix, you will add it as a "promise delivered" on that list? Ignoring the fact that without a huge stink, nothing would have been done. 

 

In short, we are here in the hopes that the issues will be fixed if voiced out long and hard enough. That, and withholding funding is how capitalism works. 

 

Come on now.. no need for that ..

Edited August 13, 2020 by Bearcat

[6./ZG26_Custard]

48 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

Remember all the muppets that defended the 10km visibility in that thread?

 

I didn't see Miss Piggy, Kermit or Gonzo posting in the forums?

 

50 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

I bet, if the 50 cals get a fix, you will add it as a "promise delivered" on that list?

 

Gimmie a break, the list is too long already!

 

 

[Tempus]

Please STAY FOCUSED in the  .50 cal damage, or lack there of. Otherwise you're doing a weak favor to the official corporative teams in the terms you're talking. We all are here trying to explain our ingame sensations, and trying to get any answer and if it is possible any kind of solution and/or any OFFICIAL explanation.

 

I guess mate who opened this topic one a half month ago, detected, as most of 50's users, how 50's "huge" lack of effectiveness after the introduction of the new Damage Model. Personally I'd detected it in close dogfights especifically against 109's. I noticed that 190 had became harder, but not too harder as 109's. We didn't know the origin of that change, but We all, 50's user and also 109 pilots start talking about "tanky 109's".

 

Few months ago we all got a plausible hunch that something has changed in the 50's punch. Then smarters (people who read more than me...I'm insulting myself) started talking about "issues" in the 109's tail.... bla,bla,bla. If you're smart (you read more than me and got 2 or more neurons well connected up there) with all that information do the Sherlock and.... Eureka, everything matches!!!!!, but it could be, and indeed it really is,  an unofficial plausible explanation.

 

List of allied A/C's who have 0.50 caliber HEAVY MG's as primary offensive/defensive weapon in BoBP:  Spitfire MK.IX, P-38, P-40 (I include it even I know it's from BOM, but has been included in a few maps in Combat Box server), P-47, P-51, A-20 (also from BOM) & B-25 (Huge list isn't it??). So.... Yes.... allies pilots talk about "lack of punch in 50's" because 99% of us use 50's as a primary weapon, and after reading about the 109 "shell tail core code dissabled mode" everything made sense for me: IMAO visual damage layer in the 109 works as it is supposed to work when A/C receive impacts, but DM "attenuates" (due senseless tail) the damages related to that: loss of control in tail flying surfaces, heavy aerodynimics drag due the amount of holes acumulated,... I haven't included fuel burning and/or fuel tank explosion and/or HE ammo explosion because it would be implemented as an API/APIT direct impact effect..... but I got to say that we could "zippo" them before DM implementation and nobody had noticed 50's were only AP rounds (I have to admit I've never concerned about they were AP, API, Stones, chewing gum,.... they did their primary job pretty well). 

 

The HUGE complain in nowadays 50's is what I call: "109 second chance". You bounce them, put them a solid burst from their belly 6 and..... upppppssss, surprise!!!!!! their airworthyness is 180 degrees far away from been dissabled, and an easy fishing day explode in your face and you've been compromissed in a couple of seconds. I've never complain about 20's 30's and or 13 mm's effects once they impact on allied A/C's: they do what they are suppoused to do: dissable opponents as a flying threats..... and to be honest these 50's release is not giving us that point as a supposed HEAVY caliber MG's, indepently if they are AP, API, APIT, Balls, tracers,.... rounds.

 

This is my own oppinion as a IL-2 BoBP "User-Customer" and this is a direct reply to a topic posted in the OFFICIAL IL-2 1C-777 Forum. So from now on I only expect an official reply and/or an official solution to this.

 

Best Regards 

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Tatata_Time

[[DBS]TH0R]

I haven't read through the whole thread here, but my impression since the last change that "nerfed" 50s is that they have not become weaker all of sudden - rather the other guns became way too powerful. I a quick and unscientific test I fired up a quick mission with 190 D9 (stock loadout) vs. few B-25s. It is now possible to completely obliterate the B-25 with a single well placed short burst in the center of the plane. This I find woefully unrealistic, as they fold up as paper planes. One doesn't even need mk 108s or gunpods.

 

Again, this is only SP testing, not accounting for MP network code issues described here that might be the culprit for .50 cal lack of potency.

Edited August 15, 2020 by [DBS]TH0R

[-332FG-Buddy]

55 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

I haven't read through the whole thread here, but my impression since the last change that "nerfed" 50s is that they have not become weaker all of sudden - rather the other guns became way too powerful. I a quick and unscientific test I fired up a quick mission with 190 D9 (stock loadout) vs. few B-25s. It is now possible to completely obliterate the B-25 with a single well placed short burst in the center of the plane. This I find woefully unrealistic, as they fold up as paper planes. One doesn't even need mk 108s or gunpods.

 

Again, this is only SP testing, not accounting for MP network code issues described here that might be the culprit for .50 cal lack of potency.

Personally I think the issue steams from multiple things spoke. In this channel that can be attributed to the big dm update we got a couple months ago.   I hope the issues I and other people have mentioned in this thread are looked at.  I initially thought it was just the 50s but have learned that it could be the 50s and/or something else.  

[Honza]

I havent seen 2 specific things in there and its Mw50 tanks and fuel tank basically both totally exposed right behind pilot iirc and mw50 tank is laaarge. There is huge explosive canister full of methanol, highly flamable substance right behind pilot combined with fuel tank right below it. Hits into tail with 50 cals will go to these two, damage it or set it to fire, setting mw50 on fire is highly dangerous and can lead to explosion in closed tank. You can actually do that even in dcs (game with almost no existant damage model but in ED they can actually acknowledge that 109s were extremely fragile planes) and itll separate 109s tail without any problem. Next thing is pilot protection in 109, 12-14mm plate. 50ap ammo have around 19mm pen at 500meters, at 200-300, itll go straight through mw50 tank and armor plate and totally rip apart pilot with each burst into tail section from 6oclock. Looks like nothing of this is present in game exept wery lucky pilot kills. Its absolute joke when 109 kills my pilot from low 6 where shells have to pass turbosupercharger, fuel tank and armor plate in p47. Meanwhile my 50 cant kill 109 pilot from 6oclock while having significantly higher pen than thickness of armor plate and having to pass only mw50 tank which should burst into flames, but ok, its not api so well leave fire for now, penning it and shredding pilot still stays. 

Edited August 26, 2020 by =DMD=Honza

[SAS_Storebror]

cal.50 issues still not acknowledged, no news on the 109s concrete tail.

A bummer.

 

Mike

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

Just for the record, .50 is not only underpowered when playing online.

 

I have a P-51 career going on and I can fully 'appreciate' how ineffective the .50 is especially against the 109, while a single 13mm bullet in your tail section will make your Mustang unflyable. 

 

 

[CountZero]

In SP atleast you can use mods, and i see its posible to change ammo files in mod so if i dont belive devs did good job on some ammo and im SP player i can just use one that works insted, 37mm is week no problem just use 30mm ammo in it, 0.50 cal is week no prob just use russian 12.7he and so on... visibility is bad, no problem have option to turn on icons when airplanes disapere, techchat is buged no problem just have instument panel ability to turn on and so on... G lock is not to my liking no prob just turn it off, in SP only thing that realy bathers me are AI behaviors and not enought missions. MP is where FM DM visibility and other stuff are problem if not done right, i imagine amount of SP players that play only on expert or never use time acelerations is low. In MP you do 30-40 min of prepering and just when your about to shoot titanium tail saves the enemy or your 0.50AP is full of blanks, or enemy disaperes, in SP i time accelerate that 30-40min run DF in real time if lose enemy turn on icons if mission dont go right just replay it and so on no time lost and no problem, use mod if something is not to my liking, in MP you cant do that there is no repet or time skip, so most heated complains come from MP guys.

Edited September 3, 2020 by CountZero

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

6 hours ago, CountZero said:

In SP atleast you can use mods, and i see its posible to change ammo files in mod so if i dont belive devs did good job on some ammo and im SP player i can just use one that works insted, 37mm is week no problem just use 30mm ammo in it, 0.50 cal is week no prob just use russian 12.7he and so on... visibility is bad, no problem have option to turn on icons when airplanes disapere, techchat is buged no problem just have instument panel ability to turn on and so on... G lock is not to my liking no prob just turn it off, in SP only thing that realy bathers me are AI behaviors and not enought missions. MP is where FM DM visibility and other stuff are problem if not done right, i imagine amount of SP players that play only on expert or never use time acelerations is low. In MP you do 30-40 min of prepering and just when your about to shoot titanium tail saves the enemy or your 0.50AP is full of blanks, or enemy disaperes, in SP i time accelerate that 30-40min run DF in real time if lose enemy turn on icons if mission dont go right just replay it and so on no time lost and no problem, use mod if something is not to my liking, in MP you cant do that there is no repet or time skip, so most heated complains come from MP guys.

 

You made some valid points, indeed the frustration in MP is insane when after 40 minutes of navigation you finally meet concrete 109's with cloaking devices. 

 

However, its still very annoying in SP when your only solution is to MOD a game that you legally purchased to fix some glaring issues that are still there after so many updates. How many updates since Bodenplatte was released? 9? Well I still have to see a single p-38 or p-51 in the sky when flying a german career. Unbelievable. 

 

I have been playing airwar sims since the first red baron. I got Janes ww2 fighters, European air war, etc etc and never, nevet in any of these games were the .50 an underpowered MG or the 109 tougher than the 190. 

 

Its shocking that its happening in the crop of the cream sim IL2 GB and that its not fixed after multiple updates!! 

 

And dont get me started about the AI....

 

[CountZero]

.50s were just fine before 4.005 , was only thing making some american airplanes worth having online. There was no need to start messing with them but here we are...

I dont expect they gona change anything sone, so for me its easy just to make them what i wont for SP and in MP best fix is just avoid them and have Tempests with P-51 or P-47 skins ?

 

Or lagg-23 with P-51B skin:

Ill have better expiriance with that of american equipment in ww2 then what well get if something isent done with merican engine timers and guns...

Edited September 3, 2020 by CountZero

[BCI-Nazgul]

On 8/13/2020 at 12:31 AM, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Then perhaps YOU should make a bug report with tracks or video and send it to the devs then? That might be more helpful and It tends to get more things done.

New stuff enables them to go back and fix old stuff. If we stop buying new stuff we can all laugh while we watch the sim fold.

It's not that the devs aren't fixing things, it's that is some cases the stuff they fix isn't nearly as important.   Do you think anyone was deeply concerned or upset that the Moscow map was 50 meters too low (or whatever it was)?  I don't recall dozens of complaints about that.   However, many people are upset about the 109 tail, the .50s, and other things that actually affect the play experience.  The prioritization of the fixes is a little "off" IMO.   Right now, I'd say the .50s and the spotting are by far the biggest problems that people are complaining about.

Edited September 4, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[Gambit21]

20 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

  The prioritization of the fixes is a little "off" IMO.   Right now, I'd say the .50s and the spotting are by far the biggest problems that people are complaining about.

 

It may have escaped your notice or sphere of knowledge that the guys working on the map etc are not the same guys working on ballistics, damage modeling, physics etc etc etc.

[BCI-Nazgul]

More etc would be nice.

[-332FG-Buddy]

1 hour ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

More etc would be nice.

Lol

[6./ZG26_Custard]

7 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

It's not that the devs aren't fixing things, it's that is some cases the stuff they fix isn't nearly as important.   Do you think anyone was deeply concerned or upset that the Moscow map was 50 meters too low (or whatever it was)?  I don't recall dozens of complaints about that.   However, many people are upset about the 109 tail, the .50s, and other things that actually affect the play experience.  The prioritization of the fixes is a little "off" IMO.   Right now, I'd say the .50s and the spotting are by far the biggest problems that people are complaining about.

 

I think it is important to understand why virtually all US aircraft were loaded exclusively with API rounds and not just AP. If standard AP was so effective and was all that was required why bother switching it out for API?  Was it because that type of ammunition was  much more effective at bring down enemy aircraft?

 

This type of ammunition is currently not modeled, something which I hope will be in the near future.  I personally think it will make the M2 a much more potent weapon if it's included at some point.

 

I think it is also important to understand that the development team are a small but extremely hard working bunch but they do not have the resources of a company like EA or Microsoft that can throw money at a project like it's going out of fashion.

 

Prior to 4.005 aircraft were very "very" easy to shoot down with just a few hits and they would fall apart in spectacular unrealistic fashion. Changes to things like damage modelling, 3D modelling or ammunition type is not a simple fix. Change one thing and a hundred other things are affected. It's not as simple as fix "this". The development of the Great Battles series  is a continuing process and it is a shame that some in the community can't see that.

As @LukeFF  has already pointed out in a previous post, just because the developers don't always reply doesn't mean they are not aware of what is going on.

 

 

Edit:

Case in point

 

7 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

spotting

 

 

  

Edited September 4, 2020 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[Tempus]

I think it is important to understand why virtually all US aircraft were loaded exclusively with API rounds and not just AP. If standard AP was so effective and was all that was required why bother switching it out for API?  Was it because that type of ammunition was  much more effective at bring down enemy aircraft?

 

This type of ammunition is currently not modeled, something which I hope will be in the near future.  I personally think it will make the M2 a much more potent weapon if it's included at some point.

 

I think it is also important to understand that the development team are a small but extremely hard working bunch but they do not have the resources of a company like EA or Microsoft that can throw money at a project like it's going out of fashion.

 

Prior to 4.005 aircraft were very "very" easy to shoot down with just a few hits and they would fall apart in spectacular unrealistic fashion. Changes to things like damage modelling, 3D modelling or ammunition type is not a simple fix. Change one thing and a hundred other things are affected. It's not as simple as fix "this". The development of the Great Battles series  is a continuing process and it is a shame that some in the community can't see that.

As @LukeFF  has already pointed out in a previous post, just because the developers don't always reply doesn't mean they are not aware of what is going on.

 

1- I think is important to understand US WW2 crews noticed they only need to load & use  API was the GREAT point for downing german aircrafts. API can penetrate almost everything and/or ignite almost everything... where is located the fuel in german fighters? In the A/C rear section. Where are located the belts full of High Explosive (HE) rounds in the 190's , also in the 109's equipped with gunpods? In the WINGS. What parts are normally hitted first in a classical bounce / dogfight? TAIL and/or WINGS. So US crews noticed they only need to equip their A/C's with a lighter caliber than german/british ones equipped with 20 or 30 mm.mm cannons. Indeed 0.50 caliber is lighter than cannons but all they have are  advantages:

 1- They're lighter,.....very important in escort fighters that had to escort bombers all way to deep Germany an back home UK (lesser weight lesser fuel consumption: like a Ryanair)

 2- M2 got a Rate of fire of 450-635 rounds per minute (7.5 rounds per second aprox.) every single MG, now multiply x6 or x8 (mustang and juggs), so they generate a, let's call it, Fog or cloud of bullets in the air before the optimal convergence point, in the convergence point and just after the convergence point. This rate of fire is higher than 20's and of course 30's.

3- Due the nature of their long missions they can carry huge ammo belts.

 

Again US crews noticed they only need to carry the matches because the enemy carry enough TNT and fuel to do a GREAT BALL OF FIRE. Prior 4.005 release that "spectacular unrealistic fashion"  german A/C fall apart was only generated cause they didn't explode in a great ball of fire, but they "zippo" in a very realistic fall apart. 

There's a sentece that resume what have been happening from 4.005 til nowadays 4.009: IF IT AIN'T BROKEN DON'T FIX IT !!!! 

 

This is the second time you mention specifically the 1C-777 dev team and their own internal bussiness organization. From my point of view, as a customer, I got ZERO interest how many they are, how they've been organized,....and a long ETC,ETC,ETC. The whole Il-2 customers (sorry you prefer to call US community) got a problem, I said the Whole, because 100% of US had paid for the WHOLE pack (german & allies aircrafts) and of course every one has the freedom of flying all, none, a few from the boths sides,..... but WE ALL OWN all models and those who use a few models than others have been  complaining and stil complain in present / future that a part of the whole product doesn't work propperly well.  The fact you show in your nick profile a yellow IL-2 flag doesn't mean you can talk in their name every time things go hot. IMAO, after 5 months, someone with an IL-2 red flag should say anything.... even if it's only: Hey What's up fellas?? 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Tatata_Time

[BCI-Nazgul]

12 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

As @LukeFF  has already pointed out in a previous post, just because the developers don't always reply doesn't mean they are not aware of what is going on.

 

 

Edit:

Case in point

 

 

 

I'm fully aware that they are working on the spotting.   But let me pose this one...What is the harm in some type of reply ANY reply just to let people know they care about these issues (or not)?  It would help to reduce the whining even if it's bad news.  Some game devs even post a development plan for future enhancements or fixes.  If you're the official spokesman for the company please let us know.

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[-332FG-Magic_Zach]

Another day goes by, and it's still silent on the dev side...

[6./ZG26_Custard]

6 hours ago, Tatata_Time said:

1- I think is important to understand US WW2 crews noticed they only need to load & use  API was the GREAT point for downing german aircrafts. API can penetrate almost everything and/or ignite almost everything... where is located the fuel in german fighters? In the A/C rear section. Where are located the belts full of High Explosive (HE) rounds in the 190's , also in the 109's equipped with gunpods? In the WINGS.

 They are much better than standard AP because they have an incendiary charge. That is why they loaded them almost exclusively for all US fighter aircraft. Incendiary rounds are much  more effective at causing fires and explosions than AP.

6 hours ago, Tatata_Time said:

US crews noticed they only need to equip their A/C's with a lighter caliber than german/british ones equipped with 20 or 30 mm.mm cannons. Indeed 0.50 caliber is lighter than cannons

 Due to the fact of massive allied air superiority there was not an urgent need to fit cannons as standard to US fighters and API worked very well. The Luftwaffe were facing mass formations of bombers and were vastly outnumbered by 1944 so there was a very urgent need for much heaver hitting weapons on their fighters.

 

6 hours ago, Tatata_Time said:

Again US crews noticed they only need to carry the matches because the enemy carry enough TNT and fuel to do a GREAT BALL OF FIRE. Prior 4.005 release that "spectacular unrealistic fashion"  german A/C fall apart was only generated cause they didn't explode in a great ball of fire, but they "zippo" in a very realistic fall apart. 

There's a sentece that resume what have been happening from 4.005 til nowadays 4.009: IF IT AIN'T BROKEN DON'T FIX IT !!!! 

Wings were folding up after very few hits and howls of derision filled the forum about fragile aircraft. The P-47 in particular, came in for very special attention from many in the community about how weak and fragile it was. 

6 hours ago, Tatata_Time said:

 

This is the second time you mention specifically the 1C-777 dev team and their own internal bussiness organization. From my point of view, as a customer, I got ZERO interest how many they are, how they've been organized,....and a long ETC,ETC,ETC. The whole Il-2 customers (sorry you prefer to call US community) got a problem, I said the Whole, because 100% of US had paid for the WHOLE pack (german & allies aircrafts) and of course every one has the freedom of flying all, none, a few from the boths sides,..... but WE ALL OWN all models and those who use a few models than others have been  complaining and stil complain in present / future that a part of the whole product doesn't work propperly well.  The fact you show in your nick profile a yellow IL-2 flag doesn't mean you can talk in their name every time things go hot. IMAO, after 5 months, someone with an IL-2 red flag should say anything.... even if it's only: Hey What's up fellas?? 

 

I'm glad that you have clairvoyant powers and can speak for the whole community but the reason you have ZERO interest is because maybe you don't understand that if you change one thing  many other thing are also affected? You can't just press a button and pesto all is solved to your liking.  

Yes I have a nice yellow badge but like many on the forums I am also a customer and fly all the aircraft. Talking of badges where are yours? 

 

Edit:

 

55 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

I'm fully aware that they are working on the spotting.   But let me pose this one...What is the harm in some type of reply ANY reply just to let people know they care about these issues (or not)?  It would help to reduce the whining even if it's bad news.  Some game devs even post a development plan for future enhancements or fixes.  If you're the official spokesman for the company please let us know.

They post development plans and future enhancements or fixes, there are 258 Developer Diaries in the relevant section of the forum. I am not an official spokesman, I'm a customer like you but I try to look at things objectively, and understand that things may go wrong in software development. The devs have proved time and again that they will not just abandon what they have created. I understand that it's frustrating but the team promise little but deliver a lot.

Edited September 4, 2020 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[Cpt_Siddy]

 

On the subject of fire, i have been lit up by 30mm German cannons in american planes many times. 

 

The opposite, having a seen a fire on German plane caused by 50 cals, is very rare in my experience. You can rake a 111 with 8 50 cals from port to starboard and make it look like a crop duster, but you wont light it on fire. 

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

On the subject of fire, i have been lit up by 30mm German cannons in american planes many times. 

 

The opposite, having a seen a fire on German plane caused by 50 cals, is very rare in my experience. You can rake a 111 with 8 50 cals from port to starboard and make it look like a crop duster, but you wont light it on fire. 

Historically the mk108 was usually loaded 1/1 with mines and incendiaries - but I don’t think this is modelled ingame. 
 

Still the he components of mines should be better at causing fires than the tracer components of ap-t and much better then ap. 

 

that’s exactly why incendiary ammo should be modelled asap. For all guns that used it. 

[CountZero]

5 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

On the subject of fire, i have been lit up by 30mm German cannons in american planes many times. 

 

The opposite, having a seen a fire on German plane caused by 50 cals, is very rare in my experience. You can rake a 111 with 8 50 cals from port to starboard and make it look like a crop duster, but you wont light it on fire. 

When i change in mod ammo used from 0.50AP to russian 12.7HE i could flame enemy airplanes, also kills looked more like what we can see in ww2 videos and not what you can see in airsoft dueals.

Maybe they can do temporary fix like they did to 109 tail, and just add mix AP HE, its better then leve main american airplanes without proper ammo modeled, its like relising airplanes without all FM modeled.

So if 109 tail cant wait for proper fix and need to have tail that can servive nuclear apocalipes why not do quick fix to this also, poll testers same way and add mix of AP HE when game dont modeled proper ammo. If only Germans made 0.50 cal guns... 

Edited September 5, 2020 by CountZero

[-250H-Ursus_]

7 hours ago, CountZero said:

When i change in mod ammo used from 0.50AP to russian 12.7HE i could flame enemy airplanes, also kills looked more like what we can see in ww2 videos and not what you can see in airsoft dueals.

Maybe they can do temporary fix like they did to 109 tail, and just add mix AP HE, its better then leve main american airplanes without proper ammo modeled, its like relising airplanes without all FM modeled.

So if 109 tail cant wait for proper fix and need to have tail that can servive nuclear apocalipes why not do quick fix to this also, poll testers same way and add mix of AP HE when game dont modeled proper ammo. If only Germans made 0.50 cal guns... 

There is a little problem with do that "buff" in order to fix the problems given by the lack of aerodynamic penalty and the 109 tail section problem. We all know that an a little ammount of HE makes the 12,7 and 13mm practically OP. I mean, there is no sense in the damage they can do. If you add HE to x6 12,7 or x8 12,7, one possibly will, if not going to make the 12,7 an overpowered monster deadlier than a cannon. Based on what i'm seeing about the 12,7 the most important thing to fix are the aerodynamic impact, incendiary and higher probabilities to rip off surfaces of control like ailerons or tailrudders with the propper burst. Structural damage and penetration are ok, but the curren problem of the aerodynamic impact and no incendiary tends to show a 12,7 way less powerfull that it should. Not talking about the difficult of ruin someones rudder or aileron.

[HR_Tumu]

20 hours ago, -332FG-Ursus_ said:

but the curren problem of the aerodynamic impact and no incendiary tends to show a 12,7 way less powerfull that it should

 

I think this issue affect to all types of ammo,