Jump to content

Comparing HMG Damage, and issues with .50 cals


Sublime
 Share

Recommended Posts

-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
1 hour ago, NIK14 said:

Edit: How about using the poll system as you did for the visibility fix? Make a poll and see how many are unhappy.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sniperton
19 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Also, I don't think the argument is "people are unhappy, fix it", the argument is "this performance is not plausible, which makes us unhappy, please take a look at it".

While I fully agree with you, unhappy people do vote with their feet. Sad as its is, but the only public mod-friendly server was shot down as a result. Its site had 16k+ views in the past 1.5 years, so estimate how many customers or potential customers may be affected, and how, by the policy of "take it or leave it for now".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RedKestrel
4 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

@RedKestrel what I find to be the most frustrating is that I feel like often times the more inflammatory claims like the one pictured drive their reasoning behind ignoring claims about the M2's being incorrectly modeled. When a well researched post does come up it can just be dismissed as "more American fan boys whining" instead of a genuine discrepancy within the simulation. 

I feel exactly the same way. That's just textbook "You're not helping, buddy." 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sniperton
5 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

When a well researched post does come up it can just be dismissed as "more American fan boys whining" instead of a genuine discrepancy within the simulation. 

The fun fact is that most of us "whiners" are not American. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VO101Kurfurst
11 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

 

This isn't correct.

Even if the HE round designers had wanted this to happen (which they didn't) it may not have been possible. The fastest inertial fuses operate in the region of 0.005 seconds. That's more than enough time for the round to pass through the skin. Furthermore, the aircraft skin may also be too light in places to trigger the round at all (until it's hits something more substantial).

That rounds explode in the wing and not on the surface is demonstrated well in the 30mm spitfire wing/tail tests from the 40's. The skin of the wing in blown outwards from an explosion within, not inwards from a detonation outside the skin. I imagine you have seen the videos, but if not, they should be easy to find.


Indeed that was the case and as far as I know the German fuses designated ‘instantaneous’ should really just read ‘very short fuse times’, as they had a bit of natural delay before blowing up the shell, during which time the shell would indeed penetrate into the structure before blowing up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tatata_Time
3 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

And here, gentlemen, is your answer. Directly from the English Facebook page.

1349998545__50s.thumb.jpg.08c41d51aed1ae6f5097de8fbf6cc58e.jpg

 

Who's more frustrated than customers/users? What an angry kid's answer.....pfffff

 

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCI-Nazgul

They may be pretty good aerodynamic engineers, but they don't know anything about terminal ballistics.  To think some of these weapons are even close to reality is ridiculous.   The fact that a 20mm HE hole in a plane was thought to be a 13mm HE hole pretty much proves that.  Small wonder the 13mm HE is like a mini-Death Star shot makes sense now.   I don't buy this bit that makes it seem like this would be difficult to correct.   If this is was programmed by anyone with any skill it should just be a matter of changing some variable values and/or parameter files.   Anyway, they're not getting any more of my money.   I feel like half of what I already spent for US planes was wasted as it is.  Also, I don't think that pointing out problems that have been ignored or left undone for months is "hostile".  I think the users have a right to be frustrated at this point.  Customer satisfaction and service should be the first priority for any company.  

Edited by BCI-Nazgul
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=AW=drewm3i-VR
3 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

They may be pretty good aerodynamic engineers, but they don't know anything about terminal ballistics.  To think some of these weapons are even close to reality is ridiculous.   The fact that a 20mm HE hole in a plane was thought to be a 13mm HE hole pretty much proves that.  Small wonder the 13mm HE is like a mini-Death Star shot makes sense now.   I don't buy this bit that makes it seem like this would be difficult to correct.   If this is was programmed by anyone with any skill it should just be a matter of changing some variable values and/or parameter files.   Anyway, they're not getting any more of my money.   I feel like half of what I already spent for US planes was wasted as it is.  Also, I don't think that pointing out problems that have been ignored or left undone for months is "hostile".  I think the users have a right to frustrated at this point.  Customer satisfaction and service should be the first priority for any company.  

Absolutely...really rooting for Team Fusion at this point as the damage models are astounding in Tobruk, the p-40 engine is modeled realistically, and the .50s are lethal as they should be. I still like GB, but it's going south fast.

Edited by =AW=drewm3i-VR
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II/JG17_HerrMurf
6 hours ago, RedKestrel said:


As far as responses go, about what I expected, but not what I hoped. Right now the engineering team is neck deep in other work - this is probably a nearly permanent situation. I do sympathize. At least the door is not closed to improvements.

For myself, the DM was overall an improvement (no more glass engines,  P-47 no longer a confetti plane structurally) but has these glaring issues with the 0.50 cal AP rounds and the 12.7mm HE damage which mar it. I can see if someone didn't often fly American planes, or didn't fly them often online, it may not seem to be a very large issue. But IMO, with the new G-modeling and the improved visibility having made such good progress, from my point of view its one of the remaining big problems.

 

  
Also, I don't think the argument is "people are unhappy, fix it", the argument is "this performance is not plausible, which makes us unhappy, please take a look at it". 



 

 

It is almost word for word, exactly what I said the answer was likely to be. They will go back and review when they have overhead to do so. They don't right now, so they CAN'T right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCI-Nazgul

I'm still stumped about how the "beta testers" could have agreed that the .50s were OK at the time.   Who were these people all JGxx'ers?

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=AW=drewm3i-VR

I think the problem isn't the ai, but the .50s, fw horizontal stabilizer, and 109 tail...in the video, you can clearly see them getting tons of hits...with no appreciable damage.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams locked this topic

Perhaps the 12.7×99mm ammunition is not working as intended for the American fighters?

I observed in my own offline QMB furballs that they repeatedly deplete ammunition for very little effect.

Edited by Leifr
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SYN_Haashashin unlocked, locked, unlocked and locked this topic

Dude, the problem is the ineffectiveness of AP. Do you think that the AI skill level is arbitrarily set lower for American planes?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mac_Messer
On 2/20/2021 at 10:46 AM, Leifr said:

Perhaps the 12.7×99mm ammunition is not working as intended for the American fighters?

I observed in my own offline QMB furballs that they repeatedly deplete ammunition for very little effect.

AP is same as in other planes, working well too. The AI however have tough time using machineguns in all planes. Most of its kills are cannon hits.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

AP is same as in other planes, working well too. The AI however have tough time using machineguns in all planes. Most of its kills are cannon hits.

image.png.ef7e02deee4fc37ee275f1384ca2a45c.png

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RedKestrel
4 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

AP is same as in other planes, working well too. The AI however have tough time using machineguns in all planes. Most of its kills are cannon hits.

So they are getting most of their kills with cannons...you mean...guns that fire primarily explosive ammunition? Is there some cannon out there that fires AP ammunition 100% of the time for the AI? All the planes I've seen have HE or HE/AP by default, with pure-AP only as an optional modification.

For planes with nose-mounted MGs and cannons, how do you know they are getting kills with the cannons and not the HE tipped MG rounds? From an animation point of view, when the HE MG rounds hit they mostly look like smaller cannon hits. They are firing both at the same time.

 

41 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

Dude, the problem is the ineffectiveness of AP. Do you think that the AI skill level is arbitrarily set lower for American planes?

It's absolutely the AP but compounded I think by the convergence of the wing guns. AI is not necessarily opening up at convergence range, so when they are aiming at the centreline of the aircraft they are scattering hits on the wings. No issue if you are firing HE rounds, but as we know almost completely ineffective with AP. With nose mounted guns and AP rounds you are likely hitting the cockpit or the engine which gets you PKs and engine fires, so the issue is masked somewhat.

Then its the same old story. Unless hits are concentrated the enemy aircraft flies along like it was not hit at all, which makes it seem like the AI are missing completely, when really they are just not hitting enough in the same place to make any impression on the flight of the aircraft.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mac_Messer
3 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

So they are getting most of their kills with cannons...you mean...guns that fire primarily explosive ammunition? Is there some cannon out there that fires AP ammunition 100% of the time for the AI? All the planes I've seen have HE or HE/AP by default, with pure-AP only as an optional modification.

For planes with nose-mounted MGs and cannons, how do you know they are getting kills with the cannons and not the HE tipped MG rounds? From an animation point of view, when the HE MG rounds hit they mostly look like smaller cannon hits. They are firing both at the same time.

No, not at all. The game seems to differentiate between cannon / mg with giving cannon much more effective range. That is easily observed when doing AP only cannons vs AP only machineguns on VVS planes. The mg projectiles are far less effective at ranges longer than 150-170m while all AP cannon fire goes well over 300m.

 

It is easy to tell since VVS/LW/RAF planes have cannon but USAF have not. The effect compounds with AI since it opens fire at long ranges and with crazy deflection angles. When AI uses USAF planes it does the same routine, to use machinegun fire only at big ranges. As such even scoring multiple hits don`t seem to do much, only if the AI gets close (Ace AI tends to get in closer before firing circa 200m).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CountZero

If you think problem is AI dont know how to shoot with MG guns, then same problem should be happening on MC202 or MiG-3 AI, its posible to test by replacing P-51s with anyof them.

If you think AP ammo is problem , you can use HE ammo switch mod for american guns and test it then.

If you think AI on american airplanes is wrongly modeled and not logic of mission you can replace american airplanes with other nations, i would start with 190A8 just to see what would happend, then would go for Tempests.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams unlocked this topic
VBF-12_Snake9

Oh boy, thread has opened again.  😀

 

I enjoy reading the comments trying to explain how the 50s are good.  

 

So much fun and hilarious at the same time.  😂

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hajo_Garlic

I’m not sure this is the place to address this, but I’m confused with the inconsistency of all aircraft armaments in regards to ground targets like buildings and dugouts. 
I’m getting back into the game now that I have more free time but I remember things like mg151s destroying buildings while shvaks and hispanos do nothing. Are they hitpoint based? 
 

Ive seen .50s strafing buildings in guncams but here they have no effect against structures. 
 

im not saying how it should be, but how it is currently confuses me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QB.Shallot

@Hajo_Garlic Mission makers can set custom values for the health pool/durability of a ground target. If you experienced this in MP, that may be the reason. Otherwise it's simply down to how the game assigns durability values to various objects in singleplayer, and potential inconsistencies on the matter.  

 

Also for the record, I've never seen any gun camera clip cause a hanger to collapse. Functional damage is often far less than catastrophic when you're shooting up some buildings. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hajo_Garlic
2 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

@Hajo_Garlic Mission makers can set custom values for the health pool/durability of a ground target. If you experienced this in MP, that may be the reason. Otherwise it's simply down to how the game assigns durability values to various objects in singleplayer, and potential inconsistencies on the matter.  

 

Also for the record, I've never seen any gun camera clip cause a hanger to collapse. Functional damage is often far less than catastrophic when you're shooting up some buildings. 

Thanks for the reply. Ive never seen hangers collapse either from .50. Yes it was in mp, that probably explains it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BatSpoggy

That developer response from facebook pretty well seals the issue for me.

I won't be spending any more money on IL-2 at any point in the future. The sim gets worse over time not better, as the bugs and poor modelling pile up and are dismissed with "well some hypothetical people think it's fine, so suck it". Every update we can expect more glaring issues to be introduced and then left unfixed for very long periods of time at best and forever at worst.

 

I say this as somebody who doesn't even fly aircraft with 50s, but such a poor response tells me all I need to know about the chance of the 1000 other problems with the sim receiving any competently-produced fixes.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the devs perspective on the issue, they did say it will be addressed at a later date, probably when more content has been released, which makes sense from a business point of view.

If you have a backlog of stuff to work on it doesnt make sense to jump between issues.

I'm confident the fuel systems update will be the key step for further DM development.

Yeah AP vs HE damage is borked but I think we have raised the issue sufficiently.

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

Neat! Its open!

But with that said, 

To me it appeared Jason had mentioned there was some changes coming with the fuel system. So for now.. I'll just accept that .50s is playing hard mode and wait until the new fuel stuff comes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCI-Nazgul
On 2/27/2021 at 9:10 AM, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter said:

There is many-many rare gun camera footage from the timed part.

Based on this film you'd actually think the .50s could shoot down other planes fairly quickly.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roland_HUNter
14 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

Based on this film you'd actually think the .50s could shoot down other planes fairly quickly.

Based on that film, those german planes (if not exploded/caught fire or lost wing) could suffer many hits from .50s.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tatata_Time
3 hours ago, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter said:

Based on that film, those german planes (if not exploded/caught fire or lost wing) could suffer many hits from .50s.

 

The only two points you could base anything from that film is:

1- OF COURSE its was PROPAGANDA

2- ALL German fighters showed there had been shot by planes equipped with 0.50 cal. I really dare you to demonstrate the opposite.

Of course the film editor surelly only used the highlights, I remind you that was a propaganda film.

 

The magic of the 0.50 API-APIT is TO IGNITE all materials prone to burning and/or to explode: internal fuel tanks in tails, Non-armored external fuel tanks, wings filled up of 20 mm. and 30 mm. HIGH EXPLOSIVE rounds. The cutting wings.... You should fly more allies with 50's to know that in game, at least 99% times, is the pilot of the 109 who pulls too much G's in his previously damaged plane. I said 109 cause from new DM implementation I've never seen an 190-A's or D9 loosing a wing.... and they should do easily than 109 cause their wings are fully filled of HE rounds. 

 

There's a false belief A/C's, at least WW2 fighters, were flying tanks..... they weren't on neither sides. Once you get caught by 50's or by 20's, 30's.... you were 99% KAPUT

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roland_HUNter
37 minutes ago, Tatata_Time said:

 

The only two points you could base anything from that film is:

1- OF COURSE its was PROPAGANDA

2- ALL German fighters showed there had been shot by planes equipped with 0.50 cal. I really dare you to demonstrate the opposite.

Of course the film editor surelly only used the highlights, I remind you that was a propaganda film.

 

The magic of the 0.50 API-APIT is TO IGNITE all materials prone to burning and/or to explode: internal fuel tanks in tails, Non-armored external fuel tanks, wings filled up of 20 mm. and 30 mm. HIGH EXPLOSIVE rounds. The cutting wings.... You should fly more allies with 50's to know that in game, at least 99% times, is the pilot of the 109 who pulls too much G's in his previously damaged plane. I said 109 cause from new DM implementation I've never seen an 190-A's or D9 loosing a wing.... and they should do easily than 109 cause their wings are fully filled of HE rounds. 

 

There's a false belief A/C's, at least WW2 fighters, were flying tanks..... they weren't on neither sides. Once you get caught by 50's or by 20's, 30's.... you were 99% KAPUT

"99% KAPUT"
Have a good reading:
https://easyupload.io/8ff02s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=621=Samikatz

At 21:18 and again at 21:20 is that a 109 having its wing tips blown off by short bursts? Don't see any big HE explosions

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCI-Nazgul
On 3/1/2021 at 3:35 AM, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter said:

Based on that film, those german planes (if not exploded/caught fire or lost wing) could suffer many hits from .50s.

I think those gun cams films are all slowed down, so none of those planes are taking "many hits".  I also saw no US planes using explosive ammo.  All the rending, tearing, and blasting was caused by API or AP ammo.

Edited by BCI-Nazgul
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

.50 M2 with just AP? Allies may already lost ww2.

I quit this game again, somehow War thunder and Dcs getting better with this problem, Byebye~

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

I shot a thousand bullet on a fighter/bomber with my .50 M2 guns, and those plane can still flyable back to their base.

 

But I got shot down or severely lost control with just 2 or 3 hit by German's guns....  

 

I quit this game for now until they officially fix this ammo problem.  

 

People think DM is a huge problem but it isn't, it can be fix easily!! Here you go

 

Edited by Shuz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LUZITANO

Hello guys ... I did some offline tests. Honestly ... online it is easier to make kills since the players generally do not shake so much.

I like the damage model. It's not perfect, but I like it.

 

Edited by LUZITANO
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

palker4
21 minutes ago, mpdugas said:

 from the article:

Quote

Field Marshall Hermann Göring, head of the German Luftwaffe during WWII reported once wrote “…If the German Air Force had the Browning .50 caliber, the Battle of Britain would have turned out differently.”

😂😂😂 Göring, what a massive tool. That is the stupidest thing I heard today and I read YouTube comments every day

Then again the quote is probably made up but still dumb as was Göring.

Edited by palker4
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...