Game Version 4.604 Discussion: SPAD 7 180 HP, Armament Tweaks, Damage Tweaks, Pilot Physiology Tweaks and Much More...

[Guest deleted@134347]

finally I got to play the latest release tonight.  The devs took away the only realism we had in this simulator: G-lock. By itself it may have been exaggerated, however coupled with all the other FM shortcomings it was the only thing that leveled the playing field and made a well planned maneuvering extremely important . Now we are back to 2017 with the arcade air-quake. I know I'll get flack for it but truly this is a step back. Just my 2 cents.

[gimpy117]

.50's Feel a little bit better. but I seemed to notice the P-38 still feels a little weird due to the clustered 50's in the nose making the pattern tighter.

 

with the new .50's it feels like you're rolling 6 dice and hoping for one to crit. It's better than it was before, but I still hope we'll get a revision of the aerodynamic penalty for  the now rarer occasion that you don't hit anything too important. 

[CrazyhorseB34]

I think. WW1 aircraft, should have split trigggers. 

You could fire only one gun. 

Seperating the triggers. Would be more accuarte. As far as history is concerned.

That is historically accurate. 

[CrazyhorseB34]

The American .50s being porked. Is a seperate subject.

The effects are great now. But...

I know for a fact. That a Soviet UB. Is not better than an American .50. 

But. these things are being addressed.

The Britsh SPAD VII. Against, Albatros V. 

Is a sucide misssion! 

An odd. Timeline thing involved. That makes me think...

"Il-2 Great Battles. " Bloody April." Might be a reality.

[Denum]

3 hours ago, 30speed said:

finally I got to play the latest release tonight.  The devs took away the only realism we had in this simulator: G-lock. By itself it may have been exaggerated, however coupled with all the other FM shortcomings it was the only thing that leveled the playing field and made a well planned maneuvering extremely important . Now we are back to 2017 with the arcade air-quake. I know I'll get flack for it but truly this is a step back. Just my 2 cents.

I disagree 

 

Previous G model made the P38 and Spitfires extremely hard to fly. You'd nuke your stamina first turn and the 109s would still be fresh.

 

New model feels just about perfect. Let's you have a good fight and your pilot needs to recover for a bit.

[CrazyhorseB34]

You are a physically fit. Less than 25 year old? 

You ever flew a stunt plane? 

Hush! 

I think it is right! Perfect. 

In a 109. You. By design. Sitting in an a G advantage. Too start with. 

Reclined. Slightly.

 

You wear a 109. 

A 109G. 

As per US Army reports. Did do some amazing stuff. Against. P-51D. 

Historical record. 

 

[CrazyhorseB34]

I think. The  G-Lock. 

Is spot on!

 

So funny! .50 cal. deleated.

 A 109. Go againts a P-51. 

Win. 

Read the reports.

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

Is point 12 in the hotfix the issues that was was 'AI torrent gunners are like snipers'?

It would be great if they finally have solved this problem!!!

[CrazyhorseB34]

This Spad... new. 

Is not 1918!

 Tearser... 

IL-2. Great Battes. "Bloody April!" 

Yep! 

Hush!

[[DBS]Browning]

6 hours ago, CrazyhorseB34 said:

The Britsh SPAD VII. Against, Albatros V. 

Is a sucide misssion!

 

HA!

Give me a day an a time for a 1v1 duel with myself in the SPAD and I'll happily prove this wrong as many times as you like.

Although the Alb's turn rate and stability may be attractive to new pilots, in the hands of experienced pilots, the SPAD VII is a far superior plane compared to the Albatros V.

[LuftManu]

4 hours ago, =gRiJ=Roman- said:

Is point 12 in the hotfix the issues that was was 'AI torrent gunners are like snipers'?

It would be great if they finally have solved this problem!!!

It is intended to do so, yes ?

[ATA_Vasilij]

Hi,

 

why did you change the ground emer landing into the "every time explosions like in the action movie " ?

Before it was absolutely perfect I guess. So why the change?

Now I dont play simulator anymore but arcade where every plane must always explode in one big fireball .... thats sad for me.

 

IL2. Flying at low speed with flaps above tanks, hitting tree so slowly falling down through the tree. The impact speed I think could be around 50 km/h. Once hitting the ground One big explosion ? Really?

IL2 and many planes has been designed to have big possibility of surviving the pilot if emer landing on the ground. 

 

I understand the increased amount of pilot injury when emer landing, but explosion of plane? WHY? According which physical law? This is simulator NOT movie, guys

 

[easterling77]

14 minutes ago, ATA_Vasilij said:

Hi,

 

why did you change the ground emer landing into the "every time explosions like in the action movie " ?

Before it was absolutely perfect I guess. So why the change?

Now I dont play simulator anymore but arcade where every plane must always explode in one big fireball .... thats sad for me.

 

IL2. Flying at low speed with flaps above tanks, hitting tree so slowly falling down through the tree. The impact speed I think could be around 50 km/h. Once hitting the ground One big explosion ? Really?

IL2 and many planes has been designed to have big possibility of surviving the pilot if emer landing on the ground. 

 

I understand the increased amount of pilot injury when emer landing, but explosion of plane? WHY? According which physical law? This is simulator NOT movie, guys

 

Survived a craschlanding in my Typhoon (badly shot up by a 190) carrer two days ago - badly injured but alive - guessing your chances of survival are now much lesser than before but it's still possible

[[DBS]Browning]

Before you could land a 262 at 800kmh in a field, gear up, hit a few trees and still have your pilot uninjured when you came to a stop a few km away.

[blitze]

22 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Wouldn't that disable Shadowplay for instance? I use it for recording on the fly videos and interesting events in MP.

There seems to be a way to keep shadowplay without Nvidia Telemetry

Maybe that would be a good compromise.

[[DBS]TH0R]

On 9/24/2021 at 6:31 AM, Denum said:

I disagree 

 

Previous G model made the P38 and Spitfires extremely hard to fly. You'd nuke your stamina first turn and the 109s would still be fresh.

 

New model feels just about perfect. Let's you have a good fight and your pilot needs to recover for a bit.

 

Seconded. This is a new combat flight sim benchmark now IMHO on how to model G-forces and stamina.

 

I would add that the only thing missing now are sudden negative G maneuvers, or better prolonged pitching up and down and thus moving from positive to negative G and back - should be more restrictive on the pilot.

Edited September 25, 2021 by [DBS]TH0R

[Rjel]

  I'm struggling a little bit with the new .50s dispersion in the P-51 and Thunderbolt (tho I've only flown it once since the patch). I've adjusted my distance from 300 yards, which has been my standard since the P-47 made its first appearance, to 350 yards. And back again. I'm just not getting hits like I felt like I was before. No devastating hits anyway. I might be the exception but I was happy with how the gun pattern was previously. Is there any graphical representation of how the bullet dispersion is set as it is now in the game? It sort of feels like I'm shooting multiple shotguns instead of machine guns. Maybe its just a matter of my re-adjusting to the new pattern.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Hmm...  I've been doing quite well in the Mustang since the patch.  Left my convergence at 300.  Noticing more engine fires on 109s and FW 190s and fewer pilot kills, especially on the the 190s, which were almost always brought down by bagging the pilot before the patch.  Even though I love the P40, I think the Mustang is my new waifu...  

Edited September 24, 2021 by BlitzPig_EL

[Rjel]

1 minute ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Hmm...  I've been doing quite well in the Mustang since the patch.  Left my convergence at 300.  Noticing more engine fires on 109s and FW 190s and fewer pilot kills, especially on the the 190s, which were almost always brought down by bagging the pilot before the patch.  Even though I love the P40, I think the Mustang is my new waifu...  

 I'll keep practicing. I'm getting a lot of wing tip hits, some fuselage but no engine fires. What's a waifu if I may ask?

[[DBS]TH0R]

1 hour ago, Rjel said:

  I'm struggling a little bit with the new .50s dispersion in the P-51 and Thunderbolt (tho I've only flown it once since the patch). I've adjusted my distance from 300 yards, which has been my standard since the P-47 made its first appearance, to 350 yards. And back again. I'm just not getting hits like I felt like I was before. No devastating hits anyway. I might be the exception but I was happy with how the gun pattern was previously. Is there any graphical representation of how the bullet dispersion is set as it is now in the game? It sort of feels like I'm shooting multiple shotguns instead of machine guns. Maybe its just a matter of my re-adjusting to the new pattern.

 

The new ballistics are throwing off my aim as well. It will take time to adjust, the new dispersion is what makes them more lethal.

[357th_KW]

2 hours ago, Rjel said:

 What's a waifu if I may ask?

 

Let's keep the pillow talk in the DM's please.  ?

 

But seriously, there's an awesome mod called the gyro gunsight.  If you spend some time with it, it works really well and will demonstrate the appropriate lead.  If you are generally missing left or right, it's almost certainly a yaw/rudder trim issue.

[Rjel]

8 minutes ago, VBF-12_KW said:

 

Let's keep the pillow talk in the DM's please.  ?

 

But seriously, there's an awesome mod called the gyro gunsight.  If you spend some time with it, it works really well and will demonstrate the appropriate lead.  If you are generally missing left or right, it's almost certainly a yaw/rudder trim issue.

I play with it but to be honest, after years of bird hunting, I feel pretty comfortable shooting at a crossing target with the older gun sight. The K-14 can be frustrating for me with targets under the nose or those maneuvering as was it historically. What I do like about it is its ability to adjust to distance and wingspan. Very useful in that regard.  

[Denum]

3 hours ago, Rjel said:

  I'm struggling a little bit with the new .50s dispersion in the P-51 and Thunderbolt (tho I've only flown it once since the patch). I've adjusted my distance from 300 yards, which has been my standard since the P-47 made its first appearance, to 350 yards. And back again. I'm just not getting hits like I felt like I was before. No devastating hits anyway. I might be the exception but I was happy with how the gun pattern was previously. Is there any graphical representation of how the bullet dispersion is set as it is now in the game? It sort of feels like I'm shooting multiple shotguns instead of machine guns. Maybe its just a matter of my re-adjusting to the new pattern.

Way to far, pull back to 250.

 

 

[Rjel]

9 minutes ago, Denum said:

Way to far, pull back to 250.

 

 

I'll give it a try. But, prior to this, 300 yards has been very effective.

[Denum]

39 minutes ago, Rjel said:

I'll give it a try. But, prior to this, 300 yards has been very effective.

Yup, it's because you were making a faux box convergence with the old DM and it's point convergence.

 

New DM with box convergence will work if you're shooting 300m, but more of us aren't. I'm about 200m when I start shooting. So 250 was pretty effective. 300 left my tickling the wings and with a pure AP belt there's not much to damage there.

 

Snagged this out an old YouTube video. Just to show the gun sight as reference.

Edited September 24, 2021 by Denum

[=RvE=Windmills]

Just tried the game again after quite a break, looks great in general but the tracers are now insanely dimm.

 

Seriously, during daytime they are incredibly hard to track and that's just not right. Tracers should be bright and easily trackable,

 

Is this being discussed somewhere?

[[DBS]TH0R]

I have no problems tracking them. Which plane did you have problems with?

[=RvE=Windmills]

Hispano's and .50s. I mean, I can 'see' them, but they're more like dimm orange orbs.

[oc2209]

4 hours ago, Rjel said:

 What's a waifu if I may ask?

 

*pushes Buddy Holly glasses up* *adjusts pocket protector*

 

I'm qualified to answer this question.

 

It's a virtual girlfriend/wife.

 

In this context, it means he wants to make passionate love to an airplane.

 

Don't we all?

[Rjel]

48 minutes ago, Denum said:

Yup, it's because you were making a faux box convergence with the old DM and it's point convergence.

 

New DM with box convergence will work if you're shooting 300m, but more of us aren't. I'm about 200m when I start shooting. So 250 was pretty effective. 300 left my tickling the wings and with a pure AP belt there's not much to damage there.

 

Snagged this out an old YouTube video. Just to show the gun sight as reference.

I’ll try 200 next. 250 didn’t really click for me. While I think I understand why the convergence was spread out, it will still take time to adjust to it. I think I’d still prefer to have the option the adjust the spread in both the vertical and horizontal. 
 

Is it stated somewhere what the actual spread in the sim? 

[[DBS]TH0R]

1 hour ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

Hispano's and .50s. I mean, I can 'see' them, but they're more like dimm orange orbs.

 

Haven't tried Hispanos yet, but I do agree the .50s are a bit on a dim side and hard to spot from a pilot's perspective. I'll give it a few more days before the decision whether I think they are too dimm or not.

 

 

EDIT: Tried Hispanos on both Temptest and Spitfire MkIX. They are super visible due to the smoky trail. .50s are less visible i.e. more dim perhaps than before but still perfectly fine for leading your rounds onto the target IMHO.

Edited September 24, 2021 by [DBS]TH0R

[Rjel]

2 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

*pushes Buddy Holly glasses up* *adjusts pocket protector*

 

I'm qualified to answer this question.

 

It's a virtual girlfriend/wife.

 

In this context, it means he wants to make passionate love to an airplane.

 

Don't we all?

Ahhhh. Okay.

 

I prefer not to admit to any sort of deviant behavior publicly. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Don't ask how someone my age knows what a waifu is, but I do try somewhat to keep up with the culture that surrounds video gaming in general.

[esk_pedja]

18. The accumulation of pilot fatigue from overload during long maneuvers has been reduced. This will allow for somewhat longer aerobatics and combat maneuvering. There is inadequate information on the fatigue accumulation under the influence of prolonged small overloads in the publicly available scientific articles, the rare data is very contradictory and therefore the model in this part was adjusted based on the collected opinion of surveyed pilots. 

 

 Unfortunately, I here disagree and this is apparently - both of Spits and Yak "cartel" influence on devs. 

 Spit is from the start in GB overestimated, not in technical terms, but super-acrobatics capabilities of "cosmic pilots" - where every novice can repeatedly perform sharp turns without even "grey out", let alone "black out" fatigue ... and  can perform 3-4 continuing sharp turns without influence on his brain and change of tactics...

 

If Spit pilots were such "Marvel" heroes - they would finish up with Luftwaffe F4, G2, A3 by the   the end of 1942... ?

 

[MeoW.Scharfi]

40 minutes ago, esk_pedja said:

18. The accumulation of pilot fatigue from overload during long maneuvers has been reduced. This will allow for somewhat longer aerobatics and combat maneuvering. There is inadequate information on the fatigue accumulation under the influence of prolonged small overloads in the publicly available scientific articles, the rare data is very contradictory and therefore the model in this part was adjusted based on the collected opinion of surveyed pilots. 

 

 Unfortunately, I here disagree and this is apparently - both of Spits and Yak "cartel" influence on devs. 

 Spit is from the start in GB overestimated, not in technical terms, but super-acrobatics capabilities of "cosmic pilots" - where every novice can repeatedly perform sharp turns without even "grey out", let alone "black out" fatigue ... and  can perform 3-4 continuing sharp turns without influence on his brain and change of tactics...

 

If Spit pilots were such "Marvel" heroes - they would finish up with Luftwaffe F4, G2, A3 by the   the end of 1942... ?

 

 

what did you smoke?

[oc2209]

2 hours ago, Rjel said:

Ahhhh. Okay.

 

I prefer not to admit to any sort of deviant behavior publicly. 

 

Yes, the personification of inanimate objects and virtual characters is deeply aberrant behavior, indicative of the overall degradation of interpersonal relations that have come to define the internet age.

 

*surreptitiously crumples up love letter to a Yak-3*

 

2 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I do try somewhat to keep up with the culture that surrounds video gaming in general.

 

As a young-ish person, I send you my deepest, heartfelt apologies for the unfortunate existence of my entire generation.

[US103_Baer]

Update has lots of good stuff. But the SPAD VII (150 and 180) flutter effect is still really odd.
It happens from moderate speeds (S7 150hp - 240kph and S7 180hp  - 260kph).

 

No other planes in FC do this. The SPAD 13 doesn't do it.

Looks like aileron flutter is being applied to whole wing or something. Its really odd and a total immersion killer.

Look..
 

 

[[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly]

4 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Yes, the personification of inanimate objects and virtual characters is deeply aberrant behavior, indicative of the overall degradation of interpersonal relations that have come to define the internet age.

 

*surreptitiously crumples up love letter to a Yak-3*

 

 

As a young-ish person, I send you my deepest, heartfelt apologies for the unfortunate existence of my entire generation.

 

As another person of that same generation I do havve some hopefull words to give here: It turns out that things weren't so different during ww2. Like, look at this poster:

Don't tell me that isn't someones.... boifu?

[oc2209]

54 minutes ago, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

 

As another person of that same generation I do havve some hopefull words to give here: It turns out that things weren't so different during ww2. Like, look at this poster:

 

Don't tell me that isn't someones.... boifu?

 

That is a... peculiar way of getting men to join the Navy.

 

I guess it's trying to make it look, well, 'cool' for lack of a better word. Or whatever the '40s equivalent word would be.

 

They don't tell you that you'll want to be shirtless all the time because the air in a sub is humid and your clothes reek of oil and sweat.

[SirFlappy]

On 9/25/2021 at 4:35 PM, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

Look, if you're going to stick a man in a tight cramped space where they will be in close contact with a lot of other greasy, sweaty men, surely you want to aim towards an audience that's comfortable with that sorta thing right?

Great update ,I feel the G-modeling is better now...as we are not physically feeling the g-forces in a sim we cannot get the same feedback as a real pilot ,so to feel the on-set of a black out in the game is very difficult...it is now well balanced.

 Along with the continued improvement in the AI from previous updates the game is moving forward  all the time ..thankyou.

 

[edited]

Edited September 27, 2021 by SirFlappy
Nonesense video