gun power help

[FuriousMeow]

OP asks for help to upgun his weapons systems, doesn't even specify which weapons system, and out of the wood works come the keyboard A2A rifle, MG and cannon experts totally derailing it.

[PatrickAWlson]

7 minutes ago, FuriousMeow said:

OP asks for help to upgun his weapons systems, doesn't even specify which weapons system, and out of the wood works come the keyboard A2A rifle, MG and cannon experts totally derailing it.

 

At least somebody answered his question (A: no, but look for mods) before it went off the rails.  That's pretty good for this place.

[PeaceO]

Gonna take all said here as a hard no thanks

[oc2209]

15 minutes ago, PeaceO said:

Gonna take all said here as a hard no thanks

 

There was a mod someone made that turned .50 AP ammo into HE ammo. I don't know what it's called, but maybe someone else can tell you where to find it.

[Ace_Pilto]

40 minutes ago, PeaceO said:

Gonna take all said here as a hard no thanks

Maybe try using infinite ammo instead of boosting the power.

[oc2209]

So far I've found this:

 

 

Or maybe you can find something you want in here (a collection of mods that also includes the above cannon one): 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by oc2209

[oc2209]

17 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Unfortunately those AI guys are not too cooperative. With their constantly turning away as soon as I get to shooting distance, it is quite difficult to shoot at the oil cooler.

 

I've seen some odd behavior where Sturm AI starts acting like it's flying a trick biplane instead of an armored bathtub with wings. However, 90% of the time, I find they're pretty docile.

 

This is what I mean:

 

Spoiler

 

 

The trick is to match your speed to the Sturm's. I generally keep my throttle at 50% or under, sometimes cutting it entirely as needed.

 

Even though I caused an oil leak with my first attack, in my opinion it wasn't enough to down him. I've seen planes fly around for 10+ minutes with a minor oil leak. You need to do extensive damage to seize the engine completely. I believe my final long burst is what actually crippled the engine.

 

Here's what happened after I stopped the recording (about 2-3 minutes later):

 

 

You could hear the engine sputtering, and the prop stopped turning right before the plane hit the ground. All that smoke isn't from fire, but rather what happens when the engine seizes mid-air.

 

10 hours ago, Avimimus said:

...it is just the 0.303, 7.62mm, and 7.92mm guns that I'm finding I can't get a kill with.

 

Maybe you (or someone) should do a video tutorial on this to put some of us to to shame (In the same way the Air Combat Tutorial Library anti-aircraft player guide videos showed us it wasn't the guns but our accuracy that made the anti-aircraft collector vehicles weak).

 

Ask and ye shall receive.

 

Spoiler

 

 

I tried to do this in an I-16 originally, and the pilot was killed twice by gunners. Third time I collided with the tail. Beyond that, I find the I-16 is a terrible weapons platform in terms of stability. I gave up and started using a Yak-1 instead, and was successful in one attempt.

Edited December 1, 2021 by oc2209

[Gr3y]

7 hours ago, oc2209 said:

I tried to do this in an I-16 originally, and the pilot was killed twice by gunners. Third time I collided with the tail. Beyond that, I find the I-16 is a terrible weapons platform in terms of stability. I gave up and started using a Yak-1 instead, and was successful in one attempt.

 

Indeed, in I-16 with just MGs even when I'm trying to aim for the engines, I'm happy with one downed bomber and that's after spending all the ammo (~2000 rounds). 

[Varibraun]

On 11/29/2021 at 4:29 PM, Rjel said:

Fly For Your Life was one of the first WWII fighter pilot autobiographies I read long ago. Great book.

 

Off topic - Me too.  Thank you and @grcurmudgeon for mentioning Tuck here.  I probably read the 1973 version of "Fly for Your Life" around that time when it came out in paperback (mid to late 70s?) helping spark a life long interest.  Now here I am flying Tuck's fighter in VR today...who would have thought it possible!? 

 

My copy disappeared many moons and moves ago, so just ordered a used copy off Amazon and am looking forward to rereading it almost half a century later...

 

[PatrickAWlson]

On 12/1/2021 at 3:50 AM, Gr3y said:

 

Indeed, in I-16 with just MGs even when I'm trying to aim for the engines, I'm happy with one downed bomber and that's after spending all the ammo (~2000 rounds). 

 

If you think about it, one downed bomber per mission would make you the highest scoring British ace of the BoB.  

[[TWB]80hd]

If you are going fast enough (and/or can control any recoil yaw with the rudder) you can saw wings off with rifle caliber MGs in this engine (works especially well against paper winged bipes in FC, of course)

 

2 x MGs are going to struggle against anything.  A lot of the very early conflict wins with rifle caliber MGs can be attributed to outlier fighter pilots with tons of interwar training (or conflicts) under their belts going up against novice bomber crews with no good/defined tactics or coordination against fighter attacks. Every airforce in existence at the time quickly went to cannons and/or banks of heavy MGs in short order.

 

That said, the outlier pilots in IL-2 hit specific areas *at convergence* (where applicable) to get fast effect on target.  You might not saw an IL-2's wings off with 7.7s, but you can definitely ruin control surfaces, cockpit, engine in one pass.

 

Having flown MP sims back to Air Warrior (and AW2/AW3) and so on, I find IL-2 BoX to be the best in as far as modeling rifle-caliber guns... better than Air Warrior, MUCH better than Aces High, and War Thunder was really a mixed bag with smaller rounds.  

 

The trick with IL-2:BoX is that it's harder to aim, but your aim actually matters more because it's the best damage model since WW2 online... so if you CAN aim (and especially if you can hit at convergence) you can ruin the day of any aircraft out there... just don't expect to disintegrate them mid-flight.

[Guster]

I haven't tried any of the mods, but I'm sure some of them answer the OPs needs.

 

However, I agree with those who advocate working on gunnery as I think this is more satisfying in the long run. I'm not so sure the .303s are underpowered in BoX.

 

My own experience is that aiming, timing and convergence matter enormously, especially with wing-mounted MGs. An enemy plane can actually pass between your two streams of bullets if you're to close, and if it's too far away you either can't see it under your nose or a deflection shot gets very tricky. From dead six it's like shooting at a paper target from the side. I prefer deflection shots just after the enemy plane starts to break away when there's a better chance of hitting the cockpit or engine.

 

I'm not an expert BoX marksman, but when I get it right the MGs seem to work as intended.

[CountZero]

ya man... just aim beter broh... why you be complinin ... ez clap

[Gr3y]

5 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

If you think about it, one downed bomber per mission would make you the highest scoring British ace of the BoB.  

 

Not surprised, It's just a game, I'm sure that most of us get way better results than top WW2 aces.

If I were to compare this situation to reality I would ask "how often ~2000 mg rounds of 7.62 caliber aimed more or less at engine/s (let's say with 40% accuracy) would down a specific bomber".  

 

EDIT: All the people telling OP to 'git gud', would be nice if someone were to put a video showing couple examples of "proper MG aiming" in a weak plane (example I-16).

Edited December 2, 2021 by Gr3y

[grcurmudgeon]

there is one just a few posts up...

[Gr3y]

28 minutes ago, grcurmudgeon said:

there is one just a few posts up...

 

The one where author stated he wasn't able to make it in I-16, so had to take Yak-1 and was successful in "one attempt", not to mention he had to close in so much, he could high five enemy crew? If yes, then it doesn't look like a "viable" tactics to me, more like suicidal attempt to get a frag, which shouldn't be the answer for OPs problems. 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Gr3y

[oc2209]

6 hours ago, 80hd said:

That said, the outlier pilots in IL-2 hit specific areas *at convergence* (where applicable) to get fast effect on target.  You might not saw an IL-2's wings off with 7.7s, but you can definitely ruin control surfaces, cockpit, engine in one pass.

 

If you define 'one pass' as hanging behind the Sturmovik for a solid minute while emptying ~4500 rounds of .303 through 12 guns at it, then maybe.

 

I don't believe the glass armor panel behind the pilot can be penetrated by light machine gun rounds from any distance. As for blowing off a control surface, that can be accomplished, but only with hundreds of rounds spent and dozens of hits.

 

Here's my example:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Convergence set to 100m.

 

After the recording ended, an elevator fell off:

 

 

But the plane was otherwise fine. I've seen this happen countless times in career mode. I use up all my ammo, hurry up and land, and then watch to see if the planes I damaged end up crashing or not. The kind of damage you see above will not result in a kill. A Sturm can land fine with half of elevator control. They can also land without rudders. Which is why even 20mm HE ammo against the tail is not a sure method of bringing them down, especially if you don't have many rounds to play with.

 

Higher than LMG-caliber AP ammo is actually a better Sturm killer, in terms of probability.

 

In the following recording, I used a P-47 (also with 100m convergence):

 

Spoiler

 

 

The difference in killing power between .303 and .50 is like 20mm versus 30mm. There is no contest. In a little under 300 rounds (and you'll notice I totally missed with my first burst), I killed the Sturm pilot and gave it a heavier oil leak than I did with ~4500 rounds of .303.

 

For the record, this is what a heavy oil leak looks like (taken from a second P-47 test):

 

 

When the leak is that heavy, the engine doesn't have more than 5 minutes left. But I got bored and decided to finish him off by lining a wing up under his belly at point-blank range:

 

[taffy2jeffmorgan]

Would not surprise me if some start asking if they could get Iron man as their wingman !!!!!!

[danielprates]

On 12/2/2021 at 12:00 PM, PatrickAWlson said:

 

If you think about it, one downed bomber per mission would make you the highest scoring British ace of the BoB.  

 

You know that is something that always chimes in my head. We are always clamouring for "moar realism" across the board but the truth is, in RL most pilots got killed after what, two or three missions, without one single kill on their record (or some other grim statistic like that). The equivalent of the infantry man who jumpes out of the landing craft in normandy to be instantly shot in the face. For game purposes, if that was the case, ragequitting would be all over the place. Most single player campaing players will expect to fly at least about ten missions before dying and shoot down at least one plane every flight or so. If the game instead serves them realistic, unchecked realism, they won't see it as realism, they will see it as a bad game.

 

I am just saying this, sometimes we have to tone down somewhat the bar we set on some things. I am not talking about the issue in the OP by the way, it's just something that passed my mind right now.

[oc2209]

12 minutes ago, danielprates said:

Most single player campaing players will expect to fly at least about ten missions before dying and shoot down at least one plane every flight or so. If the game instead serves them realistic, unchecked realism, they won't see it as realism, they will see it as a bad game.

 

The most important thing to remember about how real fighter pilots died, is that the majority never saw their attacker. Or, more specifically, even knew they were under attack until it was too late.

 

So, when you eliminate the number of pilots who died totally unaware, and the number who were made aware of an impending attack with only a few seconds of warning (like a wingman radioing 'break right!' or seeing one of your wingmen suddenly explode beside you--that kind of warning), that leaves what I expect to be a pretty small minority of pilots who died while actively evading their attacker(s) in a furious dogfight.

 

In a combat flight sim, we are generally aware of how and where combat will occur. We are never/rarely intercepted on our way to target locations. This is where real life and virtual life diverge considerably.

 

As long as we, virtual pilots, are facing enemy AI that doesn't 'free hunt' us, or Zemke fan us, we're never/rarely going to be bounced totally unaware. We're always aware of when we're approaching a target area, and we know that enemies will probably be within that specific area. That factor alone is going to keep us alive with little effort and skill on our part. The closest thing we've currently got to AI free hunts is when they follow us back to our airbase. I'm actually glad they do that, honestly, or there'd be no threat at all outside of target areas.

 

The only way true bouncing occurs, is in multiplayer. I would say that environment is much closer to your analogy of 'jumping off the landing craft to be shot in the face' than anything in single player. The best way to partially recreate how miserable real combat could be, is to go alone into multiplayer with no wingmen and no voice comms. That's the true Russian pilot circa '42, or German and Japanese pilot circa '44, experience.

[[TWB]80hd]

On 12/2/2021 at 4:13 PM, oc2209 said:

 

If you define 'one pass' as hanging behind the Sturmovik for a solid minute while emptying ~4500 rounds of .303 through 12 guns at it, then maybe.

 

 

Not at all, but your video shows 80%+ of your rounds hitting the wings as you sweep from his port to starboard, many rounds hit the fuselage, and from the video anyway (which isn't always indicative of what is actually happening, especially in MP) the damage done to the engine looks pretty lucky.  You'll know when you're hitting at convergence, or close enough, but in this example it was very rare for both banks of guns to be hitting anything at the same time, let alone concentrating on a single general impact point.

 

For an IL-2, .303s will struggle for sure, but .303s or .50s, you give a solid hit at convergence on the tail or the cockpit (and I don't mean from dead six either, get him in a turn or dive on him and hit the cockpit/engine area) you're going to put him down, especially in multiplayer where the SkyNet damage control system doesn't kick in.

 

FYI, recently, coming in at the same angle you did (but against a Stuka) I put 13x37mm AP into him, and maybe 200-300 ShKAS... this was in MP as well... killed him gunner, but the wings and fuselage absorbed enough that he put down gently rather than coming apart in midair as I expected, but my convergence was set way too far out and I was sweeping side to side and never hitting any good concentration of fire.  

 

As far as what I said on "one pass", I've been flying this sim since it was first in Early Access, and it's real rare for me to pull off what I have stated, don't get me wrong... however, I fly with and against guys that do it all the time... that's my empirical admission on what is possible.... cause I've seent it plenty, just usually on the receiving end

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by 80hd

[oc2209]

10 hours ago, 80hd said:

 

Not at all, but your video shows 80%+ of your rounds hitting the wings as you sweep from his port to starboard, many rounds hit the fuselage, and from the video anyway (which isn't always indicative of what is actually happening, especially in MP) the damage done to the engine looks pretty lucky.  You'll know when you're hitting at convergence, or close enough, but in this example it was very rare for both banks of guns to be hitting anything at the same time, let alone concentrating on a single general impact point.

 

 

Going to have to disagree on this point.

 

I didn't sweep my guns. I'm hang-gliding behind him, solid as a rock, most of the time. Especially from about the middle of the clip onward. Convergence is set to 100m, I'm always right around 100m away from him. At such a close distance, the bullets should be doing maximum damage and converging at a relatively small point.

 

I'd also say a bit more than 20% of my rounds hit the center of the plane from tail to cockpit.

 

Examples:

 

 

All those dark impact puffs? Those are all hitting the cockpit.

 

 

See that long line of puffs going back from the cockpit? Yeah. That's a lot of hits. I mean a lot. 

 

Beyond that, as I said earlier, one of his elevators fell off after I ran out of ammo. Meaning the tail was hit very hard cumulatively. I've hit Sturm tails with multiple 20mm HE rounds and control surfaces don't reliably detach. So for .303s to break it, again, means a lot of hits occurred in the tail besides the cockpit area.

 

10 hours ago, 80hd said:

For an IL-2, .303s will struggle for sure, but .303s or .50s, you give a solid hit at convergence on the tail or the cockpit (and I don't mean from dead six either, get him in a turn or dive on him and hit the cockpit/engine area) you're going to put him down, especially in multiplayer where the SkyNet damage control system doesn't kick in.

 

Well, I did say that .50s are entirely different than .303s, so it's not really the issue here. I'm saying that I'm very incredulous that .303s (or other nations' equivalents) can break the tail of a Sturmovik in one pass. It's really something I'd have to see to believe. Repeatedly.

 

As for dead six attacks being fruitless, that's again another problem. .303s seem too weak precisely because you can't do anything useful with them from dead six. Are we really to believe that a 109 or Stuka or He-111 was utterly immune to British planes during the BoB if British pilots made the 'mistake' of attacking at dead six? I'd also bet that, especially against bombers, attacks were made from well over 200m more often than under 200m.

 

That is the problem in a nutshell.

 

We need to remember that the majority of British kills were probably not scored from ~100m away, with the pilot firing every round they had at a more or less motionless target, as in the case of my Sturmovik clip.

 

What it boils down to: everyone knows .303s are weak, but are they that weak?

Edited December 7, 2021 by oc2209

[SAG]

I think that "rifle caliber rounds shot down tons of Germans in the BoB and not in BoX" problem isn't so much because the rounds don't do enough damage themselves, I believe it to be more because planes in this game can survive for veeeery long times with oil coolant or other leaks, unlike in real life. I remember this issue being discussed in other threads but I don't really feel like digging that out.

Edited December 10, 2021 by SAG

[the_emperor]

12 hours ago, SAG said:

I remember this issue being discussed in other threads but I don't really feel like digging that out.

That is currently in disscusion here:

 

overall one can say, that the inline watercooled engines are too tough and radiator damage is not as severe as it should be.

there are many things missing in the damage/plane model, that currently cant be damaged even by .303/7.92/7.62mm rounds.

The lacking of an in-depth damage model and the toughness of watercooled engines (and the superfical modeling of their cooling system) do make small calibre round seem a little bit weak.

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by the_emperor

[Angry_Kitten]

On 11/30/2021 at 11:51 AM, Yogiflight said:

You mean like the uproar, that the M2 Browning effectiveness is absolutely undermodelled

But I am absolutely with you. If IL-2 sees itself as a Flight Combat Simulation, one could expect, that extensively used ammunition, like incendiary ammo, is modelled in game.

 

They was happy to fix "the 50 bmg problem" before they rolled the new P51 b/c out.... 

 

The rifle calibers do have the problem of sucking, a lot.  If you want a good example fly the 202 or the stuka with the big machine gun pods, using standard rifle calibers...  

[Yogiflight]

6 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

The rifle calibers do have the problem of sucking, a lot.  If you want a good example fly the 202 or the stuka with the big machine gun pods, using standard rifle calibers...  

I would say, it depends on the aircraft and its gun layout. As I posted earlier in this thread, I downed several fighters with the four 7.92mm machineguns of the Bf 110 E2, when my 20mm had to be reloaded. I also was able to do so with the two machineguns of the 109, nut rarely. So centered guns, the more the better, are not completely useless.

 

[Angry_Kitten]

7 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

I would say, it depends on the aircraft and its gun layout. As I posted earlier in this thread, I downed several fighters with the four 7.92mm machineguns of the Bf 110 E2, when my 20mm had to be reloaded. I also was able to do so with the two machineguns of the 109, nut rarely. So centered guns, the more the better, are not completely useless.

 

do a bit of work with those two weapons loadouts.. youll notice that the FC issue of blowing wood off isnt fun