Pilot killed without being hit.

[Denum]

47 minutes ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

Anecdotally, it seems to many that the 50 scores pilot kills much more easily than any other gun in game.

 

Because it should?

 

How is this confusing for people? 

 

 

Even with two MG151/20s every second round is AP. 

1 second of trigger time will put 13 AP rounds capable of penetrating the seat. 

 

Mustang with 4 guns-56 rounds capable of killing you (4 times more)

 

Mustang with 6 guns-84 rounds capable of killing you (6 times more)

 

P47 with 8 guns-113 rounds capable of killing you. (8 times more) 

 

What's hard about this?

 

When I fly Axis I don't get as fancy with my shots and I don't usually shoot as long of bursts as I don't need to. I just need to hit them. Where doesn't matter.

When I fly Allied I'm aiming for the cockpit every single time. If I'm behind you I'm aiming my guns for the pilot. My intent is to kill your pilot as quickly as possible. There is no other option in game. I can't just 1 tap people and move on.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Denum

[357th_KW]

The .50 is the only gun that has changed recently, so it’s hardly a shock that people are focusing on it.  Further, the .50 still produces very little aerodynamic penalty, and as it’s modeled with only a pure AP round doesn’t do a very good job of starting fires, so pilots are specifically aiming for your cockpit.  And they tend to appear in large batteries compared to their Russian counterparts - often 6-8 guns vs 2-4.  They’re simply throwing a lot more projectiles at you, and 100% AP rather then a mix of HE/AP.  For example, a 1 second burst from a Yak-9 is probably only sending about 13 rounds of AP at you, vs 80 from a P-51D or P-40E - not surprisingly they are going to produce more pilot hits with that denser pattern of AP.

We also have a pretty big pool of stats (hundreds or thousands of total engagements) to pull from, and we can see that the 109s are typically averaging about 30 hits of .50 per kill on FVP this month, and the 110G is averaging over 50 hits per kill.  The average accuracy we’re seeing is around 5% … so it’s typically taking multiple seconds of gunfire from the .50s to produce a kill.  Maybe think about bailing out sooner.  ?‍♂️

 

[86th_Buzzi]

17 minutes ago, VBF-12_KW said:

 we can see that the 109s are typically averaging about 30 hits of .50 per kill on FVP this month, and the 110G is averaging over 50 hits per kill.  Maybe think about bailing out sooner.  

 

But why would they need to bail out of a perfectly good aircraft? ?

Edited January 26, 2022 by QB.Buzzi

[ACG_Cass]

1 hour ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

The point I am trying to make is that the other guns also have AP rounds,  and many listed have much higher penetration capabilities than the 50,   and yet from a dead 6, the 20mm , Russian 23mm,  etc  when firing and scoring AP hits  do not seem to have the same % of pilot kills as the 50.

Completely understand that point. The aspect you're missing is the fact that 50s are pure AP and they are in 4, 6 or 8 gun batteries with a higher rate of fire. Even if their penetration is slightly lower, they are far more likely to score a hit.

 

The corrected dispersion factors into this as well. Previously they were shooting a much too small a circle, whether as now the spread means an increased chance.

 

Also, if you read the pilot reports you'll find lufwaffe pilots were very keen to get out of their planes after taking damage and at a disadvantage. In IL2, pilots are all too ready to keep fighting no matter what and this means pilot kills are more likely.

[=RS=EnvyC]

22 minutes ago, ACG_Cass said:

Also, if you read the pilot reports you'll find lufwaffe pilots were very keen to get out of their planes after taking damage and at a disadvantage. In IL2, pilots are all too ready to keep fighting no matter what and this means pilot kills are more likely.
 

 

Lets not sugar coat this, we all know why this is the case but saying it out loud makes certain people uncomfortable with the fact they're playing on easy mode while their opponents have one hand tied behind their back. The reason why is because 190s and 109s take far too much systems damage and controls damage is nigh non existent. M2s should be shredding tail section controls, even with just AP rounds but they don't, so another 200 rounds gets fired at the target and eventually one hits the pilot and thats the killshot.

 

LW enjoys an enormous advantage of just being literal tanks compared to other aircraft. Stop asking why you're getting PK'd all the time, start asking why they have to shoot you for so long to secure a PK to get a kill.

Edited January 26, 2022 by =RS=EnvyC

[=[TIA]=I-Fly-Central]

7 hours ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

It seems  we are talking apples and oranges here.  I realize all could.  There seems to be a perception, by many, that with the latest few patches that the 50 cals  score pilot kills at a much higher rate than any of the other mentioned guns.  The point I am trying to make is that the other guns also have AP rounds,  and many listed have much higher penetration capabilities than the 50,   and yet from a dead 6, the 20mm , Russian 23mm,  etc  when firing and scoring AP hits  do not seem to have the same % of pilot kills as the 50.   That is all I am saying.  I don't have in game figures or stats to specifically point to.  Anecdotally, it seems to many that the 50 scores pilot kills much more easily than any other gun in game.  Now why that happens  is the question on some peoples minds.

I'm going to have to disagree with you. I've flown the butcher bird recently, and every kill was a PK from gunfire except for one P-51 where the pilot crashed, and died. (Had my aim been better on that one; would likely have been a guns PK) 

 

One PK was from the bloody plane exploding, but that is a whole different discussion. Still. The guns caused the PK. I don't see any real difference. Aim for the cockpit; pilot is likely to die.

[purK]

Some stats taken from Finnish Virtual Pilots server about pilot kill rates

P51D: 56% chance of pilot killing your enemy



109K4: 67-69% chance of pilot killing your enemy
109G14 with 20mm: 55% chance
109G6L with 20mm: 60% chance



So are .50 cals OP for pilot kills? Not any more than axis guns according to the stats.

You can find all these stats here:
http://stats.virtualpilots.fi:8000/en/all_aircraft/?tour=47&sort_by=-kills

[SCG_motoadve]

1 hour ago, Krupnski said:

Some stats taken from Finnish Virtual Pilots server about pilot kill rates

P51D: 56% chance of pilot killing your enemy



109K4: 67-69% chance of pilot killing your enemy
109G14 with 20mm: 55% chance
109G6L with 20mm: 60% chance



So are .50 cals OP for pilot kills? Not any more than axis guns according to the stats.

You can find all these stats here:
http://stats.virtualpilots.fi:8000/en/all_aircraft/?tour=47&sort_by=-kills

That is what I mentioned is not about .50s 

Pilot kills are easier now than they were before.

Would be interesting to compare this stats to stats from one year ago or so.

Edited January 27, 2022 by SCG_motoadve

[MeoW.Scharfi]

56-69% sounds more than correct in my opinion ?‍♀️  ?‍♀️   ?‍♀️ 

[=[TIA]=I-Fly-Central]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

That is what I mentioned is not about .50s 

Pilot kills are easier now than they were before.

Would be interesting to compare this stats to stats from one year ago or so.

 

As a case study to help answer that: about a year ago or so, I flew the A8 solo on combat box for a month in a "dead is dead" kind of self challenge. I shot down 30 planes. Of those 30 shot down; 19 resulted in death for the pilot, and 11 lived. That is a death rate of a little over 63%, and that puts it in the middle of the curent PK stats. 

 

Here is a link to the stats page for that month: https://combatbox.net/en/pilot/252/=[TIA]=I-Fly-Central/?tour=26

 

Here is a link to the video showing all 30 kills: 

 

[VA_chikinpickle]

On 1/25/2022 at 2:17 PM, JG1_Wittmann said:

Any  bullet that hits  enough objects will tumble,  that is not  exclusive to 50 cal rounds.  So if a guy gets hit from 6  and that 50 cal hits some fuselage items  ( it will to get to the armor )   then is it tumbling ?  What is  the velocity ?   IF it goes through  " X "  item,  what is the velocity ?  Has the angle changed ?   Are you seriously trying to convince anyone here that all of that is modeled ?   Did the 50s  in aircraft  fire all AP  or did they fire ball ammo ?    It would seem that  softer round in A2A loadouts  would be preferred

 

.50s in aircraft fired mixed belts of armor piercing incendiary ammunition, armor piercing ammunition, and armor piercing incendiary tracers. (API, API-T and AP) This is all documented in the US national archives, and on the il2 forums where members have uploaded copies of those documents. Nobody was shooting ball ammunition in usaaf planes in combat.

[ACG_Cass]

On 1/27/2022 at 7:21 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

That is what I mentioned is not about .50s 

Pilot kills are easier now than they were before.

Would be interesting to compare this stats to stats from one year ago or so.

The main problem is pilots don't bail. You keep fighting when an IRL pilot would more than likely jump. You've also got to take into account that most MP engagements are one on one. IRL you're in a swirl of planes and wouldn't have anywhere near the same time on target.

 

Even with that in mind (and I'm not saying it's 100% correct) if you read the pilot accounts, it certainly doesn't seem far off.

 

Lots of a big guns pointed at someone in a thin aluminium cage sounds pretty deadly.

[6./ZG26_Loke]

Here another evidence that this sim / game has been turned into an arcade game, even worse than Warthunder. 

You have a Spitfire downing 3 Ju-88's in one single attack, within 30 seconds. 

That is just as realistic as a flying submarine. 

The gunners are useless, the damage model for the aircraft is a laugh. To that we have heard one the waterpipes "That is how people want it." Year right. Maybe that is what Hartmanns wannabe fighter pilots wants, those who only participate for the numbers of kills, and not for the challenge where they might, just might not survive attacking a bomber formation. 

It is certainly not what ground attack flyers want. We like a good challenge where we maybe are lucky and good enough to hit the target. And we know we will be shot down from time to time, but also actually have a chance to survive, especially if we fly in a tight formation. Close formation doesn't mean anything as it is now. 

 

So could we please have a sim, for all parts, fighters, bombers and ground attackers?

And not a game for fighters only! 

 

Video show 2 Ju-88s exploding within seconds. 

Third 88 was shot to piece just seconds before the 2 88's.

 

 

Track file: https://www.mediafire.com/file/j722pdsl1aa7mgr/dogfight.2022-01-28_21-33-09_02.trk.zip/file

[354thFG_Panda_]

32 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Loke said:

Here another evidence that this sim / game has been turned into an arcade game, even worse than Warthunder. 

You have a Spitfire downing 3 Ju-88's in one single attack, within 30 seconds. 

That is just as realistic as a flying submarine. 

The gunners are useless, the damage model for the aircraft is a laugh. To that we have heard one the waterpipes "That is how people want it." Year right. Maybe that is what Hartmanns wannabe fighter pilots wants, those who only participate for the numbers of kills, and not for the challenge where they might, just might not survive attacking a bomber formation. 

It is certainly not what ground attack flyers want. We like a good challenge where we maybe are lucky and good enough to hit the target. And we know we will be shot down from time to time, but also actually have a chance to survive, especially if we fly in a tight formation. Close formation doesn't mean anything as it is now. 

 

So could we please have a sim, for all parts, fighters, bombers and ground attackers?

And not a game for fighters only! 

 

Video show 2 Ju-88s exploding within seconds. 

Third 88 was shot to piece just seconds before the 2 88's.

 

 

Track file: https://www.mediafire.com/file/j722pdsl1aa7mgr/dogfight.2022-01-28_21-33-09_02.trk.zip/file

 

Please stop with the nonsense accusations using "arcade game" & "flying submarine" if you want to be taken seriously...?

 

Issue of explosions is a global phenomenon even many fighter guys are puzzled how common they are too. Ask yourself if those explosions did not occur, what are the chances that the spit makes it back to base from damage (unless the airfield is nearby judging by the video there would be sufficient altitude to glide). Where are your escorts fighters too?

 

 

[6./ZG26_Loke]

Panda, do you enjoy having manned bombers and ground attack aircraft in this sim? 

If so, then people should start listening to the consern of where this game is heading. 

 

I've been flightsimming online since 1999, and enjoyed balanced fighters vs bombers since then. But lately it has turned into a turkey shoot for the fighters, with pilot killed accuratecy as never before seen. Aircraft blowing up after a few bullits like they were gas ballons. Gunners who can hardly hit a barn, even if they were inside it. 

The only reason I haven't turned my back to it, is the camaraderie from my fellow squad mates. 

If it continues being like this, then one just as well bail out as soon as an enemy fighter is attacking, as there is no reason to try and get away, because that is already impossible. 

 

As for fighter escort. Yes that would be nice if they implement ai fighter escort automatically if you select a bomber. As most online fighters prefer to go hunting for defenseless bombers and ground attackers. 

 

As the sim / game is right now, I would only recommend it to people who just enjoy fighter combat. I would not recommend it to those who love ground attacking. There I would actually recommend the original Il-2, as right now it is better and more balanced on that field. 

[354thFG_Rails]

3 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Loke said:

Panda, do you enjoy having manned bombers and ground attack aircraft in this sim? 

If so, then people should start listening to the consern of where this game is heading. 

 

I've been flightsimming online since 1999, and enjoyed balanced fighters vs bombers since then. But lately it has turned into a turkey shoot for the fighters, with pilot killed accuratecy as never before seen. Aircraft blowing up after a few bullits like they were gas ballons. Gunners who can hardly hit a barn, even if they were inside it. 

The only reason I haven't turned my back to it, is the camaraderie from my fellow squad mates. 

If it continues being like this, then one just as well bail out as soon as an enemy fighter is attacking, as there is no reason to try and get away, because that is already impossible. 

 

As for fighter escort. Yes that would be nice if they implement ai fighter escort automatically if you select a bomber. As most online fighters prefer to go hunting for defenseless bombers and ground attackers. 

 

As the sim / game is right now, I would only recommend it to people who just enjoy fighter combat. I would not recommend it to those who love ground attacking. There I would actually recommend the original Il-2, as right now it is better and more balanced on that field. 

What do you think your chances of survival are flying a bomber? I don't think this is about balance between fighters and bombers. I don't think any game would shoot for that. During the war Allied bomber crews had a 50/50 chance of survival. I'm sure the chances greatly depended on distance to target, fighter cover, experience and the opposition of course. But those are not great odds at all. I'm not sure what your expecting when you're unescorted and attacked by two spits, and the formation is spread out. I will agree the explosion are arcade like and in my opinion need to go away. Its not realistic at all to me. But you are a big lumbering target and not hard to hit. Unescorted too... good luck surviving. Do yourself a favor and team up with some people and get some escort. There are people willing to do that mission.

Edited January 29, 2022 by QB.Rails

[CountZero]

3 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Loke said:

Panda, do you enjoy having manned bombers and ground attack aircraft in this sim? 

If so, then people should start listening to the consern of where this game is heading. 

 

I've been flightsimming online since 1999, and enjoyed balanced fighters vs bombers since then. But lately it has turned into a turkey shoot for the fighters, with pilot killed accuratecy as never before seen. Aircraft blowing up after a few bullits like they were gas ballons. Gunners who can hardly hit a barn, even if they were inside it. 

The only reason I haven't turned my back to it, is the camaraderie from my fellow squad mates. 

If it continues being like this, then one just as well bail out as soon as an enemy fighter is attacking, as there is no reason to try and get away, because that is already impossible. 

 

As for fighter escort. Yes that would be nice if they implement ai fighter escort automatically if you select a bomber. As most online fighters prefer to go hunting for defenseless bombers and ground attackers. 

 

As the sim / game is right now, I would only recommend it to people who just enjoy fighter combat. I would not recommend it to those who love ground attacking. There I would actually recommend the original Il-2, as right now it is better and more balanced on that field. 

Fighter pilots will never understand your point, and as there is more fighter players in this game, their bright ideas will be adopted by game devs, like recent gunner nerfs.

 

You either have to continue fly just so you can give kills to fighter players, or you stop playing bombers and join fighter guys, like you know you see where things are going when it comes to bomber players so why do you even play with them, if ppl tell you you need to fly realsitic formations and so on... while fighter players dont have to do realistic things...why bather...just play as fighter player your not apriciated in bomber role and AI bombers will be added to servers to fill in lack of bomber players, as that is only solution now, i dont know how ppl still have will to play as bomber/ga player in this game online...

[[CPT]Crunch]

And until the pilot impact model is reviewed how does one know it's the shell fragmentation that's actually killing pilots and not the overall force of the impact on the air frame?  I can kill my pilot just by wing tapping a tree without any parts breaking or falling off, or thumping a hangar roof with the wheels doing a carrier practice touch and go with no aircraft damages apparent.  Even taxi and locking the brakes with a teeter and tip onto the prop will kill a pilot.

[6./ZG26_Loke]

QB.Rails

Quote

During the war Allied bomber crews had a 50/50 chance of survival. I'm sure the chances greatly depended on distance to target, fighter cover, experience and the opposition of course. But those are not great odds at all.

 

Exactly, and no not great odds at all. But still far better than the 0 chance of survival it is now.

It used to be a more realistic 50/50 chance in this sim before, but that is over.

 

Talking about gunners in real life.

There wouldn't be any idea of risking 1000s of airmens life as gunners, if it didn't make any difference to the survival of the aircraft.

 

CountZero

I do fly fighters, rarely though as I don't see much joy in it.

To me, it is far more thrilling and enjoyable to see those bombs hit right where you want them to hit, especially on level bombing. Of course, it is just as disappointing to see them miss.

I believe you are right about ending up with ai bombers, because that is what will happen if the Devs only listen to what the fighters would like to have.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Flying ground attack, we are well aware how vulnerable bombers can be and we fully expect to get shot down by fighters. However, the tripartite of laser beam precision of PK's, the seeming inability for larger aircraft to soak up damage and the approximate 50% of certain aircraft exploding almost seem like the heralds of doom for bomber and ground attack pilots.    

  

[354thFG_Rails]

2 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Flying ground attack, we are well aware how vulnerable bombers can be and we fully expect to get shot down by fighters. However, the tripartite of laser beam precision of PK's, the seeming inability for larger aircraft to soak up damage and the approximate 50% of certain aircraft exploding almost seem like the heralds of doom for bomber and ground attack pilots.    

  

again with the Pk's.... I think you have some survivorship bias even with larger aircraft. Most aircraft that got hit went down irl. You'd be lucky to make it back, especially if you get hit with cannon rounds. The only thing I agree with you is the exploding aircraft is a bit much. I don't think there is any doom for bomber or ground attackers. Develop different tactics or get escorts but to blame everything on I'm getting hit to much to easily is a bit silly. Maybe gunners need a tweak in the other direction again to make gameplay for bombers a bit more fun for those that enjoy it. But I think it's just part of the job. Big, lumbering, offensive weapon trying to slog it's way in to drop bombs on a target and get out quick. There's not much you can do without help. Allied bomber command figured that out eventually after it lost a lot of men and aircraft thinking the bomber will always get through.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Did anyone ever put any numbers down on how many .50 cal rounds the average person could take?

[6./ZG26_Custard]

2 hours ago, QB.Rails said:

again with the Pk's....

 

39 minutes ago, US103_Talbot said:

Did anyone ever put any numbers down on how many .50 cal rounds the average person could take?

 

If you get hit with a .50 cal you are going to be dead or incapacitated at the very least , unless you are extremely lucky and hit by fragments . The point is the "perceived" laser like precision of ammunition, not just .50 cals.

 

I can appreciate  just how deadly these rounds are but there seems to no consideration for tumbling, deflections, hitting spars fuel tanks or passing through multiple systems. Recently it seems like rounds pass through aircraft in an absolute straight line. Added to this is the reduction in gunner skill and the exploding aircraft.

 

It's not survivorship bias, it's seeing every mission you fly in where not one aircraft returns because now bombers seem to be one-shotted and boom or pilots are killed 70% of the time. And before I here the cries of use "different tactics" or "dodge better" we have flown for years and tried multiple tactics. In previous builds the gunners were ridiculous and super accurate and even then bombers probably had a 50/50 chance. It's a very different story now. 

 

Anyhow, time will tell and I suppose we'll have to see what happens further alone in development.  

[Angry_Kitten]

On 1/22/2022 at 8:19 PM, Denum said:

 

HE in game has a pretty generous blast radius. If they landed a round on the engine it's definitely possible it killed your pilot. 

 

Sort of like when a 151/20 hits my starboard wing and my port wing begins leaking.

 

 

 

Previous system was unrealistic and heavily benefited axis aircraft. Judging from the squad tag I can understand why your upset. 

 

 

Absolutely is realistic if you let someone park on your six at 200m. Your pilot would definitely get hit at that range. Would only take one or two .50s to outright kill you. 

 

One benefit I've seen from using such under modeled guns for so long is that most of the late war allied mains are very, VERY accurate shots. With the new penetration and dispersion model it makes them deadly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The problem is, the only reason the "unrealistic" german ammo was changed was to keep people flying allied planes happy. I remember so many old posts on here complaining about how "everyone wanting to be an ace simply flys the friendly german planes".  

 

Perhaps those who spent alot of money to get the allied collector planes should have spent more time learning to aim.. instead of having german ammo nerfed, and super powering allied ammunition.

[Barnacles]

46 minutes ago, pocketshaver said:

 

The problem is, the only reason the "unrealistic" german ammo was changed was to keep people flying allied planes happy. I remember so many old posts on here complaining about how "everyone wanting to be an ace simply flys the friendly german planes".  

 

Perhaps those who spent alot of money to get the allied collector planes should have spent more time learning to aim.. instead of having german ammo nerfed, and super powering allied ammunition.

[=RS=Haart]

1 hour ago, pocketshaver said:

 

The problem is, the only reason the "unrealistic" german ammo was changed was to keep people flying allied planes happy. I remember so many old posts on here complaining about how "everyone wanting to be an ace simply flys the friendly german planes".  

 

Perhaps those who spent alot of money to get the allied collector planes should have spent more time learning to aim.. instead of having german ammo nerfed, and super powering allied ammunition.

Buddy, my guy, pal, mate, while it's great to see that you're still alive and the pandemic hasn't taken you, remember the saga what? Last year? Where in Yak_Panther correctly pointed out that there was issues with the modelling and it was taken aboard by the devs and he was thanked for it? No?

Also, you want super powered ammo, remember... allied .50s don't have API/APIT yet, when that's eventually added, you can have a whinge then, perhaps when it is added you can try to get your add-on armour welded to the canopy of your 109 again in the suggestions channel.
 
Until then, learn to BFM better than flopping about like a freshly caught Bream/Flathead. 

[Rache-der-Boote]

2 hours ago, =RS=Haart said:

remember... allied .50s don't have API/APIT yet, when that's eventually added, you can have a whinge then

 

Coming soon™ - an infographic depicting AI behavior when shot by API/APIT (in MS Paint)

[MeoW.Scharfi]

5 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

The problem is, the only reason the "unrealistic" german ammo was changed was to keep people flying allied planes happy. I remember so many old posts on here complaining about how "everyone wanting to be an ace simply flys the friendly german planes".  

 

Everytime when you get hit by german planes your sortie is done. Complettly done. You are unable to fight anymore and u can be happy if you still fly somehow, IF YOU ARE LUCKY.

 

1x 13mm HE hit causes your plane to lose about 50mph, like the material becomes a massive airbrake.

 

5 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

Perhaps those who spent alot of money to get the allied collector planes should have spent more time learning to aim.. instead of having german ammo nerfed, and super powering allied ammunition.

 

When you say that one of the most powerful weapons ingame are nerfed and tell others to aim better, then you have clearly somekind of dunning-kruger effect. 

 

THATS JUST HILARIOUS! ???

[Angry_Kitten]

Ahh i forget how well the unsults fly here. 

 

Its like this, if in version 4.6 i could fly 100 meters behind a c47, pump 10-12 rounds into the aleron, and it would come off.. or pump those rounds into the tail, and have the rudder or elevator come off.    

 

but now its taking 30-40 direct hits to do the same damage.... NOT GOOD. 

 

Last night, this morning,  it was taking 70 hits of 20mm to the fueselage of the c47 directly where it meets the wing in order to blow the fuel tank.. massive fire ball type explosion..  but in the olden days of 4.6 I could have pumped 20 rounds into that section with the same result. 

 

Better yet i tried a lil dog fight.  against that russian biplane..  took 20 hits on the top wing to rip it off. in used to take 5. 

 

I know things are nerfed. 

 

And ammunition was only changed in time for the new normandy planes to be released... 

 

Seriously, how many of you would say the new 51-b is such a sweet killer if you had the unmoded 50 cal ammo?

 

and i actually think the new 50 cal ammo is actually as bad as the .303 is in this game

2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

Everytime when you get hit by german planes your sortie is done. Complettly done. You are unable to fight anymore and u can be happy if you still fly somehow, IF YOU ARE LUCKY.

 

1x 13mm HE hit causes your plane to lose about 50mph, like the material becomes a massive airbrake.

 

 

When you say that one of the most powerful weapons ingame are nerfed and tell others to aim better, then you have clearly somekind of dunning-kruger effect. 

 

THATS JUST HILARIOUS! ???

 

 

that 13mm ammo you say,,, why is it that in 4.6 i could put 10 or more into the wing of a c47, a20, b25, and even the I 16 and those planes would still manouver fine and dandy and not be hindered in any way?

[357th_KW]

The only change to HE in recent memory was the complete DM overhaul back in April 2020, that MASSiVELY improved HE.  There has been no subsequent “nerf” as you put it.  Feel free to dig through the patch notes and show us where this happened.  Here’s 4.601: 

 

[354thFG_Rails]

50 minutes ago, pocketshaver said:

Ahh i forget how well the unsults fly here. 

 

Its like this, if in version 4.6 i could fly 100 meters behind a c47, pump 10-12 rounds into the aleron, and it would come off.. or pump those rounds into the tail, and have the rudder or elevator come off.    

 

but now its taking 30-40 direct hits to do the same damage.... NOT GOOD. 

 

Last night, this morning,  it was taking 70 hits of 20mm to the fueselage of the c47 directly where it meets the wing in order to blow the fuel tank.. massive fire ball type explosion..  but in the olden days of 4.6 I could have pumped 20 rounds into that section with the same result. 

 

Better yet i tried a lil dog fight.  against that russian biplane..  took 20 hits on the top wing to rip it off. in used to take 5. 

 

I know things are nerfed. 

 

And ammunition was only changed in time for the new normandy planes to be released... 

 

Seriously, how many of you would say the new 51-b is such a sweet killer if you had the unmoded 50 cal ammo?

 

and i actually think the new 50 cal ammo is actually as bad as the .303 is in this game

 

 

that 13mm ammo you say,,, why is it that in 4.6 i could put 10 or more into the wing of a c47, a20, b25, and even the I 16 and those planes would still manouver fine and dandy and not be hindered in any way?

I think your frustration is misplaced. The Germans have a 2:1 HE load out. Meaning for every 2 HE rounds you have 1 AP. As it currently is in the game, HE doesn’t really do anything beyond the first shot as far as skin damage is concerned. It goes to level 3. HE is not good for structural damage or causing leaks. AP is much better in game for causing leaks and structural damage. So if your upset by anything be upset that your loadout is geared toward aero damage more. It has nothing to do with making allied pilots happy. That’s just more conspiracy crap. 

[357th_Dog]

3 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

Ahh i forget how well the unsults fly here. 

 

Its like this, if in version 4.6 i could fly 100 meters behind a c47, pump 10-12 rounds into the aleron, and it would come off.. or pump those rounds into the tail, and have the rudder or elevator come off.    

 

but now its taking 30-40 direct hits to do the same damage.... NOT GOOD. 

 

Last night, this morning,  it was taking 70 hits of 20mm to the fueselage of the c47 directly where it meets the wing in order to blow the fuel tank.. massive fire ball type explosion..  but in the olden days of 4.6 I could have pumped 20 rounds into that section with the same result. 

 

Better yet i tried a lil dog fight.  against that russian biplane..  took 20 hits on the top wing to rip it off. in used to take 5. 

 

I know things are nerfed. 

 

And ammunition was only changed in time for the new normandy planes to be released... 

 

Seriously, how many of you would say the new 51-b is such a sweet killer if you had the unmoded 50 cal ammo?

 

and i actually think the new 50 cal ammo is actually as bad as the .303 is in this game

 

 

that 13mm ammo you say,,, why is it that in 4.6 i could put 10 or more into the wing of a c47, a20, b25, and even the I 16 and those planes would still manouver fine and dandy and not be hindered in any way?

The only change in ammunition modeling was a minor tweak to the .50 cal and I think .303.

 

The nerf you’re insisting that has happened doesn’t exist at all. It’s completely imaginary 

[=RS=Haart]

7 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

Ahh i forget how well the unsults fly here. 

 

Its like this, if in version 4.6 i could fly 100 meters behind a c47, pump 10-12 rounds into the aleron, and it would come off.. or pump those rounds into the tail, and have the rudder or elevator come off.    

 

but now its taking 30-40 direct hits to do the same damage.... NOT GOOD. 

 

Last night, this morning,  it was taking 70 hits of 20mm to the fueselage of the c47 directly where it meets the wing in order to blow the fuel tank.. massive fire ball type explosion..  but in the olden days of 4.6 I could have pumped 20 rounds into that section with the same result. 

 

Better yet i tried a lil dog fight.  against that russian biplane..  took 20 hits on the top wing to rip it off. in used to take 5. 

 

I know things are nerfed. 

 

And ammunition was only changed in time for the new normandy planes to be released... 

 

Seriously, how many of you would say the new 51-b is such a sweet killer if you had the unmoded 50 cal ammo?

 

and i actually think the new 50 cal ammo is actually as bad as the .303 is in this game

 

 

that 13mm ammo you say,,, why is it that in 4.6 i could put 10 or more into the wing of a c47, a20, b25, and even the I 16 and those planes would still manouver fine and dandy and not be hindered in any way?

Simply put, it sounds like a skill issue combined with minor changes to the damage model.

[Angry_Kitten]

1 hour ago, =RS=Haart said:

Simply put, it sounds like a skill issue combined with minor changes to the damage model.

 

 

sorry but there has been a change..  to the german stuff. Seriously, i have flown the friendly german planes 90% of the time.. 

 

when in 4.602 i could get x amount of damage results from x amount of ammo impacts...  and then suddenly i need MORE ammo to kill the same plane with the same loadout.... 

 

ie, in 4.602b i could walk along the wings on a c47 firing about 30-35 rounds into the wings from directly astern at my convergence range.   i would blow that plane to crap.. it would go DOWN...  aleron on one side would be blown out, and at least 1 engine would be a fire ball with the other trailing smoke. 

 

NOW  i gotta put those same 30-35 rounds into 1 wing to do the aleron in..

 

THAT says there is a difference.   Qouting a lack of pilot skill is a snark at those trolls who demanded a more powerful 50 caliber ammo...  although the il2 50 cal ammo is more powerful on paper then in Dover blitz, but apparently is LESS powerful then in blitz

[=RS=Haart]

1 hour ago, pocketshaver said:

 

 

sorry but there has been a change..  to the german stuff. Seriously, i have flown the friendly german planes 90% of the time.. 

 

when in 4.602 i could get x amount of damage results from x amount of ammo impacts...  and then suddenly i need MORE ammo to kill the same plane with the same loadout.... 

 

ie, in 4.602b i could walk along the wings on a c47 firing about 30-35 rounds into the wings from directly astern at my convergence range.   i would blow that plane to crap.. it would go DOWN...  aleron on one side would be blown out, and at least 1 engine would be a fire ball with the other trailing smoke. 

 

NOW  i gotta put those same 30-35 rounds into 1 wing to do the aleron in..

 

THAT says there is a difference.   Qouting a lack of pilot skill is a snark at those trolls who demanded a more powerful 50 caliber ammo...  although the il2 50 cal ammo is more powerful on paper then in Dover blitz, but apparently is LESS powerful then in blitz

Dude, we went over this last year, as far as many are aware, DMs were updated to be more realistic in their modelling and to reflect pilot accounts etc. It could be as simple as the C-47 getting a realistic flight/damage model coded in for the upcoming release of the C-47/Li-2.

 

I'm sorry the game doesn't meet your expectations of being the "scourge of the skies" anymore.

 

Instead of hijacking the thread, make a new one if we're starting to call people trolls for suggesting that you're not as good a shot as you think you are, have some courtesy to OP. 

[Angry_Kitten]

5 minutes ago, =RS=Haart said:

Dude, we went over this last year, as far as many are aware, DMs were updated to be more realistic in their modelling and to reflect pilot accounts etc. It could be as simple as the C-47 getting a realistic flight/damage model coded in for the upcoming release of the C-47/Li-2.

 

I'm sorry the game doesn't meet your expectations of being the "scourge of the skies" anymore.

 

Instead of hijacking the thread, make a new one if we're starting to call people trolls for suggesting that you're not as good a shot as you think you are, have some courtesy to OP. 

i merely respond to others who are trolling/burning on the OP.  

 

TO many people on here are in the "i spent 3,000 units of currency on my system, so if anyone has issues im gonna laugh at them and mock them for no reason".  Its also in the category of certain individuals i knew back in school who had wealthy parents who were making fun of kids who could only afford a pc with this processor in it

 

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K7/AMD-Athlon 500 - AMD-K7500MTR51B C.html

 

when the kids parents got him an intel pentium 3 chip running at 600 mhz.. 

 

But yet consider this,,, if the german ammo was sooooo over powered to begin with... and JASON has stated NOTHING was actually done to german plane ammunition.... merely the ground based 20mm ammo for use in AA guns... 

 

then why does it suddenly take so much more ammunition to kill the same WEAK plane then it did before updating the system..  

 

EVEN if you take into account the variable times given for "bullet impact yield plane damage yields x amount of time to crash"  you should not be seeing an increase in bullet impact to achieve the same damage/plane crash time. 

 

Ive been working on my 3d spatial thinking by fighting the russian biplane..  in 4.602 i could get that thing down with a burst of 4 20mm to a single wing. Its now taking nearly 20 hits to the same wing.  

   Should i assume the ammunition is now different, or just assume the least liked plane suddenly has been given a damage model update that makes it as formidable as a A20?

[=RS=Haart]

2 minutes ago, pocketshaver said:

i merely respond to others who are trolling/burning on the OP.  

 

TO many people on here are in the "i spent 3,000 units of currency on my system, so if anyone has issues im gonna laugh at them and mock them for no reason".  Its also in the category of certain individuals i knew back in school who had wealthy parents who were making fun of kids who could only afford a pc with this processor in it

 

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K7/AMD-Athlon 500 - AMD-K7500MTR51B C.html

 

when the kids parents got him an intel pentium 3 chip running at 600 mhz.. 

 

But yet consider this,,, if the german ammo was sooooo over powered to begin with... and JASON has stated NOTHING was actually done to german plane ammunition.... merely the ground based 20mm ammo for use in AA guns... 

 

then why does it suddenly take so much more ammunition to kill the same WEAK plane then it did before updating the system..  

 

EVEN if you take into account the variable times given for "bullet impact yield plane damage yields x amount of time to crash"  you should not be seeing an increase in bullet impact to achieve the same damage/plane crash time. 

 

Ive been working on my 3d spatial thinking by fighting the russian biplane..  in 4.602 i could get that thing down with a burst of 4 20mm to a single wing. Its now taking nearly 20 hits to the same wing.  

   Should i assume the ammunition is now different, or just assume the least liked plane suddenly has been given a damage model update that makes it as formidable as a A20?

If you're that concerned, make a complaint post and ask the devs directly instead of derailing the post with convoluted posts and shifting goalposts/examples. 

I'm sorry your childhood was so difficult dealing with those kinds of kids, but it has nothing to do with the conversation. 

 

Your Biplane woes mean nothing to most without data unfortunately, I would suggest you download tacview to count the rounds and post the results instead of using the fisherman's excuse of "it was this big and it snapped my line" instead of acknowledging you got snagged on a rock. As I suggested, your "I can't kill things as quickly anymore reeee!" could "be as simple as the C-47 getting a realistic flight/damage model coded in for the upcoming release of the C-47/Li-2."
 

Seriously though, try not to derail it too much, post some data, last year was enough for most involved in these conversations and it doesn't appear you've got any new material aside from "my player experience doesn't match up with what it was before the update, Germany suffers"

 

[Angry_Kitten]

22 minutes ago, =RS=Haart said:

If you're that concerned, make a complaint post and ask the devs directly instead of derailing the post with convoluted posts and shifting goalposts/examples. 

I'm sorry your childhood was so difficult dealing with those kinds of kids, but it has nothing to do with the conversation. 

 

Your Biplane woes mean nothing to most without data unfortunately, I would suggest you download tacview to count the rounds and post the results instead of using the fisherman's excuse of "it was this big and it snapped my line" instead of acknowledging you got snagged on a rock. As I suggested, your "I can't kill things as quickly anymore reeee!" could "be as simple as the C-47 getting a realistic flight/damage model coded in for the upcoming release of the C-47/Li-2."
 

Seriously though, try not to derail it too much, post some data, last year was enough for most involved in these conversations and it doesn't appear you've got any new material aside from "my player experience doesn't match up with what it was before the update, Germany suffers"

 

Sorry, but 90% of the data that was used to get the 50 caliber changed was solid goal posting, and the rest was either misrepresenting data on gun cam footage they found online. 

 

Just because YOU are happy with with how things are, why dont you get offn the horse and post a video of how YOU can survive a plane and ground impact while using that nice HUD with the altitude and plane speed on it. SO when you claim you can survive certain crash conditions you have the HUD data to PROVE you hit at such a speed. 

[=RS=Haart]

2 hours ago, pocketshaver said:

Sorry, but 90% of the data that was used to get the 50 caliber changed was solid goal posting, and the rest was either misrepresenting data on gun cam footage they found online. 

 

Just because YOU are happy with with how things are, why dont you get offn the horse and post a video of how YOU can survive a plane and ground impact while using that nice HUD with the altitude and plane speed on it. SO when you claim you can survive certain crash conditions you have the HUD data to PROVE you hit at such a speed. 

Here you go mate, a video on the subjects you requested, it goes for 36min but I did put time stamps in it for the sake of brevity. I did a single sortie for both an engagement vs your suggested targets and one for a landing in the Spit 5b on it's own, so not extensive data but enough for a quick discussion:

To summarise the data points

Telemetry data from engagements versus an Fw-190A8 (F8/G8 mod taken to allow use of only 20mm guns per trigger squeeze)

U2-VS/Po-2 1 took 1 round of 20mm according to telemetry forcing the AI to seek a landing zone (mission kill), in game it looked like 2 due to landing gear strike, resulted in AI forced landing, death on impact
U2-VS/Po-2 2 took a total of 3 rounds of 20mm HE. 1 round of 20mm according to telemetry forcing the AI to seek a landing zone, then a further 2 rounds impact in game this resulted in a pilot kill from fragmentation. 

C-47 1 took 7 rounds of 20mm according to telemetry resulting in pilot/co-pilot death and AI bail out (mission kill)
C-47 2 took 12 rounds of 20mm according to telemetry resulting in pilot bailout (mission kill)

Landing data
Fw-190 pilot died on landing impact at 275km/h (take-off/landing speed 164-188km/h according to https://aergistal.github.io/il2/planes/fw190a8.html) so 100km/h faster on average than recommended take-off/landing speed

Spitfire mkVb landing at recommended speed resulted in no pilot death (129-135km/h according to https://aergistal.github.io/il2/planes/spitfiremkvb.html)

On a quick note for the .50s as previously mentioned, the developers themselves acknowledged that their in game values didn't line up with IRL tests for the .50, they adjusted this as it is a simulator first and foremost.

As I suggested before, I would strongly recommend you download and install TacView so you can look at your engagements yourself with a more in-depth look before skiting off on the forums about shadow nerfs etc. because it really does seem like a personal issue vs a game issue.
TacView (https://www.tacview.net/documentation/il2/en/)

Video Link

 

[=RS=EnvyC]

Mans is ok with faked MG131 but heaven forbid .50 performance matches real world data.