Jump to content

Regarding the next update 5.002


Recommended Posts

JG4_Qetzalcoatl
Posted

You mentioned "Dynamic Visual Damage (DVD) tech for all aircraft in the Great Battles series (the projectile holes will appear at exact place of the impact corresponding to the skin material and round type) ". I hope this will clarify how bad your plane is really damaged. I´m mostly flying Bf109s and since the last update und the enhancement of the .50cal I lost more wings than in the last 1.5 years as a whole. This occurs despite the fact that I can detect only superficial damage especially at the outer wing section. If you apply too much G-load after you got slightly hit your wing will crack like a cookie but not at the end section but right beyond the inner section. The allied side seems to exploit this fact and is spraying their victims at extreme distances.

If you hit an P-51 or a Spit with the german ammunition even with 20mm there is no similar effect. Yesterday we got multiple 20mm hits with 2 Bf109s on a P-51 and you could hardly see any damage on this plane. He could still fly every manouver, climb like a rocket, dive and turn. So an consistent new visual damage model is very welcome to assess which damage is done or received.

 

Keep up the good work!

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 5
Posted (edited)

The bf109 has a single spar in each wing as opposed to the typical double spar of most other aircraft.

Load bearing structures dont respond well to being perforated by lots of armour piercing projectiles.

 

Spraying at long range is a universal phenomenon. 

 

Cannon shells explode on contact or shortly after, AP bullets penetrate structures far into the airframe and cause higher structural damage.

 

Fly allies and you will find alot of these opinions are biased, for example cannon hits not doing much, spraying a fighter with .50 cals and not much happening. 

 

You will have a gripe regardless of what side you fly.

 

 

 

Edited by Hitcher
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Posted
37 minutes ago, JG4_Qetzalcoatl said:

You mentioned "Dynamic Visual Damage (DVD) tech for all aircraft in the Great Battles series (the projectile holes will appear at exact place of the impact corresponding to the skin material and round type) ". I hope this will clarify how bad your plane is really damaged. I´m mostly flying Bf109s and since the last update und the enhancement of the .50cal I lost more wings than in the last 1.5 years as a whole. This occurs despite the fact that I can detect only superficial damage especially at the outer wing section. If you apply too much G-load after you got slightly hit your wing will crack like a cookie but not at the end section but right beyond the inner section. The allied side seems to exploit this fact and is spraying their victims at extreme distances.

If you hit an P-51 or a Spit with the german ammunition even with 20mm there is no similar effect. Yesterday we got multiple 20mm hits with 2 Bf109s on a P-51 and you could hardly see any damage on this plane. He could still fly every manouver, climb like a rocket, dive and turn. So an consistent new visual damage model is very welcome to assess which damage is done or received.

 

Keep up the good work!

Where were you last 2 years when Axis sprayed and prayed with uber 13mm, 1 hit and your 50-100kmh slower, oh yes you were flying 109s, so not your problem.

AP is finaly fixed so now it does what AP does , it destroys internal structural parts... and if you fly spit , 51 , 38 , 47 or tempest you would see that same things happend to them... how many enemy airplanes you shot down without problems but when one shows up that takes few more bullets all of suden its problem, fly that airplane and youll see how many times you would lose wing there, also you have mix of AP and HE in 1:3 so your hiting with HE mostly not AP only.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 5
Posted
2 hours ago, JG4_Qetzalcoatl said:

The allied side seems to exploit this fact

laugh-eating.gif.feaf737deaf9feb6f47ea6017dc5cacd.gif

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Posted
7 hours ago, Hitcher said:

Cannon shells explode on contact or shortly after, AP bullets penetrate structures far into the airframe and cause higher structural damage.

except german HE-shells dont. They used delay charges for increased blast and pressure effect to destroy load bearing structures and aircraft skin.

 

8 hours ago, JG4_Qetzalcoatl said:

The allied side seems to exploit this fact and is spraying their victims at extreme distances.

what do you mean by "extreme distance" usually the max distance is the convergence distance of the wing guns?

I havent de-winged a single german fighter yet (in MP), I do mostly get a PK or bail out.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Posted
19 hours ago, the_emperor said:

except german HE-shells dont. They used delay charges for increased blast and pressure effect to destroy load bearing structures and aircraft skin.

 

what do you mean by "extreme distance" usually the max distance is the convergence distance of the wing guns?

I havent de-winged a single german fighter yet (in MP), I do mostly get a PK or bail out.

Yeah.. that's why I said on contact or shortly after.

Gustav_Hagel
Posted
On 10/2/2022 at 8:14 AM, JG4_Qetzalcoatl said:

You mentioned "Dynamic Visual Damage (DVD) tech for all aircraft in the Great Battles series (the projectile holes will appear at exact place of the impact corresponding to the skin material and round type) ". I hope this will clarify how bad your plane is really damaged. I´m mostly flying Bf109s and since the last update und the enhancement of the .50cal I lost more wings than in the last 1.5 years as a whole. This occurs despite the fact that I can detect only superficial damage especially at the outer wing section. If you apply too much G-load after you got slightly hit your wing will crack like a cookie but not at the end section but right beyond the inner section. The allied side seems to exploit this fact and is spraying their victims at extreme distances.

If you hit an P-51 or a Spit with the german ammunition even with 20mm there is no similar effect. Yesterday we got multiple 20mm hits with 2 Bf109s on a P-51 and you could hardly see any damage on this plane. He could still fly every manouver, climb like a rocket, dive and turn. So an consistent new visual damage model is very welcome to assess which damage is done or received.

 

Keep up the good work!

Interesting you've mentioned that, I literally received a single .50cal and pulled maybe max 4G (I'm not sure as I play with no technochat and HUI) and my wing just ripped off at the base. Unfortunately it was a flight I decided I wasn't going to record because I thought I wouldn't achieve much and I record almost all my flights! But there it is: https://combatbox.net/pt-br/sortie/1702673/?tour=50. I also concur with your opinion regarding planes suffering damage and still turning like nothing happened for instance in this sortie I hit the P-38 with a 30mm and despite all the leaking, he was still turning like he hasn't suffered from a massive 30mm onto his wing.

 

On 10/2/2022 at 8:43 AM, Hitcher said:

The bf109 has a single spar in each wing as opposed to the typical double spar of most other aircraft.

Load bearing structures dont respond well to being perforated by lots of armour piercing projectiles.

 

Spraying at long range is a universal phenomenon. 

 

Cannon shells explode on contact or shortly after, AP bullets penetrate structures far into the airframe and cause higher structural damage.

 

Fly allies and you will find alot of these opinions are biased, for example cannon hits not doing much, spraying a fighter with .50 cals and not much happening. 

 

You will have a gripe regardless of what side you fly.

 

 

 

I flew allies, P-51B and D and P-40 (one of my favorites). Honestly I don't find it that biased, I could withstand a lot of 20mm from different aircrafts, had all my controls and enough time to climb and bail out (https://combatbox.net/pt-br/sortie/1727233/?tour=51, not sure how correct the summary log is, but apparently I received 22 20mms), I can't do it when flying German because I simply get pilot sniped, sometimes in the first burst. Besides almost all my kills on P-51s I got on Saturday were due killing the enemy pilot. I haven't seen a single fire setting up, it's just too easy and too boring flying with P-51 and .50cals https://combatbox.net/pt-br/sorties/3670/SCG_Gustav_Hagel/?tour=51.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Posted

Edit:

 

Hid referenced post for unsupported FM/DM claims.

 

Smith


https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/1726782/?tour=51

 

4 x 13mm to shoot you down in the P-51D.


 


https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/1727233/?tour=51

 

This one makes it appear you soaked dozens of 20mm’s.  But if we dig into the log we see a different story.  https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/1727233/?tour=51
 

You took 2 x 8mm AP and 2 x 20mm AP.  The next burst that hit you was  2 x 20mm AP,  2 x 20mm HE and 6 x  8mm AP and you bailed out immediately.  All other hits came after you’d already bailed.

 

SCG_motoadve
Posted
On 10/3/2022 at 9:43 PM, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

Besides almost all my kills on P-51s I got on Saturday were due killing the enemy pilot. I haven't seen a single fire setting up, it's just too easy and too boring flying with P-51 and .50cals

Absolutely agree, pilot kills are making this sim boring.

Many pilots were shot down multiple times, crash landed or bailed out to fly another day.

Not in Il2.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, SCG_motoadve said:

Absolutely agree, pilot kills are making this sim boring.

Many pilots were shot down multiple times, crash landed or bailed out to fly another day.

Not in Il2.

I am sure those who managed to bail out or crash landed were able to tell the story. Let me guess about the ones that were actually shot.

  • Upvote 10
9./JG52_J-HAT
Posted
3 minutes ago, LuftManu said:

I am sure those who managed to bail out or crash landed were able to tell the story. Let me guess about the ones that were actually shot.


Yeah, can‘t stop imagining guncam footage (plenty on YT) from German aircraft being sprayed by allied fighters relentlessly and mercilessly while the pilot jettisons the canopy and bails out while under fire! I always wonder what really happened to the pilot.

 

Then there are the aircraft that simply crash because they‘ve been torn to pieces or the pilot got killed.

MeoW.Scharfi
Posted (edited)

I find it really stupid to change the entire durability of a pilot only because there is a handful of rare occurrence where one lucky pilot survived which is NOTHING compared to the high amount of pilots dying instantly. Those poor guys appear as one number in a huge statistic instead as book author.

 

And those pilots who have bailed out, well yeah there is that issue of ww2 pilots abondend their planes too early. Meanwhile IL2 players fight to the last second and need to be beat down till they are pink mist or their planes break in two.

Edited by MeoW.Scharfi
  • Upvote 1
Posted
5 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:


 German aircraft being sprayed by allied fighters relentlessly and mercilessly while the pilot jettisons the canopy and bails out while under fire! 

 

Surely this is sarcasm. 

Anyone?

  • Upvote 1
Gustav_Hagel
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, 357th_KW said:


https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/1726782/?tour=51

 

4 x 13mm to shoot you down in the P-51D.

 

 This one actually hit around my engine and I was leaking oil but I had to bail because I ran out of fuel, if I had maybe 2min of fuel left I'd had landed safely (forgot to check the gauges on the floor).

 

9 hours ago, 357th_KW said:

https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/1727233/?tour=51

 

This one makes it appear you soaked dozens of 20mm’s.  But if we dig into the log we see a different story.  https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/1727233/?tour=51
 

You took 2 x 8mm AP and 2 x 20mm AP.  The next burst that hit you was  2 x 20mm AP,  2 x 20mm HE and 6 x  8mm AP and you bailed out immediately.  All other hits came after you’d already bailed.

 

This one indeed I suspected those registered after I bailed, I just did not because the plane after some 20mms was uncontrollable crippled, but rather because there were at least 3 aircrafts on me and I wanted to avoid a death, the plane was totally fine even after taking some punch, just a leak here or there, but haven't felt any impat on its flight characteristics.

Edited by SCG_Gustav_Hagel
9./JG52_J-HAT
Posted
4 hours ago, Denum said:

Surely this is sarcasm. 

Anyone?


Er, no. Why would it be? 

Posted (edited)

So, uh... it's war. You're there to kill the enemy. 

 

That would be like saying 

4 hours ago, Denum said:

Allied aircraft being sprayed by axis fighters relentlessly and mercilessly while the defenseless bomber crews... 

As I said. Surely it was sarcasm. 

Edited by Denum
9./JG52_J-HAT
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Denum said:

So, uh... it's war. You're there to kill the enemy. 

 

That would be like saying 

As I said. Surely it was sarcasm. 


Yeah, of course, that‘s the point. Hail of .50 cal bullets coming your way (we were talking about the P-51). Or hail of 30 mm mine shells coming your way and you are sitting in the tail turret of a B-17. Same hellish scenario. There‘s nothing you can do but try to get out and they still keep coming. 

Edited by 9./JG52_J-HAT
Eisenfaustus
Posted
4 hours ago, Denum said:

So, uh... it's war. You're there to kill the enemy. 

Humanitarian Law forbids to attack air crews bailing out. The warrior in the heat of combat may notice the bailing out sequence too late of course. Yet strafing air crew in a chute is a war crime. 
 

Personally as an afv crewman I never really understood why though. If I leave my burning vehicle I stay a legitimate target of lethal violence - which makes sense as I would try to man the next vehicle and continue the fight.

The pilot bailing out over own territory will most likely do the same…

  • Upvote 1
Posted
7 hours ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

 there were at least 3 aircrafts on me and I wanted to avoid a death, the plane was totally fine 

 

Spoken like a true gamer, and has nothing to do with the actual DM of aircraft in the game

 

Literal translation:  Gotta save muh stats!!!!

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Posted
37 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Personally as an afv crewman I never really understood why though. If I leave my burning vehicle I stay a legitimate target of lethal violence - which makes sense as I would try to man the next vehicle and continue the fight.

 

When I was stationed in Germany in the 1980's, commanding a 56 ton Chieftain waiting for the Warsaw Pact to come over the border and ruin everyone's day, we were always trained when engaging Soviet armour, to follow up any killing round on an enemy vehicle to plaster that vehicle with the co-ax MG immediately to kill any crewman trying to get out... justified by the fact that as you stated, those crewmen would be able to crew another AFV in any future action. It also takes a long time to train an efficient and effective tank crew, so we never forgot that important point.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

We've done pretty extensive testing and it showed that pilots we're onky being killed in the correct scenarios for AP ammunition. The changes do seem to have affected HEs killing potential, which might be adjusted in the future.

 

The only outliers for AP are some of the large bombers where pilots are a bit too vulnerable from absolute dead 6, but that type of situation is very rare as your not going to be sat perfectly behind a bomber.

 

The factors at play here:

 - Gunnery is a lot easier in the sim. Torque isn't modelled to the degree it is IRL and there is no wake to deal with behind an aircraft. The latter having a huge impact especially when following twin engine aircraft.

 

- Players have 1000s of hours. Even a medium player still probably has more seat time than an IRl pilot could ever have dreamed of in WW2.

 

- Pilots don't bail. The amount of players I see hang on to the bitter end, being completely riddled with ammunition and then complain about being pilot killed. Late war aircraft firepower is devastating and pilots knew about it, if they were hit and the fight was lost they'd almost certainly get out the plane.

 

One factor I'd like to see increased is the chance of control damage. The issues were seeing with the 30mm/37mm not being effective after multiple hits to areas could be easily rectified by having the control systems more vulnerable. The tail section doesn't need to fall off if the important parts stop working.

  • Upvote 11
Eisenfaustus
Posted
2 hours ago, ACG_Cass said:

Gunnery is a lot easier in the sim. Torque isn't modelled to the degree it is IRL and there is no wake to deal with behind an aircraft. The latter having a huge impact especially when following twin engine aircraft.

Very good point which I would really like to see corrected!

ACG_PanzerVI
Posted

Back to the original topic - I concur with @JG4_Qetzalcoatl - the wing damage on 109s is over done.  Single/double spar construction is not enough to account for the dramatic uptick in pilot-induced wing failures after minor damage.  AP rounds that go through one aluminum spar are quite likely to go through the adjacent one as well in a double spar wing (while carrying some spall forward from the first one, to potentially do even more damage).  I believe that if we are going to alter our model and increase major structures failing under g-load, it should be evident across the fleets of aircraft, not just on a single model.  While I would happily agree that a P-47 wing is substantially more robust than a 109 wing, once any wing takes a certain amount of damage (more on P-47 etc... than a 109), we should see P-47 (and P-51, P-38, Yak, Lagg, Mig, FW-190 etc...) pilots pulling their wings off too.  But we don't.  Just 109s.  I do not believe that the 109 wing was that fragile IRL, and I don't believe that the incidence of wing failure in combat in 109s IRL was anywhere near as frequent as we see now in the sim.  

  • Upvote 5
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, ACG_PanzerVI said:

Back to the original topic - I concur with @JG4_Qetzalcoatl - the wing damage on 109s is over done.  Single/double spar construction is not enough to account for the dramatic uptick in pilot-induced wing failures after minor damage.  AP rounds that go through one aluminum spar are quite likely to go through the adjacent one as well in a double spar wing (while carrying some spall forward from the first one, to potentially do even more damage).  I believe that if we are going to alter our model and increase major structures failing under g-load, it should be evident across the fleets of aircraft, not just on a single model.  While I would happily agree that a P-47 wing is substantially more robust than a 109 wing, once any wing takes a certain amount of damage (more on P-47 etc... than a 109), we should see P-47 (and P-51, P-38, Yak, Lagg, Mig, FW-190 etc...) pilots pulling their wings off too.  But we don't.  Just 109s.  I do not believe that the 109 wing was that fragile IRL, and I don't believe that the incidence of wing failure in combat in 109s IRL was anywhere near as frequent as we see now in the sim.  

You see wing braking on other airplanes, also.

But where is logic in enemy has full AP belt and hits my wing, my wing brakes, so enemy should have same wing brake when i hit him with 1/3rd of AP ammo his hitting my airplane.

Take P-51 and shoot 100 times at each airplane you listed from same position, and then compare that to wing brakes on 109s in same test.

Then take 190 and do same tests to same airplanes , and then we can see how things are.

And then post test resoults and then wait for 3 years for devs to take a look, this is how it was when AP got nerfed last time.

For now you have word of 109 only flyer saying hes getting shot down because he got used to uber DM he had last few years, nothing els :P

 

Allied players spend last 3 years learning how to aim, so its just paying of now. Axis flyers now need to spend next 3 years to learn how to DF so they dont get hit, simple.

Edited by CountZero
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2
Gustav_Hagel
Posted
5 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Spoken like a true gamer, and has nothing to do with the actual DM of aircraft in the game

 

Literal translation:  Gotta save muh stats!!!!

 

 

Don't understand those attacks taht are totally unrelated to the topic, literally in real-life when hit and in those situations a real-life pilot would do the same, to SURVIVE, but still I gave you my statement about the DM, so it is related.

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

You see wing braking on other airplanes, also.

But where is logic in enemy has full AP belt and hits my wing, my wing brakes, so enemy should have same wing brake when i hit him with 1/3rd of AP ammo his hitting my airplane.

Take P-51 and shoot 100 times at each airplane you listed from same position, and then compare that to wing brakes on 109s in same test.

Then take 190 and do same tests to same airplanes , and then we can see how things are.

And then post test resoults and then wait for 3 years for devs to take a look, this is how it was when AP got nerfed last time.

For now you have word of 109 only flyer saying hes getting shot down because he got used to uber DM he had last few years, nothing els :P

 

Allied players spend last 3 years learning how to aim, so its just paying of now. Axis flyers now need to spend next 3 years to learn how to DF so they dont get hit, simple.

You missed the point.

Posted
5 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Spoken like a true gamer, and has nothing to do with the actual DM of aircraft in the game

 

Literal translation:  Gotta save muh stats!!!!

 

 

 

Bailing out of a damaged aircraft that's actively getting hit with more fire is gamey?  Sounds pretty darn realistic to me.  The alternative of always fighting to the death is the gamey behavior IMO.

 

1 hour ago, ACG_PanzerVI said:

Back to the original topic - I concur with @JG4_Qetzalcoatl - the wing damage on 109s is over done.  Single/double spar construction is not enough to account for the dramatic uptick in pilot-induced wing failures after minor damage.  AP rounds that go through one aluminum spar are quite likely to go through the adjacent one as well in a double spar wing (while carrying some spall forward from the first one, to potentially do even more damage).  I believe that if we are going to alter our model and increase major structures failing under g-load, it should be evident across the fleets of aircraft, not just on a single model.  While I would happily agree that a P-47 wing is substantially more robust than a 109 wing, once any wing takes a certain amount of damage (more on P-47 etc... than a 109), we should see P-47 (and P-51, P-38, Yak, Lagg, Mig, FW-190 etc...) pilots pulling their wings off too.  But we don't.  Just 109s.  I do not believe that the 109 wing was that fragile IRL, and I don't believe that the incidence of wing failure in combat in 109s IRL was anywhere near as frequent as we see now in the sim.  

 

The 109's wing design was in part to speed production - the tradeoff being that it was fairly weak.  This was an ongoing issue for 109s.  The first passage of this document reads: "Reference Me 109 wing breakages. Owing to continually recurring accidents caused by wing breakages in Me 109 aircraft."

 

Allied AAR's are full of examples of 109s losing their wings in dives (like here and here), and we even have gun camera examples of 109s having their wings shot off (in this

case by a P-51B with 4 x .50).

 

As to why we're seeing pilots pulling their own wings off after being damaged - it's probably related to the massive increase in control authority the 109 got a few patches ago.  Guys are rolling very quickly and pulling tons of G's at high speed - far more then they ever could in the past (or than most pilots likely could in the real world).

  • Upvote 4
Posted

Translation from Flugwer&Technik Oktober 1941, I have not yet seen the original german issue and dont know if it scientific or does more lean towards PR/propaganda, so it should taken with a healthy sceptisicm.  But an intersting read, nonetheless. 

it was translated and puplicised by the Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology May 1942 issue.

image.thumb.jpeg.8547fdc61f10912921806693bae350d6.jpeg

 

  • Upvote 2
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

I'm all for wings getting blown off by multiple cannon rounds, but the ease of the way 109 wings fall off now, even with small holes or superficial damage at the tips of wings is criminal and just not realistic, while at the same time Mustangs can eat 20mm's for days and keep flying as if nothing happened and pull ridiculous amounts of G's in turns just makes me shake my head. As a matter of fact, it barely even slows them down. They should have gaping holes creating drag. It's almost as bad when all of us virtual pilots would die during routine belly landings. I just don't think there is enough evidence, even with real ww2 guncam footage to show that wings crumble as easily as the last update made it. You might see an occasional wing get blown off when ammo explodes inside the wing in some real guncam footage, but that's about it.. I'd really like to know what Galland and Rall would say about their durability.  

Edited by ACG_Jaydog
  • Upvote 1
Posted

Atleast they can do it same as previous DM when it was obvious broken and wait 2 more years to look at this "109 wing problem"

Posted

@CountZero  hope you enjoy shooting down 'bots, because you won't be shooting at us in MP anymore.  Most LW folks are already leaving.  Servers are 2:1 allied and LW is declining.  Call us when its fixed and you want to play again.  Maybe then it'll be our collective issue, not just 'oh, now you're getting yours you LW boys!'  

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ACG_PanzerVI said:

Most LW folks are already leaving.  Servers are 2:1 allied and LW is declining. 

 

I'm not surprised considering they've been spoon fed for a few years with a damage model that heavily benefited them against enemies shooting marshmallows. 

It would be a jarring change. 

 

 

I haven't lost a wing yet in the 109 and all I've flow is Axis on CB lately. 

 

KW was able to show a pretty substantial amount of info relating to the 109s wings being a bit on the delicate side. 

 

With that said I don't feel like I'm at any disadvantage. I've been having a great time :biggrin:

Edited by Denum
  • Upvote 6
Posted
8 hours ago, ACG_PanzerVI said:

@CountZero  hope you enjoy shooting down 'bots, because you won't be shooting at us in MP anymore.  Most LW folks are already leaving.  Servers are 2:1 allied and LW is declining.  Call us when its fixed and you want to play again.  Maybe then it'll be our collective issue, not just 'oh, now you're getting yours you LW boys!'  


Stats so far for October on Combat Box.  Flight time - Allies: 5639 Axis: 4823.  Shot down aircraft - Allies: 5897 Axis: 6188.  The servers are most definitely NOT 2:1 allied, and the Axis side is scoring more kills/hour flown then the Allies and has scored more kills overall.  Many of the upgrade mods on the Allied super props have been heavily restricted, while things like MW50, D9s and K4s show up earlier and in much larger numbers then they did historically.  Meanwhile in the one 1942 map they are running, the 109F2 and F4 are absolutely seal clubbing the Spit V and Hurri II, all to try and placate the Axis players who can’t be satisfied with having the upper hand apparently.  Truly, Germany suffers.

  • Sad 1
Posted
3 hours ago, 357th_KW said:


Stats so far for October on Combat Box.  Flight time - Allies: 5639 Axis: 4823.  Shot down aircraft - Allies: 5897 Axis: 6188.  The servers are most definitely NOT 2:1 allied, and the Axis side is scoring more kills/hour flown then the Allies and has scored more kills overall.  Many of the upgrade mods on the Allied super props have been heavily restricted, while things like MW50, D9s and K4s show up earlier and in much larger numbers then they did historically.  Meanwhile in the one 1942 map they are running, the 109F2 and F4 are absolutely seal clubbing the Spit V and Hurri II, all to try and placate the Axis players who can’t be satisfied with having the upper hand apparently.  Truly, Germany suffers.

It most certainly was close to 2:1 when I was on CB yesterday (40s vs 20s). No one is disputing that wings occasionally may come off from time to time, but what some are experiencing since the new DM came out has become excessive. I've lost more wings with relatively minor damage within the last 3 days or so, than in the previous 3 years combined. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
1PL-Husar-1Esk
Posted (edited)

There was period in the game  when wings fell often from all fighters,  now looks like the 109s do loose wings more often than other planes do but is not as used to be before.  Imo 109 wing is modeled to have less resistance compared to other planes, especially wing tips. 

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk
Posted

so maybe it is more a problem with Mustang DM than Bf109

Posted
35 minutes ago, Youtch said:

so maybe it is more a problem with Mustang DM than Bf109


I personally think that the game can not simulate how the german mineshell works (entering the structure and detonating within ripping wing spars and blowing away aircraft skin on both sides. taking advantage of the load bearing „modern“ WW2 (semi)-monocoque construction for max blast & pressure damage) as apposed to a regular HE shell.

But I also want to say, that Iam very happy with the current new DM

Posted
4 hours ago, ACG_Jaydog said:

I've lost more wings with relatively minor damage within the last 3 days or so, than in the previous 3 years combined. 

Given that the DM has only recently been changed. 

 

That would make sense wouldn't it?

 

 

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, the_emperor said:


I personally think that the game can not simulate how the german mineshell works (entering the structure and detonating within ripping wing spars and blowing away aircraft skin on both sides. taking advantage of the load bearing „modern“ WW2 (semi)-monocoque construction for max blast & pressure damage) as apposed to a regular HE shell.

But I also want to say, that Iam very happy with the current new DM

That's for sure. I never see P-51s in IL-2 with gaping holes when hitting them with 20mm in the wings

 

Edited by ACG_Jaydog
VA_chikinpickle
Posted
20 hours ago, ACG_PanzerVI said:

@CountZero  hope you enjoy shooting down 'bots, because you won't be shooting at us in MP anymore.  Most LW folks are already leaving.  Servers are 2:1 allied and LW is declining.  Call us when its fixed and you want to play again.  Maybe then it'll be our collective issue, not just 'oh, now you're getting yours you LW boys!'  

 

Yes, take your ball and go home. Ragequit il2 and convince everyone else to join you so we can all enjoy empty multiplayer servers and a dead game for the next two years just like what happened with allied only pilots in the previous dm. 

 

On a more cheerful note, I have to seriously admire the dev team and their skill. No matter which side I fly it seems this game is always biased against me even if I fly both in a single night. Truly a masterpiece of programming talent. Or maybe I need to adapt my gameplay to succeed. Idk.

  • Upvote 4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...