Pilot kills

[oc2209]

8 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Yeah that maybe, but they firing into wood and fabric. The bullet seemed to magically flow around the pilots at times. 

Something certainly seems to be "off"

 

I'unno, I decided to test this in a Yak-1 (the only 7.62mm armed plane I expected to have a chance of hitting a biplane in), versus a Camel. Pilot died as you'd expect when a burst of fire hits repeatedly around the cockpit:

 

Spoiler

 

 

I don't own any FC planes, thus the necessity of the Yak.

 

More to the point, however, I'm just not seeing this 'magnetism' for shots that people are complaining about.

 

I mean, should the pilot not die in the following instance?

 

Spoiler

 

 

2 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Gunnery may be a little easier in the sim, but I suspect a bigger reason most people have good gunnery is simply the amount of combat practice most players have. The majority of second war pilots had no experience of shooting down another plane at all*, whilst the majority of virtual pilots have done it thousands of times.

 

I really think this is the best explanation.

 

As somebody who routinely aims for the enemy pilot's head (no, I'm not exaggerating--I don't aim for the body, I aim for the head), I can tell you that I get plenty of frustrating misses depending on my attack angle.

 

I also watch a lot of replay footage in super slow motion. I don't see inexplicable pilot deaths. Everything tallies up as you would expect it to. Rather than pilots being killed by 'bullet magnetism', quite often the reverse is true, and I wonder how the hell they survive instances like this:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Skip ahead to the 3 minute mark. I quite literally have to drop a 20mm HE in his lap to kill him.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

17 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

I mean, should the pilot not die in the following instance?

It's not about pilots dying it's more about the instant death that is happen at such a rate it's almost impossible to keep track of it. Flying almost exclusively in bombers and ground attack aircraft the survival rate have gone from about 50% to around 10%. The AI gunners are terrible so there is no real "defensive" fire to speak of unless you fly in a 410 which for some odd reason exhibits "fairly" good defensive fire. I have gone over the same arguments time and time again and heard "every" counter argument with but the laser beams of doom take you out in an instant. I have also flown P-51's against B-25's and B-26's and the amount of instant pilot kills is laughable. These are big aircraft with loads of metal, armour, guns,and bodies to get though before hitting the pilots. The poor old C-47 is going to be a dead duck when it comes out and more or less all the current bombers we have in game are just target drones at this point.

Edit: -Now....what about those cardboard wings on the 109 since the ammunition modelling was changed?   

Edited November 21, 2022 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[oc2209]

4 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I have also flown P-51's against B-25's and B-26's and the amount of instant pilot kills is laughable. These are big aircraft with loads of metal, armour, guns,and bodies to get though before hitting the pilots.

 

If this has only happened since the .50 was changed, then the simplest explanation is that .50s have too much penetration power.

 

5 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Edit: -Now....what about those cardboard wings on the 109 since the ammunition modelling was changed?

 

Yeah, they do seem too weak now, but that's not really pertinent to the thread topic.

 

Though, if the .50 (and Russian/German equivalents) has too much penetration, that might explain the pilot deaths and the wing breakage phenomenon.

[oc2209]

46 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

The poor old C-47 is going to be a dead duck when it comes out 

 

Well, the good news is, as long as nobody shoots .50 AP at it, the crew has a good chance of surviving long enough to bail:

 

Spoiler

 

 

[oc2209]

Did a quick test in a P-39 versus a C-47:

 

Spoiler

 

 

And here's an La-5FN with only AP belts:

 

Spoiler

 

 

The La-5FN took about half as many rounds fired (~100 versus ~200) to kill both pilots. So, better penetration from 20mm AP than .50 AP, as it should be.

 

It's possible that the pilots are dying by having their feet or lower legs shot repeatedly. If you look at the most likely bullet trajectories, it's quite possible to bypass most of the crap in the plane itself (including the cargo load) if you fire from either slightly above dead six, or slightly under.

[oc2209]

So, I was trying to figure out why the 3rd crewman lives both of the above recordings, while the pilots die.

 

As best as I can guess, I would say that the cargo does stop bullets. Observe how close the survivor is to the cargo:

 

Spoiler

 

Now look at the distance between the pilots and the radioman/navigator (the survivor):

 

Spoiler

 

Because they're sitting further ahead of him, it's easier for bullets fired from just a little above/below dead six to pass over or under the cargo area, and so be unimpeded.

 

To hit the navigator, you'd need to fire well above/below the standard dead six position.

 

At least, that's the theory.

[Charon]

  

On 11/20/2022 at 8:09 AM, SCG_motoadve said:

Exactly, this is why pilot health should be increased to compensate for how easy is to aim, shoot, compared to real life.

Then we can have a more realistic pilot kills ratio.

Ridiculous. This is a simulator, not Doom. Fix the lack of wake turbulence and G effects on head position, sure, but a pilot who takes .303 anywhere except the very extremities should usually die, or bleed out shortly thereafter.

 

7 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

This is a textbook example of survivor bias. We know about the pilots who got shot down several times without serious injury because they survived being shot down and lived to tell us about it and write about it. What we don't get to hear about is all the pilots who were killed from a single bullet. Those pilots never got to tell anyone about it, and there is no record of the way they died.

 

Agreed completely. Although Lipfert (I believe it's Lipfert) does have one account of a pilot killed in this way. Hit from from behind while rolling across the airfield, and killed by a 0.50 cal bullet through the armor plate and heart. I can't find the account at the moment.

 

Kramarenko also provides the following account:

 

Quote

Many years later, having read a description of this episode, a journalist I knew said that he'd seen a report by a German flight commander in a German memoir. [...] After the fight, on the way home, one of his pilots -- for unknown reasons -- dropped into a dive and hit the ground. I guess one of the shells from my cannon had hit that plane's cockpit and wounded the pilot, who lost consciousness from loss of blood and then crashed. It saved me, for only one pair fought against me -- the second pair flew overhead and took no part in the action.

Yeah, be glad you don't need to deal with blood loss!

 

On 11/18/2022 at 6:44 PM, Strewth said:

Although I love this sim, it appears a lot easier to PK an opponent, or be killed yourself in a armoured cockpit of a WWII aircraft.
However, when I am in Flying Circus, I notice that no matter how much lead I plant into the butter box ahead of me, it is an extreme rarity to get a PK.

Another factor, in addition to those mentioned, is likely the crude iron sights of most FC planes. I know personally I find it far harder to aim accurately with them, and usually end up just walking my tracers.

Edited November 22, 2022 by Charon

[oc2209]

Did some more testing. Yes, I get obsessive quickly.

 

Here's a Yak-9T putting 29x37mm AP rounds into a C-47. Pilots don't die until the end, easily after 20-some rounds. Somehow, the magic navigator gets out, even though I purposely picked the cargo that's slung under the plane; the main cabin is empty, so nothing could shield him. Go figure.

 

Spoiler

 

 

At other times, I've intentionally aimed on the port side of the plane to kill the navigator and port-side pilot, leaving only the co-pilot alive.

 

The shortest burst of fire (from the two .50s in a P-39) that I ever killed 2/3 of the crew with, was 28 rounds. It was in a gentle turn, so my rounds were 'falling' into the cockpit area from above and slightly off the port wing. I killed the pilot and navigator, with the co-pilot bailing.

[Gustav_Hagel]

6 hours ago, oc2209 said:

I also watch a lot of replay footage in super slow motion. I don't see inexplicable pilot deaths. Everything tallies up as you would expect it to. Rather than pilots being killed by 'bullet magnetism', quite often the reverse is true, and I wonder how the hell they survive instances like this:

 

  Hide contents

 

 

Skip ahead to the 3 minute mark. I quite literally have to drop a 20mm HE in his lap to kill him.

 

P-51s take a considerable amount of damage and absorb protecting the pilot, I've noticed that particularly with this plane, it's not unusual to survive multiple (more than 2) mk 108 30mm: https://combatbox.net/pt-br/sortie/log/1821930/?tour=52

 

One thing for a fact, shrapnel damage is too high on 30mms, most most kills, even while shooting at dead 6 on the tail seems to induce PKs

 

In general I don't disagree much with with pilot kills with .50s, I think they are realistic as one could expect, but from a report I've seen on forums (I still need to cross check) 190s A-6 and A-8 iirc should have enough protection from pexiglass and armor plate against .50 cals at some angles which it doesn't seem to be implemented here. I'm not sure about how effective were 109s glass headrest, but I must say, with either metal or glass headrest, I feel safe when flying against russian planes, I haven't witnessed many pilot kills.

[oc2209]

45 minutes ago, SCG_Gustav_Hagel said:

One thing for a fact, shrapnel damage is too high on 30mms, most most kills, even while shooting at dead 6 on the tail seems to induce PKs

 

Scroll up to the post where a C-47 eats about 20x30mm HE hits, and all the crew bails out successfully. Here's a still shot:

 

Spoiler

 

No fire, either.

 

If you're saying 30mm shrapnel can penetrate seat armor on an average fighter, I'm saying it can't. If the shell detonates beside the cockpit on the upper wing, then it can kill the pilot. Not always.

[oc2209]

One last test for the day. Yak-1, firing only its 7.62mm, versus a Handley Page O/400:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Entire crew killed in one pass, all from a firing angle beneath/to the side of, the exposed crew. Meaning they were killed from bullets that passed through the skin and framework.

 

I'd like to see some recordings to support the claims that FC planes are somehow harder to score pilot kills in than BoX planes. So far, I'm not seeing it.

[oc2209]

2 hours ago, Charon said:

Another factor, in addition to those mentioned, is likely the crude iron sights of most FC planes. I know personally I find it far harder to aim accurately with them, and usually end up just walking my tracers.

 

Personally, I love the ring and bead sight on the Yak-9. It's for a very simple reason: a perfect sight picture. I've never used textbook aiming methods; I only aim by pure intuition. And it's much, much easier to process information when the target disappears for a shorter period of time. A bulky reflector will block your view of the target for a longer period, and thus spoil your aim.

 

This is a good example of what I mean:

 

Spoiler

 

 

This shot would be almost impossible for me in a 109, primarily because the bulky sight would be in the way.

 

Now, the 410's default sight, mounted from above--I love that, too. It'd be great for deflection shooting. Sadly, though, the 410 isn't suited to turn fights.

[Charon]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

 

Personally, I love the ring and bead sight on the Yak-9. It's for a very simple reason: a perfect sight picture. I've never used textbook aiming methods; I only aim by pure intuition. And it's much, much easier to process information when the target disappears for a shorter period of time. A bulky reflector will block your view of the target for a longer period, and thus spoil your aim.

Huh, I totally forgot the Yak-9 uses iron sights. I ought to fly it one of these days.

 

It looks like you're using snap views here. YMMV, but I find ring and bead is harder to use with 6dof headtracking (and to a lesser extent, VR) because unlike a reflector sights it's so sensitive to head position. When I was using TrackIR I actually used to disable it while making gun runs in the Il-2 (1943) for that exact reason.

Edited November 22, 2022 by Charon

[Talon_]

11 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

These are big aircraft with loads of metal, armour, guns,and bodies to get though before hitting the pilots.

It's worth remembering that aircraft skin and coke cans have so much in common that "an aluminium cylinder that deforms under slight pressure" could describe either. Not even kidding, they are pretty much the same gauge.

15 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

You can also read encounter reports from many German pilots who were shot down 10 times or more and got to fly again.

 

By AN/M2 .50cal? Because the armour plate behind the pilot in a 109/190 is enough to stop a 7.62mm round, but it won't stop a .50cal.

[the_emperor]

51 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

By AN/M2 .50cal? Because the armour plate behind the pilot in a 109/190 is enough to stop a 7.62mm round, but it won't stop a .50cal.

Yes, at a direct hit certainly most aircraft armour wont stop a .50cal (24mm armour penetration at 100yards). But that value drops significantly when hitting the aircraft first and then the armour. at 100m it drops to 10.5mm when hitting 3mm duraluminium at 20 degres and the armour at 90 degres. less favourable angles and more "obstacles" will further decrease that value.

But the main "issue" I think lies somewhere else, and here I quote myself:

 "One must not forget that in game we are doing much higher deflection shots than were common (and possible) than in real life as this is still a game. 

We are still able to make high deflection shots while doing high gs/tight turns and still have our head glued behind the reticle. 

a little more realistic headshake that lets you lose your sight picture/ fire solution while rolling/high gs would make things feel more realistic (cliffs of dover does a decent job in that regards). though I dont know how that would mix with VR.

These high deflection shots might also render armour less effective than it was, since our bullets tend to enter the cockpit from side angles were no armour protection was given."

[Oyster_KAI]

One of the reasons is probably that it is so easy to shoot in GB...
Comparing other WWII combat sims, I dare say GB is the easiest to shoot accurately
Due to the minimal torque disturbance, the bullet scatter is also low, the angle of attack capability of the aircraft is very strong, and the modeling of recoil force is also negligible.

[tattywelshie]

9 minutes ago, Oyster_KAI said:

One of the reasons is probably that it is so easy to shoot in GB...
Comparing other WWII combat sims, I dare say GB is the easiest to shoot accurately
Due to the minimal torque disturbance, the bullet scatter is also low, the angle of attack capability of the aircraft is very strong, and the modeling of recoil force is also negligible.

True, I find CLOD a lot more challenging when trying to shoot AI down

[[CPT]Crunch]

Wonder how many times those 'ten bailed' pilots jumped from an untouched aircraft perceiving their luck had suddenly shifted.  Some of those highly experienced German pilots were probably smart enough to bail before receiving an incoming mortal burst, I would without hesitation over my own home turf.  

[SCG_motoadve]

32 minutes ago, Oyster_KAI said:

One of the reasons is probably that it is so easy to shoot in GB...
Comparing other WWII combat sims, I dare say GB is the easiest to shoot accurately
Due to the minimal torque disturbance, the bullet scatter is also low, the angle of attack capability of the aircraft is very strong, and the modeling of recoil force is also negligible.

Absolutely, very easy to shoot in IL2 GB, too easy.

Wanted to add wake turbulence is a big factor too IRL, not modeled in this game.

Maybe pilot health model is not unrealistic, but all those factors that makes shooting so easy makes for too many pilot kills.

Still first bullet pilot kills , specially on bombers are not realistic to happen as often as it does in Il2 currently.

This is ruining game play, giving an arcade feel, 1 bullet first shot pilot kills repeatedly. 

[Dragon1-1]

DCS has wake turbulence, some people say it's overmodeled, but it does make fights more interesting. Either way, we need better modeling for recoil, vibration, things like that. IRL, firing a 20mm cannon mounted in the engine will shake the cockpit pretty well. GB completely fails to convey how loud, vibrational and unsteady a warbird cockpit is.

 

Agreed on deflection shooting, although it was possible for a skilled pilot to make such shots. AI grunts should definitely not be making them, though, and realistic vibration would help reduce them.

[SCG_motoadve]

29 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

DCS has wake turbulence, some people say it's overmodeled, but it does make fights more interesting. Either way, we need better modeling for recoil, vibration, things like that. IRL, firing a 20mm cannon mounted in the engine will shake the cockpit pretty well. GB completely fails to convey how loud, vibrational and unsteady a warbird cockpit is.

 

Agreed on deflection shooting, although it was possible for a skilled pilot to make such shots. AI grunts should definitely not be making them, though, and realistic vibration would help reduce them.

Wake turbulence is big IRL, I have experienced a few times when doing simulated dogfight in the warbird trainer I fly.

You loose control authority for a few seconds and your plane is moved around, and you try to correct and not much is happening. It will definitely screw your aiming and shooting.

CLOD does a great job simulating recoil of cannons, and the gunnery is a lot more realistic than IL2.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

DCS has wake turbulence, some people say it's overmodeled, but it does make fights more interesting

 I heard that most multiplayer server do disabled it.

[oc2209]

12 hours ago, Charon said:

Huh, I totally forgot the Yak-9 uses iron sights. I ought to fly it one of these days.

 

It looks like you're using snap views here. YMMV, but I find ring and bead is harder to use with 6dof headtracking (and to a lesser extent, VR) because unlike a reflector sights it's so sensitive to head position. When I was using TrackIR I actually used to disable it while making gun runs in the Il-2 (1943) for that exact reason.

 

Both the -9 and -9T, yeah. It's possible to hit out to ~500m with the -9T's gun and the iron sights, but I wouldn't recommend wasting shots at that range in most instances.

 

And yes, I'm using the default snap view. I expect if I used anything else, I'd run into the same issues as you.

 

The only reflector sight I really like is the later British model (in the Tempest, etc), mounted in such a way as to grant a totally unobstructed view; but then the same planes that can use it, also have only wing guns, which largely negates the whole reason I want an unobstructed view in the first place: to land precision shots in turns.

 

Also, a minor quibble in the British planes: the nose is always visible, which eats into the view a little. Yak-9 + iron sights, is the only combination that allows a 100% clear view.

[Dragon1-1]

2 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

 I heard that most multiplayer server do disabled it.

It does eat into performance (it's a fairly complex calculation), not to mention it makes things harder, so of course some server owners didn't think it was worth it. Then again, I never put much stock in public servers, anyway. It works in SP, and if you fly with a squadron that appreciates it.

[ACG_Bob122]

5 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Wonder how many times those 'ten bailed' pilots jumped from an untouched aircraft perceiving their luck had suddenly shifted.  Some of those highly experienced German pilots were probably smart enough to bail before receiving an incoming mortal burst, I would without hesitation over my own home turf.  

I think this is the main thing. In normal multiplayer fights, people fight their plane until they die or the plane just critically fails. The 50 cals do not do enough aero damage to wings or the tail to actually cause the plane to stop flying. Therefore, people just keep fighting until they get shot in the face, their wing falls off or their engine catches fire. Rarely they will fight so long that those coolant leaks start mattering and their engine seizes. It is just sort of reverse survivor bias, people only care when they get shot in the head, not the time they got shot up and the 50s did no aero damage and they kept flying.

 

In the FTC campaign, people would get hit a bit and just bail out even though their plane was flyable to save their pilot, that rarely happens in normal multiplayer unless the pilot is pretty tryhard.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

9 minutes ago, FTC_King_Bob said:

think this is the main thing. In normal multiplayer fights, people fight their plane until they die or the plane just critically fails

I wish I could wholeheartedly agree with you but you get insta-killed in bombers so often it's beyond a joke at this point.

[ACG_Lancaster]

46 minutes ago, FTC_King_Bob said:

I think this is the main thing. In normal multiplayer fights, people fight their plane until they die or the plane just critically fails. The 50 cals do not do enough aero damage to wings or the tail to actually cause the plane to stop flying. Therefore, people just keep fighting until they get shot in the face, their wing falls off or their engine catches fire. Rarely they will fight so long that those coolant leaks start mattering and their engine seizes. It is just sort of reverse survivor bias, people only care when they get shot in the head, not the time they got shot up and the 50s did no aero damage and they kept flying.

 

In the FTC campaign, people would get hit a bit and just bail out even though their plane was flyable to save their pilot, that rarely happens in normal multiplayer unless the pilot is pretty tryhard.

We are experiencing lots of PKs in campaigns as well as on servers. Not getting the opportunities to bail, already dead.

[Talon_]

22 shotdown crew

3 unwounded

3 wounded

16 dead 

 

16/22=.74

509 dead 110 pilots/685 110s lost = .73 (Combat Box November stats)

Maybe the PK rate is not so far off.

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Talon_

[Oyster_KAI]

12 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Wonder how many times those 'ten bailed' pilots jumped from an untouched aircraft perceiving their luck had suddenly shifted.  Some of those highly experienced German pilots were probably smart enough to bail before receiving an incoming mortal burst, I would without hesitation over my own home turf.  

Combat records of P-51 pilots do have many like this:
Just got 6, before firing any bullet, the German fighter pilots bailed out immediately.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

I'll say it again, it's not the pilot kills it's the insta-death. We can study pilot reports all day long but I don't see any pilot reports from WWII stating, I depressed the trigger and a nanosecond later the pilot was killed. I've unloaded rounds of 30 mm into fighters numerous times and no pilot kills and the aircraft can still fly...after a fashion.  Flying bombers and larger aircraft sometimes you just need to nick them and the pilot is sent off the digital heaven. Either the armour piercing capabilities of rounds are now off kilter or the dev need to seriously look at the damage model with ammunition travelling through spars, systems, guns, several layers of armour plate, bodies and pilots, with no deviation, deflection and no tumbling just that laser beam straight line.

[Talon_]

5 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I'll say it again, it's not the pilot kills it's the insta-death.

 

Would you prefer if the screen faded over half a second instead of instant black? I can't imagine being shot in the head gives your brain much time for a fade-out to the afterlife.

[migmadmarine]

18 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Would you prefer if the screen faded over half a second instead of instant black? I can't imagine being shot in the head gives your brain much time for a fade-out to the afterlife.

Just fade over to 

 

[SCG_motoadve]

47 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Would you prefer if the screen faded over half a second instead of instant black? I can't imagine being shot in the head gives your brain much time for a fade-out to the afterlife.

Here is referring to the first shot, first  bullet hit in the head time after time in IL2, you dont even hear bullets hitting your plane, instant kill, maybe it happened IRL as a rare event, but definitely not as many times as it happens in IL, which is way too common no matter if you are in a bomber or a fighter.

This is arcade.

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Here is referring to the first shot, first  bullet hit in the head time after time in IL2, you dont even hear bullets hitting your plane, instant kill, maybe it happened IRL as a rare event, but definitely not as many times as it happens in IL, which is way too common no matter if you are in a bomber or a fighter.

This is arcade.

 

Is this against people, online, or AI, offline?

 

This is what I see offline:

 

Spoiler

 

 

A few interesting points here.

 

First, the crew deaths don't start until I close within approximately 400m. Judging by when the rear gunner suddenly stops firing, I was about 350m away. I was scoring hits on the plane from the 1km mark on, including some good hits around 600m.

 

Secondly, the pilot survives. Entire crew dead aside from him. Meaning, most likely, his seat armor saved him.

 

So penetration/energy/distance are all clearly being calculated here. The results look pretty reasonable to me.

 

Whatever's happening online could be from a variety of reasons that have little to do with basic sim calculations.

[[DBS]Browning]

The only difference online is that the events that are actually happening and the events you see happening are not the same due to the small delays in communication over the internet.

 

That includes what you see recorded in tracks and the dynamic visual damage.

 

Online, if you see a hit to the cockpit, it doesn't mean the round actually hit the cockpit as you only see an approximation of your opponent's actual position.

That isn't a problem with the game, it's just an unavoidable consequence of online gaming with very high speed vehicles.

 

Other things such as ballistic calculations are identical on and off line.

[oc2209]

22 minutes ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Other things such as ballistic calculations are identical on and off line.

 

Remember the bug where gentle landings would kill pilots/crew? That was seemingly much worse online than offline. This could be a similar situation. Not necessarily a result of a bug, but as I said, other factors.

 

For example, we know that .50 AP is more effective than it was. That's a fact. We also know that pilots can't take as much damage as they used to. Also a fact. Yet, these recent changes didn't result in a dramatically different single-player experience. 

 

However, if people are aiming to kill pilots/crew online, and if the .50 (or other similar calibers) is the most commonly fired round, and if, due to network lag, the sound of other bullets striking the aircraft doesn't register before the pilot death registers, then all of this combined could create a perfect storm wherein people frequently experience situations where they instantly die without warning.

[FuriousMeow]

Online where you hit the plane is where you hit the plane, and that is transmitted to the other player's front end/game. There isn't a sync where you shoot and the server determines where the rounds hit, your front end determines that and transmits it. I'm certain location/flight trajectory/speed/etc is transmitted over UDP, otherwise there'd be awful rubber banding and just general chaos online. Not sure if damage is transmitted over UDP or TCP. That could be TCP. But either way, you could do a bunch of damage to a plane from your front end but the other person doesn't receive it at the same time. Instead the other player's front end could receive all the damage at once instead of spread out over a few second burst, so while one on person's front end it the rounds were walked up from the tail to the cockpit but due to latency the receiving front end ends up getting all of that data all at once and boom - insta kill on the receiving end while the other end actually put a good burst in that took a bit longer to walk up. Usually pretty bad latency/internet connections cause that, but its a possible cause.

 

But there's no server sitting in the middle deciding where rounds landed, those are front end determined by each player's end from the person shooting and that tells the other player's front end what damage it took. It'd be a total chaotic mess if it was done another way where there's something determining location of shooter and target as to where the rounds landed over the internet. Over LAN it could potentially work, but not over the internet.

[357th_KW]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Here is referring to the first shot, first  bullet hit in the head time after time in IL2, you dont even hear bullets hitting your plane, instant kill, maybe it happened IRL as a rare event, but definitely not as many times as it happens in IL, which is way too common no matter if you are in a bomber or a fighter.

This is arcade.

I looked at the stats for the Bf109G-14, Spitfire Mk IX and P-51D on combat box comparing October of this year vs October of 2020, and the current survivability rates are only down about 5-7% for all 3.  Pilot deaths of all types, whether first round or 50th, or just failing to bail out and crashing, are around 50%.

 

For giggles I also looked at the Bf110G for October of this year and compared it to November of last year on FVP and survivability is actually up about 13%!!  
 

Pilots died in real life, pretty regularly, when hit by bullets or cannon fragments.  Talon already posted some real world numbers above, but here are some more:

 

In November of 1944, the Luftwaffe fought four large battles against the USAAF over the oil refineries around Leipzig.  This was far behind the lines still at that point, and so the only participants were the Luftwaffe interceptors, and the 8th AF bombers and escort fighters - the importance here being that ALL German losses on these days were to .50 caliber machine guns.  Over the four days in question (November 2nd, 21st, 26th and 27th) the Reichs Defense Forces reported the loss of 451 fighters, with 220 pilots reported as killed or missing and another 112 wounded.  So 48% killed and another 25% wounded.  And that’s with cases of pilots bailing out before they were ever even hit by enemy fire, compared to our game where most online pilots are fighting to the death.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

19 minutes ago, 357th_KW said:

For giggles I also looked at the Bf110G for October of this year and compared it to November of last year on FVP and survivability is actually up about 13%!!  

Well I stopped flying them, so on type, my survival rate is now 100%.

 

22 minutes ago, 357th_KW said:

Pilots died in real life, pretty regularly, when hit by bullets or cannon fragments.  Talon already posted some real world numbers above, but here are some more:

I have heard every counter argument in the book at this point, there is dying and then there is laser beam insta-death on the larger aircraft. If the pilots of "real life" bombers were killed in a nanosecond like they are now, not one of them would have survived in real life. Pilot reports like gun cam footage can be unreliable but just look at the amount of damage that bombers take in some of the gun reels from 20 and 30 mm and they keep flying. Some fighters seem to be able to soak up more damage than the larger aircraft in game at this point. Anyway, it's great for the fighter boys, and girls now because the bombers are target drone death traps with effectively little to no defensive capabilities.  

[oc2209]

19 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I have heard every counter argument in the book at this point, there is dying and then there is laser beam insta-death on the larger aircraft. If the pilots of "real life" bombers were killed in a nanosecond like they are now, not one of them would have survived in real life.

 

Real pilots weren't being sniped by gamers with hundreds to thousands of hours of experience, zero fear, combat fatigue, or other factors that make gunnery more difficult than in a sim.

 

You can accept this fact, or you can get extremely bent out of shape and hate the entire sim for purely online factors that really aren't an indictment of the sim's overall quality.

 

Your choice.

Edited November 23, 2022 by oc2209