Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-06-2010, 04:11 PM
I/ZG52_HaDeS I/ZG52_HaDeS is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ΑΘΗΝΑΙ-ΕΛΛΑΣ, Athens-Hellas
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest
So the question comes down to whether we should expect TD to make changes based on cherry-picked data, because some people think there is a conspiracy to boost certain nations' aircraft?
Hardly. Who talked about "cherry-picked" data. And this does not affect the German planes or guns/bombs. The soviet Pylons concern the Soviet planes and not the German, right? Also the .50s caliber are way more weak than the UBs 12mm machine guns. If you want to check a plane that has at leat "weird" Damage Model check the SM-79. Try to bring it down, compare it with other contemporary planes, and read any data you could find.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest
So much for objectivity.
I presented data while you have not. This doesn't make you more "objective".

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD
Team Daidalos does not fix stuff because it looks wrong, but when correct data is provided and it contradicts current game values. What's the point in balancing stuff instead of fixing it?
I never said about balance. I have always talked about Fixing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD
Simple question related to the example: Which bomb is wrong - the FAB 1000 or the SC 1000? Or both? What would you want TD to do without knowing the proper values? Guessing? In the worst case you end up with even more wrong values.
I just asked something that looks wrong. You can find generic bomb blast range/damage data but its hard to find for these specific bombs.
I just question myself on how should be such a huge difference between bombs of the same category, same weight.

I have not found any account to stress this huge difference for these bombs.

And how would i want to fix this stuff since not exact data is available? Well, i'll say something like the following:

The 7.62 mm Browning machine guns were almost equal with the 7.62mm ShKAS in terms of damage and penetration ability. As you can see from here:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Historic%20MGs.htm

They have almost the same muzzle velocity and muzzle energy.

The ShKAS are slightly stronger for about less than 10%.
In game though they have almost twice the penetration ability of the 7.62 browning ones. Instead of probably 10. 20 or 30%
Just do the following "experiment":

Try to make a bomber to caught fire with a plane armed with the brownings like a Hurrie or Spit and try the same with a plane armed with the ShKAS like the I-16 or I-153.

You will be amazed how easily the ShKAS will cause fire and increased damage compared with the Brownings.

How could this be "Fixed"? Well, you can always inspect/judge the data values for the same category gun so maybe increasing the penetration ability of the brownings to be closer wouldn't be such a mistake, should it?
Since the muzzle vellocity and muzzle energy differ in less than 10% perhaps if you adjust the brownings to have the 80-90% the penetration value of the ShKAS you would be inside the 5% general accepted error.
Is it a "Biased" and wrong logic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viikate
No, you are wrong. The "sniper effect" happens with all guns and it has nothing to do with the maxDeltaAngle.
Nope, you are Just change the delta angle and fly again. No matter if the gunner is Ace or not, you'll get significant less headshots.
The delta angle error ALSO plays significant role in this aspect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viikate
So all bombs with same weight belong to same family by your logic? German SC bombs are thin wall high-explosive bombs that kill with blast effect. Not with sharapnels. I recall that most of the allied bombs kill also with shrapnels so their effective radius should be naturally bigger.
The German iron bombs also had the sharpnel "effect":
The following are from the SC German bombs:
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200004.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200005.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200006.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200007.jpg


Quote:
Originally Posted by Viikate
How many people have actually whined about the pylon mass bug during all the IL-2 years? I haven't seen any complaints, since weight != drag . Probably the biggest effect that is has is making for example Seafire with rockets too heavy and carrier take-off is more difficult.

Oh... maybe the 0kg value was a "place holder" value. That would make it prefectly ok, right?
You didn't answer what kind of data you used to make all the previously weighted 150 kgs pylons to weight 15 kilos.
And you didn't also answer what are you going to do for the Zero weight pylons.

Cheers

Last edited by I/ZG52_HaDeS; 12-06-2010 at 04:24 PM.
  #2  
Old 12-06-2010, 05:16 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS View Post
I never said about balance. I have always talked about Fixing it.
You said it can't be that bomb A has a larger blast radius than bomb B without backing that claim up with research data. So you want to change values because you don't like them, without knowing the correct ones. So you're certainly not talking about fixing it.

Quote:
I just asked something that looks wrong. You can find generic bomb blast range/damage data but its hard to find for these specific bombs.
Well, then I guess you start looking. And when you found relevant data, you post it, and there's a good chance for change.

And for what it's worth, I agree with your point of view that there's little reason to justify the blast radius difference. What I don't agree with is changing values without knowing the proper ones.
  #3  
Old 12-06-2010, 07:02 PM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,819
Default

Where is the data to proof the original in game data is right?
While i trust OM and his crew thats not enough here, me thinks.
If there is no data to find one should use logic.
To defend the ingame data without proof doesn't work.
my 2 cents.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects
  #4  
Old 12-06-2010, 08:08 PM
stugumby stugumby is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 384
Default Just somethings i would like to see introduced..

1. Weapons arming/safety switches implemented into the controls section, to include an intervalometer and jettison without arming for bombs. (in video for jettison i think)

2. Drop tanks having a selector switch, from wings at take off to drop tanks and back to wings to jettison drop tanks.

3. Bomb bay doors in controls section for open and close. (exists in mods)

4. Do something about the He-111 taxi dance for ground handling, did it really have that much torque??

5. An updated pilots cockpit guide with an included rpm and pitch section with basic data.
  #5  
Old 12-07-2010, 12:55 PM
Viikate Viikate is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 93
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS View Post
Then this proves my point perfectly and shows that German SCs were NOT pre-fragmented from inside the body to produce thousands of small fragments that cover larger areas and can cause damage way beyond the ranges of the blast effect. You pics shows huge chunks of the body and not fragments. Sure they would kill, but they don't cover any big are and wont fly as far small ones.
__________________
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.