PDA

View Full Version : Damage mode inconsistancies.



BSS_Vidar
12-13-2005, 01:52 PM
I did a series of tests to see if their is actually a difference in the 109/190's ability to resist damage form 50 cal gun fire.

This is just my observations to compare the F-4U Corsairs hardiness compared to the 109/190's damage model.

I used the F-4U1 Corsair as the gunnery platform against all three targets. Then flew the F-4U, 109, and the 190 against a single F-4U to measure 50 cal effectiveness from the stand point of the bogie to observe the damage model responce to 50 cal hits, and their ability to continue to fight.

3 sorties for each account.

Corsair vs Corsair: I found in only a few short bursts, the Corsair was left helpless due to flight control loss or wing loss. However I was able to defeat the AI all three times, but not unscathed.

The 109 vs Corsair: Flying the 109, I received some solid hits from the AI Corsair. I even had massive holes in the starboard wing and thought I was done for. To my suprise, I still had full control and was esily maintaining 300+ mph with a hole in my wing the size of a baby carage! I was able to extend, reverse and easily down the Corsair with just a few hits.

When flying in the Corsair, it took quite a few rounds with solid hits to get the 109 to loose control and auger in. No visual catostrophic damage was noted. However, I have been able to split a 109 in two in a P-47 on-line on a few occations.

The 190 vs Corsair: The slightly overmodeled roll rate at slow speeds (been confirmed in other thread by Tagert) made it quite easy to out manuever the Corsair. Even with good hits, the 190's hardiness withstood the Corsairs 50 cal attack easily. While flying the 190, I never caught on fire, and easily shrugged off any attack that was successful. To finish the thrid sortie, I rolled wings level and just let the AI Corsair blaze away to see how much she would take. Eventually cables were shot away, but that was the extent of the damage. No wing loss or any appendages shot way were noted.

When flying the 190, the Corsair was an easy kill once established behind him with just a quick burst.

Conclusion:
I think the 50 cals are just fine the way they are. Evidence is in how quickly the Corsair is made ineffective, or de-winged from a short burst. The problem "I believe" is still within the german Damage Model. There is no way these two aircraft are more sturdy than that of the Corsair. The Hose-nose is a third larger than both of these aircraft, and had a tremndous airframe structure to endure carrier operations, and high speed dive capability.

German Damage Models do not seem to properly include increased parasite drag to reflect the visualy observed damage graphics. However, a single bent panel on the Corsair's wing causes the plane to yaw, and roll into the damaged wing and significanly reduce its airspeed... as it should.

I think if they should ever correct the DM of German aircraft, this game would be alot better in the long run. Let's hope they resolve this atleast in the next generation of PC flight sims.

p1ngu666
12-13-2005, 02:39 PM
brave man http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

MEGILE
12-13-2005, 02:45 PM
riiighht.....

chris455
12-13-2005, 03:03 PM
I wonder if AI damage model conforms to online or if there is in fact "two" damage models.

Vidar, you should try flying against AI VAls or Ki-43s. Their resistance to .50 caliber is surprising, given all the anecdotal evidence we've heard over the years.
They can definitely be shot down, but seem to resist fire much better than one would expect.

faustnik
12-13-2005, 03:28 PM
The 190 vs Corsair: The slightly overmodeled roll rate at slow speeds (been confirmed in other thread by Tagert) made it quite easy to out manuever the Corsair. Even with good hits, the 190's hardiness withstood the Corsairs 50 cal attack easily. While flying the 190, I never caught on fire, and easily shrugged off any attack that was successful. To finish the thrid sortie, I rolled wings level and just let the AI Corsair blaze away to see how much she would take. Eventually cables were shot away, but that was the extent of the damage. No wing loss or any appendages shot way were noted.

Do you have tracks of this amazing damage resistance? The 4.02 Fw190 is normally vulnerable to control loss, wing lift loss, wing breakage, pilot kill and fire from .50 fire.

The F4U seems very vulnerable to me, especially to PKs from light caliber rounds from dead six. It burns easily too.

Maraz_5SA
12-13-2005, 03:57 PM
The fact you see large holes in the wings depends on the damage layer used in the graphical animation. Some aircraft have a bit "overdone" damage layers, with large holes (eg bf.109, Sturmovik), others only have small holes and bruises. These different graphical effects may correspond to the same damage level in the DM.

Does someone know how many damage levels does the IL-2 DM have? Or it does depend on how the modeler chose to model it?

Cheers
Maraz

chris455
12-13-2005, 04:16 PM
Does someone know how many damage levels does the IL-2 DM have? Or it does depend on how the modeler chose to model it?

No. I don't, but you make a very good point. A great example of theis is the P-40E, which can have a hole in the wing you can drive a Kubelwagen through, and oftentimes no real FM penalty to speak of.

BSS_Vidar
12-13-2005, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by chris455:
Vidar, you should try flying against AI VAls or Ki-43s. Their resistance to .50 caliber is surprising, given all the anecdotal evidence we've heard over the years.
They can definitely be shot down, but seem to resist fire much better than one would expect.

I agree, the Val is very robust as compared to real world accounts. Ki-43's seem to go up like a roman candel from my experieces flying Wildcats against'em. That is if you can get a good enough shot on them while they're flying around like stunt kites. LOL

I'm just curious how leathl 50 cal rounds are on a very sturdy aircraft like the Corsair, but 109's and 190's in particular can suck it up in the airframe, save a good engine shot or PK. My gunnery is very consistant, so that isn't the issue.

There are numerous gun camera footages that show 50 cal just shreding German fighters wings and airframes. Many of which I've seen in my own Navy flying career. Tons of which are still not available to the public eye. "Yeah, We still study the past to be prepared for the future." http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I refuse to fly aircraft like the Spitfire which uses 20mm to get kills that I should be getting in a P-51 of 47. Just call me hard headed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Von_Rat
12-13-2005, 05:30 PM
German Damage Models do not seem to properly include increased parasite drag to reflect the visualy observed damage graphics.



huh,,,, haven't you ever flown a 190 with just a little plink in wing and lose 50-80kph????

ECV56_Rolf
12-13-2005, 05:36 PM
Curious, but all your observations could have another reading... the F4U, is too fragile.

And yes, you can cut a 190s wing with a well put burst.

p1ngu666
12-13-2005, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">German Damage Models do not seem to properly include increased parasite drag to reflect the visualy observed damage graphics.



huh,,,, haven't you ever flown a 190 with just a little plink in wing and lose 50-80kph???? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

u get speedloss on any plane, more noticeable with 190 as its fast to start with.

banged up il2's often cant manage more than 300kph~ or so, about 100kph or more down on its maxium, and remmber its a much slower plane, so the drag from equal damage would be less

WWMaxGunz
12-14-2005, 11:27 AM
Look, there was the switched MG 151/20 pod/internal ammo data segments for how long?
Is it possible that they put some damage graphics together in the wrong order like
high to low instead of low to high? You get lots of trouble and no big holes and
other times big holes and no big trouble. Would that be a possible reason?

Vidar, aka Hard-Head... S!

How about doing your tests online in controlled conditions (squad members who follow
directions and don't jack the whole thing up... you want controlled angles, no?) and
get the stats for every plane, how many shots, how many hits. The kind of data that
takes words up a ways from Generalityville.

Just a thot.

Professor_06
12-14-2005, 01:25 PM
I experienced the same thing. I was so irritated at not being aboe to knock down a val that I went Blue on Blue and Shot my F4U wingy and was able to sever the fuselage. Cut the F4U in Half with 50s!! In short burst too!! LOL... Somebody doesnt like Corsairs it seems. To counter the Val thing I just use a F4UC... Vals? No problemo.

BSS_Vidar
12-14-2005, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by ECV56_Rolf:
Curious, but all your observations could have another reading... the F4U, is too fragile.

Actually no... I think the Corsairs damage model reacts propery from 50 cal hits.

And yes, you can cut a 190s wing with a well put burst.

I agree, but not as frequently as you should.

I have fired a deck mounted 50 cal MG when I was a youngster on the Nimitz in 1983. I was part of the ships self defence force before I started flying for the Navy. When a single 50cal round hits something, it blew whatever it hit apart, that's for sure.

In a live-fire excersize, my mount and three others disintegrated an old garbage barge made of steel in short order. They were not AP or HE rounds. In-game, they certainly don't retain their reputation for hitting power on certain DM's.

Actual LW pilots called the P-47 "The Buzz Saw" because airframes were consistantly ripped to shreds with just a short burst. Too much time in-game is spent pouring rounds into a 109/190, and yes, I agree with the Val as well.

chris455
12-14-2005, 09:42 PM
Actual LW pilots called the P-47 "The Buzz Saw" because airframes were consistantly ripped to shreds with just a short burst.

Hi Vidar,
Do you have something documenting that "buzz-saw" thing? I've been a big Jug fan all my life, but I've never heard of that one. It would be neat to add it to my P-47 lore, if you've got a source.

p1ngu666
12-14-2005, 09:54 PM
many bullets would kinda cut thru something, like a tree famously http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BSS_Vidar
12-14-2005, 10:43 PM
My point exactly Plug.. But that was only four 50cal gun mounts pounding on a heavy barge. Imagine six, or even eight 50's on the light aircraft materials of the day. It should be quite devistating, but it just isn't in some cases.

50 cals were in F-86's against MiG-15's in Korea, and just shreded that husky lil jet to pieces. Sure, the MiG had 30mm canon, but its rate of fire was too slow to be an effective gunery platform for a fighter.

Hope Oleg has a 1950's era Combat Flight Sim waiting in the wings. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Oh, the posibilites!

Badsight.
12-14-2005, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
50 cals were in F-86's against MiG-15's in Korea, and just shreded that husky lil jet to pieces there is two sides of that story

where Migs repeatedly just flew away after recieveing bursts of fire . . . . . guess you will post about them too right ?

chris455
12-15-2005, 02:28 AM
I once heard Bud Mahurin talk about how robust the MiG-15 was...............and that if you got caught on the rough end of one in a Saber...............................not good.

The poor performance of "Ma Deuce" vs communist jets in Korea was the deciding factor in the adoption of 20mm cannon in the USAAF.

Badsight.
12-15-2005, 02:40 AM
they used the M3 on the Saber no ?

that gun had excellent ballistics , 1200 RPM

V.4_Glo
12-15-2005, 04:11 AM
I find really intresting Your comment.

First of all: Fly at least 100 missions with the selected planes before making long time opinion. Just because You have flown 3-4 Quick mission, as it seems from Your comment "3 sorties for each account.", You are not able to take differences. Ask some LW squads about it.

I just want to ask some questions: How much speed-reduction and manouvering difficulty, stall dispose did You have while flying a bf109 with a wing hole? I have flown it hundreds of time, and I can tell You that it is really hard, even impossible, to fight with a damaged bf.

Second: The F4 has lot of small caliber, the FW190 has much bigger but few, so do not wonder if the F4 has been blown up from a short burst.

I just want to ask You to make such a test with the VVS planes. And tell me if You will have any visual damage on the LAGG, La5, Yak (all the series), and so on, after You have shot in the enemy all Your bullets.

Just a data: The germans made the mk-108 30mm granade launcher as a "one shoot to fighters 3 to bombers" weapon. The impact made average 0,75 m2 hole on every plane. Just tell me than, why do the p-51 manage to fly after 3 hits in the hull? I don't want to make an argue about the russian planes, they are made from Chrome-Vanadium as it seems from the game.

Or make a test: how many times do the enemy crash after You made a collosion with him? I can tell You: almost never, always Your plane will crash and they fly away like nothing happened.

Third: An AI does not target Your wing, it targets only the plane, no matter where it has the weakness.

So, not the LW planes are overmodelled. The new patch has a lot of bugs and technical impossibilities according to real and historical technical databases. By the way I don't wonder about it, it is a russian game.

But please next time think over some thing before You post such an irreal notice.

I do not stand for the LW side or my Squad, it was only my personal comment to Your post.

S!

ECV56_Rolf
12-15-2005, 05:00 AM
Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ECV56_Rolf:
Curious, but all your observations could have another reading... the F4U, is too fragile.

Actually no... I think the Corsairs damage model reacts propery from 50 cal hits.

And yes, you can cut a 190s wing with a well put burst.

I agree, but not as frequently as you should.

I have fired a deck mounted 50 cal MG when I was a youngster on the Nimitz in 1983. I was part of the ships self defence force before I started flying for the Navy. When a single 50cal round hits something, it blew whatever it hit apart, that's for sure.

In a live-fire excersize, my mount and three others disintegrated an old garbage barge made of steel in short order. They were not AP or HE rounds. In-game, they certainly don't retain their reputation for hitting power on certain DM's.

Actual LW pilots called the P-47 "The Buzz Saw" because airframes were consistantly ripped to shreds with just a short burst. Too much time in-game is spent pouring rounds into a 109/190, and yes, I agree with the Val as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you cared to check with the Arcade mode on?

I didn´t do 100 time trials to collect so much data, but with just 10 I'am arriving to the awfull conclusion that your aim may not be as good as you believe to. At least in game.

The in game .50s are synched, so that a missed shot is a 6 bullets miss. And even a hit does not mean 6 hits, but may be just one.

Tried your 3 planes, all suffering .50s fires, and their behavior against bullet hits is almost the same.

You could place 12 bullets through a F4U1 wing and only then the AI will loss control and fall down. Almost the same amount for the 109 and the 190.

In all three planes a single bullet in the engine will give smoke. More than 6 will bring engine fire.

The armor behind 109 and 190s don´t stop .50s. You get a Headshot without trouble there.

Breaking a wing is as difficult in all of them. It is also very difficult to have more hits there, because the plane start to fall out of control before you could place more hits on it.

Hitting from dead six is almost useless on all cases. Hits don't get concentrated in that way.

Aero_Shodanjo
12-15-2005, 07:35 AM
Usually Im not really interested in DM/FM discussion, but maybe these pics will explain why visual DM aren't always "resembles" the plane's DM calculations.

Visual DM area for:

bf 109G-10

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/Bf109G10_DM.jpg

and FW190F8

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/FW190F8_DM.jpg
compared with:

F4U & Corsairs (all types)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/CorsairMkIV_DM.jpg

I have some others pics from diferent a/c void files if you're interested.

Now speaking about the DM calculations, i believe this sim with all its limitations already has the "best" compromise - especially when you compare other WWII sims. Ofcourse everything could be made better, but I won't complain with what Ive got now.

MEGILE
12-15-2005, 08:05 AM
Originally posted by Aero_Shodanjo:
Usually Im not really interested in DM/FM discussion, but maybe these pics will explain why visual DM aren't always "resembles" the plane's DM calculations.



Bingo!
Excellent work Shodanjo

This works both ways be sure! People complain about speed loss on the Focke Wulfs from only small holes in the wings.. when in reality.. what you see aint the "whole" truth http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Excuse the pun

chris455
12-15-2005, 12:54 PM
Aero, can you post the D3A1 Val DM???

faustnik
12-15-2005, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by chris455:
Aero, can you post the D3A1 Val DM???

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/brick.jpg

chris455
12-15-2005, 05:25 PM
Faustnik, you are too good. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

BTW, any headway with your R2800 engine DM project?

Aero_Shodanjo
12-15-2005, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chris455:
Aero, can you post the D3A1 Val DM???
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/brick.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ROFL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Will do. I'll post the Val visual DM tonight. Err... That's my night (GMT +7) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

PS: Anyone notice that the F4U visual DM is far less than any other types in those pics? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Aero_Shodanjo
12-16-2005, 09:44 AM
Hmmm http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Val's Visual DM:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/D3A1_DM.jpg

Resized the pic to 640x640 to save space on my photobucket account http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And this one I took yesterday:

P47

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/P47_DM.jpg

Need more? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aero_Shodanjo
12-16-2005, 09:49 AM
B17
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/B17G_DM.jpg

B24
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/B-24_DM.jpg

B29
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Aero_Shodanjo/2bb6d5d1.jpg

Still got some more... I'll wait for responses first http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

faustnik
12-16-2005, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by chris455:
BTW, any headway with your R2800 engine DM project?

I'm remaking tracks and testing in 4.02. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

GR142-Pipper
12-16-2005, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
I did a series of tests to see if their is actually a difference in the 109/190's ability to resist damage form 50 cal gun fire.

This is just my observations to compare the F-4U Corsairs hardiness compared to the 109/190's damage model.

I used the F-4U1 Corsair as the gunnery platform against all three targets. Then flew the F-4U, 109, and the 190 against a single F-4U to measure 50 cal effectiveness from the stand point of the bogie to observe the damage model responce to 50 cal hits, and their ability to continue to fight.

3 sorties for each account.

Corsair vs Corsair: I found in only a few short bursts, the Corsair was left helpless due to flight control loss or wing loss. However I was able to defeat the AI all three times, but not unscathed.

The 109 vs Corsair: Flying the 109, I received some solid hits from the AI Corsair. I even had massive holes in the starboard wing and thought I was done for. To my suprise, I still had full control and was esily maintaining 300+ mph with a hole in my wing the size of a baby carage! I was able to extend, reverse and easily down the Corsair with just a few hits.

When flying in the Corsair, it took quite a few rounds with solid hits to get the 109 to loose control and auger in. No visual catostrophic damage was noted. However, I have been able to split a 109 in two in a P-47 on-line on a few occations.

The 190 vs Corsair: The slightly overmodeled roll rate at slow speeds (been confirmed in other thread by Tagert) made it quite easy to out manuever the Corsair. Even with good hits, the 190's hardiness withstood the Corsairs 50 cal attack easily. While flying the 190, I never caught on fire, and easily shrugged off any attack that was successful. To finish the thrid sortie, I rolled wings level and just let the AI Corsair blaze away to see how much she would take. Eventually cables were shot away, but that was the extent of the damage. No wing loss or any appendages shot way were noted.

When flying the 190, the Corsair was an easy kill once established behind him with just a quick burst.

Conclusion:
I think the 50 cals are just fine the way they are. Evidence is in how quickly the Corsair is made ineffective, or de-winged from a short burst. The problem "I believe" is still within the german Damage Model. There is no way these two aircraft are more sturdy than that of the Corsair. The Hose-nose is a third larger than both of these aircraft, and had a tremndous airframe structure to endure carrier operations, and high speed dive capability.

German Damage Models do not seem to properly include increased parasite drag to reflect the visualy observed damage graphics. However, a single bent panel on the Corsair's wing causes the plane to yaw, and roll into the damaged wing and significanly reduce its airspeed... as it should.

I think if they should ever correct the DM of German aircraft, this game would be alot better in the long run. Let's hope they resolve this atleast in the next generation of PC flight sims. You're absolutely right, Vidar. I would further offer that in my view the 50's are still weak.

GR142-Pipper

Viper2005_
12-16-2005, 05:13 PM
Step 1 should be to get the .50s desynchronised.

Then you'll be in a much better position to talk about weapon effectiveness IMO.

Kuna15
12-16-2005, 09:52 PM
I find that .303s are really devastating to Hayabusas Rikkos and other Japanese aircraft. .50s are inflicting more physical damage but .303s are setting them alight faster from my experience.

p1ngu666
12-16-2005, 10:12 PM
i think its just difficult to get many hits with 50cals due to being unsynced

303's spray alot too

faustnik
12-17-2005, 03:56 PM
P-47 people please go here:

http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=112699#112699

Thanks

horseback
12-17-2005, 05:25 PM
Just my 2 cents here...

I think we're working with at least three different sets of DMs here: the offline enemy AI DM, the friendly AI DM and the online players' DM.

As an almost exclusively offline campaigner, I have on numerous occasions shot down wingmen who grossly violate the laws of physics or plain old etiquette. It is amazing how many fewer rounds it takes to shoot down a "friendly" AI 109, 190, La-5 or Mustang as opposed to a "hostile" one.

I can't begin to count the poaching 109s who have fallen to a short warning burst of LMGs, and a similarly greater damage seems to be done to any friendly a/c types who wander in front of my guns...

Similarly, when running afoul of my AI buddies on a few rare occasions, they seem to do much more damage than I would have expected.

I can't help but think that there are different DM rules applied for friendly vs hostile fire. Certainly, you can pour rounds into an enemy aircraft to no seeming effect, seeing the rounds hit again and again, and have the little bastage fly off apparently unharmed (I-153s have been driving me crazy lately in one of my current campaigns) after you've exhausted your ammo. But throw up a QMB with the same aircraft as a friendly, and he goes down after a single cross word... It may be a form of penalty for shooting at your wingmen, you know, depriving them of their support in the fight later, or keeping them from gaining experience and becoming more valuable in your campaign.

Simply put, I question whether a QMB friendly AI's DM is the same as the same aircraft type's DM for a hostile ai, or if either of these is truly comparable to a LAN or online aircraft flown by a live pilot.

cheers

horseback