PDA

View Full Version : This has been put off long enough, it needs to be addressed...



Maj_Death
03-29-2004, 04:38 PM
One thing that has always bugged me in IL2/FB/AEP is that more often than not it takes 20-30 20mm hits or 4-6 30mm hits to down a fighter. This is just silly. In real life the accepted average is 4-6 20mm hits to down the average single engine fighter and 1 (and only 1) 30mm hit to down the average single engine fighter. This means planes are about 400-600% more durable than the real thing or conversly, cannons are 25% to 17% as powerful as they should be. It is likely too late for this to be addressed in the first patch for AEP but a second patch could correct it. Fire, pilot kills and control severings need to be much more common and in the case of 30mm hits, a 30mm hit should simply blow off whatever it hits. If that is the wing, the wing comes off, if that is the tail, the tail comes off and if it is a glancing blow on a stabilizer then that stabilizer should come off. MG's suffer the same problem. While they should not cause catastrophic failures like cannons, they should cause fires and kill crew much easier than they currently do.

Yes I have heard stories of P-47's coming home with 30 20mm holes in them and I've seen the pictures. But these were extremely rare exceptions to the rule and the P-47 had well above average durability. In my oppinion, the A6M is the only plane in AEP that actually goes down as fast as it should. The Spitfire, Hurricane, Bf-109, P-51, I-153, LaGG-3, La-5, La-7, I-16, Yak everything, Mig-3 and probebly a few I forgot should be almost as easy to destroy. The P-38, P-47, Bf-110 and Fw-190 should be slightly tougher but not by much. Maybe 7-10 20mm hits would be reasonable for them.

I do not know why Oleg has made planes in this series so tough but my guess is for the most hated reason of all, "gameplay." If my recommendation is done it will radically alter the "fairness" of this so-called flight sim. Fast planes that pour out tons of bullets will totally dominate slow planes. This would be wonderful for those who like B&Z planes like most american and german planes but terrible for those who like the slow super agile stuff like Yak's and the various bipes. I am certain I'll take a bit of flak for this but this issue has been ignored far too long. It needs to be fixed. I realize it will be very unfair but that isn't the issue for me, I want realism, not fairness. If I wanted fair I would go play Delta Force where 1 bullet kills your enemy every time regardless of how big the bullet is or where it hits.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs for CrazyIvan. If you would like some of them you can get them at http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

Maj_Death
03-29-2004, 04:38 PM
One thing that has always bugged me in IL2/FB/AEP is that more often than not it takes 20-30 20mm hits or 4-6 30mm hits to down a fighter. This is just silly. In real life the accepted average is 4-6 20mm hits to down the average single engine fighter and 1 (and only 1) 30mm hit to down the average single engine fighter. This means planes are about 400-600% more durable than the real thing or conversly, cannons are 25% to 17% as powerful as they should be. It is likely too late for this to be addressed in the first patch for AEP but a second patch could correct it. Fire, pilot kills and control severings need to be much more common and in the case of 30mm hits, a 30mm hit should simply blow off whatever it hits. If that is the wing, the wing comes off, if that is the tail, the tail comes off and if it is a glancing blow on a stabilizer then that stabilizer should come off. MG's suffer the same problem. While they should not cause catastrophic failures like cannons, they should cause fires and kill crew much easier than they currently do.

Yes I have heard stories of P-47's coming home with 30 20mm holes in them and I've seen the pictures. But these were extremely rare exceptions to the rule and the P-47 had well above average durability. In my oppinion, the A6M is the only plane in AEP that actually goes down as fast as it should. The Spitfire, Hurricane, Bf-109, P-51, I-153, LaGG-3, La-5, La-7, I-16, Yak everything, Mig-3 and probebly a few I forgot should be almost as easy to destroy. The P-38, P-47, Bf-110 and Fw-190 should be slightly tougher but not by much. Maybe 7-10 20mm hits would be reasonable for them.

I do not know why Oleg has made planes in this series so tough but my guess is for the most hated reason of all, "gameplay." If my recommendation is done it will radically alter the "fairness" of this so-called flight sim. Fast planes that pour out tons of bullets will totally dominate slow planes. This would be wonderful for those who like B&Z planes like most american and german planes but terrible for those who like the slow super agile stuff like Yak's and the various bipes. I am certain I'll take a bit of flak for this but this issue has been ignored far too long. It needs to be fixed. I realize it will be very unfair but that isn't the issue for me, I want realism, not fairness. If I wanted fair I would go play Delta Force where 1 bullet kills your enemy every time regardless of how big the bullet is or where it hits.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs for CrazyIvan. If you would like some of them you can get them at http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

VW-IceFire
03-29-2004, 06:36 PM
The DM globals got a good tweaking with AEP...it still needs to be tweaked. I'm hoping thats addressed in the future patch.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

SkyChimp
03-29-2004, 06:38 PM
I nailed a Yak-9 3 times with my 30mm, knocking one aileron and one elevator off. The plane manuevered like it had never been touched.

Regards,
SkyChimp
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/skychimp.jpg

xTHRUDx
03-29-2004, 07:58 PM
game needs an insta-gib setting option. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

ElfunkoI
03-29-2004, 08:09 PM
In another thread reporting bug in 20mm it was said there is disproportionate number of AP to HE/Mine rounds. Twas a bug. So I am assuming this is going to be fixed, then we will see our 20mm doing what 20mm is supposed to do. (speaking for mg151/20)

"A6?http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Will be A6!"

Edit: And IIRC it was Robert Johnson with 21 20mm hits (and much much more rifle calibre). If there had been 9 more 20mm hits I doubt he would have survived.

VW-IceFire
03-29-2004, 08:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I nailed a Yak-9 3 times with my 30mm, knocking one aileron and one elevator off. The plane manuevered like it had never been touched.

_Regards,_
_SkyChimp_
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/skychimp.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I also hit a FW190 with 3-4 37mm cannon rounds in an offline dogfight and he was still flying. The 5th of course caused a major structural failure and the plane disintegrated but that was still a little wild to the extreme. Its happening on all sides of the equation...

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

ElfunkoI
03-29-2004, 08:14 PM
Hehe. If only the 190 would still manuever as if it wasn't hit...or better yet after it gets hit let it manuever like a yak. Wouldn't life be grand. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

"A6?http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Will be A6!"

noshens
03-29-2004, 08:59 PM
We get this sort of topic in every page or two, I just hope Oleg sees them.

Korolov
03-29-2004, 09:27 PM
I gotta agree with this. Cannon fire from all planes seems to be pure fodder, and HMGs are only slightly better. You have to be very careful and very sharp to get a critical hit needed to take a plane out. It doesn't help much that both the AI and humans don't easily call it quits and hit the silk - I can understand why human players wouldn't, but AIs should be treated differently. Heavy damage barely even affects AI, whereas a pilot in real life would just hit the silk with 5 big gaping holes in the right wing (if the plane even flew anymore).

Cannons feel like they're shooting small bags of frozen peas, with about the same lethality. I used to think cannons weren't all that different from HMGs, until I saw and compared a .50 cal round to a 20mm round. Looking at the 20mm, you just KNOW it's going to cause a world of hurt for anything it hits. Move up to heavy caliber cannon, and it makes me wonder how a P-38, much less a Yak or La-7, can take 5-10 of those big arse Mk108 rounds. Even the non-explosive rounds are bound to do some critical damage in one form or another. I could understand them just making a light hole through a elevator or unarmored part, but in areas like the wing root and fuselage, it's just plain silly.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

CaptainGelo
03-29-2004, 09:30 PM
Amen...

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/Animation3.gif

crazyivan1970
03-29-2004, 09:58 PM
I am not free to give any details... but difference between off-line and on-line is significant... all i can say, wait for the patch guys http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

PzKpfw
03-29-2004, 10:02 PM
IIRC didn't Oleg say they changed te DM, made it more realistic? aded structure to all planes, If thats the case & the weapons model remained untouched that their I'm thinking would cause a problem if the weapons performance wasn't also adjusted to compensate for the new DM changes Ie, you have an IL-2FB weapons system vs a new ACE AC damage model that factors in more data then FBs DM concerning weapons hit locations ever had to simulate.

Ie, adding 10 more mm armor to an PzKpfw V
w/o adjusting an 90mm guns penetration model to compensate would cause severe problems in an detailed penetration model, that relied on the original armor thickness etc.

Basicly any change to code can have unforseen consequences to the whole model system.


Regards, John Waters

---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

------
"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

Maj_Death
03-29-2004, 10:08 PM
That is a good point and that has added to the problem I think. But this is an issue dating back to IL2 v1.0. Planes in IL2 have always been WAY too tough. What prompted me to post this was Gib's 24 page thread on the Browning 12.7mm. In the past I have commented on the MG17 and other individual guns but I now realize that it is just a global issue which affects almost all guns in IL2/FB/AEP.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs for CrazyIvan. If you would like some of them you can get them at http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

Nikodemus-LH
03-29-2004, 10:34 PM
Hi guys .
I allso think that the planes are much tougher in this game than in real life .
But you have to remember that the shooting is MUCH easier too.
Because planes fly much shoother ,there ist any winds or "airpockets" and no vibration caused by engine/ turbulence.
So it is possible to hit enemy even from 600m +.
At least now we have more realistic chance RTB than before 2.0

but maybe a little bit of tweakin would be needed in damage modelling.

Shot2Pieces
03-29-2004, 10:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I am not free to give any details... but difference between off-line and on-line is significant... all i can say, wait for the patch guys http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're not allowed to give details of bug fixes? The story of IL2: we get excited about upcoming patches that fix things that were broken by the previous patch...

[This message was edited by Shot2Pieces on Mon March 29 2004 at 09:52 PM.]

Hunde_3.JG51
03-29-2004, 10:43 PM
I reported this 2 days after AEP was released so obviously I agree. I even made a poll asking if others noticed a change but nobody responded http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. Thought I was going crazy there for awhile until others slowly started noticing, now it is everywhere http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. I can appreciate a change to make things more realistic but I thought in 1.22 we finally had some decent weapon/DMing (for the most part). Just hope it gets fixed.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

chris455
03-29-2004, 10:49 PM
Thanks for the ray of hope, CrazyIvan
"Small bags of frozen peas" Korolov?? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif http://members.cox.net/miataman1/P47.jpg

Bearcat99
03-29-2004, 11:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I am not free to give any details... but difference between off-line and on-line is significant... all i can say, wait for the patch guys http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have any idea when that may be? 2 weeks? 3 weeks? May? I know you are limited in what you can say.. but ummmmmm http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

clint-ruin
03-29-2004, 11:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I am not free to give any details... but difference between off-line and on-line is significant... all i can say, wait for the patch guys http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I completely agree that removing that post of Olegs email was the right thing for you to do .. it was certainly confusing for a while there with no "official" statement on the root cause having been made. But it seems pretty clear that FBs networking components [prediction vs lag vs anticheat] do seem to be the cause of the perception of change in the gunnery and DM modelling.

I would agree with the initial poster that ever since Il-2 V1.0 there's been a certain lattitude in the damage planes are able to take. But I think the difference really isn't totally out of order once hit location and round type used are taken into consideration. Figures Butch2k posted recently recommended 2 "explosive" hits from the MK108 to down a fighter, as an aside on that issue.

It is important to remember that replicating historical "rounds per kill" is at least as complicated an issue to replicate in-game as any other aspect of aircrafts performance.

When people post data on climb rates and fail to specific map, speed schedule during climb, "prop pitch" as appropriate, radiator settings, or their throttle position and use of boost, that's enough to make any comparison to a specific figure impossible.

When people post "I needed 30 rounds to kill a fighter" and fail to specify which specific type of rounds hit, where, and at what angle, that tells us a lot more about the validity of that as a comparitive test, rather than FBs modelling of guns and damage.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

LLv34_Flanker
03-29-2004, 11:40 PM
S!

I totally agree with Maj.Death in this issue. Feels so frustrating to pump a LOT of 20mm into a plane KNOWN to be fragile and see it fight on like nothing ever hit it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I also agree that FIRES should start more often. These planes had grease, oil, fuel, dust scattered all over them and when an incendiary round with it's VERY hot burning substance hits that one can guess what happens next.

One can say that some planes had self sealing tanks with gases pumped into them to prevent this. Very true against small calibre single hits, but multiple 20mm or greater will for sure start a fire.

What I also would like to see in the future is structural damage under high G turns etc. if the plane has been damaged by gunfire. Now it is non-existant. This feature works in AcesHigh BTW, shoot a plane in a high-G turn and the wing snaps off with a few MG hits, but needs more if the plane is flying in low-G regime...U get the pic.

Ivan's snippet gave hope, let's see what the patch brings to us http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

---------------------------

Flanker
1.Lentue p√¬§√¬§llikk√¬∂ / TO
Lentolaivue 34

"Let Chaos entvine on defenseless soil!"
~Dimmu Borgir~

Fehler
03-30-2004, 12:56 AM
In my opinion, the damage should increase, but so should the disperion of nearly all the guns.

Watch some gun footage. These guys werent shooting lasers. Their bullets (Tracers) bounced around like a nervous ****** at sunday school. Also, read a little and most of the aces preferred to get in close. Why do I ask? Simply put, to get more hits on the target. If they could sniper planes from .5-1KM, dont you think they have preferred THAT method?

The guns we have in IL2 are too accurate, so a dumbing down of the damage seems appropriate.

Appropriate, but not very realistic...

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/FehlerSig.gif
http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/9JG54.html

RAF74_Buzzsaw
03-30-2004, 01:22 AM
Salute

A note to Maj. Death:

The Me110 was not a durable aircraft. It was quite lightly built and disintegrated rapidly under fire.

The low wingloading which makes it turn so well is reflected in the fragility of the structural components.

LLv34_Flanker
03-30-2004, 01:22 AM
S!

Fehler, agreed! Pilots wanted to get close so their hits would be lethal faster and at the same time they could save precious ammo they carried for another encounter.

It would also be interesting to see how heating up of the barrels would reduce the accuracy of the guns. When firing long bursts the barrel heats up causing more dispersion and down goes the accuracy. There's only 1 flight sim I know of that models this..Target:Rabaul(and other Target-series). Maybe in BoB? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

---------------------------

Flanker
1.Lentue p√¬§√¬§llikk√¬∂ / TO
Lentolaivue 34

"Let Chaos entvine on defenseless soil!"
~Dimmu Borgir~

LEXX_Luthor
03-30-2004, 01:46 AM
You fellas/fellattes want increased dispersion? I can see why ya'll shy away from Gibbage's Dispursion Thread, they would cut your legs off. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I would add the Aces may, or may not, get close for better aiming too, regardless of dispersion. I dunno.



__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

WWMaxGunz
03-30-2004, 02:04 AM
I had no idea the LaGG-3 and La's should be so easy to shoot down as the Yaks and other lightweights. The LaGG's and La's were very sturdy planes, on the order of P-40's for structural strength. Not light fighters at all.

One thing I see in offline tests is the explosive rounds that should IMHO be disabling or killing pilots and crew rarely even do so. A 20mm HE round exploding on the cockpit glass does nothing, for example. HE exploding inside right within inches of the pilots' head does nothing on average even when on playback I see arcade fragment lines go through the pilot. And yet if I get slow for 2 seconds anywhere behind a bomber then on the first burst in the first round or 2 I get PK'd through the armorglass. Perspex stops shells but 190 windshield glass is the PK spot.

How much easier would kills be with pilots vulnerable to fragments?


Neal

WWMaxGunz
03-30-2004, 02:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
You fellas/fellattes want increased dispersion? I can see why ya'll shy away from Gibbage's Dispursion Thread, they would cut your legs off. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I would add the Aces may, or may not, get close for better aiming too, regardless of dispersion. I dunno.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gibbage is quick to point out how little dispersion most MG's in the game have. JtD has posted the same. That's still being argued but it's clear enough there are differences.


Neal

KGr.HH-Sunburst
03-30-2004, 03:15 AM
im with you on this one Maj_Death
its so frustrating to hit an enemy plane with 20 Mg 151 hits and after the smoke clears up it has only a fuel tank leak and some engine smoke "Cough" P-63 /Ki-84 Cough"

the DM on most A/C is FUBAR sometimes im thinking this SIM is nothing more than an average quake game,i mean a week ago i was flying onwhine when i saw a P-63, he cruising for home base when i popped out of the cloud in my 109G i sneaked behind him and shot all my ammo in to him(30MM) he was making a slow turn that gave me the perfect shot all over his fuselage (maybe he was away i dunno but he wasnt moving that much but he could turn and roll i didnt shot his controls cus after i was out of ammo he turned harder and started to roll) the conclusion is how on earth can a p63 survive that amount of punishment im talking about 10 mk108 HITS wich i know i hit him hard with the rest i maybe missed but to make it short http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif after all those hits he had only a fuel tank leak engine smoking on the bottom and (1)hole in his wing he flew home and landed safely http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

http://www.freewebs.com/fightingpumas/
http://img31.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/sig-97th.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
03-30-2004, 03:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Gibbage is quick to point out how little dispersion most MG's in the game have. JtD has posted the same. That's still being argued but it's clear enough there are differences.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Gibbage is slow to want to talk about the fact that most FB guns have wide dispersion and only quick to point out the MGs that do have little dispersion. JTD does not want to talk about this at all.

* EDIT:: Sorry, some cannon too have very little dispersion--laser shot cannon. MG17 also have very little dispersion, but this one for some reason is considered as modded correctly (or there would be Whining http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ).

[This message was edited by LEXX_Luthor on Tue March 30 2004 at 02:42 AM.]

M0NS
03-30-2004, 03:39 AM
Agreed for the most part on the big beans like 30mm & 37mm nose cannons - but when comparing guncam footage with FB 20mm effects I think they're pretty much accurate. There is also the factor of luck - I've destroyed fighters with a short burst of 20mm & maybe 2 or 3 hits but I have also turned them into cheese planes with no noticable effect. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

S!

M0NS

"So when Diogenes perceived that he was greatly excited and quite keyed up in mind with expectancy, he toyed with him and pulled him about in the hope that somehow he might be moved from his pride and thirst for glory and be able to sober up a little. For he noticed that at one time he was delighted, and at another grieved at the same thing, and that his soul was as unsettled as the weather at the solstices when both rain and sunshine come from the very same source."

(Dio Chrysostom "Discourse" 4.77-78)

LLv34_Flanker
03-30-2004, 04:22 AM
S!

To add a bit to the damage MG or cannons do. Let's take as an example the Pe-2. In previous versions of FB and even in AEP it is VERY hard to make this plane burn except U blow off an engine.

There are numerous recorded accounts of this particular plane catching fire VERY easily if firing between the fuselage and engine. It has fuel tanks there and even Bf109G-2's "puny" MG17 could make a bomber burn. And in many WW2 guncam footages I've seen a few hits cause a thick smoke with a starting fire already developing to a blaze.

About ruggedness of LagG-3 and La-5. They caught fire as any other fighter, no difference there. They also contain fuel + oil inside the wings and fuselage next to a big hot radial engine.

I know it is anecdotal evidence, but all the interviewed Finnish WW2 pilots recall that even a short burst from MG's, not to even mention cannons, made any VVS opponent to smoke heavily + burn. Pilot kills seemed quite frequent too since in most cases the Russian pilots weren't seen bailing out. Especially hits in the fuselage and nose area resulted in a blaze.

It is easy to see why nose should be vulnerable. Most of the fighters during WW2 had their oil tanks placed very close to the engine, either in front of it as in Bf109 or behind as in Hurricane, Spitfire, Mustang etc. There is also high pressure fuel streaming in the pipes to the engine. So one can easily figure out what happens if You pour in MG + 20mm shells there..filled with HE + incendiary stuff.

I know there are for sure more educated guys than me in aircraft, but with my experience working with military aircraft, I can say that the chance of structural damage and fire when large calibre rounds hit the A/C is VERY high. This is not the case in FB/AEP.

So I really wish Oleg & Team would take a look into the matter. I am not whining here. Let's see what the patch gives for us and then check in again http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

---------------------------

Flanker
1.Lentue p√¬§√¬§llikk√¬∂ / TO
Lentolaivue 34

"Let Chaos entvine on defenseless soil!"
~Dimmu Borgir~

03-30-2004, 04:36 AM
Is it a DM problem or a net connection problem?

Because, no matter how many times I test things again and again and again and again, the "10~20 20mm hit planes flying fine" thing just never happens to me. At least not in offline testings.

And then, in MP games, I'd admit the probability of "oddities" increase dramatically. That's why nowadays I prefer to play with my own countrymen - not much problems there. But venture out one step and play in foreign servers, the problem manifests itself again.

Another problem would be with how the overall DM manifests itself - maybe the whole outer section of the "skin" itself should be considered as another "damageable part" in its totality: meaning -&gt; even if important structures are not fatally damaged enough to cause catastrophical wing snaps, a plane that was literally bathed with 20mm shells would lose its ability to fly due to the lack of lift forces.

Currently, the wing droops down when it is hit, but as long as it holds and some part doesn't snap off, the plane can stay up in the air no matter what.

Maybe they should change it so if a plane receives megabytes of 20mm hits all over the wing, the wing structure may hold but so much of the stressed skin is ripped apart, that the plane begins to fall out of the sky.

..

3ra_DSLam
03-30-2004, 06:34 AM
Agree, in offline missions Brownings ripp off wings easily in online no http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

AndyHigh
03-30-2004, 06:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
To add a bit to the damage MG or cannons do. Let's take as an example the Pe-2. In previous versions of FB and even in AEP it is VERY hard to make this plane burn except U blow off an engine.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This goes for the notorious DB3 as well. I'll give my personal medal of honor and packet of candies to somebody who manages to shoot down 6 of them in a row with 7.62mm mg's in FB/AEP. This was done in real life by Lt. Sarvanto with the cost of 23 bullet holes in his own Fokker D.XXI. The half empty fuel tanks in DB3's should catch flames easily because of fumes generated inside tanks.

I have never managed to kill their tail gunner either which was common practice of wartime FAF pilots.

PikeBishop
03-30-2004, 08:43 AM
Hi Folks,

Now I have a problem with this argument. It's all very well making aeroplanes move as they would in real life but I can see the problem with trying to get a balanced game versus the probability of hits and then damage.
Think about it for a minute....in a real war situation a pilot might be lucky to actually see an enemy aircraft for a few seconds let alone shoot at it. I'm not thinking now of a BoB situation.......but over the whole war period the average number of kills for a pilot averaged out was say 12. This means that in 4 years or so (1,460) days he actually hit and destroyed 12 aircraft. Each of those specific combats may have lasted 5 minutes so one had to wait a long time for that adrenaline rush. Probably there were lots of combats where there were lots of misses and little seen.
That being the case what were the reasons for this?
The REAL difficulty of hitting?
The lengh of time between encounters?
The tolerance of airframes?
The difficulty of hitting anything in general?
The fact that pilots did not want to die and spent most of their time hiding?
Now if you want realism and not get a kill
every 5 minutes like most of us do it would be pretty boring.
Now Oleg has to balance things in terms of probability, so it SEEMS as though it is real however he can tweak the game and I don't think that is easy.
My view is that I like seeing lots of little flashes on my target and would not want thousands of kills after an hour.

regards,

SLP

WWMaxGunz
03-30-2004, 10:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kweassa1:
Is it a DM problem or a net connection problem?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think there's both as 2 different issues.

I can't say much about the online that you haven't covered well.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Maybe they should change it so if a plane receives megabytes of 20mm hits all over the wing, the wing structure may hold but so much of the stressed skin is ripped apart, that the plane begins to fall out of the sky.

..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From track playbacks of offline I've seen time and time again where the only damage is from AP strikes or fragments. Never from blast damage. Even to the crew from shells going off inside the cockpit. No holes in the skin from blasts but then (game fact) damage graphics do not represent actual damage.

And nothing I've done or seen can verify how many hits get ricochetted so I can't say how many apparent hits did not result in real damage.

With the DM's allowing more damage and kills this sim has the potential to turn out aces with 100's of kills in a campaign just for the average player, if he doesn't die from the same vulnerability within 3 missions in 20 campaigns and come whining back about that.

PikeBishop? Ever heard of a guy calls himself Beery?

The other side to average kills is average lifespan. Aces with 5 to 9 kills were not that common in the number of pilots that saw combat, and many of those didn't see the end of the war. Sim players, most of them, expect to be survivor multiple aces and no question about realism settings comes up. In a realistic environment most players would never get any 5 kills before falling prey. They'd be lucky to get one. Of course the AI in a realistic environment would be what amounts to impossible on todays' PC's.


Neal

carguy_
03-30-2004, 11:23 AM
Agreed,this issue is too old not to be fixed.
Everything was great in the beta version of patch 1.2 for FB.I remember ppl saying about other issues that it had gone too far in modifications(vide FW190 maneuverability).However DM was just right.Released 1.2 had no noticable changes in DM.

Heh,when I see the smoke just after a MG151/20 hit it looks as if the cannon shells turned into smoke after hitting the airframe.

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
03-30-2004, 11:35 AM
Some fascinating observations there PikeBishop.

Also, we flight simmers with our small maps run across enemy planes much more then they did in real life, that and half the time the goal was to avoid the enemy airplanes. And, we *always* try to design missions so they are not "boring" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/icon_twisted.gif

Still, if tough nuts like DB3 were made flyable (somebody is working on this I think) then Oleg would probably re~visit DM of planes like that.

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

E_Temperament
03-30-2004, 02:23 PM
I'm currently playing the Lvov41 multiplayer campaign in offline mode using all realistic settings. Maybe my shooting accuracy is lousy I don't know, but I'm spending around 30 minutes on a single lagg-3's six pumping bullets into it and running out of ammo and not even being able to make the engine smoke up. If I'm lucky I can sometimes cause fuel leaks and maybe a PK. Same goes for the I-16 Type 24. However if I get shot at I'll lose my engine or wing and or control cables. I have reverted to using unlimited ammo and going berko on the trigger and it's still the same story, just seems a bit off balanced to me?

PBNA-Boosher
03-30-2004, 06:25 PM
Maj Death, one thing you might want to know is that FB pilots usually fly a lot more daringly than most WW2 pilots did. What I mean when I say this is that when we get our engine smoking, and we still go after an enemy aircraft, this is something most pilots would not do. Most pilots would peel away from the fight even if the smallest signs of smoke showed unless there was immediate danger, like a bandit on their six. Once they were rid of that, they would have gone home. The average FB pilot will still chase after a bandit, even if a wing is filled with holes and ripped open, and their engine is about to flame. That behavior right there, especially if that someone downs two or three more enemy fighters, would usually get a highly distinguishing medal for valor. Also, to tie this up, it only takes about 3-4 hits, sometimes even less than 3, to rip holes and down many fighters in FB in terms of the way real pilots fought. However, in FB, there seems to be a preference in ripping the wing off, when in reality it did not happen too often.

WWMaxGunz
03-31-2004, 02:42 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing the AI's peel off for home when their engines smoke. Instead the smoke stops after a while sometimes and regardless they hang right in. I've watched playbacks and seen the RTB message and still it's like flip a coin to see if they really run. AI planes take damage to the wings and they stay fighting. Not only that but they are masters of the stick and rudder about it. AI does not fear death. With examples like that....

Smart pilots should run just from being outnumbered to certain odds depending on who is flying what. Or at least they should make their firing pass and scoot. If bounced, they should go defensive. They should not attack from disadvantage. That is all AI and players. But smart AI aren't so often and thanks to the miracle of respawn and not wanting to have to fly all the way back to base and try to land, the DF players often enough just fly till they die and come back again and again.

Realism?


Neal

clint-ruin
03-31-2004, 02:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
Maj Death, one thing you might want to know is that FB pilots usually fly a lot more daringly than most WW2 pilots did. What I mean when I say this is that when we get our engine smoking, and we still go after an enemy aircraft, this is something most pilots would not do. Most pilots would peel away from the fight even if the smallest signs of smoke showed unless there was immediate danger, like a bandit on their six. Once they were rid of that, they would have gone home. The average FB pilot will still chase after a bandit, even if a wing is filled with holes and ripped open, and their engine is about to flame. That behavior right there, especially if that someone downs two or three more enemy fighters, would usually get a highly distinguishing medal for valor. Also, to tie this up, it only takes about 3-4 hits, sometimes even less than 3, to rip holes and down many fighters in FB in terms of the way real pilots fought. However, in FB, there seems to be a preference in ripping the wing off, when in reality it did not happen too often.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was going to write a big long post about this but I had to go out and didn't bother.

But what you say is absolutely correct.

Just to cut it down to a reasonable size, three things to think about for damage assessment:

The first comprehensive and complete re-construction of a crashed aircraft occured well after WW2 as far as I know [British Comet crash].

The threshold of damage to blow a plane out of the sky is quite likely not to actually leave anything useful left once it hits the ground.

The threshold of damage to make a plane:
a) run for homebase
b) ditch
c) bailout

..is much, much lower than is usually required to blow it up compeletely.

Ditched aircraft and ground tests are the only ones likely to provide anything much in the way of useful specific information on damage location and type for the purposes of determining what makes an aircraft too badly damage to fly, or to fight.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

jurinko
03-31-2004, 03:29 AM
according to my friend who spent few days in China with Oleg recently, there is a general bug inn AEP V2.0 concerning effectivness of cannon shells, something like the fragments cause no damage at all or similar. The patch is on the good way to correct this. Cannons will rock.

----------------------
Letka.13/Liptow @ HL

"With the advent of the FW 190A, this was not as critical as it once had been. The aircraft was a superb dogfighter, and its pilots used it as such. The previous summer, faced with slashing attacks by the 109s, the constant complaint of RAF pilots was that 'Jerry' didn't stay and fight, totally ignoring the fact that in the 109 this was tactically correct. Now they were repaid in spades: in his new Fw 190A, 'Jerry' stayed and fought as never before."

PikeBishop
03-31-2004, 03:33 AM
Quite right Neal....it is clear as we speak that this area must be hard work for the developers.
This chap Beery by the way.....he wasn't the chap who did the Beery Super Patch for RB2 was he??
It seems to me that the best senario's are things like BoB or Wake Island where it was a forced 'fight or die situation' and then I suppose the men spent most of the combat trying to hide in the clouds for the right position and moment to catch a group unawares and kick the S**t out of them.....THEN run like hell!!
Looking at it this way all we go on about in terms of comparative performance does not amount to much..........Oh!...look there's some baddies....what are they?...don't know....quick dive on them!......fire quickly before he vanishes!.....Oops where did he go?.....Oh, S**t I'm dead............uuuugggh...slump...sigh.....

Bye

SLP

03-31-2004, 03:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jurinko:
according to my friend who spent few days in China with Oleg recently, there is a general bug inn AEP V2.0 concerning effectivness of cannon shells, something like the fragments cause no damage at all or similar. The patch is on the good way to correct this. Cannons will rock.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If that is true, it is indeed good news. The sheer amount of 20mm hits received will have a good chance of bringing the target aircraft down, even if it is not concentrated to a single spot.

It also confirms clint's first assumption that there might be insufficient fragmentation effects to the cannons. (Can't seem to find that post tho')

...

The headbanger is, geez, why do we have to hear that news from someguy in China? Couldn't Oleg have just said it out loud in these forums?

clint-ruin
03-31-2004, 04:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kweassa1:
It also confirms clint's first assumption that there might be insufficient fragmentation effects to the cannons. (Can't seem to find that post tho')

...

The headbanger is, geez, why do we have to hear that news from someguy in China? Couldn't Oleg have just said it out loud in these forums?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Changes in fragment distribution / penetration / deflection was the first thing that occured to me as a possibility, because I couldn't make any different come up in targetted firing. That's all I had data on [though an awful lot] to compare AEP to.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=144104562&r=322100662#322100662

Many reports seem to indicate that whatever is happening, it's much more an online issue than offline, possibly something to do with the gunnery data passing through FBs networking layer. JTDs tests which did show a small but noticable difference were done via an online local game [no lag, minimal prediction difference].

From the data we have I'd be looking more at AEPs anticheat / network protection code causing the usual lag/prediction/hit location issues to stand out massively more than they usually do.

But yeah, I'd wait til we hear a bit more from Oleg about this before it's considered to be nailed down at all.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

[This message was edited by clint-ruin on Wed March 31 2004 at 01:23 PM.]

609IAP_Recon
03-31-2004, 06:48 AM
Wait for patch and reevaluate

Salute!

JG50_Recon

----
http://www.thepassionofthechrist.com

crazyivan1970
03-31-2004, 10:36 AM
What Recon said http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

P.S. Clint, please check your PT, Thanks

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

[This message was edited by crazyivan1970 on Wed March 31 2004 at 10:29 AM.]

Brain32
03-31-2004, 12:39 PM
And I thoght I was the only one...
(P11 with energy shields)

WWMaxGunz
03-31-2004, 05:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PikeBishop:
Quite right Neal....it is clear as we speak that this area must be hard work for the developers.
This chap Beery by the way.....he wasn't the chap who did the Beery Super Patch for RB2 was he??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The same. The name is a psuedo taken from an ace he admires. Beery is a native Brit living in the US. I wasn't sure but you and he might be the same person as there's some similarities in style and views.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It seems to me that the best senario's are things like BoB or Wake Island where it was a forced 'fight or die situation' and then I suppose the men spent most of the combat trying to hide in the clouds for the right position and moment to catch a group unawares and kick the S**t out of them.....THEN run like hell!!
Looking at it this way all we go on about in terms of comparative performance does not amount to much..........Oh!...look there's some baddies....what are they?...don't know....quick dive on them!......fire quickly before he vanishes!.....Oops where did he go?.....Oh, S**t I'm dead............uuuugggh...slump...sigh.....

Bye

SLP<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK the Island forces (I'll call em that because there were pilots of many countries even though mainly British.) were scrambled on short notice and vectored onto the enemy by ground control in attempts to get them fighting soon and as far from targets as possible... it takes time to break up an assault. There must have been some delay when trying to coordinate a large attack, such as was done on occasion, from different squads and airfields on a big wave.

The Germans were likewise in a hurry. Sorry but it's hard for me to imagine a lot of waiting around in all that except by the AA crews.

As far as the dying and dead part, there was a lot of that going on. Some pretty good accounts have been on the web that taught me a few things. i did a good bit of accessing back in 1999 when I started playing EAW.


Neal

Hendar23
04-01-2004, 06:42 AM
Are we all playing the same game? Ok sometime I spray away and do no damage.....but I't cos I'm not hitting. I regularly get kills from one or two cannon rounds. It really depends if you can hit an critical component. It seems to match up with what I've read in WW2 journals...

JorBR
04-01-2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I nailed a Yak-9 3 times with my 30mm, knocking one aileron and one elevator off. The plane manuevered like it had never been touched.

_Regards,_
_SkyChimp_
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Surely it was an AI plane, in spite of now sometimes they spin to death it‚¬īs a known issue they fly flawless most of the time, no matter the damage.

"Never wrestle with a pig; you both get dirty but the pig enjoys it!"

Maj_Death
04-01-2004, 04:48 PM
The fact that the Yak-3 was still flying at all after 2 Mk108 hits is the problem, not that he seemed to be flying fine. Yes human players do take some unrealistic risks but that doesn't change the problems with the damage modeling. A 30mm round or bigger should simply blow the plane in half. No amount of piloting skill can compensate for that. 4-5 20mm rounds should be able to saw the wings off, ignite the fuel tanks or render the tail feathers useless. Once again piloting skill cannot compensate for this type of damage. No WW2 fighter could absorb as much damage as planes in AEP do. That is my complaint. If you think Yak's surviving 2-5 30mm hits or 25 20mm hits was common, I suggest you buy a gun camera film. I garuntee you will change your mind on that within 5 minutes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs for CrazyIvan. If you would like some of them you can get them at http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

clint-ruin
04-01-2004, 05:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maj_Death:
A 30mm round or bigger should simply blow the plane in half. No amount of piloting skill can compensate for that. 4-5 20mm rounds should be able to saw the wings off, ignite the fuel tanks or render the tail feathers useless. Once again piloting skill cannot compensate for this type of damage. No WW2 fighter could absorb as much damage as planes in AEP do. That is my complaint. If you think Yak's surviving 2-5 30mm hits or 25 20mm hits was common, I suggest you buy a gun camera film. I garuntee you will change your mind on that within 5 minutes.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Maj_Death,

I was wondering if you have any opinion on the following post by Butch2k:


According to Report 30 from Luftwaffe "Schiesschul" :
2 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a fighter
3 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a twin engined aircraft
4 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a four engined aircraft

Also according to this report :
@100m expenditure of 11 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter
@200m expenditure of 34 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter
@300m expenditure of 64 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter


http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=815102092&r=815105092#815105092

Or on this post by Kurfurst:

Be sure to check with what type of shell you hit the plane.

There was two types used for the MK 108, in 50%-50% composition : High Capacity Explosive (aka Minengeschoss), that is what basically vaporizes the plane.

The other was Incendirary shell, it contained NO explosives, but a LARGE amount of burning mixture, which guearanteed setting the plane on fire if you hit the fuel tank. It was used because it was very effective vs. large fuel tanks in bomber wings.. however, structural damage it made was not any tougher than a 20mm cannon round.


http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=959102472&r=442106472#442106472

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

VO101_Mahgar
04-01-2004, 06:51 PM
Hi all!

First of all Im glad we, realism fans are quite numerous herehttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I must say I don't understand why Oleg didn't tell openly something is wrong with DM. Afaik he negated all speculations on weapon effectiveness changes from 1.22 to AEP. Then maybe big tournaments like VEF2 or VOW wouldnt switch to AEP...

On the other hand I fully agree with MjDeath. All weapons should do more damage. Especially from short range. Period. You can talk about gameplay, etc. The fact is that Oleg's work is hardly appreciated for the seriousnes and realism never achieved before at this level in a flight sim.

Therefore arguments about "fairness" and compensation of "wind" etc. are simply BS. The fact is that it looks very arcade-like to see a fighter eating 10-20 20mm rounds and not catching fire. Same thing about Lavochkins eating several 30mm...

I was only satisfied once, with the 06beta patch of FB. That was something reflecting all the data, historical info, and words of veteran RHAF, FAF and LW pilots. (Only fire could be more oftenly happening...http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

I hope the coming patch will REALLY fix this matter for once and ever. And I hope it wont tweak down some "particular" planes' performance in compensation. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

S!
Mahgar

SeaFireLIV
04-01-2004, 07:04 PM
Well that`s the AEP patch delayed for a month then! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/1072.gif

609IAP_Recon
04-01-2004, 07:06 PM
no worries mate, Oleg is very close to this game, it won't go unnoticed!

Salute!

JG50_Recon

----
http://www.thepassionofthechrist.com

MaJoWi
04-02-2004, 02:18 PM
Bump!

gun and cannon DM has to be fixed.


MaJoWi

04-02-2004, 02:31 PM
Another noteable thread at:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111645

Indianer.
04-05-2004, 08:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I am not free to give any details... but difference between off-line and on-line is significant... all i can say, wait for the patch guys http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/vfc/home.htm

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yeah Ivan....nice one..........rubbish.

"Wer auf die preussische Fahne schwort, hat nichts mehr, was ihm selber gehort"

Enofinu
04-05-2004, 01:36 PM
Mahgar, range wont affect much when using HE ammo, it only need to penetrate airplane skin and KABOOM there http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif no KE needed.