PDA

View Full Version : Gunnery fixes generate problems?



Magister__Ludi
03-08-2004, 06:52 PM
It's good to see that there are some fixes related to gunnery.

Most important to me is that machine guns hits do less structural damage but they hit harder the engine and the fuel tanks. The proportion is still not entirely correct but it is an improvement: before AEP you could cut the wings of any fighter except P-47 with only 2 machine gun hits. That was very unrealistic because it made machine guns a much harder hitting weapon than cannons, which is absurd, not to mention that it is much easier to land to MG hits on a wing than to cannon hits on a wing. Now you generally need between 10 and 20 hits to cut the wing (there are even differences between wings), still less than in reality, a ww2 fighter wing needed at least 50 hits to be cut off.

Another improvement is the small caliber MG rounds: they are more effective than in the past, which is good, but there is still a much too big difference in effectiveness between SHKAS and the rest of small MGs; compare SHKAS and MG81: 1800 to 1600rpm and 850 to 750m/s, quite a small difference, it should be hard to notice; not in the game though.

Now the bad part:
All the cannons are less effective against airframes, which is not right, even before AEP most fighters could soak effortless more than 15-20 20mm hits, now they seem even more able to do it. And now a new breed of fighters have appeared: those that can stand 30mm hits. Before AEP there was some inconsistecy regarding the effects of 30mm hits, sometime you could hit Yaks or Las repeatedly with no effect other times they exploded on the first hit. Now we have fighter that do not even blink when hit, fighters like P-47, P-38 even jets like P-80. How is that possible? I send a 30mm shell through the jet pipe and all I see is a healthier than ever P-80? I hit controls with 30mm and for no effect?? wings can stand multiple hits, and srapnel does nothing to the engine - why is that? P-47 and P-38 share the same behaviour.

Somewhat unrelated but still dissapointing: why Jumos and BMW jets ignite for only a couple of MG hits and YP-80 can eat a lot of them? Is it armoured? No it's not. The damage model under fire should be the same for these jets. For example I engage offline a couple of P-80 - I hit twice one of them from close distance with 30mm at high angle of deflection and the srapnel from the hits ignites my engines?? but P-80 leaves unharmed. That was really a showstopper.

Magister__Ludi
03-08-2004, 06:52 PM
It's good to see that there are some fixes related to gunnery.

Most important to me is that machine guns hits do less structural damage but they hit harder the engine and the fuel tanks. The proportion is still not entirely correct but it is an improvement: before AEP you could cut the wings of any fighter except P-47 with only 2 machine gun hits. That was very unrealistic because it made machine guns a much harder hitting weapon than cannons, which is absurd, not to mention that it is much easier to land to MG hits on a wing than to cannon hits on a wing. Now you generally need between 10 and 20 hits to cut the wing (there are even differences between wings), still less than in reality, a ww2 fighter wing needed at least 50 hits to be cut off.

Another improvement is the small caliber MG rounds: they are more effective than in the past, which is good, but there is still a much too big difference in effectiveness between SHKAS and the rest of small MGs; compare SHKAS and MG81: 1800 to 1600rpm and 850 to 750m/s, quite a small difference, it should be hard to notice; not in the game though.

Now the bad part:
All the cannons are less effective against airframes, which is not right, even before AEP most fighters could soak effortless more than 15-20 20mm hits, now they seem even more able to do it. And now a new breed of fighters have appeared: those that can stand 30mm hits. Before AEP there was some inconsistecy regarding the effects of 30mm hits, sometime you could hit Yaks or Las repeatedly with no effect other times they exploded on the first hit. Now we have fighter that do not even blink when hit, fighters like P-47, P-38 even jets like P-80. How is that possible? I send a 30mm shell through the jet pipe and all I see is a healthier than ever P-80? I hit controls with 30mm and for no effect?? wings can stand multiple hits, and srapnel does nothing to the engine - why is that? P-47 and P-38 share the same behaviour.

Somewhat unrelated but still dissapointing: why Jumos and BMW jets ignite for only a couple of MG hits and YP-80 can eat a lot of them? Is it armoured? No it's not. The damage model under fire should be the same for these jets. For example I engage offline a couple of P-80 - I hit twice one of them from close distance with 30mm at high angle of deflection and the srapnel from the hits ignites my engines?? but P-80 leaves unharmed. That was really a showstopper.

Heart_C
03-08-2004, 07:05 PM
Good stuff. That was so sophisticated, well thought after and complete, you'll fish a whole ocean clean with that one. I would like to meet you in person some day. People like you must have BIAS written on their head.

Magister__Ludi
03-08-2004, 07:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Heart_C:
Good stuff. That was so sophisticated, well thought after and complete, you'll fish a whole ocean clean with that one. I would like to meet you in person some day. People like you must have BIAS written on their head.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't understand, who's bias are you criticising, mine or developer's? Do you thing that American jet engines could be hit more times than the German jets? Why?

Heart_C
03-08-2004, 07:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
I don't understand, who's bias are you criticising, mine or developer's? Do you thing that American jet engines could be hit more times than the German jets? Why?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was not all what your posting was about, was it? What I think? I think you need to rest, Huck. That's all. Just to rest.

Magister__Ludi
03-08-2004, 07:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Heart_C:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
I don't understand, who's bias are you criticising, mine or developer's? Do you thing that American jet engines could be hit more times than the German jets? Why?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was not all what your posting was about, was it? What I think? I think you need to rest, Huck. That's all. Just to rest.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks heart, you're kind.

Next time try trolling with arguments, there are good teachers around. It pays off, you'll see.

Heart_C
03-08-2004, 07:28 PM
Good night Huck.

Magister__Ludi
03-08-2004, 07:32 PM
Good night heart.

Hunde_3.JG51
03-08-2004, 08:01 PM
Heart, I see what you are getting at but please listen. I have played AEP on arcade mode almost since I bought it because I noticed DM changes early on. A couple of interesting things have happened:

I took a Spitifre, after merge I shoot FW-190A4 with initial short burst of.303.s only and it caught fire. I go to external and a total of 2 .303 rounds had hit the 190. Two .303 rounds and she is ablaze.

Took same Spitifre against Lagg-3 ('43), hit it with about 80-100+ (probably more) rounds all over the plane. The result? Nothing, no visible damage, no smoke, nothing. Tried it several more times and not once could I cause any external damage or cause plane to catch fire. Managed 1 pilot kill and one time out of many I got an extremely small trickle of smoke.

I take FW-190 against Lagg-3, and then Lagg-3 against 190. In the 190 I take few hits and every time I am critically wounded or crippled badly. In Lagg-3 I eat numerous cannon rounds with little effect on FM. I have/had a great track which I named "whatever" where I hit a Lagg-3 with about 15-20 20mm rounds and countless small mg rounds and it continues to fight/fly. It then hits me with 1, that is a single 20mm round in wing root and my wing starts dipping severely. Now I understand the AI can fight under crippled circumstance much better than human but flying the Lagg-3 for myself doesn't seem to bear this out. I welcome you to fly/try these two planes back to back in various conditions and tell me the DM's are fine.

I take a Ta-152 and use Mk.108 only. I hit opposing P-63 three times, one in tail, one on top center of each wing when diving vertically on it. Result: minor external damage with no holes, missing pieces, etc.

Yet other times, things seem fine. Planes like the P-40, La-5, P-39, P-51, & others have been very consistent with DM results.

My point is that I am seeing some real oddities after installing AEP. I thought the weapons and DM's were pretty good in 1.22 (except 190 with simplified DM and P-47 which was too tough with an engine that was too weak). I suspect that it is some sort of global DM thing but I think there may be some things that need to be worked out.

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

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

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Mon March 08 2004 at 07:19 PM.]

PzKpfw
03-08-2004, 08:07 PM
I think we would need to know more about the DM before any hard conclusions can be made. Ie, damage modeling of 20 & 30mm shells their effectiveness depends much on the type of projectile type Ie, AP, HE, HE-I. For MGs AP, API etc.

As well as the location of hit, Ie, an 20mm round hits a P-47: the HE detonation sprays fragments over a cone, the HE's bursting alone might not destroy the P-47, but the fragments might damage several major subsystems, Ie, wiring, control cables, etc.

An .50Cal AP round lodged in a fuel tank might not be bad, but a .50Cal AP-I round in the same spot might be lethal. The Japanese 20mm rounds were initialy fused to detonate on impact, which was suited for engageing canvas skinned AC etc, but made them much less lethal vs aluminum skinned AC, 20mm HE with delayed bursters, provided much better performance, as they exploded after penetration.


The Soviets found an 50Cal AP round cleanly penetrated the Bf 109s seat armor @ 400ms, while the US found that radios etc installed behind the pilot seat often deflected and or minimised 13mm & 20mm cone damage etc.


It's interestimng the British initialy found 20mm AP was more effective vs German fighters then HE. Then we have ruggedness of AC, Ie, the Germans found it took an average of 20 20mm hits to down a B-17, & an average of 7 20mm to down a fighter, one could assume for example an realy rugged fighter like the P-47 would require even more on average.

How detailed is the ballistic modeleing in IL-2?. I'm not saying their is or is not a problem in the ACE DM etc, just pointing out it would be good to know how IL-2 handels ballistic modeling & damage etc, as well before jumping to conclusions.


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.

[This message was edited by PzKpfw on Mon March 08 2004 at 07:27 PM.]

clint-ruin
03-08-2004, 08:20 PM
It wasn't too long ago that Huckles was posting about similar issues in ORR:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=30310959&r=34710959#34710959

I would not completely rule out changes at this point, but I think that Huckles has pretty much blown through his supply of credibility.

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

WWMaxGunz
03-08-2004, 09:59 PM
Maybe external explosions aren't doing as much structural damage with the more complex DM's, the effects aren't being shared clear down to the bones.

Just out of curiosity I looked again at Olegs' Guns and Ammo table to see how the 151/20 stacks up. 1 of 5 shells is AP, then there is 2xHE and then 2xMG. To me, the HE shells should be as AP with a small charge and on the chart the AP is also incendiary with charge power as .0036 as opposed to HE charge power as .0044. Both of those has mass of .115 and velocity of 710. I wonder if the HE rounds are exploding on the skins and can only get in through holes that are not mapped but only as graphic states? Might that explain some things?

Then I look at the Hispano 20mm. Every other round is AP with HE and HET in between, HET-AP-HE-AP. The AP mass is .124 and the velocity is 860 giving a more powerful AP hit than the 151/20.

I wish that Oleg would update the Guns Table to include Rate of Fire used information to include if synchronized or unsynchronized use. For now I cannot say how many AP per second each of those guns makes in the sim.


Neal

Hunde_3.JG51
03-08-2004, 10:11 PM
After another few hours of testing:

I really believe that is is a global thing. All cannons seem weaker (yes, even VVS) offline. Heavy mg's seem about the same or weaker. Small mg's are about the only thing that seems stronger. Big cannons are still devastating, but the occasional oddity rears its ugly head. I'm sure DM's were changed, I have no doubt, and it appears it will take more hits to down planes and require more specificity in hitting critical areas.

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

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

Heart_C
03-09-2004, 02:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
After another few hours of testing:

I really believe that this is a global thing. All cannons seem weaker (yes, even VVS) offline. Heavy mg's seem about the same or weaker. Small mg's are about the only thing that seems stronger. Big cannons are still devastating, but the occasional oddity rears its ugly head. I'm sure DM's were changed, I have no doubt, and it appears it will take more hits to down planes and require more specificity in hitting critical areas.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

See that? I agree fully with it. Long before the original topic starter came up with this thread, there were plenty of others already from people experiencing exactly what you wrote. And I can confirm it. There has been an overall change in weapon effectiveness / DM. And I can tell you, the heavy machine guns are not about the same either, but weaker, too. Flown Jugs and Mustangs to death already before AEP. Now, Huck of course welcomes the less effective 50s, calls it a "fix", but cries only about his LW cannons. This is bias in its most natural form. And they (the 50s) do not hit harder to the fuel and engine for the loss of structural damage infliction now, like he said earlier. Simply not true. If anyone is fine with what the 50s are now, he must have no idea about what 6 heavy machine guns mean. Maybe we can talk about it when we assume that we are still using only AP rounds. But I wonder what's the reason NOW that AP&gt;I&lt; rounds should still not be modelled after we've basicly moved further to the Western Front option (or why are there US/British skins for the Western allied rides?) Surely they cannot be API when I look at what 50s do (or do not do) to A6Ms.
And I say the cannons are really too weak now. I myself entered 3 30mm and several (around 6) 20mm into a Kingcobra with my Me-110 and it just kept on flying, only leaking oil smoke. This cannot be accurate.
I agree that weapon effectiveness was pretty realistic in 1.22. Too bad Oleg never speaks too openly about how things are calculated or what changes are based on. Surely it would help to understand and reconsider, or correct errors in his / their calculations. When we look back now and see where we come from, and how DM/FM in this game has changed many times, I guess no one of the developers can claim immunity to errors. No offense here, this is something very normal. But making obvious changes and then not commenting on them when people ask, or even denying any changes (like on DM here) when everyone notices them, is unfortunate.

Regards
heartc

Disclaimer: Yeah, this Add-On is overall very good, I like it very much and had already a ton of fun with it. The IL-2 series is still the best current prop sim series on the market.

CHDT
03-09-2004, 03:14 AM
If the 50's are so weak now, there's a real "realism" problem!

http://gallery.cybertarp.com/albums/userpics/16105/PV-1%20Ventura%2010.JPG

Amicalement,

CHDT
03-09-2004, 03:16 AM
Don't know why the pic is cropped on the forum:

so the end of the sentence is: "....a straffing attack could cut a small ship in half."

Cheers,

Functio
03-09-2004, 03:16 AM
It's hard to sometimes see what is going on WRT the DM. But one thing that I've noticed is that the Bf109 is very prone to any sort of engine damage - it's as if it's oil-cooler is 6 feet wide! A few hits from, for example, a .303 and it starts to smoke. Other fighters with chin-mounted oil coolers don't seem to suffer from this problem. It also seems to lose it's engine to small amounts of gunfure very quickly. Compare it to the unarmoured Zero and the Zero seems alot tougher. And I'm stating this as someone who doesn't often fly the Bf109 (I much prefer the Fw190) - I'm just noting that it's very very easy to knock out a Bf109 with just a few MG hits, and that this factor stands out from the other planes in AEP (as was the case in FB also).

Heart_C
03-09-2004, 03:21 AM
CHDT, the pic is not cropped for me, I can read it.

WWMaxGunz
03-09-2004, 04:05 AM
Small wooden ship? Or big boat really? I've read a book from a Marine Aviator about experiences from Henderson Field and he described strafing wooden Japanese supply barges to set them on fire and blow holes through the bottom but never about cutting one through. How many 50's on a Corsair?

We had 30 cal belt fed MG's in the Army that could chop trees down even far away. They reduced berms and tore up logs given time... but none of those were armored or moving. Still those slugs were very powerful and things like cars are not considered as cover, you could get killed right through two car doors at combat range.

It takes a lot of 303 hits to knock control surfaces off an He-111 now but only a couple or even one in the right place to smoke an engine on one, or make a fuel leak. A good spray from close up gets results. Range really matters with the 303's too... get within 150-200m and the damage is much more.

Compared to the Spit cannons, the 50's take longer to do the same and compared to the Mk 108's the Spit is pretty lightweight. I flew the A4 and when I could get hits (checked with Arcade=1) it was good but it's easier to get hits on a target drone in the Spit since I can see them better while lining up to shoot. The bar really must be lowered! The A4 cannon are not as strong as the Hispano on that chart Oleg posted back in 2002, IIRC.


Neal

Hunde_3.JG51
03-09-2004, 06:12 AM
Heart, I agree. .50's do seem weaker as do all heavy mg's. Glad you noticed oddities with large cannons and P-63 (even though I am sure there are others) as well.

And functio, that is one thing that seems to have changed also, all engines seem a bit more vulnerable.

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

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

Functio
03-09-2004, 07:19 AM
I think the Bf109 suffers the most out of all of the in-line engined fighters. The others seem able to deal with hits to the nose from small-calibre MGs - but the 109 is very easy to knock out with only a few minor hits. If anything, it seems easier now to get oil and lots of smoke from the 109 when hitting it only quite lightly.

Magister__Ludi
03-09-2004, 09:45 AM
I have a question for machine guns whiners on this thread: how many 12.7mm hits do you consider to be enough to cut a fighter wing: 2, 10, 20, 50, 100?

I'll give you a hint: all sources mention that pilots needed more than 1 or 2 seconds of concentrated machine gun fire (usually in 6x0.50in config) against a non maneuvering fighter to cut its wing; this is also consistent with gun camera shots. So how many hits were needed?

mike_espo
03-09-2004, 09:58 AM
I flew a freccia vs a spit V and cut his wing off with the two breda 12.7mms. I had to keep the gun trigger depressed for 3 sec. Hit him in the wing root. Range about 50m

PzKpfw
03-09-2004, 10:11 AM
How many .50 rounds are fired in 1 burst?. How do you fire just 2 or 10 rounds?. I have seen ppl here say they saw 2 .303 hits take out a Fw 190 yet, what is to say what you think you saw, graphicly represented in IL-2 was actualy what the game saw?.


I have read accounts of US fighters shearing the wings of Fw 190's etc in half sec bursts, as well as cutting 109s in half, which BTW were manouvering. How many rounds leave 6 x .50cal in half a sec?.

The US tests of P-51B's 4 x.50Cal guns, showed a ROF of about 700-800 rpm, when pulling a full belt of ammunition from the ammo trays through the feeds.


But the tests also showed that those same 4 x .50cal fired at rates in excess of 950rpm when firing near the end of the belt, where the weight & drag of the remaining rounds on the belt was changeing with each shot.


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.

Oleg_Maddox
03-09-2004, 11:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
It's good to see that there are some fixes related to gunnery.

Most important to me is that machine guns hits do less structural damage but they hit harder the engine and the fuel tanks. The proportion is still not entirely correct but it is an improvement: before AEP you could cut the wings of any fighter except P-47 with only 2 machine gun hits. That was very unrealistic because it made machine guns a much harder hitting weapon than cannons, which is absurd, not to mention that it is much easier to land to MG hits on a wing than to cannon hits on a wing. Now you generally need between 10 and 20 hits to cut the wing (there are even differences between wings), still less than in reality, a ww2 fighter wing needed at least 50 hits to be cut off.

Another improvement is the small caliber MG rounds: they are more effective than in the past, which is good, but there is still a much too big difference in effectiveness between SHKAS and the rest of small MGs; compare SHKAS and MG81: 1800 to 1600rpm and 850 to 750m/s, quite a small difference, it should be hard to notice; not in the game though.

Now the bad part:
All the cannons are less effective against airframes, which is not right, even before AEP most fighters could soak effortless more than 15-20 20mm hits, now they seem even more able to do it. And now a new breed of fighters have appeared: those that can stand 30mm hits. Before AEP there was some inconsistecy regarding the effects of 30mm hits, sometime you could hit Yaks or Las repeatedly with no effect other times they exploded on the first hit. Now we have fighter that do not even blink when hit, fighters like P-47, P-38 even jets like P-80. How is that possible? I send a 30mm shell through the jet pipe and all I see is a healthier than ever P-80? I hit controls with 30mm and for no effect?? wings can stand multiple hits, and srapnel does nothing to the engine - why is that? P-47 and P-38 share the same behaviour.

Somewhat unrelated but still dissapointing: why Jumos and BMW jets ignite for only a couple of MG hits and YP-80 can eat a lot of them? Is it armoured? No it's not. The damage model under fire should be the same for these jets. For example I engage offline a couple of P-80 - I hit twice one of them from close distance with 30mm at high angle of deflection and the srapnel from the hits ignites my engines?? but P-80 leaves unharmed. That was really a showstopper.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry to tell you bug gunnery wasn't changed. Just was done the Complex Damage model stucture for "missed" in the past FW-190 from the list of flyables.

And I would suggest to hit in P-80 the exact places that are really very vulnerable for hits...

WWMaxGunz
03-09-2004, 12:30 PM
John Waters;

Make a track of shooting and then exit the sim.
Set Arcade=1 in conf.ini.
Play the track and you will see how many hits.

In reality, how many hits do wing guns put down close enough together except at convergence? Even then, they all don't hit one point unless point harmonized.

From watching with Arcade=1 I have seen a very few make fule leaks, engine damage or crew casualties. Some few may knock off a control surface but many can go through a wing, very many MG rounds, and not break it. Cannon takes less and much more chance of destroying a wing.

In reality I would expect a maneuvering plane with the structure under load to break much sooner if members get cracked much less pierced. A crack under stress is a collector for forces, any sharp corners just magnify them which is why fillets and rounding are good mechanical design. A crack is worse than a smooth hole in general. A hole with cracks... not good either but actually stresses may distribute among the number of crack points and one can be worse.


Neal

PzKpfw
03-09-2004, 01:04 PM
Hi Neal will give it a try, when able.


ROF is also an factor Ie, .50 vs MG 151 the .50 is putting 50 more rounds out than the 20mm, for the same second of fire and the gunnery % is the same, then the .50 is in a position to double it's basic effectiveness over the MG151.

We also cant set convergence in IL-2 like real fighters did Ie, the 8 .50 on the P-47 were generaly set:

2 x - 250yrds
2 x - 350yrds
2 x - 450yrds
2 x - 550yrds

Which gave a density pattern in depth & width @ 200yrds similar to an X. Which gave a much higher % to hit.

Though the above is off topic I would be interested in how IL-2 handels gun convergence & spread over an limited area. Which I'm guessing arcade mode would give an idea?.

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.

Hunde_3.JG51
03-09-2004, 01:35 PM
Yes PzKpfw, I was the one "claiming" to have set a FW-190 ablaze with 2 .303 rounds. How do I know? Easy, I set game to arcade mode (as I have said several times), put my first short burst using only .303's, then counted the arrows (2 of them), which means two 7.62mm rounds hit my Focke-Wulf and set it on fire behind cockpit. I am guessing there is a very specific area where even single small caliber mg round can set the 190 on fire, what else could it be.

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

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

WWMaxGunz
03-09-2004, 11:41 PM
Using Arcade mode to check hits in tracks is a blast. I just wish that there could be an Arcade=2 setting where the word bubbles would go away and specific damage messages like there is HEADSHOT now would come up on the HUD. Good messages would be for FIRE (think it's there, just in the word bubbles it may be covered up), and then degree of damage if not locations. These things would end a lot of confusion and whine potential or at least make answers easier.


Neal

ajafoofoo
03-10-2004, 12:59 AM
There may be a bug in fw where hits do damage along entire trajectory of the arrow (as seen in arcade mode).

Oleg admitted at least to this problem affecting the gunsight so far. The gunsight gets shot out if an arrow points to it. Which means even if the bullet should have stopped in the tail where it entered, it will still knock out the gunsight.

The bug may be more serious and affecting the entire damage model and not just the gunsight.

I have no idea if this is the case, but you never know.

WWMaxGunz
03-10-2004, 03:39 AM
The problem is known. Oleg posted that and expect the fix to be coming.


Neal