Engines are too strong and reliable.

[Jumoschwanz]

If you read enough about the real aircraft that are included in IL2, and if you are an expert on internal combustion engines, then you know that even on Realistic settings IL2 pilots have it too easy when it comes to engine reliability and management.

I do not have a problem with hitting one button and having engines start because it would be an immense amount of work to research and make this accurate for every aircraft in IL2, but the engine reliability and mechanical strength could easily be made more realistic by making the engines more prone and more quick to overheat and break when they are run under WEP or the settings are wrong for mixture, prop pitch etc...


If an engine's mixture is too lean it will overheat and detonate or ping. Under full power detonation or pinging from a lean mixture could blow an engine is seconds by holing a piston or even cracking a head or cylinder.

A too rich mixture could foul plugs and see an engine put out less power for a while or the rest of a flight.

Too high a mechanical supercharger speed at low altitude and full power could blow an engine in seconds.

When WEP was used on some WWII aircraft it was a last-ditch desperate measure, not something done on ever flight, the use of WEP on some engines meant either a mandatory lengthy inspection or a replacement of the engine before a next flight. A realistic setting could put a delay of so much time before a pilot could fly again because he has to wait for this work to be done on his aircraft before it is used again.

Even on realistic settings much of the combat flying in IL2 sturmovik is done at the highest power setting available with no consequences. Some of the aircraft can fly on maximum WEP indefinitely, which is total crap.

It does happen while flying IL2 that some fights are won when an opponent ruins their engine, but it should happen far more often in light of how much time IL2 pilots spend at the highest power settings available to them, and how many of them neglect engine management.

I have worked on, rebuilt, tuned and studied internal combustion engines for close to half a century.

[Aviar]

Unfortunately, the AI still needs work in this area. They can fly at very high RPM's with no penalty to their engine(s). This, at times, may compel the Player to fly in a possibly 'unrealistic' manner, in an attempt to simply 'level the playing field'.

I don't believe those who say the AI use the same FM as the player. It's not true. Spend some time in the FMB creating and testing missions and it will become obvious very quickly. Or just play against the AI a lot.

Engine management (both human and AI) is one of the core facets of IL-2. It would be nice if DT gave this area some more attention.

Aviar

[Treetop64]

Totally agree with Jumo. Another issue is that you can run an engine at high or maximum manifold pressure, while at low RPM, with absolutely no consequence, except for a rise in the CHT in air-cooled engines which can still be managed.

However, the simplified engine dynamics is just a legacy of just how old this game is, and I've come to accept it over time. High-fidelity engine simulation was simply outside the game design philosophy at the time, and now more than a decade later we're paying attention to it.

Having said that, there is no reason why pilots should be able to use WEP as a matter of routine.

[swiss]

Dear jumo, I honestly think you got issues.
I suggest you save some money for a real PL and find your peace there.:grin:

[IceFire]

Unfortunately, the AI still needs work in this area. They can fly at very high RPM's with no penalty to their engine(s). This, at times, may compel the Player to fly in a possibly 'unrealistic' manner, in an attempt to simply 'level the playing field'.

I don't believe those who say the AI use the same FM as the player. It's not true. Spend some time in the FMB creating and testing missions and it will become obvious very quickly. Or just play against the AI a lot.

Engine management (both human and AI) is one of the core facets of IL-2. It would be nice if DT gave this area some more attention.

Aviar
They can always use some more work but I should point out that when the overheat models were changed in 4.13 (or was that 4.12) the AI were also upgraded to deal with the same overheat modelling. Prior to that they were not.

Now they do and the model is the same for AI as it is for players. I'm not sure about other stuff but that one I remember being very happy to see.

[Derda508]

And I remember the whining that started when 4.11 came out with the new engine overheating feature...
You get used to it with practise and certainly it would be possible to get used to an even more difficult level. But is that neccessary? Luckily there is always the option to change settings.
As I stated it before: This is a game. And there is no way to play it "right". As long as you enjoy it it is just the way it´s meant to be
About AI I don´t think they have other FMs, its just doing everything in a perfect way, its doing everything at the same time and instantly when its needed. A human player can´t do that. He can look at just one gauge at a time, then he needs more time to think how to react and even more to adjust the controls. Maybe he is adjusting too much or too little, he has to check and re-adjust. While doing this, he cannot watch the surrondings etc. AI is doing instantly everything right and at the same time are always perfectly aware about all planes, friend or foe, in their field of view and know exactly about their speed and distance. That´s why booming and zooming can be pretty frustrating against AI.
I play Il-2 ´46 exclusively offline (full real, except for Icons because my eyes are not what they used to be) and AI is a challenge for me. CloD (with more challenging engine management) I play exclusively online (full real), the AI is not very interesting, but human players sometimes give me a chance by making more mistakes than I do.

[Jumoschwanz]

A simple test for AI aircraft proving they have limits when flown with realistic settings:

Get in an aircraft that can dive very fast, over 800km/hr without falling apart, then get some aircraft with a low diving speed piloted by Ace AI on your tail at over 3000 meters altitude, you will be able to dive away from them because they will break off before their aircraft reaches a speed where it will break. Case closed.

A lot of guys get shot down in dives by slower aircraft simply because they read situations poorly and are not going as fast as the AI initially.

The Ace AI is very good at a lot of things, and one thing that a computer will do better than most humans is managing every aspect of the aircraft better at all times. It also seems to be able to track opponents better than many human virtual pilots. A simple solution for those who are having trouble fighting Ace AI, is to simply not fly against them, switch them to Veteran or some lower setting so they make more mistakes.

I was flying a late p47 against a dozen ACE AI yesterday and when I kept it fast none of the AI could keep up with my aircraft, I was able to pull distance on them then turn back and make some head-on shots at them. I also escaped a lot of it by diving away while changing direction. It is tough to do if you are not going really quickly and a Mustang is on your tail, but it takes practice like anything else.

On a hot map you can blow the engines of some aircraft by using full power in a fairly short amount of time, this was a recent modification to IL2 and it shows that they could certainly go further in that direction and make the engines react even more quickly when they are abused.

I am sure it would not be popular with "gamers", but if you look on Hyperlobby the general population there has no problem disabling any Realistic settings that spoil their fun, so the development team should not worry about giving flight simmers historical accuracy.

Have the Modders taken any time to make IL2 more of a flight sim while they were busy turning it into a cliched Hollywood action movie? No.......

[majorfailure]

The Ace AI is very good at a lot of things, and one thing that a computer will do better than most humans is managing every aspect of the aircraft better at all times. It also seems to be able to track opponents better than many human virtual pilots. A simple solution for those who are having trouble fighting Ace AI, is to simply not fly against them, switch them to Veteran or some lower setting so they make more mistakes.

AI is way too good at spotting and keeping track of enemy planes - not only ace AI. It just happens far too seldom, that you attack an AI from below 6 and they do not twitch at exactly the right moment. And they seem too aware of anything around them - even at lower levels, and they seem to be able to look and lean in one direction and look to the opposite a split second later.
AI is more convincing to me than ever before, but it could IMHO still use some improvement.

[IceFire]

AI is way too good at spotting and keeping track of enemy planes - not only ace AI. It just happens far too seldom, that you attack an AI from below 6 and they do not twitch at exactly the right moment. And they seem too aware of anything around them - even at lower levels, and they seem to be able to look and lean in one direction and look to the opposite a split second later.
AI is more convincing to me than ever before, but it could IMHO still use some improvement.

They still have a kind of radar where if the object is in their viewable arc out to a certain distance they will see it. At least they can't see through the airplane anymore. That was a big change back a couple of patches ago too. You can sneak up on them but it's very hard because if you appear at all in their viewable arc at any point during the approach they will see you and react.

It could be better but I don't want people to think that it hasn't improved since the earlier days. I think they can't see through clouds anymore either but I'm not 100% if that was actually implemented or not.

[Jumoschwanz]

You can lose Ace AI by going through clouds, how could anyone who flies this sim with any frequency not know that???

[IceFire]

You can lose Ace AI by going through clouds, how could anyone who flies this sim with any frequency not know that???
The last few times they still managed to find me so.... :rolleyes:

[majorfailure]

They still have a kind of radar where if the object is in their viewable arc out to a certain distance they will see it. At least they can't see through the airplane anymore. That was a big change back a couple of patches ago too. You can sneak up on them but it's very hard because if you appear at all in their viewable arc at any point during the approach they will see you and react.
That was IMHO partially offset due to AI able to lean right/left and that way they seem to be able to cover even their sixes while still retaining control of their plane - a move which I think is next to impossible to a rookie human player. AI is IMHO too good at doing a lot of things simultaneously.

It could be better but I don't want people to think that it hasn't improved since the earlier days. I think they can't see through clouds anymore either but I'm not 100% if that was actually implemented or not.
It has improved way beyond what I thought possible before around 4.09.
But it still needs a little improvment IMHO. Especially the task overload a rookie in his first few combat actions would typically experience, despite all training - and not all oft them did recieve as thourogh a preparation as early war German/Japanese or mid-late war British/American pilots did.

[sniperton]

That was IMHO partially offset due to AI able to lean right/left and that way they seem to be able to cover even their sixes

You're probably right, but it happened to me a couple of times that I attacked an AI from a climb, that is, from his absolute dead six fully covered, as I believed, by the bottom of his fuselage, and still he broke away as soon as I arrived in firing distance (<300). He may have seen me curving in, but I seriously doubt that he could see me in the last hundred meters of my approach. Either he's got a monstruous rubber-neck to lean out and look back (as you suggest), or he's so clever as to count till ten after I disappeared from his sight... :-P

[Laurwin]

good tactic which works in multiplayer at least, would be to make a diving attack from above and behind.

Dive below the AI, and shoot him when you start zoom climbing, and then continue zooming up.

Adolf Galland used that tactic quite often in Battle of Britain.

[Jure_502]

Well overall I think such AI as it is now, is way much fun then before.
Before they were just speed junkies with bad accuracy, firing their guns allways off (unless a veteran or ace).

Even old campaigns are now way much intensive then before, and when I complete the hardest missions, I feel like I'm happy to be alive - just like reading Clostermann's or other reall ww2 pilots books. Feels intensive.

[majorfailure]

You're probably right, but it happened to me a couple of times that I attacked an AI from a climb, that is, from his absolute dead six fully covered, as I believed, by the bottom of his fuselage, and still he broke away as soon as I arrived in firing distance (<300). He may have seen me curving in, but I seriously doubt that he could see me in the last hundred meters of my approach. Either he's got a monstruous rubber-neck to lean out and look back (as you suggest), or he's so clever as to count till ten after I disappeared from his sight... :-P

Either possibility makes them more unlike human pilots.
good tactic which works in multiplayer at least, would be to make a diving attack from above and behind.

Dive below the AI, and shoot him when you start zoom climbing, and then continue zooming up.

Adolf Galland used that tactic quite often in Battle of Britain.
Have tried it and it works sometimes, but not as often as I'd think a seemingly unsuspecting enemy would be shot down. I in the position of the aatacked would either not see my enemy coming until too late or if I would, then I'd react early - because else I'd risk getting my timing to the break wrong.

[sniperton]

Either possibility makes them more unlike human pilots.

Yep, exactly that was my point. But maybe I've been cheated by my senses, so next time I'll try to record what exactly happens. Cheers :grin: