Pilot kill after pilot kill. How do they do it??

[Torian]

Well we had had quite a break on the ATAG server while certain pilots had an extended break but now they are back and getting something like a 95% pilot kill rate...u know, you are in a dogfight and then ur screen suddenly goes black.
These guys are all of one nationality and are all on the same TS server together and do work well together. But PK after PK after PK and often in quick succession. Is it wrong to start asking questions??
Had one of them PK me twice on the server today while I was pulling fast moves in IIa and would have been a difficult target just to hit let alone PK and I mean no bullets whizzing by or anything just a sudden black PK screen both times. I know a lot of u fly 109s and blue exclusively and just wonder if any1 can explain how even a good pilot can pull this off 95% of the time LEGITIMATELY ? Please help me out. I fly a 109 every now and then and can't for the life of me work out how u could do it routinely. I know u can get a headshot hack in 1st person shooters (seen it often enuff) but is it possible something like this is being used in CloD ? It would be good if we could have a level headed discussion about this and not turn it into a flame war and have the thread deleted. If there is something dodgy happening then it has the potential do a lot of damage to the community.

[SlipBall]

It is possible depends on the pilot/loadout/patience :)

[Anders_And]

I honestly dont think there is any cheating going on in CLOD. As a 109 driver alone I am amazed(coming from warclouds in il2) how easy some red flyers go down in this game. Situational awareness seems gone. Turns that give a perfect setup and perfect target. I was on for 3h yesterday and only once did i even get shot at... I did cause a few PK but it seems to be more luck than anything! Maybe something in the new patch?? I cant remembee causing so many PK before. Saying that, also the 109 seems more sensitive to PKs...

[Ataros]

100% AP rounds and shooting at convergence (see convergence settings below the video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZczgdRRdGV8&feature=channel&list=UL

It is easier to do this with E1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSIj6AfOh4M&feature=plcp

[Anders_And]

Ataros are you Mr X?

[SlipBall]

Ataros are you Mr X?


That is the rumor now :-P

[Ataros]

Ataros are you Mr X?

No, but I like his tactics and shooting skills and asked him about convergence, loadouts, etc.

He uses 50% non-linear setting in elevator BTW. Good for shooting but not good for stall-fighting. He was not very good in a 1 vs. 1 championship BTW probably because of this.

His video thread on the forum http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=29379 (good training videos but mostly in Russian)

[David198502]

well, there is definitely some cheating going on...
ive seen for example a spit with only one wing turning like crazy for about 10minutes, while about 10 109s were shooting at it on ATAG above Folkstone...
it just didnt go down...it turned like it didnt had no damage at all...it only went down when i managed to kill the pilot....this was approximately 3months ago...

on the same day one of our RAF pilots told us, that they have seen a 109 flying with supersonic speeds around shooting like crazy...

...but about the pilotkills...well maybe they are just good pilots, have a good loadout and are skilled in aiming...

[pupo162]

in 1946 people would make the head of pilot a 10 meter sphere.

given how easy it is to hack Cod, i wouldnt be surprised same is happening.

[Anders_And]

This all sounds like lag to me...

[Anders_And]

in 1946 people would make the head of pilot a 10 meter sphere.

given how easy it is to hack Cod, i wouldnt be surprised same is happening.

Why would they do that Pupo. Only the person with cheat install would benefit from it. So if u wanted to fly around with a 10m head be my guest but u cant make everyone elses head 10m in size!

[Borsch]

People play single player and feel themselves as absolute aces and then the rude awakening of the multilayer brings them down a notch and produces cognitive dissonance that leads to them talking about cheating... People are much better than the AI ok? :)

Its the same story with BF3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBFZh3jFAi4&feature=g-u-u

There are quite a lot of people who are AWESOMELY better then you, just admit it and try to improve. If you give a firing solution to your enemy, expect to die - simple as.

[BGs_Ricky]

As Ataros suggests I's say that probably getting the right ammo belt could increase the percentage of PK. Much more "gaming the game" than cheating, as those loadouts are probably not historically correct. My two cents.

[pupo162]

Why would they do that Pupo. Only the person with cheat install would benefit from it. So if u wanted to fly around with a 10m head be my guest but u cant make everyone elses head 10m in size!

well, in 1946 it was possible. it may be possible in COD. i dotn really hack so dont ask me how.

all im saying is that i wouldnt be surprise if the game was being hacked, and VAC was not working.

[Insuber]

well, there is definitely some cheating going on...
Ive seen for example a spit with only one wing turning like crazy for about 10minutes, while about 10 109s were shooting at it on atag above folkstone...
It just didnt go down...it turned like it didnt had no damage at all...it only went down when i managed to kill the pilot....this was approximately 3months ago...

On the same day one of our raf pilots told us, that they have seen a 109 flying with supersonic speeds around shooting like crazy...



lag

[David198502]

10min lag while the spit turns perfectly?no warping or whatsoever...?

[notafinger!]

100% AP rounds and shooting at convergence
This.

As Ataros suggests I's say that probably getting the right ammo belt could increase the percentage of PK. Much more "gaming the game" than cheating, as those loadouts are probably not historically correct. My two cents.
Maybe not historically correct but since Spitfires do not burn there is little point in bringing incendiary to a fight.

[julien673]

What its will be good is like counter strike, the last 5-15 second in reply when you are shooting down in the enemy view

[Bikerjack]

People play single player and feel themselves as absolute aces and then the rude awakening of the multilayer brings them down a notch and produces cognitive dissonance that leads to them talking about cheating... People are much better than the AI ok?

I agree with this sentiment. I know I have to improve both my flying and dogfighting/aiming skills in order to survive online.

Situation awareness is of paramount importance. It's difficult to spot other planes in the first instance and even then to identify a friend from foe is never easy. You have to get up close to check out the plane you are targetting and so your concentration is 100% on that aspect. Check your six and your eyes can easily lose track of the plane you were originally flying towards. This is surely close to reality? How many actual WW2 pilots were shot out of the sky without even knowing what hit them?

I really like to hear other pilots on teamspeak who seem to work in teams and support each other. Fundamentally, the need to fly with a wingman was almost a given in real combat. Personally, I would love to be good enough to fly in close formation with others and therefore support each other in spotting, targetting and engaging enemy aircraft. It would be good if we "regrouped" at a given point after combat and therefore, hopefully live a bit longer?

Too often there are lone "maverick" pilots (me included) flying about without any coordination. Suddenly, you are attacked by a "better" pilot or, simply, he has seen you first, and - game over.

I recall a note from one poster who said it took a year or two in IL2 to perfect flying skills and dogfighting. I can well believe it.

I don't know enough about the potential for cheating to comment. I just accept that I have a lot to learn and believe that "practice makes perfect" to be the only way forward:!:

Communication is the key. Fly alone and you are gonna die!:(

[JG52Uther]

Also don't forget some people already have 100's even thousands of hours already flying one particular aircraft in CoD, so anyone with less than that is going to be at a disadvantage.

[Robo.]

if any1 can explain how even a good pilot can pull this off 95% of the time LEGITIMATELY ?

Aim at the cockpit. MG fire from a 109 is extremely effective, I really like the 2 machineguns in the nose. PIlot is often exposed in break-turn so PK is very likely. There is no alchemy in that.

[Torian]

People play single player and feel themselves as absolute aces and then the rude awakening of the multilayer brings them down a notch and produces cognitive dissonance that leads to them talking about cheating... People are much better than the AI ok? :)

There are quite a lot of people who are AWESOMELY better then you, just admit it and try to improve. If you give a firing solution to your enemy, expect to die - simple as.

Borsch, I have over a thousand hours pretty much all on the ATAG server and am very happy to admit that there are plenty who are awesomely better than me. What I am referring to is a very small group who rarely get anything other than a pilot kill and can get them in quick succession. I don't see any1 else who can amass the sheer number of kills in any given server session so quickly. Admittedly they rarely bother to land their planes but just ditch them and get a new plane to get back into the action...just what u like to see in a full realism sim. If AP loadouts, tweaked convergences, low monitor resolution and great flying skill is what is happening then ok. I don't have the expertise needed to know what can be "altered" by knowledgeable people but I know a fair few good 109 pilots who can't hold a candle to these guys. One flight sim I flew years ago was hacked to pieces by a programmer who could assign any hit power value to his ammo loadout so u were dead if any bullet hit ur plane. At least he was up font about it but what I greatly fear is that we are not all played for fools and we have our d'oh moment down the track and say "it looked like a duck and quacked like a duck" but we insisted it was all good.
I guess u really have to be in the ATAG server when these guys are on to appreciate where I'm coming from and I'm not sure how often u get in there.

[Torian]

Situation awareness is of paramount importance. It's difficult to spot other planes in the first instance and even then to identify a friend from foe is never easy. You have to get up close to check out the plane you are targetting and so your concentration is 100% on that aspect. Check your six and your eyes can easily lose track of the plane you were originally flying towards. This is surely close to reality? How many actual WW2 pilots were shot out of the sky without even knowing what hit them?:(

Kind of the point I am trying to make. Do all that and with difficulty u will end up with 5 or 6 kills in any given server session, sometimes more. When u can get 5 or 6 kills in 10 mins then people are gonna wonder.

[Robo.]

What I am referring to is a very small group who rarely get anything other than a pilot kill and can get them in quick succession.

You're suggesting that there is a group of pilots, apparently from Russia, who are too good to be legit. Would you mind providing the nicknames?

I often fly practice on Russian minced meat servers like Repka No.4 and some of the local guys are ridiculously good pilots and shots. I know several other pilots who would PK you when you blink and they are not Russian and there is certainly nothing else than skill in that.

[Torian]

You're suggesting that there is a group of pilots, apparently from Russia, who are too good to be legit. Would you mind providing the nicknames?

Just come into the server on a regular basis and u will soon see for yourself and make your own assessment.

[JG52Krupi]

Do you fly with an open canopy, if you do I think it's only right that you are more susceptible to pks.

[Winger]

Do you fly with an open canopy, if you do I think it's only right that you are more susceptible to pks.

i guess so as well. Thats what you get when flying cabriolet:P

Winger

[Ze-Jamz]

To the OPs if original question....armour piercing rounds and already stated E1 can fire 4mgs worth...

Be grateful the Beos don't work online where we could set fire to your aircraft..shocking that they don't but hey ho as I'd rather load them up tbh

[Robo.]

Just come into the server on a regular basis and u will soon see for yourself and make your own assessment.

I do actually, that's why I am asking. :eek:

Open canopy or not, if you get it in the cockpit you're dead. The bullets won't bounce off the glass. Same PK with 109 when they expose the canopy in a climb or in a turn and hold your the piper in there and hose him down.

[Torian]

Do you fly with an open canopy, if you do I think it's only right that you are more susceptible to pks.

I don't fly with an open canopy and since canopy drag has been introduced I don't know many who do now.

[ZaltysZ]

It is very easy to do PKs with E1 and tungsten carbide load out. You don't even need to aim for glass. Aiming at belly or even from dead six does just fine.

[Ze-Jamz]

It is very easy to do PKs with E1 and tungsten carbide load out. You don't even need to aim for glass. Aiming at belly or even from dead six does just fine.

This...^

Very effective ammo type

[ATAG_Doc]

He does not cheat. He probably has over 2000 hours and VAC is enabled now. Getting a PK is much easier with AP it go right though everything even from dead 6.

[Torian]

How can u tell if VAC is on or not now ?

[TUSA/TX-Gunslinger]

Do any of these pilots carry the tag =FB=?

I fly RoF and CoD. There are quite a few Russian pilots (and a few Germans) that are that good. In both sims, although not sure if they'd take the time to fool around on an American server.

They don't cheat. They train exceptionally hard, only take in a very tiny percentage of squad applicants and spend a lot of time flying (versus posting, testing, tweaking, making movies, skins or anything else).

There are Americans this good too - most have not shown back up from Il2.

Take a look at this - http://riseofflight.com/en/community/leaderboard/Multiplayer

Look at the top 15. Then look for the guys with the best K to D.

=FB= Vaal 3.57: 1 - 576 hours flight time
=FB= Viks 3.84: 1 - 323 hours
kim 5.12:1 - 191 hours
(Winger is up there too :) )

Now think about how much you fly. How many Americans have 300 to 500 hours online time?

The Russians have always dominated these type of Combat Flight Sims. This is a sport to them. They take it very very seriously and they are the toughest adversaries you will face (this thread is a good example of their skill).

They have their weaknesses, but it's not 2 v 2 skills. They are the very best in the world at 2 v 2 - Air to Air.

[SlipBall]

^^ agree...it is amazing how good some pilots are on-line

[phoenix1963]

I'm sure there are plenty of vulnerabilities in CloD, an obvious one is unencrypted packets.
But the most likely answer is there are many other games with a far bigger fan base and the small minority of gamers who get a thrill from cheating day-after-day and investing effort to crack a game will be on those, not CloD.

56RAF_phoenix

[Flanker35M]

S!

Some Russian squads and pilots are exceptionally good ones, like Flying Barans with VikS and all. I would regard FB as the best one, at least in original IL-2. ROSS was medicore, they were caught outright cheating in IL-2 online wars. Some their pilots were OK. Mr.X seemed to have good SA and shoots very well. Add to this the all-AP belting and PKs do happen and a lot.

About cheating. The best cheater is not the most easily seen one. That individual changes only something that gives and edge, but not too much so it can be so easily spotted. Most of it can be put to lag or similar if well done and no-one would suspect cheating. There has always been and always will be cheating and I do not expect CoD to be any different due it's easy to manipulate file structure.

Online flying is hard and requires a lot of training. Unfortunately have no time or much passion to do that these days so merely a target drone :D But for a strictly offline player online is hell unless has natural talent.

[slm]

S!
Online flying is hard and requires a lot of training. Unfortunately have no time or much passion to do that these days so merely a target drone :D But for a strictly offline player online is hell unless has natural talent.

When flying OFFLINE you get used to flying with target drones. :)

[Borsch]

end up with 5 or 6 kills in any given server session, sometimes more. When u can get 5 or 6 kills in 10 mins then people are gonna wonder.

5 kills in 10 minutes? This vid has 5 kills in 5 minutes and is typical kind of vid for his channel. (@7:35) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8HCMXE4AdE&feature=plcp In recent Il2:Clod Championship the author of the vids and an unquestionably fantastic pilot Mr.X was knocked out in the second round having been completely outclassed. Just to show how good a players play this game. Now that patch is out people commented that some all time greatest il2 pilots appeared on ATAG - like =FB=Arhangel...

Forget about cheating, it will only mess with your mind. Or play RoF - definitly no cheating there (official!), but few people still dominate in exactly the same manner.

[SlipBall]

Personally speaking, I never use the cannon's they are just too lethal on-line or off. Still there is a lot to be admired of the positioning and the target leading that goes on.

[raaaid]

online is easier than offline:

offline target doing difficult scissors

online target doing predictable hard turn

[Borsch]

Personally speaking, I never use the cannon's they are just too lethal on-line or off. Still there is a lot to be admired of the positioning and the target leading that goes on.

Here's his vid with canonless E1 on ATAG. Practically all kills are PKs :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSIj6AfOh4M&feature=plcp

[recoilfx]

online is easier than offline:

offline target doing difficult scissors

online target doing predictable hard turn

Predicable scissors and hard turns are difficult?

Sorry, I think you havn't been playing enough online... For one, you can't turn evade your enemies by turning hard.

[*Buzzsaw*]

No, but I like his tactics and shooting skills and asked him about convergence, loadouts, etc.

He uses 50% non-linear setting in elevator BTW. Good for shooting but not good for stall-fighting. He was not very good in a 1 vs. 1 championship BTW probably because of this.

His video thread on the forum http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=29379 (good training videos but mostly in Russian)

Not making any accusations, just relating my experience which is contrary to the above.

In my experience in fighting Mr X, he uses stall fighting almost exclusively to escape defensive situations.

If you get on his tail with similar E, he will begin by using mild rollrate maneuvers to try to bleed speed from the opponent on his tail, then escalates to full horizontal scissors, culminating in semi-vertical scissor stall fight technique in attempts to get opponent to stall out in nose high attitude.

Mr X definitely does head shoot a lot. I was the recipient twice on Sunday, once completely my fault, when I was dragged and bagged by Mr X and another of his wingmen. (or maybe not a wingman, perhaps Mr X just took advantage of a situation where I was too focused) 2nd after we had extended fight, and lost sight for a brief second, he got behind for a second and shot.

So far haven't killed him yet, although that is more my fault than his, had several opportunities when my shooting wasn't up to par, or when so close my convergence was going either side of his cockpit. Certainly put bullets into him. He isn't invulnerable although he will rarely give you an easy shot. Especially as for example in the Dunkirk setup on the ATAG server, where the E-1/E-3's are the class of the available aircraft. I was flying a Rotol Hurricane 87 octane in my fights with him, would have done better in a Spitfire IA.

[SlipBall]

Here's his vid with canonless E1 on ATAG. Practically all kills are PKs :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSIj6AfOh4M&feature=plcp


That is better, thank you...he has much talent:)

[*Buzzsaw*]

Do any of these pilots carry the tag =FB=?

AFAIK FB_Viks was one of the original developers for RISE OF FLIGHT, later bought out by 777 Group. I believe many members of FB were on Beta teams.

He also knows the IL-2 code very well, his group originally had a deal with 1C Maddox to purchase a revised version of the code in the predecessor to RISE OF FLIGHT, but the developers changed their mind after much experimentation with the IL-2 code, the Sim was renamed RoF, and published with an in-house original code.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Here's his vid with canonless E1 on ATAG. Practically all kills are PKs :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSIj6AfOh4M&feature=plcp

The video shows exactly the technique he commonly uses to get most of his kills.

Not a lot fancy maneuvering, an approach at altitude and speed, a quick sweep of the area of the Dunkirk field, looking for taking off and landing aircraft at lower alts and speed, a dive and single pass kill. When he has to make a couple passes, the usual zoom into vector roll and back down for another pass. He'll make his escape when he sees someone approaching co-alt or energy.

Most of these kills are due to failure on the part of the British pilot to notice their attacker, giving an easy 5/6/7 o'clock shot.

Notice the fact the angle on for many of the firing passes is such that pilot armour should, in my estimation, be a factor if he is only using MG rounds, but not sure whether armour is actually modelled, or whether the coverage or protection is accurate for British aircraft, so much of the modelling of this nationality has been completely wrong.

Historically British pilot armour would defeat 7.92 mm MG rounds, but not cannon.

[Robo.]

In my experience in fighting Mr X, he uses stall fighting almost exclusively to escape defensive situations.

Easy against the RAF, not so easy against another 109.

There are some even better pilots from Russia and other countries, just look up the tournament roster ;)

[AbortedMan]

Torian I wholly agree with you on this subject. I've never been one to call "cheat" in online games, as I know for sure people are better than me at many games...but when the evidence presents itself in such a way, it's hard not to wonder.

To anyone that is speaking in absolution about no one cheating, don't kid yourself. It is entirely, completely, and utterly probable that there are cheaters out there playing CloD...it's a piece of software just like any other and VAC is not the end-all cheat prevention. With 1C's apparent limited resources in regards to coding this game, I doubt there was any attention paid to cheat prevention other than the obvious and "along-the-way" sort of fixes.

Like I said, I'm not one to ever accuse of cheats/hacks, unless its painfully obvious (as seen in some Battlefield 3 games) but my vote is that this group is up to something...and it's evident by noting what gets damaged on your aircraft before you are PK'd. There have been several occasions where nothing, and I mean NOTHING gets hit on my aircraft except my pilot from a shot that was ~200m-500m away. No damage, no hitsound, no systems failure messages, decals, tracers, just black screen. To believe that someone can repeatedly pull a pilot killing sniper shot off on a REGULAR basis from a moving aircraft at range is questionable to say the least.

And please take into account there are multiple people saying this. Torian and I are not the only ones noting something fishy, obviously.

I agree there are good pilots/players out there, but this is extremely suspect.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Torian I wholly agree with you on this subject. I've never been one to call "cheat" in online games, as I know for sure people are better than me at many games...but when the evidence presents itself in such a way, it's hard not to wonder.

To anyone that is speaking in absolution about no one cheating, don't kid yourself. It is entirely, completely, and utterly probable that there are cheaters out there playing CloD...it's a piece of software just like any other and VAC is not the end-all cheat prevention. With 1C's apparent limited resources in regards to coding this game, I doubt there was any attention paid to cheat prevention other than the obvious and "along-the-way" sort of fixes.

Like I said, I'm not one to ever accuse of cheats/hacks, unless its painfully obvious (as seen in some Battlefield 3 games) but my vote is that this group is up to something...and it's evident by noting what gets damaged on your aircraft before you are PK'd. There have been several occasions where nothing, and I mean NOTHING gets hit on my aircraft except my pilot from a shot that was ~200m-500m away. No damage, no hitsound, no systems failure messages, decals, tracers, just black screen. To believe that someone can repeatedly pull a pilot killing sniper shot off on a REGULAR basis from a moving aircraft at range is questionable to say the least.

And please take into account there are multiple people saying this. Torian and I are not the only ones noting something fishy, obviously.

I agree there are good pilots/players out there, but this is extremely suspect.

I would suggest you provide proof in the form of videos and screenshots.

Otherwise it is just speculation.

[AbortedMan]

Unfortunately, I do not have proof, and this is speculation.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

As I'm not in the position to take action against said pilots, my producing proof is irrelevant, and a moot point. I'm stating what I believe is true and that the OP is not alone in this matter.

[*Buzzsaw*]

...my producing proof is irrelevant, and a moot point...

Far from true.

If you produced convincing proof, you could undoubtedly get these pilots banned on the popular servers.

Otherwise you are just casting doubt on the integrity of the pilots, without providing any facts. Kinda like certain political techniques best not mentioned.

And we don't need politics on this forum...

[ATAG_Colander]

Aborted,

Just to clarify...
Every pilot is in a position to take action on ATAG. All that is needed is to submit proof of any claims and such proof will be evaluated and actions taken if necessary.

In this particular case, I believe no one has any proof of wrongdoing hence no action is taking place.

Above statement aside, I personally think he's a very good shot and doubt there's cheating involved but I have no problem whatsoever of being proven wrong.

[AbortedMan]

Colander,

Of course, if I were to come upon information that could prove that something was being exploited I would make the effort to report through the appropriate channels. I meant I'm not in the position to acquire such information, as in, proof is unattainable to me through conventional (and legal) means.

Please tell me that the people in this thread are not oblivious to the possibility of cheats being used online. I understand that no one wants to slander another or compromise the integrity of another player, but don't let that cloud your vision of the *possibility* of foul play.

[ATAG_Colander]

The possibility exists and that is the reason we are talking about providing proof. If there was no such possibility, this whole thread would be moot :grin:

One thing I really regret is that track recording is causing disconnects. Recording the missions on the server would be the ideal way to acquire proof of cheat/no cheat and/or discover others that no one might have noticed.

Sadly, recording in the server will cause every one to get disconnected (I tried it some time ago).

[CaptainDoggles]

He does not cheat. He probably has over 2000 hours and VAC is enabled now. Getting a PK is much easier with AP it go right though everything even from dead 6.

Have the developers confirmed this?

[Ataros]

Historically British pilot armour would defeat 7.92 mm MG rounds, but not cannon.

I think it can not stop tungsten AP rounds. If you load 100% AP this makes pilot completely unprotected, as if he sits in the air without any cover I guess. Thus PK comes with the first bullet that hits aircraft body.

[He111]

In reality, aricraft weren't armoured, except for IL2 (cannot wait :) ) .. any well aimed shots are going to hit the pilot especially for early, unarmoured aircraft.

Plus, i have force-feedback joystick, trying to out-fly someone without a FF would probably be futile ??? yes ? no ?

Cannot wait for the AI to be fixed so historic offline campaigns can be made .. :grin:

.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Sadly, recording in the server will cause every one to get disconnected (I tried it some time ago).

Actually you can record, I did quite a bit of online testing on your server, during which I recorded, but the times I did so, there were only 10-15 pilots online. Haven't tried when there is the usual high point of 40+ pilots

[*Buzzsaw*]

I think it can not stop tungsten AP rounds. If you load 100% AP this makes pilot completely unprotected, as if he sits in the air without any cover I guess. Thus PK comes with the first bullet that hits aircraft body.

And how many Tungsten rounds were used historically? Are you suggesting this was the standard loadout for the 7.92mm MG's?

I don't think so. This was a relatively rare strategic metal, not available in Germany, usually reserved for application in Anti-Tank rounds, in this time period for the 37mm and later for the 50mm.

It's typical of a 1C product that you have these options in terms of loadout or aircraft, which can be selected without any penalty or restriction, and which completely unbalance the game.

So you have the situation whereby people are flying E-1's in preference to E-3's because the armament is more effective... Complete nonsense.

Why did the historical Luftwaffe replace the wing 7.92's with 20mm if they were no more effective?

[*Buzzsaw*]

In reality, aricraft weren't armoured, except for IL2 (cannot wait :) ) .. any well aimed shots are going to hit the pilot especially for early, unarmoured aircraft.

Plus, i have force-feedback joystick, trying to out-fly someone without a FF would probably be futile ??? yes ? no ?

Cannot wait for the AI to be fixed so historic offline campaigns can be made .. :grin:

.

Spitfire and Hurricane both had seat back armour standard after July of 1940, this was not the Soviet airforce.

The Hurricane and Spitfires are shown as having the weight of an aircraft with pilot and fuel tank armour.

[Pegasus_Eagle]

and as far as the pk after pk after pk it can be done, but in my exp even talking to alot of good flyers only way to get a 95% pk like that is to make the damage area of your bullet larger and you can hit them in the wing and get a pk.

and yes i have flown both blue and red and in 46 and in clod im not bad i can also prove that it is easy to cheat but that backfired on me before and not goin that rout again.

i do know that some of the people mr x fly's with have been kicked and band from servers for cheating in 1946.

i look at it as birds of a feather flock together LOL

[JG52Krupi]

Spitfire and Hurricane both had seat back armour standard after July of 1940, this was not the Soviet airforce.

The Hurricane and Spitfires are shown as having the weight of an aircraft with armour.

Yes from behind, but as the reds know they have a superior turn rate which means that the default move is almost always to pull back on the stick to try and get away from the 109 which just puts it at the perfect angle to make all that lovely armour irrelevant :|

[BadAim]

I love all this talk of cheating. I have been flying online for several years and have never seen anything that I consider cheating. Maybe that's because I wouldn't consider cheating? Hmmmmmm.

[aus3620]

My two bobs worth! Having been on the wrong end of MK MR X's gunnery a number of times, I take my hat off to him. His videos show that it is no fluke, in red or blue planes. Obviously he has invested considerable hours of thoughtful practice to get that good.

Flying with my squad I have experienced some success against MK MR X - albeit he was flying Red (latest patch) and our blue flight outnumbered the red aircraft. So even the best individual flyer can be overcome by a team.

Appreciate that hacking code to turn one's aircraft into an uber-plane is probably not impossible. But if you were anywhere near as good as the videos attest why would you bother.

[SlipBall]

The fact is that they are just good pilots...probably don't post much, just keep flying developing their skills. From the example vids, one would conclude that the pilot has very good tracking skills/ability to position himself. He does just as well when he is flying Red, go figure

[AbortedMan]

Same here BadAim, especially in a simulator, but people are strange.

It's be foolish to assume there are no cheats in an online game, in what is essentially an uncontrolled environment (coding-wise) such as Cliffs of Dover.

I've seen cheaters in ArmA2 cooperative missions, even...a game that's about the activity of teamwork, not kills.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

An acknowledged expert on Weapons in general, and Air to Air weapons specifically is Anthony Williams, who has been published multiple times and has a website here:

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/miltech.htm

On the site is an article which deals specifically with the armament of the different sides in the Battle of Britain, and which goes into detail on the effectiveness of these weapons.

There is ZERO mention of tungsten cored 7.92mm ammunition being readily available. The article does mention the 20mm M-Geschoss round.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoB.htm

An analysis of the effectiveness of the British 7.7mm and German 7.92mm rounds shows them as similar in armour penetration.

A British study during the same period found the effectiveness of these light MG rounds in penetrating pilot armour was poor:

From Mr. Williams article:

Tests by the RAF indicated that both the .303 and 7.92mm AP bullets had some problems penetrating the structure of the relatively small and light Blenheim bomber. Both guns were fired at a range of 200 yards (180m) through the rear fuselage at the 4 mm armour plate protecting the rear gunner, which was angled at 60º to the line of fire. The results were poor; only 33% of the .303" rounds reached the armour (the rest being deflected or absorbed by the structure) and 6% penetrated it. In contrast, only 23% of the 7.92 mm bullets reached the armour, and just 1% penetrated.


No mention of tungsten core bullets ripping through pilot armour there.

Wikipedia in reference 7.92mm AP rounds notes:

The most common type of armor-piercing round had a hardened-steel core with plated-steel jacket and weighed 11.5 grams (177 gr). Other types appeared which used tungsten carbide and combinations for cores.


No indication as to when tungsten rounds were available, and clear indication those which may have had tungsten in the core were rare.

For the Germans to have been given unlimited numbers of 'magic bullets' is clearly wrong.

But just another one of the many botched aspects of this Sim.

[*Buzzsaw*]

...PK after PK after PK and often in quick succession... how even a good pilot can pull this off 95% of the time LEGITIMATELY ? Please help me out.

Well we apparently now have an answer for the OP's question...

The German 'Magic' Tungsten round.

[AbortedMan]

Well we apparently now have an answer for the OP's question...

The German 'Magic' Tungsten round.

Heh, if it were only that simple. Though it may be a factor, I hardly believe its a matter of ammo loadouts. If this were the case, there'd be a slew of this sort of pilot in question.

[CaptainDoggles]

No indication as to when tungsten rounds were available, and clear indication those which may have had tungsten in the core were rare.

For the Germans to have been given unlimited numbers of 'magic bullets' is clearly wrong.

But just another one of the many botched aspects of this Sim.

So what you're saying is, your source gives no concrete info. The most you can infer from your quoted passage is that the tungsten-carbide rounds were less common than the standard hardened steel AP rounds.

Cool, thanks for editorializing it as a magic bullet. :rolleyes:

[AbortedMan]

So what you're saying is, your source gives no concrete info. The most you can infer from your quoted passage is that the tungsten-carbide rounds were less common than the standard hardened steel AP rounds.

Cool, thanks for editorializing it as a magic bullet. :rolleyes:

In any case, whether that ammunition was effective/available or not does not give solid evidence that it was correctly modeled as such in the game...and still doesn't give an explanation as to why/how certain pilots are able to hit ONLY the pilot from 200m+.

[CaptainDoggles]

In any case, whether that ammunition was effective/available or not does not give solid evidence that it was correctly modeled as such in the game...and still doesn't give an explanation as to why/how certain pilots are able to hit ONLY the pilot from 200m+.

You have 2 choices:

1)Prove that they're ONLY hitting the pilot from 200m+

2)Stop talking

If you can't prove it, you're just another noob getting his wings clipped online, crying about cheats rather than learning to fly. So, once again, prove it or shut up.

Have you considered the possiblity that these guys are just really good, and you're just really bad?

[AbortedMan]

You have 2 choices:

1)Prove that they're ONLY hitting the pilot from 200m+

2)Stop talking

If you can't prove it, you're just another noob getting his wings clipped online, crying about cheats rather than learning to fly. So, once again, prove it or shut up.

Have you considered the possiblity that these guys are just really good, and you're just really bad?

You're a wonderful human being with fantastic qualities and deserve to be loved like anyone else.

[*Buzzsaw*]

So what you're saying is, your source gives no concrete info. The most you can infer from your quoted passage is that the tungsten-carbide rounds were less common than the standard hardened steel AP rounds.

Cool, thanks for editorializing it as a magic bullet. :rolleyes:

Salute

You obviously didn't bother reading my entire set of posts, or perhaps you decided to ignore the content.

1. I have quoted a British test which used captured German ammunition loadouts, and which shows 1% penetration of pilot armour, and makes no mention of special tungsten rounds.

2. I have linked to Anthony Williams article on the Battle of Britain, which deals with the ammunition used by either side, and which makes no mention of Tungsten cored rounds.

3. I quoted from the Wiki article, which notes only at some point tungsten rounds were built, but also they were not common, and doesn't give a time frame.

4. I have pointed out the Germans implemented as quickly as possible, a policy of converting from 7.92 mm wing weapons to the 20 mm FF, why would this policy be in place if the 7.92mm was as effective as it seems to be in the game?

I think it is up to you actually to prove these rounds were in general use during the BoB, available in large quantities, and had the penetrative abilities which seem to be in effect in the game.

To suggest that a round which has the same propellant charge would have suddenly the capability to automatically penetrate the same armour which only 99% of the standard German AP rounds, with the same propellant could not, could seems to me to call for proof.

Right now you are arguing for their inclusion when it's clear their effectiveness runs contrary to all the available facts.

All you have done in your reply is to show you have nothing in way of substantive proof to argue for their inclusion in the game.

[AbortedMan]

Salute

You obviously didn't bother reading my entire set of posts, or perhaps you decided to ignore the content.

1. I have quoted a British test which used captured German ammunition loadouts, and which shows 1% penetration of pilot armour, and makes no mention of special tungsten rounds.

2. I have linked to Anthony Williams article on the Battle of Britain, which deals with the ammunition used by either side, and which makes no mention of Tungsten cored rounds.

3. I quoted from the Wiki article, which notes only at some point tungsten rounds were built, but also they were not common, and doesn't give a time frame.

4. I have pointed out the Germans implemented as quickly as possible, a policy of converting from 7.92 mm wing weapons to the 20 mm FF, why would this policy be in place if the 7.92mm was as effective as it seems to be in the game?

I think it is up to you actually to prove these rounds were in general use during the BoB, available in large quantities, and had the penetrative abilities which seem to be in effect in the game.

To suggest that a round which has the same propellant charge would have suddenly the capability to automatically penetrate the same armour which only 99% of the standard German AP rounds, with the same propellant could not, could seems to me to call for proof.

Right now you are arguing for their inclusion when it's clear their effectiveness runs contrary to all the available facts.

All you have done in your reply is to show you have nothing in way of substantive proof to argue for their inclusion in the game.

Uhh, I mean this in the politest of ways, but I think you're losing track of what the OP is about...and I'm not sure why the historical effectiveness and availability of the tungsten AP round is being brought to attention. I'm willing to bet money that the ballistics are far (FAR) from modeled correctly in-game. So comparing historical tests is not a valid comparison to in-game effects, IMO.

(In no way am I supporting Doggles narrow-minded, tl;dr-esque comment or taking his side, btw.)

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

Here is a quote from an online source re. 7.92mm projectiles used by the Germans and the quantity manufactured:

Infanteriepatrone 7,9mm / Mauser 7.92x57 ammunition

This cartridge was used by the german Mauser Karabiner 98K, Gewehr 41, 43 and numerous other rifles as well as in aircraft, vehicle and infantry machine guns. As the german standard rifle cartridgeMauser 7,92x57 Infanteriepatrone it was called Infanteriepatrone 7,9mm ("infantry cartridge"), also known as the 7,9mm - Militärpatrone ("military cartridge") or as Mauser - Standardmunition 7,92x 57 (Mauser as the weapon company that introduced the ammo for its famous 98K rifle; 7.92mm is the calibre and 57mm the length of the casing (not the chamber as in the US); also, in germany a bore's caliber is measured from land to land). The total production of this cartridge during WW II was 10,475 million (that is over ten billion). Sometimes, esp. among angloamericans, it is also referred to as 8 mm Mauser.
The fired projectile of the Infanteriepatrone had a typical initial energy E0 of 3,700 Joule (sS - projectile of 12.8g at a V0 of 760m/s) but could reach initial energies of over 4,500 Joule (some V-Patronen) depending on the concrete ammunition type and firing weapon.

Between 80 and 90 % of all 7,9mm ammunition produced was of the 7,9 sS (sS for schweres Spitzgeschoss = "heavy pointed bullet") type; the complete cartridge weighed 27g, it was 80.6 mm long and contained 2.7g of gunpowder; the projectile weighed 12.8 g and was 35mm long. When fired from a MG34 or MG42 (as well as from the other rifles using the cartridge) it had a typical V0 of 755 m/s. The regular sS projectile had the following penetration performance: 85cm of dry pine wood at 100m, 65cm at 400m, 45cm at 800m and 10cm at 1,800m; 10mm of iron at 300m, 7mm at 550m; 5mm of steel at 100m; 3mm at 600m.

The second most used type was the SmK (Spitzgeschoss mit Kern = "pointed bullet with core") bullet that measured 37.2mm, weighed 11.5 g and contained a hardened steel core (about 8% of all produced 7.9mm rounds).

(my note, this is standard AP bullet)

Another type was the SmK L'spur (L'spur = Leuchtspur = "bright trace" = "tracer") bullet that was the previous type combined with a tracer that burned for 800 to 900 m (a little less numerous than the SmK).

The lS (leichtes Spitzgeschoss = "light pointed bullet") which had an aluminum core and therefore weighed only 5.5g which resulted in a higher speed of V0 = 925 m/s but of course also in a shortened total range (the bullet was used mainly in the air defense role; about 4-7% of the total production), the lS-L'Spur which with a length of 37.2mm and a weight of 6.1g was again the tracer version of the lS (less than 1% of total production).

A version produced mainly for use with the MG 17 as aircraft armament was the so-called V-Patrone which had an increased powder charge that increased the V0 by 15%. This ammunition type was available with the PmK projectile ("Phosphor mit Stahlkern" = "phosphor with steel core") or with the B ("Beobachtung" = "Observation") projectile contained a little phosphor and exploded upon impact, the latter ammunition type was also known as the B-Patrone and was used as an incendiary round; both types are not counted in the 7,9mm production

The final and most interesting (for our purposes) bullet type was the SmK(H). The H stood for Hartkern (hardened core), this was the armor piercing version of the 7,9mm Infanteriepatrone. The projectile had a length of only 28.2mm, weighed 12.5 g and contained a tungsten core that was 22.5 mm long. The propellant gunpowder of the shell was increased to 3.6 g. The bullet had a penetration power of almost 20mm of plain steel at a range of 500m (90° impact angle). However, production of this ammunition type ceased in March 1942 because of an acute shortage of tungsten; still, SmK(H) cartridges continued to be issued to the troops as late as February 1943. while it was still inproduction, this ammo type accounted for 1 to 2 % of the production of 7,9mm Infanteriepatronen.

You will note the source does not include SmK(H) in the list of ammunition designed for aircraft, it is noted as being issued to ground troops. And of course, it is 1-2% of production.

[ATAG_Colander]

I suggest a new thread is opened to discuss ammo load outs and ballistics for this one to stay in topic.

[Willia55m]

It is possible depends on the pilot/loadout/patience
http://www.rdox.info/01.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/02.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/8.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/04.jpg

[scotchegg]

I'd find a tutorial on how to effectively load out your plane very useful, being a noob.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

I am going to correct myself, it appears the SMK (H) was used in aircraft, although again, it is clear it was a very rare round, it was not used in aircraft exclusively, was listed in being used by the Wermacht in a number of weapons, and the Wehrmacht was a much larger customer.

US Army Medical Corps did a survey of wounds and deaths due to enemy action, determining the source of the casualties, a rather gruesome survey, (don't click on the photo links unles you want to know the realities of what ordinance does to the human body) but exhaustive, it notes in 'Enemy Ordanance Material' in paragraph 54/Table 9 of the following link that some (non-standard) tungsten cored bullets were used in aircraft mounting the MG15:

http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/default.htm

[AbortedMan]

Salute

I am going to correct myself, it appears the SMK (H) was used in aircraft, although again, it is clear it was a very rare round.

US Army Medical Corps did a survey of wounds and deaths due to enemy action, determining the source of the casualties, a rather gruesome survey, (don't click on the photo links unles you want to know the realities of what ordinance does to the human body) but exhaustive, it notes in 'Enemy Ordanance Material' in paragraph 54/Table 9 of the following link that some (non-standard) tungsten cored bullets were used in aircraft mounting the MG15:

http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/default.htm

Buzzsaw the unstoppable...thread derailed.

/thread

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

Another source showing the SmK (H) used by the Wehrmacht in its Infantry weapons and obviously was the biggest user of this ammo.

US Army Military History document, see page 188 for details of bullet:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12980915/26/a-Introduction

[*Buzzsaw*]

Buzzsaw the unstoppable...thread derailed.

/thread

Salute AbortedMan

With respect, I did reply to your comments earlier, and suggested you bring forward some proof regarding hacking.

The fact that this issue of the Tungsten round has come forward during the discussion is obviously relevant to the number of Pilot Kills you (and I) have noticed.

An MG round which penetrates right through the armoured seatback is going to make it a lot easier to make these insta-kills.

[AbortedMan]

Salute AbortedMan

With respect, I did reply to your comments earlier, and suggested you bring forward some proof regarding hacking.

The fact that this issue of the Tungsten round has come forward during the discussion is obviously relevant to the number of Pilot Kills you (and I) have noticed.

An MG round which penetrates right through the armoured seatback is going to make it a lot easier to make these insta-kills.

Of course, and due respect reciprocated...I just didn't see the relevance of bringing ballistics vs anatomical studies and records of the written recollections of availability of ordnance into a discussion regarding someone possibly editing game files to insta-kill players.

The ordnance is available in game en masse, unlimited, therefore its logistics is a non-issue. The effects of the the player's "body" is boolean, it either kills you or it doesn't, there's no wounding going on here, that's the issue I believe the OP was talking about.

In any case, there's nothing that can be done here about it except bait the trolls for their squeamishly giggly offerings of "L2Play, noob" as seen in posts previous.

[Pegasus_Eagle]

for the people that seem to be blind to the fact that this game can be modded have a look here

(i have 3 steam accounts 2 with just this game have gone on servers that are empty and flown those 109 mods often and still have all 3 accounts there for one can deduce vac is not active)


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/forumdisplay.php?f=199

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23921

nuf said

[5./JG27.Farber]

I suggest a new thread is opened to discuss ammo load outs and ballistics for this one to stay in topic.

+1

for the people that seem to be blind to the fact that this game can be modded have a look here

(i have 3 steam accounts 2 with just this game have gone on servers that are empty and flown those 109 mods often and still have all 3 accounts there for one can deduce vac is not active)


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/forumdisplay.php?f=199

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23921

nuf said

Tell us more! ;)

[AbortedMan]

I'd like to note that while it sucks being PKd so consistently by the same couple if people, it is kinda cool that there is a bit of infamy surrounding the player in question...he's kinda like ATAGs Red Baron.

[*Buzzsaw*]

for the people that seem to be blind to the fact that this game can be modded have a look here

(i have 3 steam accounts 2 with just this game have gone on servers that are empty and flown those 109 mods often and still have all 3 accounts there for one can deduce vac is not active)


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/forumdisplay.php?f=199

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23921

nuf said

Salute Pegasus

The comments in the links you have posted are quite old.

However, they do indicate German players were flying with 109 mods on online servers.

There is much "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" about how the Luftwaffe side is doing well.

The question is, were those players flying on servers loaded with Beta patches, or were they flying on official Steam program servers?

There is a big difference between a Beta patched server and one loaded with an official Steam install.

[Pegasus_Eagle]

Salute Pegasus

The comments in the links you have posted are quite old.

However, they do indicate German players were flying with 109 mods on online servers.

There is much "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" about how the Luftwaffe side is doing well.

The question is, were those players flying on servers loaded with Beta patches, or were they flying on official Steam program servers?

There is a big difference between a Beta patched server and one loaded with an official Steam install.

including this final patch the last one uped by steam 1.11.20362 ,

so in answer to your question yes in servers with official steam patches.

and i see those links are dead but those mods and more still are available.

[Torian]

Showcasing a cheat in an online tournament wouldn't be the smartest move as all eyes are on u.
The performance of a plane can be altered. Another ATAG member and myself were taken into another server a while back and discreetly shown how a planes flight modelling can be altered. This was occasioned by some weird stuff happening with 109s on the server (and no not lag related) and we were shown what could be done. In this case a plane made to fly 450-500mph without damage in straight and level flight. Now this wasn't a demonstration of some gunnery hack but it was absolute proof to me and my ATAG colleague that files can be altered to make planes do things in online servers that they shouldn't be able to do.
Look if these guys are legit then so be it. My only concern is that cheating will be misguidedly praised as skill. If it is skill then these guys are very good and I salute them.

[Pegasus_Eagle]

Showcasing a cheat in an online tournament wouldn't be the smartest move as all eyes are on u.
The performance of a plane can be altered. Another ATAG member and myself were taken into the Number 2 server a while back and discreetly shown how a planes flight modelling can be altered. This was occasioned by some weird stuff happening with 109s on the server (and no not lag related) and we were shown what could be done. In this case a plane made to fly 450-500mph without damage in straight and level flight. Now this wasn't a demonstration of some gunnery hack but it was absolute proof to me and my ATAG colleague that files can be altered to make planes do things in online servers that they shouldn't be able to do.
Look if these guys are legit then so be it. My only concern is that cheating will be misguidedly praised as skill. If it is skill then these guys are very good and I salute them.

i would like to thank you i was not going to bring that up as to not include you but i was there and all that you seen still works

i S! you for your cumming out and telling this story,
for what he says is 100% true the ac he was referring to was a hurri also flying inverted at that speed.

[AbortedMan]

What is it about recording flights online that is broken? Is it developer side or something on ATAG specifically?

[Winger]

This thread is riddiculous. Always the same folks that cant get over their own disability and look for explanations in others instead of looking where they should - their own doorstep.
Pilotkills happen folks. I have been pilotkilled myself and never thought it was a cheat. I mean HELLO? 8xBrowning hammering me?
Or vice versa - MINESHELLS?
Armor piercing rounds?
Hello what would some of you say when playing something like Battlefield - grin.

Get over it...

[JG52Krupi]

You will never stop cheaters they will always find a way to, personally I just don't understand why people cheat in games :(

I was an okay pilot in il2 but I am terrible at aiming in cod and have no self control when it comes to sticking with BnZ tactics and try and turn fight spits :lol: but I still would never ever even contemplate using a cheat the whole thing perplexes me :confused:

[Ze-Jamz]

You will never stop cheaters they will always find a way to, personally I just don't understand why people cheat in games :(

I was an okay pilot in il2 but I am terrible at aiming in cod and have no self control when it comes to sticking with BnZ tactics and try and turn fight spits :lol: but I still would never ever even contemplate using a cheat the whole thing perplexes me :confused:

Good wingin last night krups...you even got some kills, good skills n drills :)

On topic I agree with winger, this thread has been derailed some what.

[SlipBall]

This thread is riddiculous. Always the same folks that cant get over their own disability and look for explanations in others instead of looking where they should - their own doorstep.
Pilotkills happen folks. I have been pilotkilled myself and never thought it was a cheat. I mean HELLO? 8xBrowning hammering me?
Or vice versa - MINESHELLS?
Armor piercing rounds?
Hello what would some of you say when playing something like Battlefield - grin.

Get over it...

Its always easier to take from the rich, they must be terrible pilots:grin:

[Ataros]

including this final patch the last one uped by steam 1.11.20362 ,

so in answer to your question yes in servers with official steam patches.

and i see those links are dead but those mods and more still are available.

I think the way to solve it is to report this cheating procedure to Steam VAC managers. VAC is a service Steam provides to game publishers and they are interested in improving it. This is how it works with other games: players report cheats and they fix it. There is no chance they test CloD cheats themselves.

Anyone who knows how to use altered files online please write to Steam and explain the procedure. Otherwise this thread will be just a promotion for this cheating mod and more players will use it next week already.

[lonewulf]

"...there is a bit of infamy surrounding the player in question...he's kinda like ATAGs Red Baron."

I can see no valid point of comparison between a man like Richthofen and some bloke who happens to play video games for a hobby. None at all.

[LoBiSoMeM]

I think the way to solve it is to report this cheating procedure to Steam VAC managers. VAC is a service Steam provides to game publishers and they are interested in improving it. This is how it works with other games: players report cheats and they fix it. There is no chance they test CloD cheats themselves.

Anyone who knows how to use altered files online please write to Steam and explain the procedure. Otherwise this thread will be just a promotion for this cheating mod and more players will use it next week already.

+1.

[Kurfürst]

German penetration table for the commonplace 7,92mm SmK v round, at different ranges and angles, striking the armor plate directly (cont. lines) or indirectly (hitting a 3mm thick dural plate at 20 degrees 1,5 meters before the the armor plate).

For reference, the armor thickness on the Spitfire noted. I believe the Hurricane had the same thicknesses.

Apparanatly a lot was dependent on wheter the bullet hit anything before it struck armor plate. If not, it could go through it rather easily. I am not sure if the Spit had 3 mm thick dural plating on the fuselage (it seems unlikely to me, given that the 'deflector plate' cowling over the tank was only 3.5mm thick and it was considered to be a reinforced part to deflect bullets) but 20 degrees angle of impact and 1.5 meters of spacing does seem practical.

[CaptainDoggles]

1. I have quoted a British test which used captured German ammunition loadouts, and which shows 1% penetration of pilot armour, and makes no mention of special tungsten rounds.You're stretching your specific evidence to cover all cases. It shows 1% penetration when angled 60 degrees to the line of fire.

2. I have linked to Anthony Williams article on the Battle of Britain, which deals with the ammunition used by either side, and which makes no mention of Tungsten cored rounds.Well, we know that they existed, so if this source doesn't cover them then we'll just ignore it, I guess.

3. I quoted from the Wiki article, which notes only at some point tungsten rounds were built, but also they were not common, and doesn't give a time frame.Okay, so they're uncommon. It doesn't give a time frame. I don't understand how this means they should be removed.

4. I have pointed out the Germans implemented as quickly as possible, a policy of converting from 7.92 mm wing weapons to the 20 mm FF, why would this policy be in place if the 7.92mm was as effective as it seems to be in the game?You're framing the question to suit your pre-conceived notions. The Germans developed large-calibre cannons so that they could destroy heavy bombers more easily and rapidly. By contrast, the USAF decided to stick with lighter machine guns (50 cal, etc) because they were effective enough against fighters. If machine guns weren't good enough then the USAF would have adapted.

I think it is up to you actually to prove these rounds were in general use during the BoB, available in large quantities, and had the penetrative abilities which seem to be in effect in the game.And I think it's up to you to prove that they weren't. Your evidence has been reviewed, and found lacking.

To suggest that a round which has the same propellant charge would have suddenly the capability to automatically penetrate the same armour which only 99% of the standard German AP rounds, with the same propellant could not, could seems to me to call for proof.As previously noted, depends entirely on the angle. Furthermore, nobody in this thread has presented proof that the pilots in question are doing it from dead astern. Plenty of spitfire pilots will haul back on the stick at slightest provocation, often presenting a planform-view shot, with easy line-of-sight to the canopy which was not armored.

Right now you are arguing for their inclusion when it's clear their effectiveness runs contrary to all the available facts.Facts which have been overstated/misconstrued.

Anyways, if you want to continue this side-topic you should start a new thread as someone else suggested.

[CaptainDoggles]

You're a wonderful human being with fantastic qualities and deserve to be loved like anyone else.

I'll interpret that as you choosing option #2.

I applaud you for choosing not to continue smearing the names of good pilots simply because they are better than you, as it would seem some participants in this thread are content to do, despite not having a shred of evidence.

I personally find the "he killed me, he must be cheating" attitude to be just as pathetic as cheating itself.

[Ze-Jamz]

Gawd..were not trying to remove ammo now are we?

blimey

[Flanker35M]

S!

Ze-Jamz..you said it out loud. Just wait for the Purist Battalion and their funny sidekicks to march in and demand it ;) :D On a more serious note can't the servers restrict loadouts like in IL-2 1946? Would solve these fantasy beltings etc.

[JG52Krupi]

I recall asking this to be added as a server side options and was imediatly jumped on :( looks like I was correct after all.

P.S. I use a (for the most part) historical belt in my aircraft :P

[*Buzzsaw*]

On a more serious note can't the servers restrict loadouts like in IL-2 1946? Would solve these fantasy beltings etc.

Salute

1. The SmK (H) Tungsten round is clearly causing an ahistorical imbalance, since it makes the E-1's weapons more effective than the E-3's and E-4's, not accurate representation of the real situation.
2. The round was in very short supply, its not even listed in the game as part of the standard E-1 loadout, unlike the Dewilde Inciendary round in the Spitfires and Hurricanes or the M-Geschoss in the E-4.
3. We don't have an accurate determination of exactly how good this round was.

I am not raising an issue about the M-Geschoss, that was clearly part of the battle, and an real indicator of which direction the Luftwaffe was taking its air to air weapons program in 1940, ie. towards 20mm weapons.

I'd be happy to see a server with historical beltings, including restricting the British to limited numbers of DeWilde rounds.

[CaptainDoggles]

2. The round was in very short supply, its not even listed in the game as part of the standard E-1 loadout, unlike the Dewilde Inciendary round in the Spitfires and Hurricanes or the M-Geschoss in the E-4.

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Please quote a source that states the round was "in very short supply".

[*Buzzsaw*]

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Please quote a source that states the round was "in very short supply".

Go back and read my posts.

[CaptainDoggles]

Go back and read my posts.

I did. You seem to be confusing "my source doesn't mention the tungsten ammo" or "the tungsten ammo was less common than the standard ammo" with "the tungsten ammo was in short supply"

If you can't quote it, then I'll accept that you agree.

[*Buzzsaw*]

German penetration table for the commonplace 7,92mm SmK v round, at different ranges and angles, striking the armor plate directly (cont. lines) or indirectly (hitting a 3mm thick dural plate at 20 degrees 1,5 meters before the the armor plate).

For reference, the armor thickness on the Spitfire noted. I believe the Hurricane had the same thicknesses.

Apparanatly a lot was dependent on wheter the bullet hit anything before it struck armor plate. If not, it could go through it rather easily. I am not sure if the Spit had 3 mm thick dural plating on the fuselage (it seems unlikely to me, given that the 'deflector plate' cowling over the tank was only 3.5mm thick and it was considered to be a reinforced part to deflect bullets) but 20 degrees angle of impact and 1.5 meters of spacing does seem practical.

Salute

First of all, we're talking about the SmK (H) round, not the standard version. I have no issue with the standard AP round being included, it was part of the historical 109 7.92mm loadout, the SmK (H) was not, as mentioned previously the Dewilde was standard loadout, so was the M-Geschoss.

2nd, in relation to the penetrative abilities of the standard AP round, the only relevant line in your graph is the slashed one, showing the penetration after hitting duraluminum sheeting first, since in order to hit the pilot armour the round would need to penetrate the aircraft skin. Note also the chart does not take into account the effect of hitting one of the Spitfires aluminum struts or formers, much more substantial.

Lots of them.

http://cutawaycreation.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/spitfireixc-600-x-426.jpg?w=593&h=421

[pstyle]

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.

Just to be pedantic ;):

In many historical cases, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It's then a matter of degree or probability how strong that evidential gap is with respect to the event proposed.

I think what you mean to say is that absence of evidence is not PROOF of absence.

[AbortedMan]

My dog smiles with his tail.

...am I helping?

[*Buzzsaw*]

I did. You seem to be confusing "my source doesn't mention the tungsten ammo" or "the tungsten ammo was less common than the standard ammo" with "the tungsten ammo was in short supply"

If you can't quote it, then I'll accept that you agree.

Not confused, the ammunition was in short supply, wasn't part of the standard loadout.

Did it exist as part of a Luftwaffe ordinance plan? No idea. Probably, at some point, who knows when?

I actually think its up to advocates for its use to prove it was a part of the battle.

More importantly, like other glitches which affect the game, it is creating an ahistorical enviroment.

[CaptainDoggles]

Not confused, the ammunition was in short supply, wasn't part of the standard loadout.You don't have a source, but you keep claiming there was some kind of ammo shortage with that particular round.

[lonewulf]

I don't know if people are or aren't using 100% 8mm tungsten, but even if they are, is it really an issue? If 2cm cannon rounds easily penetrate aircraft armour (ball goes through about 14mm worth at 200m - that's more than twice the thickness of a Spit back plate) what's the difference? It just means that an E 1 can probably kill you just as quick as an E 3, if it gets rounds on your head or back plate. The trick of course, as others have already pointed out, is to avoid a situation where this can happen. Much easier said than done of course but that's the challenge.

[ATAG_Doc]

I don't know if people are or aren't using 100% 8mm tungsten, but even if they are, is it really an issue? If 2cm cannon rounds easily penetrate aircraft armour (ball goes through about 14mm worth at 200m - that's more than twice the thickness of a Spit back plate) what's the difference? It just means that an E 1 can probably kill you just as quick as an E 3, if it gets rounds on your head or back plate. The trick of course, as others have already pointed out, is to avoid a situation where this can happen. Much easier said than done of course but that's the challenge.

Nope not at all.

[*Buzzsaw*]

I don't know if people are or aren't using 100% 8mm tungsten, but even if they are, is it really an issue? If 2cm cannon rounds easily penetrate aircraft armour (ball goes through about 14mm worth at 200m - that's more than twice the thickness of a Spit back plate) what's the difference? It just means that an E 1 can probably kill you just as quick as an E 3, if it gets rounds on your head or back plate. The trick of course, as others have already pointed out, is to avoid a situation where this can happen. Much easier said than done of course but that's the challenge.

Actually M-Geschoss actually had poor penetration when it came to armour, what it did was penetrate the skin of the aircraft, then explode, and because of the large amount of explosive filling, more than a standard HE round, the explosive force was enough to blow whole sections of the aircraft skin off, and without the skin strength, the structures of wings and fuselage often failed.

This particular 7.92mm tungsten round in the game gives the German side an ahistorical advantage which they did not have.

It allows players to load up 2000 rounds and 60 seconds worth of firing into the E-1, and get equal power, same penetration as a 20mm AP round, more firing time, and better accuracy than the 20mm cannon in the E-3 and E-4, which the Luftwaffe said was a better weapons system, and which only allowed Luftwaffe pilots 7 seconds of firing time.

The game has created a weapons system for the 109's which isn't based on any kind of historical reality. The Germans were converting their MG armed E-1's as fast as they could into cannon armed versions because the cannon versions were more effective. The real life pilots complained when they had to fly the E-1's. The opposite is happening in CoD. Go on the servers, the guys who have the biggest scores are flying the E-1, and Blue flyers are converting wholesale into this plane from the E-3 and E-4.

Where are the tests showing what this round could do in penetrative terms? Where are the historical records showing its use in Luftwaffe fighters in 1940? No one has produced anything.

What we have now is a legal hack, we might as well allow the Germans to use the pulse cannon of the Su-26.

[BadgerSmedly]

Tally Ho Gents!

Wasn't Paul Richie given a near fatal neck wound from an AP round going through his hurricane's seat back plate whilst he was in France? Circa 1939/1940. Can't get to the book at the mo but will confirm.

I remember that the undertone was that after this everyone had noted that the 'game had changed'.

Regards

Badger

[ZaltysZ]

The game has created a weapons system for the 109's which isn't based on any kind of historical reality. The Germans were converting their MG armed E-1's as fast as they could into cannon armed versions because the cannon versions were more effective. The real life pilots complained when they had to fly the E-1's. The opposite is happening in CoD. Go on the servers, the guys who have the biggest scores are flying the E-1, and Blue flyers are converting wholesale into this plane from the E-3 and E-4.

Maybe there is nothing wrong with weapon system, but there is something wrong with DM? Repka server is very good for pointing this, because it is possible to fight against any plane there. If E4 hits another BF109 there, wings break off 8 out of 10 times. If E4 hits Spit, Spit gets damage in various parts, but still continues to fly and even soaks another 1-2 bursts of MG-FF/M before it crashes due to control damage or pilot death. It is easier and faster to kill pilot with tungsten rounds, than to kill Spit with mine shells, and that stimulates preference for E1. If MG-FF/M (or even MG-FF) had similar effect on Spit like it has on BF, no one would bother with E1.

[hiro]

Gawd..were not trying to remove ammo now are we?

blimey



So true . . .


I feel the discussion of the ammo is relevant, even though the devs won't patch to fix it in ClOD, possibly maybe after the sequel,

but its good to get it out now, so in the sequel, the ammo can be more historically correct . . . and issues like this is on their minds.



I just had to say this, even though its already been said.

Unfortunately, I do not have proof, and this is speculation.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

As I'm not in the position to take action against said pilots, my producing proof is irrelevant, and a moot point. I'm stating what I believe is true and that the OP is not alone in this matter.



This is wrong. With this attitude you won't help anyone, just throw false accusations. You call someone out and tarnish their rep with out evidence.

I know its possible to cheat. Shoot when Call of Duty 3 was released or Black Ops, within the hour, people were cheating (more so on PS3). on WOW (blizzard mmorpg) when they released cataclysm (new add on), on the day of, between the lags, there was cheating going on . . . and Blizzard puts alot of effort into stopping the cheaters.


But if you feel strongly someone is cheating compile evidence, have video, get other witnesses, etc. That way you help yourself and everyone else on the server, and help people to know about the cheat, help in development in the game (and the devs can fix it / the guys hosting the server can do something about it).

Even if you can't do anything about it, putting the evidence out there will put it on the devs or the ones running the server to do something about it, or at least warn others so they know.

You don't take a holier than thou attitude in this. If you're going to call someone out, back up with facts and proof. If you can't, its just hearsay.

Otherwise be quiet about it, and if they are known for cheating eventually they'll get caught and your suspicions are correct. And if they aren't, then they've earned their reputations and will continue to pwn people.


ok back to the ammo discussion. . .

[5./JG27.Farber]

What we have now is a legal hack, we might as well allow the Germans to use the pulse cannon of the Su-26.

Not really. The cannons on the 109 kick like hell and go all over the place... firing above 100 metres with cannon is a waste of ammo. Thats why guys with high scores use the E1 plus the extra ammo...

[Ze-Jamz]

Fellas neither side can prove how abundant these rounds were and I'm guessing the devs couldn't either so they are modeled...get over it

You've count de whilde in abundance which causes a lot of DMG to a 109, you talk about the big hitters using the e1....not true

Numbers of E1 have risen due to you harping on in this thread

ALSO

Beos do not work online in any 109 so regardless what model you take were going to load SMKh

Just stop on your quest now

EDIT
Seriously we've gone from the whiners and the fanbois at war for how long? Now we've got the finished no more updates on CoD certain members have finished from here crawled back under there rocks but now we've got another breed of purists counting the rivots..

If people want to load 100% of a certain ammo let them do it, you play your historical load out game but don't try and force it on others...go play a server that sanctions it...

In every game off every genre on every forum your get the ones shouting the loudest who are on the receiving end just like the blues moaning about the spits Alt advantage in game now yada yada..

Sort it out before you get the ammo changed too

[lonewulf]

"It allows players to load up 2000 rounds and 60 seconds worth of firing into the E-1,..."

Well sort of. The MG 17 has a cyclic rate of about 1200 rounds per minute. The two cowling guns have up to 1000 rpg. This should give you about 50 seconds of continuous fire, at least in theory. The 17s in the wings had up to 500 rpg. This would give you about 20 seconds of fire. So, in reality, just like the E 3/4, the E 1 has just two weapons that should provide more than about 20 seconds of continuous fire.

"The game has created a weapons system for the 109's which isn't based on any kind of historical reality. The Germans were converting their MG armed E-1's as fast as they could into cannon armed versions because the cannon versions were more effective. The real life pilots complained when they had to fly the E-1's. The opposite is happening in CoD. Go on the servers, the guys who have the biggest scores are flying the E-1, and Blue flyers are converting wholesale into this plane from the E-3 and E-4."

The ammo issue is clearly an anomaly, but it's hardly the only one. Others include the ability of Spits to shrug off catastrophic cannon damage and continue fighting, or to lose an elevator with no apparent reduction in turning performance. Unless you're suggesting that individuals are actually using the tungsten ammo anomaly, in conjunction with some sort of aim bot, I really struggle to see why its such a big deal. If you allow someone to assume a good shooting position on your six then chances are, tungsten or no tungsten, you're unlikely to make it home.

[notafinger!]

Maybe there is nothing wrong with weapon system, but there is something wrong with DM? Repka server is very good for pointing this, because it is possible to fight against any plane there. If E4 hits another BF109 there, wings break off 8 out of 10 times. If E4 hits Spit, Spit gets damage in various parts, but still continues to fly and even soaks another 1-2 bursts of MG-FF/M before it crashes due to control damage or pilot death. It is easier and faster to kill pilot with tungsten rounds, than to kill Spit with mine shells, and that stimulates preference for E1. If MG-FF/M (or even MG-FF) had similar effect on Spit like it has on BF, no one would bother with E1.

Very well said. To go further this is actually a reaction by blue flyers to what red was doing. For a very long time 99% of red was flying Spits exclusively, nobody was using Hurricanes. Since Spit wings absorb 20mm shells like a sponge some blue pilots, including myself, changed their tactics to something that would be more effective against Spitfires. If you can't kill the machine you had to kill the pilot. Considering how vulnerable the 109 is to cooling system, engine, fuel tank, and even pilot damage much of what is being said in this thread is just sour grapes.

[JG52Krupi]

Totally agree, the spits have a ludicrous DM.

If you fly at 3000m above an airfield in a 109 for any length of time and your going to be going down. Now do the same in a spit, it just soaks up damage like its made of 20mm thick titanium!!!!!

This is the simple truth, I have flown both red and blue.

[Ataros]

All kills are PK in this Hurri vid as you could see before. This is not a privilege of tungsten only but of any AP ammo and aiming at the center of aircraft instead of wings (sharp at convergence range). A pilot is the softest part of an airplane.

http://youtu.be/ZczgdRRdGV8

I think it is possible to limit certain loadouts on server side via scripting if needed. MG just gave us a possibility to use different loadouts. Offline it is a responsibility of a mission-maker to include historic loadouts (this is the reason we can not change it offline). There is probably a way to do this online too, C# scripters know better.

[SlipBall]

Using the default 109 loadout I have good success against the Spits. I always try to make my first burst on the inside port wing. With the resulting oil leak his time in the sky is now on the clock:-P Many times a fire breaks out and he is forced to hit the silk.

[FFCW_Urizen]

Others include the ability of Spits to shrug off catastrophic cannon damage and continue fighting, or to lose an elevator with no apparent reduction in turning performance.

I have to agree and disagree at the same time with this statement. Holes in my wing, control surfaces shot off? Time to make a run for it, you cannot effectively fight with such damages, as your turning ability is extremely FUBAR.
Have you ever tried to outturn an experienced 109 driver, when he notices that you are in trouble? Probably not, because you are dead before long.

At the same time, there is definitely something wrong with the Spitfires DM.
How many times was i set on fire? Never!

S!

[Hellbender]

I was set on fire twice so far when my engine got shredded and I saw orange flames left and right of my cockpit.

[FFCW_Urizen]

never had that either, usually for me it´s one of 3 scenarios:

1. wing ripped to shreds -> B/O
2. controls gone -> B/O (i´m not thinking of any particular 6./JG26 pilot, now do i david :D )
3. PKed -> RIP

[Hellbender]

never had that either, usually for me it´s one of 3 scenarios:

1. wing ripped to shreds -> B/O
2. controls gone -> B/O (i´m not thinking of any particular 6./JG26 pilot, now do i david :D )
3. PKed -> RIP

You may have forgotten that in these days the following occurs very often:

4. Water/Oil Radiator is perforated/damaged leaking and you have to B/O :grin:

[FFCW_Urizen]

you are right, forgot that one :D

[David198502]

well urizen, meanwhile i practised to make pilot kills, and im quite successfull doing so...so you might soon notice a difference.... :)

[*Buzzsaw*]

Fellas neither side can prove how abundant these rounds were and I'm guessing the devs couldn't either so they are modeled...get over it

I'm calling Bullsh*t on this.

I have already provided proof these rounds were 1-2% of the total LMG rounds manufactured, in addition, there was a known shortage of Wolfram the raw material used to manufacture Tungsten Acid, which was such the whole manufacture of the material was discontinued in 1942.

In addition, the Wehrmacht used the rounds as well, they were not made for the Luftwaffe exclusively, and the Wehrmacht had huge requirements, there were over 750,000 MG34 and MG42's produced for them, compared to 24,000 MG17's for the Luftwaffe.

The game shows the historical belt loadouts for both sides, as 'Default', and the SmK (H) is not even listed as part of the historical belt loadouts for 109E's.

[FFCW_Urizen]

we´ll see about that :cool:

€: meant as response to david Buzz! u just snuck in there mate ;)

[Slipstream2012]

Just a quick distraction from the forum furballing :grin:

Got two pilot kills in two hours yesterday, first time I've had two PK's since the old IL2 :cool:

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute Notafinger

Very well said. To go further this is actually a reaction by blue flyers to what red was doing. For a very long time 99% of red was flying Spits exclusively, nobody was using Hurricanes.

The reason no one flew the Hurricane was because it was 534 lbs overweight, stalled like a pregnant whale, and couldn't outturn the 109's unlike the historical aircraft. Even now most people prefer the Spitfire because of its better speed.

Since Spit wings absorb 20mm shells like a sponge some blue pilots, including myself, changed their tactics to something that would be more effective against Spitfires. If you can't kill the machine you had to kill the pilot. Considering how vulnerable the 109 is to cooling system, engine, fuel tank, and even pilot damage much of what is being said in this thread is just sour grapes.

If you have a problem with the Spit DM, then I would suggest you provide proof and make it known.

This argument has no relevance to the issue of the use of these Tungsten rounds and whether or not that is accurate.

[Ze-Jamz]

I'm calling Bullsh*t on this.

I have already provided proof these rounds were 1-2% of the total LMG rounds manufactured, in addition, there was a known shortage of Wolfram the raw material used to manufacture Tungsten Acid, which was such the whole manufacture of the material was discontinued in 1942.

In addition, the Wehrmacht used the rounds as well, they were not made for the Luftwaffe exclusively, and the Wehrmacht had huge requirements, there were over 750,000 MG34 and MG42's produced for them, compared to 24,000 MG17's for the Luftwaffe.

The game shows the historical belt loadouts for both sides, as 'Default', and the SmK (H) is not even listed as part of the historical belt loadouts for 109E's.

Which means what? That doesnt proove F** All!

[notafinger!]

Salute Notafinger

The reason no one flew the Hurricane was because it was 534 lbs overweight, stalled like a pregnant whale, and couldn't outturn the 109's unlike the historical aircraft. Even now most people prefer the Spitfire because of its better speed.

If you have a problem with the Spit DM, then I would suggest you provide proof and make it known.

This argument has no relevance to the issue of the use of these Tungsten rounds and whether or not that is accurate.

You failed to grasp the point entirely. Hurricanes burn and wings break off. Spitfires do not burn and rarely a wing will break off. Blue pilots learned there was more effective way to kill Spitfires. It doesn't mean a damn thing if it's historic or not. It's in the game and people are going to use it. Get over it.

[JG52Krupi]

You failed to grasp the point entirely. Hurricanes burn and wings break off. Spitfires do not burn and rarely a wing will break off. Blue pilots learned there was more effective way to kill Spitfires. It doesn't mean a damn thing if it's historic or not. It's in the game and people are going to use it. Get over it.

Don't worry Notafinger just leave him to it, he thinks that if he moans long enough the reds will get 200oct aircraft :rolleyes:

[5./JG27.Farber]

I'm calling Bullsh*t on this.

I have already provided proof these rounds were 1-2% of the total LMG rounds manufactured,


WHERE? Can you repost it!?

[Ze-Jamz]

Don't worry Notafinger just leave him to it, he thinks that if he moans long enough the reds will get 200oct aircraft :rolleyes:

And the Mk2 Hurri with Hispanos

[SlipBall]

Since work on Clod is finished, shouldn't the discussion of these AP be a server's forum chat:)

[lonewulf]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to point out that a belt of 100% 8mm tungsten would most likely be historically inaccurate. That's fine I can understand that. Same with 100% 20mm AP or 100% 20mm HE. Generally speaking these ammo types were usually used in combination with others. However, even if they are used exclusively, and in a way that is not strictly historically accurate, you still have to hit the enemy to be effective. Moreover, with something like tungsten, you only really have an advantage if you can consistently hit the cockpit from the six or near six position. Honestly Buzz, unless you are suggesting these guys are using something other than skill (is that what you're suggesting?) to achieve those sorts of hits, I just think your blowing this thing completely out of proportion.

[klem]

I haven't bothered to read all these pages but on two issues, here's my 2p;

Lag - IMHO definitely occurs. I have sometimes been hit by a 109 making a near head-on pass when his line of flight moved from 11 o'clock to my 1 o'clock to pass down my right hand side and at no time within normal guns range was he pointing at me unless he shot very early from 1000+ metres when he was last pointing at me. It seemed he could not have hit me from normal range at his angle. But.... bang! Dead. I accept that no Tracer can add to the impression of imposssible shots but I'm happy (happy?!) that when it happens, its probably lag.

PKs in general. Sudden unexplained PKs (no tracer) perhaps due to mine shells exploding in a cluster around the cockpit. No armour to the sides. Loud impacts/explosions (not like the sound of 7.62mm hitting the airframe), instant black screen. Or simply a 20mm in the right place.

I doubt very much that its hacking.

I just wish the damn 109 pilots would oblige with a few PK deaths from my 0.303" AP! :)
No wonder the RAF pilots began asking for heavier armament.

[CaptainDoggles]

Sigh.

It's plain to see that for some people, this is more than a game. They have to "win". First the bogeyman was the Minegeschoss. Now it's the SMK(H).

Soon it will be, what?

I shudder to think what this place will be like when Fw 190s appear in game. The level of whining is going to be catastrophic.

[Kurfürst]

Sigh.

It's plain to see that for some people, this is more than a game. They have to "win". First the bogeyman was the Minegeschoss. Now it's the SMK(H).

Soon it will be, what?

Bf 109F. I am sure we will have numerous threads about how it was around only in very limited numbers in the summer of 1941... ;-)

Truth of the matter is, an all- SmK (H) belt is not any more or less ridiculus than an all- de Wilde belt... "historical belts" should be a server side option. I am sure the Reds would have issues with having some of their Brownings loaded all-ball. ;)

[raaaid]

i hate tracers since with no depth perception they just obstruct the view so i use now traceless cordite VII and i wonder:

what are the best allied bullets with no tracers? in the game of course

[chantaje]

i use a mix of de wilde and ap, i dont know if its the best but it works for me.

without tracers the enemy dont know when you miss :P , i use that too. do you fly online raid?

[vranac]

I haven't bothered to read all these pages but on two issues, here's my 2p;

Lag - IMHO definitely occurs. I have sometimes been hit by a 109 making a near head-on pass when his line of flight moved from 11 o'clock to my 1 o'clock to pass down my right hand side and at no time within normal guns range was he pointing at me unless he shot very early from 1000+ metres when he was last pointing at me. It seemed he could not have hit me from normal range at his angle. But.... bang! Dead. I accept that no Tracer can add to the impression of imposssible shots but I'm happy (happy?!) that when it happens, its probably lag.

PKs in general. Sudden unexplained PKs (no tracer) perhaps due to mine shells exploding in a cluster around the cockpit. No armour to the sides. Loud impacts/explosions (not like the sound of 7.62mm hitting the airframe), instant black screen. Or simply a 20mm in the right place.

I doubt very much that its hacking.

I just wish the damn 109 pilots would oblige with a few PK deaths from my 0.303" AP! :)
No wonder the RAF pilots began asking for heavier armament.

+1

[*Buzzsaw*]

Don't worry Notafinger just leave him to it, he thinks that if he moans long enough the reds will get 200oct aircraft :rolleyes:

Salute

Please don't accuse me of bias when that is clearly not the case.

I've never asked for performance better than historical, unlike some of those who have responded to my comments, several of which who admitted flying with 109 mods on public servers.

And by the way, I am record on any number of occasions noting the following:

1. 109's too slow on the deck
2. Hurricane and Spitfire 2 pitch planes climb too well.

And other suggestions for changes which would benefit the Blue side.

If you want to provide proof the Spitfire's damage model is incorrect, then I would suggest you do so.

All I see right now is a lot of response from those who fly Blue saying they want an ahistorical situation to continue so they can benefit.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Honestly Buzz, unless you are suggesting these guys are using something other than skill (is that what you're suggesting?) to achieve those sorts of hits, I just think your blowing this thing completely out of proportion.

Salute

Read the thread and you will see me on record as stating I don't think any of the pilot's mentioned were hacking. I didn't start this thread or make any of those allegations.

My issue is the modelling of this Sim.

The fact is, this is supposed to be a highly realistic simulation. (Unless I didn't read the box cover and promotion material correctly)

Not an Arcade game where the side with the most ways to exploit the botches in design. comes out on top.

All those who are complaining about the Spitfire's damage model... Why didn't you do something about it instead of muttering to yourself?

Why didn't you do some testing, provide proof to the Developers before the last patch??

I had suspected a long time that the Hurricane was modelled incorrectly, I did my research and provided proof it was overweight, and it got changed.

Just because those on the Blue side are too lazy to provide the proof required, (if it even exists) for a change in the Spitfire damage model is not my problem, it's theirs, despite their attempts here to try to associate my correctly provided information on the SmK (H) with a possible flaw in the Spitfire.

It's quite clear that those who are shouting the loudest were also those who were the quietest and most self satisfied when the Red aircraft were completely mismodelled and the 109's were sailing freely.

Now that things are more realistically modelled, (far from perfect, the engine cutout bug makes the Spits and Hurricanes far from historical at higher alts) the Blue side is complaining... perhaps no surprise.

That's not my problem and personally I don't care if some misinformed and one sided players want to attack me... just an indicator of their personal lack of character.

If I discover facts which bear my point out, I will continue to point out what I perceive as errors in this Sim, whatever others may say.

[raaaid]

do you fly online raid?

i like to play online but just on airquake i dont have the patience to look for for so long for a contact as in full real

i dont know now im tweaking my settings and have a better visibility i may give it a try :)

[Ataros]

Beware! They are coming again! :) ATAG Friday 10/26 21.00 MSK/17.00 UTC and later

Details: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?2320-Italian-Job-%29&p=21169#post21169

http://i.imgur.com/GDA4X.jpg

[adonys]

point is, at this time, the game is ridiculously easy to be modified.. which means cheating is happening for sure in the online environment.

[Kongo-Otto]

You don't have a source, but you keep claiming there was some kind of ammo shortage with that particular round.

Tungsten ore (in German Tungsten = Wolfram) was in extremely short supply in Germany so that after no more Tungsten ore (Wolfram) supplies were available in adequate numbers to the German Arms Industry the Production of Weapons and tungsten cored ammo like the
2,8 cm schwere Panzerbüchse 41 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.8_cm_sPzB_41), 4,2 cm Pak 41, 7,5 cm Pak 41 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_Pak_41) and the 5,/7,5/ 8,8 cm Panzergranate 40 (H) (H= Hartkern aka Tungsten Core) had to be stopped.

Germany’s minimum requirements for Tungsten ore were 3,500 metric tons per year.

1939 4142 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from China, 62 from India, 638 from Portugal and 74 from Spain. Total: 4916 metric tons
1940 61 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from Portugal, 800 from China and 394 from Spain. Total: 1255 metric tons
1941 318 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1418
1942 794 metric tons tungsetn ore were Imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1894
1943 835 metric tons tungsten ore were Imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1935
1944 895 metric tons tungsten ore were Imported from Portugal, 564 from Spain (smuggled). Total: 1459


Great sources for the shortage of Tungsten and many other urgently needed materials and also the overstreched german war industry is: Germany and the second World War Volume V/ I and II
http://www.amazon.com/Germany-Second-World-War-administration/dp/0198228872
http://www.amazon.com/Germany-Second-World-War-Administration/dp/0198208731/ref=pd_sim_sbs_b_1/184-8798559-3538864
CARUANA L.R. and ROCKOFF H.(2001): "A Wolfram in Sheep ́s Clothing: U.S.Economic Warfare in Spain, 1940-1944." NBER Working Paper No. H0132
LEITZ, C. (1996): Economic Relations Between Nazi Germany and Franco’ s Spain1939-1945. Clarendon Press. Oxford

[Kurfürst]

5cm PaK/Kwk munition production did not stop IIRC (others were, but there were for example a very limited amount of Hartkern Pzgr. 40 produced for the (long) 8,8 Pak/KwK 43 gun. OTOH 5cm Pzgr. 40 was very commonly used in the Eastern Front in 1941 - one in three-four AP rounds fired IIRC.

The 7,92mm smk (H) tungsten cored small arms munition did stop by mid 1941, at which point stock of this ammuntion amounted to about 10 million rounds.

[notafinger!]

the reason it's not working for you guys is because the Jews are sabotaging your ammo....

Stay classy bro.