Official Fulqrum Publishing forum
Page 2 of 7 1 2 34 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   Ammunition power (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=6255)

zapatista 02-17-2009 02:58 PM
interesting post !

i always thought the values used for munitions explosive power and their velocity should be openly provided, in the same way we need aerial speed and climb rates etc (like il2 compare did). that is the only way to confirm that the game is historically accurate and that the values used for both sides are correct and fair.

does anybody know if that list of explosive power and velocity is still accurate, going by the date in that post it was from 2002 ?

we need somebody like josse to have a peak at the files and give us a list of the current values oleg used in 4.09b

KG26_Alpha 02-17-2009 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zapatista (Post 67222)
interesting post !

i always thought the values used for munitions explosive power and their velocity should be openly provided, in the same way we need aerial speed and climb rates etc (like il2 compare did). that is the only way to confirm that the game is historically accurate and that the values used for both sides are correct and fair.

does anybody know if that list of explosive power and velocity is still accurate, going by the date in that post it was from 2002 ?

we need somebody like josse to have a peak at the files and give us a list of the current values oleg used in 4.09b
didnt he already do that and adjust the 20mm ?

Chivas 02-17-2009 04:24 PM
I think the individual aircraft armament strength won't matter as much in SOW. The Damage Model will balance the fight. Hopefully with the SOW's new far more detailed DM you will have only two options if you survive a solid burst from any caliber weapon. Bail out or run. I don't think we will see anymore heavily damaged aircraft out running you or out turning you. The fight will be over, and you can turn your attention quickly to the next threat.

This is going to make a huge difference in game play, for the better, IMHO.

Insuber 02-17-2009 06:55 PM
Quote:
(...) With USAAF suffering the most from wrong .50 cal belting. The velocity values you posted in the first post reflect that balance very well (FM / WM => Belting / Velocity values).
I don't want to start a whining contest but, as demonstrated recently by peeking into the game code, the Regia Aeronautica wins the most porked gun award. The Breda SAFAT wasn't a powerful gun indeed, but in the game they are simply ridiculous.

Ins

Thunderbolt56 02-17-2009 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insuber (Post 67239)
...the Regia Aeronautica wons the most porked gun award. The Breda SAFAT wasn't a powerful gun indeed, but in the game they are simply ridiculous.

Ins


Yes...yes they are.

T}{OR 02-17-2009 09:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insuber (Post 67239)
I don't want to start a whining contest but, as demonstrated recently by peeking into the game code, the Regia Aeronautica wons the most porked gun award. The Breda SAFAT wasn't a powerful gun indeed, but in the game they are simply ridiculous.

Ins
Appologies, you're quite right there. I forgot about that.

Bearcat 02-17-2009 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.}{.O.R. (Post 67217)
From: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2830
I have to agree with Diablo here.
You can complain that velocity is porked in favour of Allies, but the actual advantage in-game goes to Blue - by a long margin. Wrong belting and what not else.
The way I see it blue (especialy 190s and 109s) need only one or two shots for their opponent to explode. You might want to complain about that first.
Need proof - just hop over to the WarClouds.
Yes, the balance might have been something which was attempted, but in very odd way. With USAAF suffering the most from wrong .50 cal belting. The velocity values you posted in the first post reflect that balance very well (FM / WM => Belting / Velocity values).
I cant agree more... that's why when I read about the "disadvantage" of blue planes.. I almost fell out of my chair.... and don't forget the Ki-84Cs..

Avimimus 02-18-2009 02:11 AM
Wow. Genuine luftwhinners. I thought they'd gone extinct!

Oleg doesn't balance, so you need another explanation ;) (maybe biased reference materials...) ;) ;)

II/JG54_Emil 02-18-2009 01:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.}{.O.R. (Post 67217)
From: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2830...The way I see it blue (especialy 190s and 109s) need only one or two shots for their opponent to explode. You might want to complain about that first. ...
I didn´t open this thread to say blue planes need faster bullets, but to say that I would like everything to be historicaly correct as possible.

I only understand the meaning of velocity the other data is too abstract for me to be able to compare and judge about it´s correctness.

IceFire 02-18-2009 11:36 PM
There are likely some other factors that are governing the speed of bullets so comparing values across the table probably means you need to compare all of the values rather than just cherry picking the velocity value.

That'd just be a guess but with a system as complex as IL-2s...that'd be my assumption.

If we go by feel...ever since the MG151/20 got its proper belting in place it became the best 20mm cannon available...especially in terms of power. Its tied in my books for #1 most destructive 20mm cannon in IL-2. Surely there is more to it...


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:31 AM.
Page 2 of 7 1 2 34 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.