Emil did not ask for a change, he did ask for the reason of this wrong data.

LOL! You know what I mean... you buy a box with a big word "bicycle" but you can't see its content yet... like a videogame object.

Of course... but it's strange that when people uses real data the thing ingame seem more realistic... or do you really believe to the green ray of death? I believe Oleg did a great job with his engine.

Mhm.. I though it was more realistic in the first version of the game... you could stall in a La7 as in a 109.. now you can't...
Anyway I'm aware of the engine problems (i've been a oleg supporter since the start, I've been a oleg doubter since the famous patch who porked the 109s and a conspiracy believer since the i16/G50 fight I did)

Modders tried and it worked.. they only agreed to not change any original data keeping "Il2" as the game developed by Oleg.

Me too.. Oleg di a good job and we all must thank him.
The only thing I need to say is "Please leave SOW a realistic hystorical simulator, don't change hystory for marketing affair". I have 5 copy of this game at home... and I'm going follow him. I only wish that this time Blue players could play without handicaps because Red world needs to win...

AFAIK the damage models of some weapons/ammunitions are not correct (blue or red, I do not care a damn), that is they are not 'realistic', and with a little tweaking of the parameters (and the mod guys say that it is a very easy tweaking) the 'realism' can be improved.

When I say lack of 'realism' I intend:

- the lack of data coherence when comparing the effects of similar ammunition fired by different weapons in the game, which strangely enough yields sometimes very different results (DM is in cause here),
- the lack of correspondence with historical accounts and guncam movies, even though this method is more prone to flaws and subjective interpretations.

I brought the example of the 4 cm radius of damage of a type of 12.7 gun, versus the 15 cm radius of a different type of 12.7 gun. Is this logical or coherent ? IMHO it isn't, and the obvious results are a huge loss of 'realism' if you dogfight in a plane with the first type of gun.

I have to go now, I need to practice so to improve my hit ratio by at least 50% ... hoping that it is enough :-).

Regards,
Insuber

Bullet isn't missile, which propels itself and its characteristics do not depend on launcher.

Bullet accelerates only when it is in the barrel of the gun, so barrel length directly effects muzzle velocity. Higher velocity allows the bullet to fly in less curved trajectory and do more damage (penetration). Guns with different length of barrel will have different effects on target and will have to be aimed differently, despite the same ammunition.

Difference between guns increases even more when they are fired in bursts. The higher muzzle velocity is, the higher recoil will be and the more subsequent shots will be thrown away from aim point, so higher muzzle velocity (longer barrel) will result in larger spread when burst time (or shots count) increases.

The last thing is RPM of the gun. It mostly depends on how strong are the materials from which the gun is made. Basically designers trade between high RPM and high muzzle velocity, so the gun will not be destroyed just by firing it. Higher RPM is desirable when firing from unstable platforms such as aircraft, because it decreases spread which occurs because of platform instability. However, high RPM coupled with high recoil can give very very high spread.

So, to sum up: different guns with the same ammunition will fire differently.

Zaltys,

Well said and agreed, in principle. But my point is that the "different" is way too much so in game, especially for HE rounds where the amount of HE is the same, and penetration is a second order factor. In particular, if true, the 4 cm vs. 15 cm damage radius for two different .50 guns (that is a 14x in effectiveness factor as far as affected area, and 50x as far as affected volume ...) is not "realistic".

Also, I believe that even for ordinary AP shells the penetration effect on thin aluminum surfaces is *approximately* the same, independently from the bullet energy, since the aluminum foil resistance is again a second order factor.

Going to a more subjective talk, I'm ready to accept a penalization for using weaker planes/guns, but not ready to pepper a Tomahawk with hundreds of .50 well aimed rounds from convergence distance, only to see him loosing some small debris and flying home with a large "bras d'honneur" popping out of the cockpit ... You know what I mean, if you don't, just try ... ;-)

Regards,
Insuber

There is big problem with ammunition types in this game. All heavy MGs in this game have only AP (AP-T) rounds and no incendiary or explosive ones. That is why .50, MG131, MG151, BredaSAFATs look so weak.

Thanks Zaltys, that's right. I can't explain still the relative difference between Brownings (and HO's, btw) and the rest of .50's.

Regards,
Ins

And here we come to another factor. IL-2 is IMO so far the game with best scaling I ever saw and this goes to both, graphics and more importantly for this topic difficulty.
There are so many difficulty options that one can scale il2 from high fidelity simulation to sunday afternoon shootout arcade.
But what happened? The thing commonly reffered to as "elitism", some people coudn't handle more realistic settings but also couldn't accept it and simply turn off the options that were in the way of their fun. And then, on the 7th day - the whined at O.M.
Pffft one of the worst things for IL-2 was so many "inputs" on ubi...
I would even go THAT far and say that the best thing that could possibly happen for SoW is O.M.'s absence from us

Realistic torque was modelled and people did bitch, a small but load group of weekend "war winners" ruined it for many of us, while all they had to do for their instant gratification is turn off the darn torque in the difficulty options, yes it's actually there.
I remember there was a small DF server ran by a female in the past, she simply turned off the torque, that's one of the reasons I love females so much - they usually throw much less BS around...


In the end don't get me wrong I fully understand what you want to say, I just hate the reasons that make the whole situation what it is.
This is also one of the reasons simulation genre is barely living...too many people want instant gratification. The would all like to be uber aces with no effort, well they can play Ace Combat on "Realistic" settings thinking they would be awsome pilots IRL - LOL

It's all relative. Given 109s and 190s lose a great deal of speed and stability by just beeing looked at by 50cals the wrong way a porked 50 cal belting does not make that much of a difference. 50ies don't do structual damage that easily, but they are certainly more then adequate in reducing german planes combat efficiency to a degree no other planes are effected. This is especially true for the 109 engine. Though this makes Ponies and Jugs more or less "kill message 5 minutes after engagement" planes, in my exprience whenever I fly those, which is not that a rare happening, all in all they are not less effective. The danger of kill stealing is pretty high, however.

The only guns I never felt at home with are the Hispanos. But that may be because most Hispano planes I flew have their cannons pretty much far away from the center of the planes, which makes precise shooting only a real possibility at convergence range. You lack the range flexibility other aircraft possess in this regard.

I don't know how I could cut in 2 late 109s (2 of them in the same mission) simply firing at convergence distance flying a P51... it's like the uber overmodelled K4 that you have to learn to fly, above all to remain at 400m from a US bomber since its .50s will open you (AI can be good to hitting you; it doesn't involve the damage at your plane, ammo data does).

At the same time I like to be PKed from 500m by the green ray of death.

Anyway this is true even for the P51's engine: one shot and you are out... other planes (P39, Spit) you can fly all the mission with a smoking engine like you had 300lts. of oil.