Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Quote:
Antons losing all 3 control axis from a single shot even with pushrod accuated control surfaces.

No problem, we will replace it with PK.

Quote:
Antons non self-sealing fuel leaks or what I call a fuel leak bug which empties the plane in a matter of minutes.

I don't see a problem there, FW have self sealing tanks which stops some fuel leaks just like in any other plane with self sealing tanks. Completely realistic IMO.

FC

.................................................. ..............

Lets hope your not doing FM & DM just AI on your team then.

+1

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by FC99

This is new one for me, what is wrong with accuracy?

Does this really need an explanation? Nothing new. This all started with syncronizing the 50s then desyncing the 50s and their hitting power. Very well covered territory.

The current six wing mounted 50s have an accuracy problem. Look on any active server and look at the hit rates for planes that have them and you will see an over all trend that can't be ignored.

Originally Posted by FC99

There are almost 300 planes in game it is not surprising that some problems are not solved. Best way to get issues fixed is to collect reference material, make in game tests and politely ask for fix.

That's why at the beginning of this thread I mentioned it would be nice not to keep reintroducing new aircraft and fix some of the problems with the current set.

Originally Posted by FC99

I don't see a problem there, FW have self sealing tanks which stops some fuel leaks just like in any other plane with self sealing tanks. Completely realistic IMO.

Then make it across all the planes with self sealing tanks. The Anton series is the only plane out of the entire 300 plane series that has this particular problem.

I will ignore your comment about replacing 3 Axis damange with a PK.

Can we get a real G6AS the one with high Alt Peformance?

[LesniHU]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

Antons losing all 3 control axis from a single shot even with pushrod accuated control surfaces. Antons non self-sealing fuel leaks or what I call a fuel leak bug which empties the plane in a matter of minutes.

Spitfire can lose all controls with one hit too. No surprise for me, why couldn't one hit through cockpit area do this.
Fuel leak: I never had feeling it leaked faster than other fighters. Certainly there is nothing nonstandard in DM, selfsealing is same as other planes have and works.

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

Does this really need an explanation? Nothing new. This all started with syncronizing the 50s then desyncing the 50s and their hitting power. Very well covered territory.

The current six wing mounted 50s have an accuracy problem. Look on any active server and look at the hit rates for planes that have them and you will see an over all trend that can't be ignored.

Irrelevant. I'm sure that if you look at Stuka BK3.7's antiair hit rates, you will find them really low. Does it mean we should improve them?

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by LesniHU

Spitfire can lose all controls with one hit too. No surprise for me, why couldn't one hit through cockpit area do this.
Fuel leak: I never had feeling it leaked faster than other fighters. Certainly there is nothing nonstandard in DM, selfsealing is same as other planes have and works.

So what you're telling me is there is one critical spot on plane where all the controls can be knocked out? I would like to see your diagram that supports this theory especially one planes that had built in Redundancy. Shooting out the right Aileron doesn't mean the left one doesn't work any more. The FWs used PushRods not cables.

Let me be clear about the Anton fuel leak... It doesn't leak any faster than any other plane... The leak will not seal and the plane will run out of fuel. No other plane suffers from this problem. If there is I haven't run across it in the 8 years I've been flying this sim.

Originally Posted by LesniHU

Irrelevant. I'm sure that if you look at Stuka BK3.7's antiair hit rates, you will find them really low. Does it mean we should improve them?

It's very relavant because 50s are Inherently accurate. It also sounds as if you never experience the earlier problems with the 50cals. Syncing and finally getting desynced weapons in 4.08. Do you remember the Wobbles or are you just forgetting that part?

Actually you need to do some research before making statments about the BK3.7s accuracy. Oberstleutant Hans-Ulrich Rudel is a guy who comes to mind. Your just using this excuse to obfuscate the subject.

[rakinroll]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

.................................................. ..............

Lets hope your not doing FM & DM just AI on your team then.

Amen!

[LesniHU]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

So what you're telling me is there is one critical spot on plane where all the controls can be knocked out? I would like to see your diagram that supports this theory especially one planes that had built in Redundancy. Shooting out the right Aileron doesn't mean the left one doesn't work any more. The FWs used PushRods not cables.

Stick itself is certainly one critical spot which, when hit successfully, will disable elevator and both ailerons. It does not matter if cables, rods of FBW is used. I do not know how exactly are hitboxes placed and which compromises had to be done to keep computer requirements on reasonable level. We all will have to live with it until new game engine comes. Just remember that this behaviour is not unique to FW190.

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

Let me be clear about the Anton fuel leak... It doesn't leak any faster than any other plane... The leak will not seal and the plane will run out of fuel. No other plane suffers from this problem. If there is I haven't run across it in the 8 years I've been flying this sim.

Strange. Track. Leak starts at 2:44, sealed around 7:00. Recorded on clean 4.08m, from qmb mission, on first try.
Selfsealing works. Case closed.

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

It's very relavant because 50s are Inherently accurate. It also sounds as if you never experience the earlier problems with the 50cals. Syncing and finally getting desynced weapons in 4.08. Do you remember the Wobbles or are you just forgetting that part?

Actually you need to do some research before making statments about the BK3.7s accuracy. Oberstleutant Hans-Ulrich Rudel is a guy who comes to mind. Your just using this excuse to obfuscate the subject.

No, it was not attempt to obfuscate it, it was just simple attempt to show flaws in your logic, which, unfortunately, missed you completely.

Your theory was: low average % to hit in A2A => weapon is inaccurate and need to be improved.
I only applied this theory to another weapon with low % to hit air targets (or at least I think it has low %, I did not verify it), outcome -according to your theory- was that weapon should be more accurate. If you disagree with this, you disagree with your own theory.

Stats can't be used for these purposes, there is too much possible explanations - from reasonable like "50cals are used to spray in low probability situations because have more ammo than cannons" to improbable like "most pilots always aim behind target so accurate weapon will register less hits than something with shotgun-like pattern". I hope you understand now why I used BK3.7 as example, if not, I will try to elaborate more.



I'm sure DT will try to fix all errors (depending on difficulty of task and time available), but you have to *prove* it. No feelings, no personal experience from past years, nothing just because it was repeated thousand times, no earlier problems. Situation now, hard proof. This paragraph is not aimed at JG27CaptStubing only, I just wanted to use this occasion to write it before number of such requests for changes explodes and this thread turns into "red vs blue" battlefield.

[JG27CaptStubing]

.[/QUOTE]Stick itself is certainly one critical spot which, when hit successfully, will disable elevator and both ailerons. It does not matter if cables, rods of FBW is used. I do not know how exactly are hitboxes placed and which compromises had to be done to keep computer requirements on reasonable level. We all will have to live with it until new game engine comes. Just remember that this behaviour is not unique to FW190.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I understand it's a limitation of a game and how hit boxes work but I think you can agree it's a pretty more implementation of what a complex damage model is and can be. It's very unique to the FW. In the 8 years I've been flying this I have yet to experiece all three axis wiped out in any other plane. Why not address that issue instead of continuing to built more airplanes which potentially introduce yet more problems?

Originally Posted by LesniHU

Strange. Track. Leak starts at 2:44, sealed around 7:00. Recorded on clean 4.08m, from qmb mission, on first try.
Selfsealing works. Case closed..

Not a very complete test... Did you try it on other planes and compare the time? Also I've had it seal on occasion. There are times it never seals even with 100% fuel the plane is empty in minutes. Like 2-3 to be exact. It's not a feeling and I'm not making it up. Try it again I can assure you its there. If it doesn't show up in the QMB then try it online.

Originally Posted by LesniHU

No, it was not attempt to obfuscate it, it was just simple attempt to show flaws in your logic, which, unfortunately, missed you completely..

Flaws in my logic. Check the records... I pointed out several problems some of which have been agreed to in this very thread. So wake up a bit and look around before you cast stones about logic.

Originally Posted by LesniHU

Your theory was: low average % to hit in A2A => weapon is inaccurate and need to be improved.
I only applied this theory to another weapon with low % to hit air targets (or at least I think it has low %, I did not verify it), outcome -according to your theory- was that weapon should be more accurate. If you disagree with this, you disagree with your own theory.

Apples and Trash Cans. Try to keep on track here. Just throwing in some random large caliber gun for AA to prove your point has nothing to do with the issue I pointed out. The simple fact is and remains .50cals are very accurate inherently add it six mounted weapons and they have a poorer percentage of hitting that the 4 wing mounted counterparts. At least I'm going off of my experience at the moment. I will have to get you some real stats. I usually hit on average 10%-18% with cannons and mixed MGs like FWs. Same amount of weapons mind you. My average drops down around 6-8 percent with 50s and yes I do know how to shoot.

Originally Posted by LesniHU

Stats can't be used for these purposes, there is too much possible explanations - from reasonable like "50cals are used to spray in low probability situations because have more ammo than cannons" to improbable like "most pilots always aim behind target so accurate weapon will register less hits than something with shotgun-like pattern". I hope you understand now why I used BK3.7 as example, if not, I will try to elaborate more..

I understand you used a large caliber very low rate of fire weapon as your example which is nothing like an MG which ROF can make a tremendous difference in terms of hitting percentage. Regardless you've chosen to ignore it so be it. At least people know where you stand.

Originally Posted by LesniHU

I'm sure DT will try to fix all errors (depending on difficulty of task and time available), but you have to *prove* it. No feelings, no personal experience from past years, nothing just because it was repeated thousand times, no earlier problems. Situation now, hard proof. This paragraph is not aimed at JG27CaptStubing only, I just wanted to use this occasion to write it before number of such requests for changes explodes and this thread turns into "red vs blue" battlefield.

I agree things must be stated and then backed up with some documentation or at least some simple testing that illustrates the issue. Didn't take much for your counterpart to figure out 47s Doras Tempests can easily break the sound barrier. That was done with a simple test.

My suggestion is before you jump on the bandwagon and become defensive try being open minded. There are many many posts about the 50s alone.

At one point we were told by Oleg the Muzzle Flash problem couldn't be fixed until a new engine. They where eventually fixed so please don't use that as an excuse. He has access to the Code.

I just hope you guys focus on fixing outstanding issues instead of adding more with new planes and new things. Let the sim catch up. It will make for a better product.

[MicroWave]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Quote:
Antons losing all 3 control axis from a single shot even with pushrod accuated control surfaces.

No problem, we will replace it with PK.

Quote:
Antons non self-sealing fuel leaks or what I call a fuel leak bug which empties the plane in a matter of minutes.

I don't see a problem there, FW have self sealing tanks which stops some fuel leaks just like in any other plane with self sealing tanks. Completely realistic IMO.

FC

.................................................. ..............

Lets hope your not doing FM & DM just AI on your team then.

Sorry to disappoint you.
FC's comments although harsh, are spot on from what I've seen.

@all
Please, when you would like to make a suggestion or ask for a fix, add some documentation. It is impossible for us to follow every discussion in all forums.
Il2 world is 'object rich' with all the benefits and problems this 'richness' brings. You can use Daidalos Team e-mail to do that (we would also prefer comprehensible subject title).
I need to state that we can't add/fix everything. Some things will take precedence over the others based on complexity of the issue, new quality this issue can bring into the sim, available time and personal preference.

Now, I would like to add some comments of my own about accuracy issue raised by JG27CaptStubing.
I haven't investigated all the possibilities and some of it comes from my bad memory.
Each gun type is represented by it's own class. In each of them there is just a type of bullet(s) (weight, initial velocity, explosive power if any, RoF, visual effects, etc). IIRC, trajectory of all these is calculated in one (1) piece of code for all guns without discrimination towards 0.50s or any other gun. From this point of view, I find it very hard to believe that 0.50 have accuracy problems.
Proper testing environment to prove that there is an accuracy problem might be difficult to achieve. I don't think that it is possible to compare different guns in combat due to different bullet characteristics, the fact that different planes require different firing solutions, etc.
For example (disclaimer: I fly like a brick) when I fly FW190s I prefer to take larger lead and let the target fly through the bullet stream (that doesn't happen as frequently as I would like to). There is plenty of ammo in those birds and I try to use B&Z (badly). As a result, my hit rate with FW190s is smaller than with, say Bf109s. Therefore, I'm inclined to believe that online statistics is not the proper testing environment.

So, is there a problem with bullet trajectories of 0.50s in Il2 that you can document? Is there a problem with planes or their flying characteristics with this armament that would lead to accuracy problems (I think you mentioned some wobbling)?

[ramstein]

Does this mean, the P51 balance from the center, behind the seat fuel tank, can be corrected by having the center (fuselage) fuel tank drain first? The plane is horribly out of balance. It flies like crap until somone cares to fix this problem. Over the years everyone else refused to fix it.

Along with crappy guns that need corrected. They don't have the punch they should.

The P47 roll rate is one more problem that needs fixed, it needs to roll faster as it did in real life.

Those are the two most important items for most of the pilots for American planes.

If there is going to be work done, can we asked these items please be addressed?

is this true more work wil be done on IL-2?

Or are late comers asking for the things that data was supplied for for many years, yet Olegs team never fixed.. all of the data was supplied over these past years...

thanx..

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by MicroWave

Sorry to disappoint you.
FC's comments although harsh, are spot on from what I've seen.)

Please elaborate. In what way?

You can just sit there an ignore it all you want but anyone who has flown the Anton series over the years can tell you first hand it has a fuel leak bug. It's your choice if you want to investigate it. I could care less about the lack of professionalism.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

@all
Please, when you would like to make a suggestion or ask for a fix, add some documentation. It is impossible for us to follow every discussion in all forums.
Il2 world is 'object rich' with all the benefits and problems this 'richness' brings. You can use Daidalos Team e-mail to do that (we would also prefer comprehensible subject title).
I need to state that we can't add/fix everything. Some things will take precedence over the others based on complexity of the issue, new quality this issue can bring into the sim, available time and personal preference..)

Clearly you have your own agenda.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

@Now, I would like to add some comments of my own about accuracy issue raised by JG27CaptStubing.
I haven't investigated all the possibilities and some of it comes from my bad memory.
Each gun type is represented by it's own class. In each of them there is just a type of bullet(s) (weight, initial velocity, explosive power if any, RoF, visual effects, etc). IIRC, trajectory of all these is calculated in one (1) piece of code for all guns without discrimination towards 0.50s or any other gun. From this point of view, I find it very hard to believe that 0.50 have accuracy problems.
Proper testing environment to prove that there is an accuracy problem might be difficult to achieve. I don't think that it is possible to compare different guns in combat due to different bullet characteristics, the fact that different planes require different firing solutions, etc...)

Testing aye?

Here is an old 35 page thread on Ubi that talks about the tests and some of the findings. It was ignored as usual.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t.../979109092/p/1

Gibbage did quite a bit of testing and it does show out of all the guns the 50s have had an issue with dispersion. It's still present today.

It's one of many threads brought up about the 50 cal.