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

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

So lets summarise:

A) It is ok certain bombs to have >3 times the effective radius compared with the same family bombs from another side.
B) It is OK that bomb and Rocket pylons from a certain side to NOT cause drag or add weight to certain fighters while all other Pylons add significant weight and drag.
C) Its OK guns from a certain side to be more accurate.

And you are talking about "political agenta",

Anything else?
Are you planning to fix this? And yes, there are data for bombs. I'll send you some time allows.

Cheers,

[MicroWave]

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

So lets summarise:

A) It is ok certain bombs to have >3 times the effective radius compared with the same family bombs from another side.
B) It is OK that bomb and Rocket pylons from a certain side to NOT cause drag or add weight to certain fighters while all other Pylons add significant weight and drag.
C) Its OK guns from a certain side to be more accurate.

And you are talking about "political agenta",

Anything else?
Are you planning to fix this? And yes, there are data for bombs. I'll send you some time allows.

Cheers,

A) Why wouldn't it be OK, if this matches the historical performance? If you have any documents proving otherwise, feel free to send them to the appropriate address. You don't want us to "balance" things because it is unfair, do you? Have you checked other nations too? I've heard that Japanese have some uber bombs also...
B) Where did you get that from? Maybe those 4 types of pylons are considered as always attached and the penalty for "your" nemesis is always on? You can at least detach "your" pylons and fly without them just by using a different loadout.
C) Which side? Which guns? All I saw was rambling about uber RED guns and completely distorted perception of what the numbers 'mean'.

Are you accusing me of RED bias?
I have to bookmark this post.
I suppose people will easily see who has the agenda here. If you do not completely edit your posts, that is.

We will fix anything that is wrong in the game:
1) if it is feasible (regarding time needed and our skills).
and
2) if we have/obtain evidence to back it up.

Oh, since you are editing your post so fast, I'll preserve this pearl for posterity:

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

...

And weight here mainly means Drag!

[bigbossmalone]

dear TD members
some time ago i made a request, if it was possible for you guys to enable padlocking of ships, as can be done with planes and ground targets.
since there was no reply either in either direction, i thought it might be a good idea for me to re-define the question.
currently, ships can be padlocked, but only for about 2-3 seconds, before the padlock is lost - thus rendering the ship padlock ability practically useless.
do you guys think you could fix this, please, and enable ships to be properly padlocked, as one would padlock an aircraft - so that the padlock can be maintained indefinitely, unlesss the player's view to it is obstructed by interference from aircraft cockpit/fuselage/angle?
this would be a much appreciated fix for many peopple. thanks in advance.

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

Originally Posted by MicroWave

A) Why wouldn't it be OK, if this matches the historical performance? If you have any documents proving otherwise, feel free to send them to the appropriate address. You don't want us to "balance" things because it is unfair, do you? Have you checked other nations too? I've heard that Japanese have some uber bombs also...

Do you have any of these data? And no, i don't want to balance things but to be as close to historical perspective as possible. And about the Japanese: Have you heard this or you have seen this? It is importand.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

B) Where did you get that from? Maybe those 4 types of pylons are considered as always attached and the penalty for "your" nemesis is always on? You can at least detach "your" pylons and fly without them just by using a different loadout.

????
I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that these Pylons are ALWAYS attached to the airplanes even in default loadout? In this case you are wrong. An example using these anti-gravity (ops 0 kg i meant) Pylons is the I-16 Type 24.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

C) Which side? Which guns? All I saw was rambling about uber RED guns and completely distorted perception of what the numbers 'mean'.

So you mean that you are unaware of the game's specs? If yes then how will you be able to make proper adjustments? And i clearly stated in simple words what these numbers mean.
I have also "heard" that some certain guns have increased damage and that some other have Twice the penetration ability of some others, have you "heard" it also? A comparison can be made by using some reliable data (except from books of course) like this:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

He is the author of the Flying Guns.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

Are you accusing me of RED bias?
I have to bookmark this post.

I am not accusing anyone for anything. I only want historical accuracy and proper "tuning"/bug correcting of the game.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

I suppose people will easily see who has the agenda here. If you do not completely edit your posts, that is.

I edited what exactly? I didn't edit the MEANING of the posts, but saved space for un-needed "data". It is not the place for extensive inspecting of the data.

Originally Posted by MicroWave

We will fix anything that is wrong in the game:
1) if it is feasible (regarding time needed and our skills).
and
2) if we have/obtain evidence to back it up.

What kind of evident do you need to make the Pylons to have weight?
What kind of data did you use when you made all the rest of the Pylons weighting from 150kgs to weight 15 kgs?

Originally Posted by MicroWave

Oh, since you are editing your post so fast, I'll preserve this pearl for posterity:

Oh, and drag means less maneuvrability, less climbing, etc...
Language barrier? Perhaps.

Cheers,

[AndyJWest]

So the question comes down to whether we should expect TD to make changes based on cherry-picked data, because some people think there is a conspiracy to boost certain nations' aircraft?

So much for objectivity.

[JtD]

Team Daidalos does not fix stuff because it looks wrong, but when correct data is provided and it contradicts current game values. What's the point in balancing stuff instead of fixing it?

Simple question related to the example: Which bomb is wrong - the FAB 1000 or the SC 1000? Or both? What would you want TD to do without knowing the proper values? Guessing? In the worst case you end up with even more wrong values.

[Viikate]

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

And you confirmed that i was right about the 20mm sniper-gun. Thank you for this.

No, you are wrong. The "sniper effect" happens with all guns and it has nothing to do with the maxDeltaAngle.

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

So it is Perfectly OK Bombs of the SAME "family", having the SAME weight to have 3+ times greater effective radius?

So all bombs with same weight belong to same family by your logic? German SC bombs are thin wall high-explosive bombs that kill with blast effect. Not with sharapnels. I recall that most of the allied bombs kill also with shrapnels so their effective radius should be naturally bigger. Isn't this issues something that have been discussed at UBI forums countless of times?

How many people have actually whined about the pylon mass bug during all the IL-2 years? I haven't seen any complaints, since weight != drag . Probably the biggest effect that is has is making for example Seafire with rockets too heavy and carrier take-off is more difficult.

Oh... maybe the 0kg value was a "place holder" value. That would make it prefectly ok, right?

[Flanker35M]

S!

Read thru this thread and posting some thoughts. IL-2 is a great game, but not without flaws/bugs/features. Some have been known for ages, but yet to be corrected. Some are game engine limitations and the rest falls in whatever category. TD has taken over patching IL-2 and many of you are either longtime fans of IL-2, ex-IL-2 team members(SaqSoN?) etc. So you SHOULD have the insight how IL-2 works and how it has been all this time. So...

Maybe TD should consult some military EOD/Armament personnel to get their facts right and more info about bombs and/or armament. If you REALLY claim that a SC1000(or any bomb of that size regardless country) with effective 600kg+ of TNT blowing up has a range of less than 200m then really you know nothing about bombs or explosives in general. The bombs could use a check, ALL of them to make sure. Not only the Germans but ALL. Clear enough? Claiming things without checking and back-up, that is just empty words.

I can give an example. In an EOD excercise we blew up a charge of 2.5Kg consisting of PETN. The blast could be felt at 300m, a clear blast wave that moved clothing. And that was a mere 2.5Kg equal some 4.66kg of TNT. So try to imagine 600kg+ TNT exploding that near. You would be dead and things near you blown away. So please, check the bombs. Please?

Since day 1 in IL-2 the Russian guns have had smallest dispersion of ALL guns except the TIE twin lasers on I-16 or I-153 that have some of it. It was, and still is, childishly easy to kill a running Bf109 with a Yak-1b's 20mm cannon by sniping off as you need to take very little lead to get a hit even up to extreme ranges. This on FinskaViken1 server before the "mod episode" came up, squad flew as reds to show that the Bf109G-2 was not that superior after all

I would be extremely happy to see TD fixing bugs more first than adding a heap of new content, which can cause new bugs thus adding to the workload big enough already. You got the tools for it, use them.

[Kwiatek]

Yea but DT if even would like to change something they first need to accept changes from 1C.

I really really doubt that they will ever get agreement from 1C ( Oleg M.) in such case which could affect any russian plane or weapon.

After above 10 years of these game, many discuss in many forums i have not any doubt that many things in game were balanced against historical realism.

Truly speaking who would like to fly early-mid war russian planes when they would be made with more historical and realistic performacne regarding fact that Il2 was primary designed for Russian market?

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

So the question comes down to whether we should expect TD to make changes based on cherry-picked data, because some people think there is a conspiracy to boost certain nations' aircraft?

Hardly. Who talked about "cherry-picked" data. And this does not affect the German planes or guns/bombs. The soviet Pylons concern the Soviet planes and not the German, right? Also the .50s caliber are way more weak than the UBs 12mm machine guns. If you want to check a plane that has at leat "weird" Damage Model check the SM-79. Try to bring it down, compare it with other contemporary planes, and read any data you could find.

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

So much for objectivity.

I presented data while you have not. This doesn't make you more "objective".

Originally Posted by JtD

Team Daidalos does not fix stuff because it looks wrong, but when correct data is provided and it contradicts current game values. What's the point in balancing stuff instead of fixing it?

I never said about balance. I have always talked about Fixing it.

Originally Posted by JtD

Simple question related to the example: Which bomb is wrong - the FAB 1000 or the SC 1000? Or both? What would you want TD to do without knowing the proper values? Guessing? In the worst case you end up with even more wrong values.

I just asked something that looks wrong. You can find generic bomb blast range/damage data but its hard to find for these specific bombs.
I just question myself on how should be such a huge difference between bombs of the same category, same weight.

I have not found any account to stress this huge difference for these bombs.

And how would i want to fix this stuff since not exact data is available? Well, i'll say something like the following:

The 7.62 mm Browning machine guns were almost equal with the 7.62mm ShKAS in terms of damage and penetration ability. As you can see from here:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Historic%20MGs.htm

They have almost the same muzzle velocity and muzzle energy.

The ShKAS are slightly stronger for about less than 10%.
In game though they have almost twice the penetration ability of the 7.62 browning ones. Instead of probably 10. 20 or 30%
Just do the following "experiment":

Try to make a bomber to caught fire with a plane armed with the brownings like a Hurrie or Spit and try the same with a plane armed with the ShKAS like the I-16 or I-153.

You will be amazed how easily the ShKAS will cause fire and increased damage compared with the Brownings.

How could this be "Fixed"? Well, you can always inspect/judge the data values for the same category gun so maybe increasing the penetration ability of the brownings to be closer wouldn't be such a mistake, should it?
Since the muzzle vellocity and muzzle energy differ in less than 10% perhaps if you adjust the brownings to have the 80-90% the penetration value of the ShKAS you would be inside the 5% general accepted error.
Is it a "Biased" and wrong logic?

Originally Posted by Viikate

No, you are wrong. The "sniper effect" happens with all guns and it has nothing to do with the maxDeltaAngle.

Nope, you are Just change the delta angle and fly again. No matter if the gunner is Ace or not, you'll get significant less headshots.
The delta angle error ALSO plays significant role in this aspect.

Originally Posted by Viikate

So all bombs with same weight belong to same family by your logic? German SC bombs are thin wall high-explosive bombs that kill with blast effect. Not with sharapnels. I recall that most of the allied bombs kill also with shrapnels so their effective radius should be naturally bigger.

The German iron bombs also had the sharpnel "effect":
The following are from the SC German bombs:
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200004.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200005.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200006.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...7/P5200007.jpg

Originally Posted by Viikate

How many people have actually whined about the pylon mass bug during all the IL-2 years? I haven't seen any complaints, since weight != drag . Probably the biggest effect that is has is making for example Seafire with rockets too heavy and carrier take-off is more difficult.

Oh... maybe the 0kg value was a "place holder" value. That would make it prefectly ok, right?

You didn't answer what kind of data you used to make all the previously weighted 150 kgs pylons to weight 15 kilos.
And you didn't also answer what are you going to do for the Zero weight pylons.

Cheers