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

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

You know... i was thinking...
I was thinking what kind of values did the Original "old" Il2 Sturmovik circa 2001 had for the bombs. I always had the impression that its feeling is still somehow "better" in the "Simulator" aspect.
Anyway, i was curious to see the "old" data and then maybe there would be one more argument to Fix at last the same "bug", "political correct", "biases", [put the correct name here], that plaque the current release.
And guesss what. What kind of data do you think i found? Normally i should have found more or less the same data like the current right?
Well...

BINGO!

Lets see the Bombs data, shall we?

___________FAB250____SC250

Radius:_____50m_______77m
HE_Weight:__120kg_____130kg
Weight:_____250kg_____248.2kg


___________FAB500____SC500

Radius:_____77m_______82m
HE_Weight:__275kg_____220kg
Weight:_____500kg_____500kg


___________FAB1000___FAB2000___FAB5000

Radius:_____150m______300m______750m
HE_Weight:__555kg_____1025kg____3260kg
Weight:_____1000kg____2000kg____5000kg


These was the data for these bombs back in 2001. There were no bigger German bombs than the SC500 in this release.
They look beter for sure, the are more aligned with internet
data found for these bombs, plus the FEEL better.
No more MOABs with >3 times bigger the explisive radius for ANY nation, not just Russians.

And now here are the "miracusly", "political corrected", "buggy", [enter proper word here] data from current release:
While for smaller bombs they are mostly untouched, when it comes to the bigger ones, they are grossly changed:


(Same data from 2001 release)
___________FAB250____SC250

Radius:_____50m_______77m
HE_Weight:__120kg_____130kg
Weight:_____250kg_____248.2kg


(The FAB has been increased dramatically while the SC500 is the same)
___________FAB500____SC500

Radius:_____250m_______82m
HE_Weight:__275kg_____220kg
Weight:_____500kg_____500kg


(Here we see that the FAB1000 has almost get 4 times the radius it has in 2001 data)
___________FAB1000____SC1000

Radius:_____500m_______168m
HE_Weight:__555kg_____630kg
Weight:_____1000kg_____1090kg


(Again FAB2000's radius got 4 times bigger than it was in 2001 release)
___________FAB2000____SC2000

Radius:_____1100m_______275.8m
HE_Weight:__1025kg______975kg
Weight:_____2000kg_____1950kg


(And now here comes the MOAB or FOAB, no comments )
___________FAB5000

Radius:_____2500m
HE_Weight:__3260kg
Weight:_____5000kg

So, what happened? I am asking you. Either:
A) STRICKING, as MW says, data has seen the light that confirms these changes, or
B) game just had to get, "political correct", get "bugs", "biases", [put the appropriate word here].

There is a unique opportunity to correct these "bugs". We have not only data from the Internet that suggests it but also the Data from the game itself before it went
"politicalcorectized" and things "went south". (or should i say "east"? )

If Td has not the will nor the skill or the patience to correct these things then other people will do.

For me and believe for most of the people it is essential to correct EXISTING game Bugs, not jusat add new planes or features.
Fix the bombs, guns, never overheating planes, etc... (the list is big enough) and
then import new stuff also. But closing the eyes to such things it is not the best way to deal with these facts.

Its high time to fix the eternal game's "bugs".

That was it gents

P.S.

@MW
WHO is "blathering"? I see you loose your temper,

I asked you, and gave you data about this, what you are going to do for certain Sniper-Cannons and you didn't reply but only said "one plane with a sniper out of 300 is not big deal).

I asked what are you going to do with the >3 times bigger bombs of the same bomb category-weight and you said there are data for this, yet again you provided none to justify this odd, at least, issue while you asked me to give you data to justify my claim that there is not possible to have same weight and category bombs to differ so much.

Now i have also presented to you earlier data from IL2 before they went "buggy", and i will also provide some Internet to justify that there was NO such a Hige Difference in the Same Weight Bombs.

I asked WHERE did you find data or WHAT data did you find to make the majority of the Pylons in IL2 to weight from the 150kgs they weighted until 4.09b patch to 15 kgs in the latest. Again you provided No Data for this but only "demand" data from others.

I asked indirectly what you are going to do with some "odd" data in guns of the same caliber that although differ only in less than 10% they have almost twice the difference in their penetration ability and the damage they can cause and i got no reply.

Now i am asking what are you going to do with the never overheating planes and the overheat issue for many planes.
And obviously if you will fix the wrong damage model of the SM-79 which is hard like a granite and nearly impossible to shot down with MGs.

@El-something:
There is no need to reply your "objective post", really. Keep on like this.

@HansBurger.
Yes i am aware of what you are saying about the interpretation of game's data by game's
engine. But its the same when you deal with absolute values.
You have 5 lets say and it get interpreted by game's engine as 6
So by having 10 it will get interpreted like 12, etc...
If we correct these values then we are closer to get the best outcome.
~S~

P.S.2
The "Original" Il2 2001 era had also more appropriate values for the guns also. Maybe you should REALLY consult its data MW, i can send you the data, just ask

P.S.3
The German MG151/20 20mm also had the correct Mine-Shells in the 2001 Era release, but it lost these when things "went east"

EDIT:
And i also asked What are you going to do for the Zero-weight bomb and rocket pylons and i got no reply either.

[csThor]

The last few pages are a perfect example why I never bothered with Mods:

Self-proclaimed experts who insinuate they've been fed pure wisdom instead of milk as a baby and who attack people bringing up very real concerns (DATA?).

EDIT:

How about this: For future FMs we throw darts over our shoulder at a dart board. What the dart hits is the value we enter. Ridiculous? Of course, but exactly the same credibility as some of the people here suggest. Even when the data currently in the game looks "irrational" we still need accurate and plausible data to change it. Otherwise ... well it'd be back to throwing darts. Nuff said ...

[bigbossmalone]

well, i didn't provide any data for my ship padlock request, which is in amongst those pages, as well....hope that's not included, lol
but seriously, it already works 'to a small degree'....is it asking to much to make it work properly, or at least a reply in either affirmative/negative....
i've requested this for a long time now, and repeatedly been ignored.......am i expected to provide some kind of padlocking 'data'?
if it can't be done, i'd be happy if someone just said so, at least i could be put out of my misery.....

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by csThor

The last few pages are a perfect example why I never bothered with Mods:

Self-proclaimed experts who insinuate they've been fed pure wisdom instead of milk as a baby and who attack people bringing up very real concerns (DATA?).

EDIT:

How about this: For future FMs we throw darts over our shoulder at a dart board. What the dart hits is the value we enter. Ridiculous? Of course, but exactly the same credibility as some of the people here suggest. Even when the data currently in the game looks "irrational" we still need accurate and plausible data to change it. Otherwise ... well it'd be back to throwing darts. Nuff said ...

In fact TD, you do NOTHING at all!!!

You keep fussing about the bombs, while there is no comment about the guns the snipers, the non-overheat issues, wrong engines, wrong power settings, wrong cockpits, wrong FM, etc..

Team Daedalus, you were the ones that the community hoped for to correct these errors and you could.
But you prefer to sit in your ivory tower and ignore all the named facts.

I´m sorry to say that, but judging by your reactions in this thread (and also others), you lost your professional reputation and your credibility.

Shame, shame, shame.

[pupo162]

Being myself a mod hater, i have to agree with hades...

i mean, c'mon, he presented Data over Data, wich actually goes along my personall expirence in game. Team daidalus response was just childish here

I dont you grown up MEN, jsut make an arangemente go to a teamspoeak server and have a talk, it would be the best for this sim, if hades actually is able to prove he is right, with all the data and facts im sure he cllected, to TD then, wahts the problem of correcting it?

there is no bias here, jsut a sim...

[_1SMV_Gitano]

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil

In fact TD, you do NOTHING at all!!!

You keep fussing about the bombs, while there is no comment about the guns the snipers, the non-overheat issues, wrong engines, wrong power settings, wrong cockpits, wrong FM, etc..

Team Daedalus, you were the ones that the community hoped for to correct these errors and you could.
But you prefer to sit in your ivory tower and ignore all the named facts.

I´m sorry to say that, but judging by your reactions in this thread (and also others), you lost your professional reputation and your credibility.

Shame, shame, shame.

LOL...

are you a TD member? Do you know what TD is doing/changing/adding? Not to my knowledge. So, how can you say that TD is doing nothing???

please...

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by _1SMV_Gitano

LOL...

are you a TD member? Do you know what TD is doing/changing/adding? Not to my knowledge. So, how can you say that TD is doing nothing???

please...

I see what TD is ignoring (in most replies in a very downward way).

That´s what is annoying.


I kind of like Pupos proposition.

why not get on TS and speak personally about the mentioned problems, that might weaken the fronts and can only benefit the IL2 community.

[csThor]

Since when is TD required to communicate each and every bit of internal discussions and since when are we supposed to cater to everyone's pet whims?

Fact 1: We can't do everything at the same time.
Fact 2: We can't do everything within a heartbeat.

Seriously, just because you don't get a "Yes, we'll change this and that" reply it doesn't mean the issue is not on our scopes. But knowing flight simmers and especially this community we prefer to look into the issue privately to avoid flame fests which serve no purpose (other than stroking some people's egos) and which are essentially counter-productive. And the first step for any such work is establishing a consistent data fundament to work with.

[flying]

What are you doing,DT?One years more,Where is the 4.10?Tell us,plz!

[MicroWave]

Originally Posted by pupo162

Being myself a mod hater, i have to agree with hades...

i mean, c'mon, he presented Data over Data, wich actually goes along my personall expirence in game. Team daidalus response was just childish here

I dont you grown up MEN, jsut make an arangemente go to a teamspoeak server and have a talk, it would be the best for this sim, if hades actually is able to prove he is right, with all the data and facts im sure he cllected, to TD then, wahts the problem of correcting it?

there is no bias here, jsut a sim...

Where? He presented false and incomplete information about source variables without understanding what they mean. All of this flavored with wild accusations.
No matter how fishy they look (and some of them do look fishy) what matters is ingame performance (test), comparison to historical evidence and game limitations.

We collect historical references on subjects we think might be wrong on our own. If you want to see some issue addressed sooner, it is by far the easiest way for us if you perform ingame tests and provide historical documents. We don't care who provides those data if everything is reliable.
That's the normal procedure for any "Bug report" for any game.
If you don't want to help, the issue goes at the end of the cue.

Now, you tell me how you want us to respond when someone comes along and says "something looks fishy, fix it!"?
Our experience is that in 90% of cases such claims are false.