Dead AI Gunners Tracer Arcs

[Flying Pencil]

Originally Posted by PeterPanPan

Brian Kingcome (RAF Spitfire Pilot, 92 Sqdn) wrote that often one of the first indications that his bullets were hitting home was that the tracer arc from a bomber's rear gunner suddenly arced skywards. This was caused by the dead gunner slumping on his gun.

Might this be added to SoW? Should be fairly simple to simulate and, I feel, would add to the immersion of the game.

PPanPan

Hit =/= Dead.

Wounded, stunned, but not out, but could be also.

Good idea though.

[Madfish]

Why would a dead gunner continue to fire? A wounded one with cramps maybe but a dead gunner would maybe fire for another 2 seconds or so and then stopping to fire (who pulls the trigger?).

So that said, noticing that there is no one firing at you anymore suddenly is a better indicator then someone firing around randomly, no?

[PeterPanPan]

@ Frantishek & Madfish

I agree, hit may not equal dead. Please remember though this this is not my original idea. This is what a real world Spitfire pilot saw and wrote down. It is immaterial whether the gunner was killed or not (indeed, it is likely that BK would not have really known this either) but what is certain is that putting bullets into a rear gunner often had an immediate effect on the arc of his tracer fire.

Fortunately, I am no expert in death, but I assume it is entirely possible for parts of the body to carry on with their last commanded muscle movements after sudden death i.e. squeezing the trigger? The dead/injured gunner may have stopped firing all together a second or so after being hit, but the immediate change of tracer direction was the initial clue that the attacking aircraft had scored a hit. No doubt this pattern didn't always happen, but it did happen and so I think it would be a worthwhile addition to the sim.

PPanPan

[winny]

Originally Posted by PeterPanPan

@ Frantishek & Madfish

I agree, hit may not equal dead. Please remember though this this is not my original idea. This is what a real world Spitfire pilot saw and wrote down. It is immaterial whether the gunner was killed or not (indeed, it is likely that BK would not have really known this either) but what is certain is that putting bullets into a rear gunner often had an immediate effect on the arc of his tracer fire.

Fortunately, I am no expert in death, but I assume it is entirely possible for parts of the body to carry on with their last commanded muscle movements after sudden death i.e. squeezing the trigger? The dead/injured gunner may have stopped firing all together a second or so after being hit, but the immediate change of tracer direction was the initial clue that the attacking aircraft had scored a hit. No doubt this pattern didn't always happen, but it did happen and so I think it would be a worthwhile addition to the sim.

PPanPan

I don't want the gore because there's very little gore in the combat reports and what gore there was was usually thier own.

It would be a nice touch that if you raked the rear gunners position then he'd cease fire because he was dead.. I don't really wanna see his head come off, just him be out of action would be realistic enough for me.

For some reason nobody's firing back from this b-17.. I find it a little eerie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4KF...eature=related

[Novotny]

Lol - Banana forum hits new heights, as forumite argues that Brian Kingcombe's memoirs are 'over-modeled'.

[Splitter]

I would take just being able to knock out a gunner. I swear, those gunners are too good and can hit me even as their plane spirals toward the ground. I don't need ot see his guts splashed all over the bubble, but I do wish he would take off the SuperMan cape.

Splitter

[PeterPanPan]

Originally Posted by winny

I don't want the gore ...

I know, I know! Neither do I. As I have said, that's not what this thread is about!! The suggestion given by the change in tracer arc is perhaps more powerful (and certainly more useful) than seeing any gore. It is a sign that your bullets aren't just hitting metal, but having a real impact on the human crew.

BTW, fantastic video. I wonder if the B-17 made it back ok?

PPanPan

[PeterPanPan]

Originally Posted by Novotny

Lol - Banana forum hits new heights, as forumite argues that Brian Kingcombe's memoirs are 'over-modeled'.

Hee hee, my thoughts entirely. Silly BK, what did he know eh?!

PPanPan

[ColdfireTrilogy]

What really excites me is to one day actually have (extremely) accurate weapon models. Its interesting seeing a video of a b17 getting whacked hard like the video above. Direct hits on the engine cowlings, direct hits on fuselage and wings. Direct cannon hits all over (big plumes of debris). That b17 wasn't smoking, engines kept on a chuggin and as far as we can tell pilot is still under control. I can tell you what. Every time ive played in Il2 if a german fighter gets that close on my rear and hits me that hard my plane A) breaks into a million bits B) each of those engines would be smoking black instantly and i would have at least 3 fuel leaks by that point. Who knows; fuel could have been leaking from that bomber but it clearly wasnt the big 5 foot sprays that Il2 loves to show. Air cooled radial engines also have an insanely good nack of surviving multiple direct hits due to how they function and that each piece of the radial engine can in theory function with other parts damaged. While power may be severely degraded, a direct hit wouldn't necessarily send the prop into a 5 minute death march of gradual power loss like an engine hit in IL2 leads to. Imagine one day being able to have a 15+ man b17 run on a city and having insanely heavy flack like in a real war. Loud BOOMS all around and your plane shuddering and shaking from the air pocket changes from explosions as you fly over a city. Then get harassed as you head home as well.
Currently In Il2 strong flack even at high altitudes = eventual death from some lucky shot that blows your wing off or Pilot kills you. A 190 on your rear at 100 meters usually means heavily sustained damage unless superman AI gunners insta kill him. Doing a full heavy flight to and from an enemy target in Il2 is very hard to do. I realize b17s were extremely perilous and had high mortality rates but in IL2 its a different beast. You dont go down from sustained damage you go down from one thing or another after a quick tiff with said attack. Theres no 5 or 6 fighters attacking you and then continuing to target. its 1 or 2 fighters severely crippling you then one flack shell ripping you apart. At the flight ceilings b17s were at to have flak hit you repeatedly with extremely close hits is ... to say the least, a bit absurd. XD Just my take i suppose
(P.S) i have tried in the mission editor to make battles as large as a real bomber attack would have been in WW2. I made the installation thats being attacked have a good supply off AAA and large amounts of both friendly and enemy fighters. I had the fighters come in 15 minutes before we reached destination of which even with friendly fighter support out of the 30 bombers on target 20 were lost... fighters became tangled and the remaining 10 bombers continued (4 of which were almost to the point of the AI crew bailing) As we reached the destination flack became heavier and heavier and eventually I succumbed to 3 flack hits to the face killing my pilot. The last AI pilot bailed after 2 direct engine hits and an elevator shot off. Long story short out of 30 bombers and 60 fighters (30friendly 30 enemy) and heavy AAA around the target only 4 bombs were even able to be dropped on target ... When using larger and more realistic battles in Il2 starts to show how it fails to replicate how a real fight may have taken place as damage just ramps up too dramatically with increased numbers.

WoW thanks forum for deleting all my syntax ... there go paragraph breaks and spaces between ... FML
TLR ... dont bother ....