Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Cannons 109E firing rate

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- FM/DM threads (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=196)

- - Cannons 109E firing rate (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=27271)

drewpee, that is the difference between sim-light, sim and real life.

In a sim-light you need instant success, i.e. wings ripped off, huge explosions

In a sim you get more authentic damage, most of the time a delayed kill.

In real life pilots with even minor damage would have extended and returned home, not fought to the end if avoidable.

Quote:

“In Pursuit” by Johan Kylander:
Learning how to play a computer game should be an easy matter. Most games ARE easy to master once you’ve figured out what makes them tick, but the massively multiplayer online air combat game is a striking exception because it isn’t predictable. There are simply too many factors to consider at any turn: beyond certain automated functions the action is totally unscripted, unregulated and unpredictable because every action or piece of the
environment is that of another human being - and it all happens in real time.

This Work-of-Art “In Pursuit” by Johan Kylander is a MUST READ:

Quote:

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&...Pzfe3Q&cad=rja

Regards Varrattu

Quote:

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow (Post 352102)

I wonder if (like in old IL2) perhaps not all bullets are physically modelled but only some.

I'm sorry but even the "old" IL-2 modelled each and every round fired, the majority just werent visible due to not having tracers. I do not know where you got that assumption from...

Quote:

Originally Posted by drewpee (Post 353131)

In my own experience I found it easier to hit things in IL2. I could bring down a tough target like a FW-190 or a P-47 by wrecking control surfaces. In COD I struggle to bring down a target. I do have more success destroying targets in a Spitfire than a BF109 but I prefer to fly the BF109.
It's harder to use historical reference's for tactics and AC design because no one really knows what parts of the game are accurate and whats not. For me I think my flying skills have improved but the ability to quickly dispense of an opponent has not.

well.

the other day was flying with comms with a mate, and he shreaded me to pieces, i ahd no controls, bleeding, my wings ahd holes bigger than head and fuel was leaking badly. i was as good as dead. why am i telling this?

My mate was complaining on how he could not kill me and how we wasted all of his ammo to do no damage too me.

i believe the kill eficience, and the fast dispense of an enemy is the smae as off old il2, yet, due to the new complexety of damage model, the game will not jump wings and tails off as often becouse it has new ways of "killing players".

be sure, if yo usee the 20mm shells hitting the target he is not fighting back, and if he is we will be a broken wing bird.

cheers, and good hunting

Quote:

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow (Post 352068)

Concerning the canons of the 109 my observation is that in 90% of all cases when I give a broadside shot (aspect angle 90% seeing nearly top view of target plane) with canons at a close target (60m) or medium distant target (100-130m) my canons just don't hit. For me it is basically impossible to score a hit with canons by letting a target fly through my bullet stream. I only score very few hits with my machine guns.

Somehow I have some doubts if the cadence is correctly modelled. I may accept that few cannon rounds hit - perhaps only one or two and that occasionally the target just flies through. But really almost in any case? This seems to me very strange.

It's sad that the track recording function is broken at the moment because I used to enjoy using ntrks to check my deflection shooting in 1946.

However my experience with Cliffs is that the cannons are working just fine. I can usually hit targets at 90-degrees angle-off (i.e. crossing in front of my guns perpendicularly, my view being of the top of his aircraft). But I find I have to give more lead than I used to in 1946, and I rarely take off the target's wings with these snapshots. Most of my online victories in such situations have been pilot- or engine-kills. Gunnery has always been the weakest part of my game, so I find to really take someone's wings off I need a decently-long burst (at least in this game... Mk 108s from 1946 are different). It might be the ammo I'm loading *shrug*

I've never had the target fly through my bullet stream and seemingly pass between rounds unless I was pulling a lot of G's as I was firing. In my experience that is the key: To unload your aircraft before pulling the trigger.

If you were to watch your aircraft from the side as you fire, and draw lines where your rounds went, you want the picture to look like a single spike, not a mohawk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robtek (Post 353155)

Sorry I think you miss my point. Not being a Computer programing WW2 fighter pilot most of what we talk about is just assumptions based on our own experience. None of us have flown a actuarial bf109 and a Spitfire in battle. Therefor I for one have no idea how quickly an AC can be brought down.

To say COD is newer so there for is more realistic is incorrect. Sorry to dampen debate.

I agree that IL2 was far too "explosive" in terms of ripping wings off and explosions.

So Clod is definitely an improvement.

And yes, one can still rip off wings but my guess is this occurs when the shooter achieves to be within the limits of certain parameters (like distance, certain spot on the wing hit, certain amount of bullets hitting this certain spot) which then triggers a wing-away-sequence. Ever seen the neat cut line of the wing and the stump remaining on the plane when this occurs? So imho a simplified algorithm kicks in here.

On the other hand you can see planes flying with swiss cheese wings around without little effect to their aerodynamic.

Or those 3/4 wing 109ers ...

I landed back a Hurri without a wing. I think it can happen with all planes in game.

I think wingless behaviour is probably a discussion best saved for the next patch.

Hopefully when they address the flight/damage models they include these issues as well.

Getting a bit off-topic, but I finally saw a chance to publish this beauty:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1319489440

The AI plane flew a straight line without any change in altitude for more than 10 minutes. Probably, it would have continued this way endlessly, but I then lost interest.
Besides the severe damage it managed to overrule physics even with a dead pilot. :grin: