The new bomb fuzing needs to be an option.

[DKoor]

Originally Posted by swiss

That is exactly my point - I dont want it to be super realistic(real-what?).
It's a game and you'll have to find a balance between the needs of fun seekers and requirements of some die hard "I want it real" geeks.
The latter are probably the ones who fly Tokio-LAX realtime in Fsx, LOL.

Again:
It's game which has to attract as many ppl as possible, that affects sales too you know?
If you make it super hard(or realistic) the game becomes unaccessible for newbies. Deserted servers are great fun...

Now TD can change whatever they want, in fact it's very cool they gave the die hard bombers what they wanted, however TD sets standards for the whole community - that is the problem, respectively the reason why such stuff should be optional.

Just look at the servers, where are most ppl flying, what do they fly?
Fighters or bombers?
Bingo.
Now you know what the majority wants when playing IL2.
I'm pretty sure the new feature didn't help at all to change the Bombers-Fighters proportion.
More fighters, less bombers - is that what the ppl applauding to the new fusing wanted?
Their live gets even harder now - it's actually too funny robtek complained about not being able to bomb Portsmouth due to the overwhelming fighter mass.

I wrote long post to you but changed my mind and deleted it, I see no point already said what I have.

Instead I'll ask you one thing.

Since you took some time to reply me twice have you at least downloaded my track and replayed it so we can discuss that?

[swiss]

Originally Posted by DKoor

Since you took some time to reply me twice have you at least downloaded my track and replayed it so we can discuss that?

No, I didn't, as can skipbomb with the 4.10 version.*
Took me about 2hrs to re-learn.
But that's not the point - it's not about whether you can adapt or not, the question is why you even have to force ppl to adapt.


*
I suck with torps, but then again I never spent much time learning.
Dive bombing is something I hated before, now it's necessary, and you can't even be sure if you hit something at all.
I wonder how often even a experienced stuka pilot goes home with more than 3 tanks(500/2x50)...
But hey, they gave us the Henschel with neat guns, which love TD for, it became my new weapon of choice if go for AG.

[F19_Klunk]

Originally Posted by swiss

Dive bombing is something I hated before, now it's necessary, and you can't even be sure if you hit something at all.

If you hated dive bombing, take hints and tips from the real USN:

http://f19vs.se/page.php?50

Three parts. This section of our site also present other interesting instructional movies

When you get to learn how things were done IRL, they seem to be more fun to perform.. imo anyway

[JHartikka]

Almost Realistic But Not Quite..!

Here are the three main cases related to improving IL sim to get bombers truthful:

1. Bomb SALVO settings.
2. Fuse settings.
3. Missing bomb damage after pilot hit.

Nr 1 means that this otherways truthful sim has a queer property of dropping bombs as pairs. I guess that we are rather unanimous that back in those days bomb effect was with all efforts maximized. It would have been unprecedentedly foolish to waste bomb effect by dropping bombs as pairs into the same spot! Luckily, there already is a fix available for this IL sim 'idiot pairs of bombs' dilemma so it should not be very difficult to set correct with some future patch, I hope!

Nr 2 means of course that for every mission bombs were funished with a fuse best suited for that particular mission. Again, bombs were never carried to be wasted in those days! It was crew's choice to say the last word about fuse that would be best for the mission. Pilot select should be the case with this sim, too, if we wish to further keep the sim historically accurate instead of becoming just another fancy game?

Nr 3 is the IL sim curious feature that bombs released before but exploding after flak or enemy interceptor has hit the bomber pilot do not cause any damage. In reality, bombs of course were quite as dangerous even after the aircraft that dropped them was hit - I guess we all agree about this?

Originally Posted by F19_Klunk

...take hints and tips from the real USN: http://f19vs.se/page.php?50
...

Thank you for the link to an riginal educational film - it really tells steep dive bombing physics very clearly in an easy to grasp illustrative way. I looked at the carefully made film with pleasure!



Best regards,

- J. Hartikka -

Finland

I added original wartime photos to messages http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...d=1#post210220 and http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...782#post213782 and http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...588#post216588

[JG52Uther]

It should not be a setting in the difficulty settings at all.It should be an option ingame like the bomb delay setting.
THAT would be realistic.

[DKoor]

Originally Posted by swiss

No, I didn't, as can skipbomb with the 4.10 version.*
Took me about 2hrs to re-learn.
But that's not the point - it's not about whether you can adapt or not, the question is why you even have to force ppl to adapt.


*
I suck with torps, but then again I never spent much time learning.
Dive bombing is something I hated before, now it's necessary, and you can't even be sure if you hit something at all.
I wonder how often even a experienced stuka pilot goes home with more than 3 tanks(500/2x50)...
But hey, they gave us the Henschel with neat guns, which love TD for, it became my new weapon of choice if go for AG.

IMO now I think they should simply put it as option since of rather big opposition to the idea.

Why I asked you to watch my track is because I think it is not fairly easy thing to do but just plain easy. And is a step closer to reality all together.
In ww2 they didn't do skip bombing from sea level but from certain small alts;

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skip_bombing

The bombing aircraft flew at very low altitudes (200–250 ft (61–76 m)) at speeds from 200–250 mph (320–400 km/h; 170–220 kn). They would release a "stick" of two to four bombs, usually 500 lb (230 kg) or 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs equipped with four- to five-second time delay fuses at a distance of 60–300 ft (18–91 m) from the side of the target ship. The bombs would "skip" over the surface of the water in a manner similar to stone skipping and either bounce into the side of the ship and detonate, submerge and explode under the ship, or bounce over the target and explode as an air burst. All outcomes were found to be effective. Unlike "Upkeep" or "Highball", this technique used standard types.

We still can do our skip bombing lower than their lowest alt in RL, but anyhow the fact that they didn't do skip bombing at sea level as often witnessed in pre 4.10 versus real life scenario settled my dilemma about the issue.

Why would I want to game a game?
That doesn't make a sense to me and a lot of other folks... however I see that is a prob with some other folks who want luxury that is why I said that I'm in for making it option on/off.

Argument easy vs hard bombing and both being unrealistic doesn't hold water for me as I feel this brought us closer to the real thing, especially the case with torps.

God forbid they ever code the waves and ship evasion paths, apart from few unlucky seagull strikes most people wont hit anything at sea.

[swiss]

Dkoor:

IT IS NOT about SKIPBOMBING, skipbombig is easy - try tanks.

od forbid they ever code the waves and ship evasion paths, apart from few unlucky seagull strikes most people wont hit anything at sea.

If that is a completely new game - no prob.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by swiss

Dkoor:

IT IS NOT about SKIPBOMBING, skipbombig is easy - try tanks.

Killing tanks was considered to be very hard - also with bombs. This is why weapons like the Ju 87G, Hurricane IID, the NS 37mm cannon or cluster bombs were introduced.