Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-28-2011, 04:04 PM
addman's Avatar
addman addman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vasa, Finland
Posts: 1,593
Default

Try to hit the radiator from behind/underneath, works in IL-2 1946. The IL-2 Sturmovik had the same weakness, hit that thing and you're set .
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-28-2011, 04:17 PM
SEE SEE is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,678
Default

They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) and found that aiming for the fuel tanks by swooping under and upwards, chopping throttle, was the only way I could rupture them and ignite. Even then, it doesn't always work (in terms of 'flaming') , the AI drop so his rear gunner has you in his sights again but hit the engine from below and down they go. (De-Wilde and AP load out)

From what I have read, the Ju87 was withdrawn from operational use in the BoB due to high losses- something isn't right with the current damage modelling.




Last edited by SEE; 04-28-2011 at 04:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-28-2011, 06:47 PM
Catseye's Avatar
Catseye Catseye is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 242
Default

[QUOTE=SEE;275241]They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) . . . .

What did you select for convergence?

I've tried to find out more info on the "DeWild", as an incendiary is it more effective than the tracer/incendiary?

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-28-2011, 07:53 PM
SEE SEE is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,678
Default

[QUOTE=Catseye;275330]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEE View Post
They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) . . . .

What did you select for convergence?

I've tried to find out more info on the "DeWild", as an incendiary is it more effective than the tracer/incendiary?

Cheers
I prefer the 'De Wilde' with AP but generally, the ordinance for Allies is pretty weak as many RAF BoB vets testify in their memoirs.

I converge all my guns at 150m ( I say meters because I believe CoD uses metric). This places a Ju87 at around 2/3 the size of my gunsight ring for my optimum firing point. 200m distance and its a little over half the size.

However, getting a BF109 within 150m is another ball game - what works against a dawdling JU isn't necessarily the best all round setting. I wouldn't use anything higher than 200M with 0.303's , but thats me!

Last edited by SEE; 04-28-2011 at 08:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:02 AM
BlackbusheFlyer BlackbusheFlyer is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 105
Default

They do appear to be too tough, same with the 110's.. very hard to kill and when flown by the AI perform amazing feats of evasion. Find them much harder than 109's to bring down.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:25 AM
Romanator21 Romanator21 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 507
Default

Quote:
Anything over 10% losses is considered high and would be unsustainable long term. That is shooting down one plane out of a formation of ten. I guess that would be possible with the present damage model.
Good point.

According to a cutaway image I have of the plane, the fuel tank is on the inboard part of the wing behind a thick spar. Maybe that's why you're having a hard time getting it from its six?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-28-2011, 06:53 PM
BadAim BadAim is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 984
Default

Anything over 10% losses is considered high and would be unsustainable long term. That is shooting down one plane out of a formation of ten. I guess that would be possible with the present damage model.
__________________
I'm pretty much just here for comic relief.
Q6600@3.02 GHz, 4gig DDR2, GTX470, Win7 64bit
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.