4.12.2 de-bugging

[Ventura]

Originally Posted by Monty_Thrud

Any news on the mission i posted?, bug? or something i've done?

Thanks.

I've had this happen.

It helps much if you set the first waypoint immediately after takeoff to an echelon formation to compliment the turn.

[Aviar]

A small graphics bug concerning the following Stationary Airplanes:

IL-2M, 1942 (first series)

IL-2M, 1942 (later series)

*Note the floating helmets above the rear gunner stations. (see screenshots)

Aviar

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by Aviar

I have also noticed inconsistencies when placing runway tiles over original tiles. When you run the mission several times, sometimes they appear on top of the originals and sometimes they appear under the originals.

I'm just curious whether such bugs are planned to be fixed in the close future in a hotfix (4.12.2?), or we should wait until 4.13 comes out next (?) year?

[Pursuivant]

Ki-43 III wing tank fires initially produce flames but no smoke, then smoke but no flame.

Additionally, fires in the wing tanks don't seem to further damage the plane's wings or cause risk of explosion, nor do they trigger a bailout by AI pilots.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Ki-43 III wing tank fires initially produce flames but no smoke, then smoke but no flame.

Additionally, fires in the wing tanks don't seem to further damage the plane's wings or cause risk of explosion, nor do they trigger a bailout by AI pilots.

I believe this is normal behavior as of 4.12. The intention is to replicate those times when there is a fire but its clean burning and there is no smoke... sometimes the fire goes out (in a dive for example) and then there is just smoke left over as the fire goes out... its not perfect but its not bad either.

If there is more damage done then the fire with no smoke turns into a fire with smoke and thats when all sorts of bad things happen

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I believe this is normal behavior as of 4.12. The intention is to replicate those times when there is a fire but its clean burning and there is no smoke...

That just seems strange, since a gasoline fire is normally at least a bit smoky. Also, even for a pure fuel fire there will usually be other things like paint and rubber from the self-sealing fuel tanks burning.

Originally Posted by IceFire

If there is more damage done then the fire with no smoke turns into a fire with smoke and thats when all sorts of bad things happen

I've subsequently seen this. Heavy damage to the wings plus more severe fire also triggers bailout.

[Pursuivant]

Is it just me and my crummy flying or does the P-40M seem extremely vulnerable to "critical hits"?

I've been flying a lot of 1-1 missions against the Ace AI Ki-43II (i.e., 2 0.50 caliber guns, sniper-like accuracy within 200 meters) and it seems like even a single second of gunfire will do something terrible to my plane.

If I'm lucky it's just a jammed gun, more typically it's some control surface rendered inoperative, a pilot hit or really severe engine damage which results in the engine conking out within seconds. Mind you, the actual plane never breaks apart - or even shows heavy damage, it's almost always a pilot kill, messed up controls (usually 2-3 at a time) or inoperative/flaming engine.

This seems at odds with Clive Caldwell's assessment that the P-40 "would take a tremendous amount of punishment, violent aerobatics as well as enemy action," plus the fact that the P-40 had armor around the engine and cockpit which allowed it to survive head-on passes against the Ki-43.

Mind you, I think that the game gets the P-40's basic ruggedness right in terms of light damage/heavy damage/broken damage modeling to the airframe. It's just that there seems to be something wrong about the likelihood and severity of critical hits.

Flying against another contemporary opponent, the Bf-109F, I'm getting much the same sort of damage, although the Bf-109's programming makes it much less likely to take head-on shots and Bf-109F Ace AI doesn't seem to have the same inerrant accuracy as the Ki-43.

[Pursuivant]

This is an old bug, but is there any way to make collisions with parachutes not break your plane?

Conceivably, a collision with a human could break a part off an airplane (although usually it just leaves a dead person and a big messy dent in the airplane) but there's no way that striking a parachute or its risers is going to damage a plane, much less remove a vital part.

On a larger scale, there are some ground objects that should damage a plane without breaking it. Right now, things like wires or flag poles will kill your plane, when realistically all a collision with such things should do is damage it.

[ElAurens]

As a very dedicated P40 flier I have to concur with your observation.

The P 40 has a glass jaw engine damage model, and always has, ditto the one hit damage to control functions. It is very perplexing, as other less robust allied fighters (Spitfire and Yaks, for example) do not show this.

This has been brought up many times over the years, so now I expect that:

A: The "learn to fly" excuse will be used as it often is.

B: Someone with knowledge of the DM will point out that some critical part of the engine, and or flight control system, has a big red target painted on it, or has a magic bullet magnet installed as original equipment.

C: Pilot accounts cannot be taken at face value as we all know that the men that actually went in to combat with these aircraft were just kids and knew nothing about their mounts.

D: Nothing will change.

[SaQSoN]

Originally Posted by Aviar

I have also noticed inconsistencies when placing runway tiles over original tiles. When you run the mission several times, sometimes they appear on top of the originals and sometimes they appear under the originals. (When I say 'run the mission', I usually do so in Coop mode.)

This is not a bug. If two, or more co-planar polygons overlap, Z-buffer can not decide which should be rendered on top (obviously). This causes "shimmering" effect, or display of random polygon on top of the other(s). You would get the same effect, if you place, for example, two same building models with different texture exactly one into the other. But, for some reason, no one wants to do that...