Ammunition power

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil

For me personally it´s not about domination of one side(excellent comment Avimus, I learned a lot from it). It´s more or less about historical correctnes and this is not happening in the game.

You have a Polikarpov I-185, that never existed, with the best flying abilitys ever and great guns, where nobody knows how that thing was flying in the first place(2 prototypes that fell out of the sky). Fortunately not many servers have it.
And on the other side you have castrated planes or characteristics like the Browning 50 cal.(I´m not talking about blue planes now as many red pilots feel aparently offended if I do).

This simulator is said to be a WW2 simulation, so it claims to be a historical simulation and the community says it´s one of the best.
I love this sim too for this very reason, but seeing the arguments above, I must say, it has some aspects of a fantasy game.

Now why am I writing this? Not to provoke anyone or to put anyone off(especially not Oleg Maddox, as he has done more than anyone else for the sim-world)
This is meant as a constructive input. I would like things to be historically corrected for the future either for IL2 or SoW, in order to really be able to enjoy a historical simulation.

Emil I think you're having a bit of a disconnect between what a historical simulation is capable of (especially one that is now 7 years old) and how that history is interpreted. Oleg's done a marvelous job of taking a game that was meant to be a simulator for the IL-2 ...for use on old Pentium computers and turning it into a modern flight sim master piece spanning virtually the entire war.

Now a year or two ago a number of people took the average number of bullets the average fighter in WWII would sustain from weapons like a 20mm cannon and a .50cal machine gun. I can't find the thread on the Ubi forums anymore but basically it came down to the fact that the "average" number of bullets required in IL-2 and in data we could find from World War II and after was fairly close. I apologise for only being able to mention and not cite the exact information but I took away from it that what we have is close. Very close all things considered.

Its not perfect and in some ways we're at a disadvantage due to the inadequacies of the damage modeling system...but given the limitations of the technology and the limitations of time working on such a project I think what we have is so close to reality that anyone who is talking seriously...I mean seriously...is going to be splitting hairs over a couple of percentage points plus or minus.

The .50cal is a weapon that keeps coming up and I think that the biggest problem is the interpretation from years of watching The History Channel. It was not a perfect weapon but...in real life and in the game if you use it correctly then it will shred the enemy. Its biggest disadvantage is that its a weapon that breaks stuff inside the plane...and the damage model could stand to have a few more objects inside each plane that can be hit. But the average number of hits its still quite close to history if the numbers and testing are to be believed.

The I-185 did fly and presumably was tested so no doubt there is information to base the flight model on. Its probably optimistic and its fun to have...but its not likely to show up in a serious historical mission. Thats ok. It was a FUN bonus project (I believe it was third party)....and I think the real goal there was to show off what texture baking could do for the quality of cockpit. Its ok to have fun with history too.