4.13.2 de-bugging

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

The size of the M-17, or BMW-VI engine is very similar to the size of the DB-6XX family, or Merlin family. And definitely much larger, then a truck engine. Their strength isn't much different either. Not a bug.

Ignoring things like power output, compression ratio, and power-to-mass ratios for a moment, let's look at dry mass and length for the M-17 vs. the DB-605 and Merlin:

540-553 kg, 1,810mm Mikulin M-17

756 kg, 2,158 mm Daimler-Benz DB 605

744 kg, 2250 mm Rolls-Royce Merlin

It's indisputable that the M-17 is 25-30% lighter and 20-25% shorter than the other engines I referenced. That means that any given bullet is going to do relatively more damage to the smaller, lighter engine.

Unless you have better data than I do, which indicates that the M-17 was inherently 20-25% tougher than the larger engines, I'd suggest that the M-17 engines in the game are a bit tougher than they should be.

As to wing struts and landing gear struts not being modeled, that might not be a "bug" but it is bad damage modeling.

If you can blow the fixed landing gear off a Stuka or A6M "Val" then you should be able to do the same thing for the R-5 family or any other plane with a fixed gear.

Likewise, wing struts aren't just there for show, they're critical to preventing the wings of a biplane from coming off. Break a wing strut and the inherent structural stability of all wings on that side of the plane is compromised. They represent just as vital a target as the main spar in a monoplane's wing.

Modeling control surfaces being blown off if they're hit at the hinge is good damage modeling, but having smaller control surfaces like elevators be harder to damage than a relatively large control surface like a rudder doesn't make sense.

Additionally, one .50 caliber bullet is all that's needed to trigger damage textures in the rudder. Realistically, that bullet is going to blow a fist-sized hole in the control surface at best. For a fabric-covered surface, it might just blow through leaving a hole the size of a man's thumb. It's going to take a lot of holes - or a lot of structural damage to the rudder frame - before you lose enough rudder surface that you start to lose significant amounts of rudder authority.

This isn't a problem with the R-5 family, though, it's a problem with many planes in the game. Control surfaces are often far too vulnerable, particularly huge control surfaces which are made entirely of metal, such as those on large bombers.

[KG26_Alpha]

BMW-VI engine is huge

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

BMW-VI engine is huge

Yes, but not as huge - by length or mass - as the other engines I referenced, yet it has about the same capacity to absorb damage.

Perhaps the BMW-VI and its sucessor, the M-17 are somehow 20-25% harder to destroy due to other factors - like reduced HP, outstanding reliability or durability, or unusually large oil and coolant tanks.

Otherwise, it makes most sense to base an engine's ability to absorb damage purely on its mass and volume.

[stovak]

On the R-5 co-pilot's panel, the altimeter can appear broken in the co-pilot view but fixed if you shift to the gunner position.

[HBPencil]

Not so much a bug as an error, the Article XV squadrons of the RAAF (450 to 467 inclusive) and RNZAF (485 to 490 inclusive) are now listed under under the RAAF/RNZAF when they should be under the RAF (like the RCAF Article XV squadrons are). Now if you select one of these squadrons you get Aussie/Kiwi PTO markings instead of the RAF roundels they should have.

Cheers, HBPencil

P.S. The RNZAF XV units will also need their squadron codes added.

P.P.S It'd be worth while removing the squadron crest for 486 (RNZAF) Squadron as they didn't paint it on their aircraft.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by HBPencil

Not so much a bug as an error, the Article XV squadrons of the RAAF (450 to 467 inclusive) and RNZAF (485 to 490 inclusive) are now listed under under the RAAF/RNZAF when they should be under the RAF (like the RCAF Article XV squadrons are). Now if you select one of these squadrons you get Aussie/Kiwi PTO markings instead of the RAF roundels they should have.

Also, the RAAF (NEI) units are listed under the Netherlands.

In all cases, the choice to place the new squadrons where they are gets you the right voice-packs, but not the right default insignia. This appears to be a limitation of the game. Correct markings or correct voice packs, take your choice.

Originally Posted by HBPencil

P.P.S It'd be worth while removing the squadron crest for 486 (RNZAF) Squadron as they didn't paint it on their aircraft.

There are many units where the unit crest is automatically applied to the plane. This is historically accurate in a few cases cases (e.g., early war Luftwaffe), but doesn't make sense in most other cases.

[HBPencil]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

In all cases, the choice to place the new squadrons where they are gets you the right voice-packs, but not the right default insignia. This appears to be a limitation of the game. Correct markings or correct voice packs, take your choice.

I should point out that these aren't new squadrons (at least I know the NZ ones aren't and I strongly suspect the Aus ones as well), rather TD just moved them from the RAF to the RAAF/RNZAF.
It's not much of a choice though, having 24 squadrons rendered pretty much unusable just to use different voice packs seems rather pointless. I feel I should say that as a Kiwi I wasn't bothered by hearing British accents in game rather than my own.

[shelby]

Originally Posted by HBPencil

Not so much a bug as an error, the Article XV squadrons of the RAAF (450 to 467 inclusive) and RNZAF (485 to 490 inclusive) are now listed under under the RAAF/RNZAF when they should be under the RAF (like the RCAF Article XV squadrons are). Now if you select one of these squadrons you get Aussie/Kiwi PTO markings instead of the RAF roundels they should have.

Cheers, HBPencil

P.S. The RNZAF XV units will also need their squadron codes added.

P.P.S It'd be worth while removing the squadron crest for 486 (RNZAF) Squadron as they didn't paint it on their aircraft.

i just start the stock campaign of the RNZAF and i see this bug. it is not only the commands it is and the voice

[stugumby]

This is not a new bug but an annoying long term hold out.
Opel blitz trucks standard color is panzer grey, they do not change color for desert or winter maps, yet the opel ambulance does. The standard cargo truck gets a winter cover on the back but the skin stays panzer grey.The radio truck is always in 3 color scheme.

Russian fuel tanker and standard truck/ radio truck stay russian green on all maps, gaz trucks and ambulance from later add ons change from green to winter.

[HBPencil]

Originally Posted by HBPencil

Not so much a bug as an error, the Article XV squadrons of the RAAF (450 to 467 inclusive) and RNZAF (485 to 490 inclusive) are now listed under under the RAAF/RNZAF when they should be under the RAF (like the RCAF Article XV squadrons are). Now if you select one of these squadrons you get Aussie/Kiwi PTO markings instead of the RAF roundels they should have.

Cheers, HBPencil

P.S. The RNZAF XV units will also need their squadron codes added.

P.P.S It'd be worth while removing the squadron crest for 486 (RNZAF) Squadron as they didn't paint it on their aircraft.

Just to add to this, the RNZAF Article XV squadrons (but not the regular RNZAF squadrons) now use the Russian voice pack.