PDA

View Full Version : HOW MANY TIMES?????



XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:54 PM
HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO ATTACK LAAVENSARI FROM HELSINKKI????
It´s 158Km, we are chansless 8-10 against 14-16!, it´s getting boring, it´s a five minute ride with 8X, they force us to use FW. I have completed the mission 10 times now and in the briefing for the next mission it says "Prepare to attack Laavensari", is this a bug?, or is it a way of making my army weaker in order to keep up with history?
YES the blue will loose if it keeps up like tjis i come home with 1 maybe two if im lucky, and in debriefing we downed 1 or 2 planes!
Is this the way its got to be?

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:54 PM
HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO ATTACK LAAVENSARI FROM HELSINKKI????
It´s 158Km, we are chansless 8-10 against 14-16!, it´s getting boring, it´s a five minute ride with 8X, they force us to use FW. I have completed the mission 10 times now and in the briefing for the next mission it says "Prepare to attack Laavensari", is this a bug?, or is it a way of making my army weaker in order to keep up with history?
YES the blue will loose if it keeps up like tjis i come home with 1 maybe two if im lucky, and in debriefing we downed 1 or 2 planes!
Is this the way its got to be?

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:33 PM
The IL-2/FB -series is made for the russian players. This is clearly visible in the certain 'aspects' of the game.

If you want to complete a campaign without ripping your hair off, I suggest you take the carreer of a russian fighter pilot. It is a WHOLE LOT easier to play, score kills and return alive, trust me.

Try it out, and you will see. I think that in the first mission, you might get something around 4-5 kills with your I-16, compared to the 1, maybe 2 you get in the FW 190...

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:03 PM
Sounds like a frustrating experience. You might want to repost this on General Discussion (or Technical) forum and see if anyone else has had a similar experience. Maybe someone has a fix, or some way to by-pass that particular mission.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:35 PM
If you want easy, fly the Stalingrad campaign with FW190A4. You will lose 1 pilot every other mission (especially the early missions), all enemy planes will be destroyed every mission, and you will have trouble keeping up with the killrates of your wingmen (your mileage may vary, getting alot of airfield attacks will cause more losses, encountering lots of Hurricane IIb and biplanes will pad your wingmen's scores). Then try it in 109s and tell me the 190 isn't superior.

As for the original question, are you sure you are applying the mission?

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:40 PM
yeah!, i apply the mission when i have completed it!
Im keeping count of completed missions...it´s up to 60 now!.....so i dont want to abort it when i have spent so much time to get here.......but if nothing happens i dont know what ill do!

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:24 PM
Celorfie wrote:
- The IL-2/FB -series is made for the russian players.
- This is clearly visible in the certain 'aspects' of
- the game

Riiiight...more proof of the evil communist bias Oleg has programmed into FB.

When will some of you stop inventing these conspiracy theories?

I/JG54^Lukas
He 162A-2 Cockpit Modeler

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:33 PM
yeah, right.....biase

wait a second....


beauuurargh

ok I vomited

Feel better now.

5 min rides 8x doesn't seem very long for me /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

As far as I know, some of your grief will be adressed in the patch (less enemy if you want, possibility to set a max. distance for missions).

Nikko

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:59 AM
The il-2 stab has an option to put a *wished* distance for the campaign missions /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 04:04 AM
Learn to cover ur wing man and make ur wing man cover you, it is all in your mind... i enjoy all campians, you can alway enable instand susses to, for not have to repeat missions

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:58 AM
i apply as soon as i can, but when i crash there is nothing to do but restart!
Well, if my calculations are correct the patch should be on its way and be released on the first half of this week.
If Oleg keeps his time schedual that is!, he said 2-2,5 weeks about 2,25 weeks ago...../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:38 AM
JG54_Lukas wrote:
-
- Riiiight...more proof of the evil communist
- bias Oleg has programmed into FB.
-

Ahem.. What has communism to do with Oleg ? I thought that Russia had gotten over that Cold War -era government completely ? The idea of sosialism (By Karl Marx) is good, by basis, but the way 'Father Sunny' manifested it in the Soviet Union is not right.

-
- When will some of you stop inventing these
- conspiracy theories?
-

The day Oleg will come back from wherever he is and will admit that there are certain aspects in the game which need to be fixed.

If you do not believe me, watch this track, in which I, alone, take down a total of 8 SB-103 bomber planes in a single Yak-1. Also note, that first 6 bombers are taken down with pure MG fire from 7.62 ShKAS. The seventh is downed by ShVAK fire and the last one is rammed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.tpu.fi/~t1akeski/VVS-MG.trk

When you have watched this track, go do it yourself. You can even take down a total of 12 bombers in a single Yak-1.

If you tell me that this is the way it is supposed to be, then I suggest you should do some research first. After that, go fly a BF-109 and do the same with it's default loadout.

I would bet my credits on that you cannot do the same with the BF-109. If you can, post a track of you doing it. Remember, you must down the first six SB-103s with machine guns only.

This is an example of a clear bug/bias/evil communism, whatever you want to name it. However, it is just one. There are more, like the shifted/unshifted view differences in allied/VVS and LW planes..

EDIT: More details over the issue.

Here are the programmatical details of both weapons, taken from a post supplied by Oleg himself:

ShKAS
// APIT - API - T - API

APIT
mass = 0.0096
speed = 869.0
power = 0.0005

API
mass = 0.0096
speed = 871.0
power = 0.0005

T
massa = 0.0096
speed = 869.0
power = 0

MG 17
// AP - AP - APT

AP/APT
mass = 0.010
speed = 810.0
power = 0

Now, when you look at the details, it clearly reads that the ShKAS shoots APIT and API bullets, which deliver the main damage. Their 'power' rating is 0.0005. So, when one cycle of these bullets is fired, a total of 0.0010 power rating is used to deliver damage.

Now, look at the corresponding values of MG17. It shoots AP and APT bullets, which are the ones to deliver it's damage. Interesting point is that both bullets (according to the schema) have a total 'power' rating of ZERO. After I readed this schematic, I no longer wonder why the MG 17 (main weapon of early LW fighters) is so ineffective. It doesn't deliver damage at all ?

I hate to repeat myself, but I would call this a bit strange..

-Celorfie

Message Edited on 07/06/0310:51AM by Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:02 PM
power is explosive power, obviously incendiary rounds are modelled as having a very tiny explosive power.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:24 PM
Celofire, basing your insane bias accusitions on data you didn't even interpret proberly does nothing for your credibility.

The german maschine guns rely on kinetic energy, which is a result of MASS and VELOCITY. You will notice that the russian guns have a little less mass, but substanital more velocity, and do more damage, they also have a higher rate of fire, which you didn't even mention.

Power stands for explosive power, and yes, it seems that incendary rounds carry a bit of explosive power with them. But that doesn't mean, like you wishfully read into it, that rounds with "Power=0" dont do any damage.

Oh Lord, some people really should make the time warp out of their cold war bias against russians.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 04:09 PM
IJG54_Nowi wrote:
-
- Celofire, basing your insane bias accusitions on
- data you didn't even interpret proberly does nothing
- for your credibility.
-

Your inability to type my nickname correctly also does bad for your creditability.

However, this is not a judgement of my creditability. You are not in any position to do such, and if you do, you're outright stupid. If you think that I am completely off-track in this issue, then go and watch the da*n track I posted a link to.

Then, take your favourite BF-109 F2/F4/G2/G6 and DO THE SAME. Post a track in whick you single handedly down 6-8 SB-103 bombers. After you have done that, and posted the track, we'll discuss more about this issue and my creditability.

-
- The german maschine guns rely on kinetic energy,
- which is a result of MASS and VELOCITY. You will
- notice that the russian guns have a little less
- mass, but substanital more velocity, and do more
- damage, they also have a higher rate of fire, which
- you didn't even mention.
-

The university physics are enough of an education. You don't need to repeat it, as I already know this. However, we will face another dilemma here: if the german MGs rely (as you say) solely on kinetic energy of the projectile, the apparent damage (as seen in the game) is very much less to that of the russian weaponry.

Let's take an example here, shall we ? If you have fuel leaking from a container, and you shoot at it with a rifle loaded with normal AP bullets, then what is the chance of the tank exploding ? We must remember here, that on an impact situation, majority of the kinetic energy is transformed into heat, that is, raise in temperature. A quick, sudden raise of temperature is in many cases enough to burst a flammable liquid (such as fuel) into burning. The elements are there: enough oxygen, enough burning material, and a high enough temperature (only for a short while, though. After the explosive start of the fire, it becomes self-upholding)

Can you do this in Forgotten Battles with german MGs ? Can you start an engine fire on a bomber by shooting a fuel leak with MGs ? Again, if you can, post a track showing you do it. If not for anything else, at least it shows me how to do it.

-
- Power stands for explosive power, and yes, it seems
- that incendary rounds carry a bit of explosive power
- with them. But that doesn't mean, like you wishfully
- read into it, that rounds with "Power=0" dont do any
- damage.
-

I stand corrected on the issue of 'power'.

-
- Oh Lord, some people really should make the time
- warp out of their cold war bias against russians.
-

If you want to throw in personal comments, then come over and say it to me face to face. Unless you have the guts to do that, I suggest you to keep your mouth shut or stay on topic. I have, earlier, said that Forgotten Battles is an easier game to play for the russian side. Can you prove otherwise ?

Meanwhile, stay on topic, people. This forum is not meant for flaming of other people. However, as a side note, the most ineffective way to prove your intelligence is by barking at others. It just shows that you think that the only way to prove your worth is to lessen other's value. This, gentlemen, is stupidity at it's most beautiful form.

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:24 PM
Celorfie wrote:

- Your inability to type my nickname correctly also
- does bad for your creditability.

I couldn't actually care less how to spell the nickname of someone who is on a mission to proof that "Oleg made this sim so that russians will win".

- However, this is not a judgement of my
- creditability. You are not in any position to do
- such, and if you do, you're outright stupid. If you
- think that I am completely off-track in this issue,
- then go and watch the da*n track I posted a link to.

Coming here and declaring that german MGs do no damage, and ignoring the weigh/MV relation sure does a lot to hurt your credibility...if you are going to bring data, at least make sure you understand what it says before posting it.


- Then, take your favourite BF-109 F2/F4/G2/G6 and DO
- THE SAME. Post a track in whick you single handedly
- down 6-8 SB-103 bombers. After you have done that,
- and posted the track, we'll discuss more about this
- issue and my creditability.

I got a better suggestion. I have been looking, but did find neither ROF nor Ammo Count for the russian MGs. I haev a hinch that they carry more rounds than german MGs, and I KNOW that their ROF is higher. So stop comparing apples with oranges.


- The university physics are enough of an education.
- You don't need to repeat it, as I already know this.
- However, we will face another dilemma here: if the
- german MGs rely (as you say) solely on kinetic
- energy of the projectile, the apparent damage (as
- seen in the game) is very much less to that of the
- russian weaponry.

The "less" damage they do, or what you percive to be the case is due to a lower muzzle velocity...

- Let's take an example here, shall we ? If you have
- fuel leaking from a container, and you shoot at it
- with a rifle loaded with normal AP bullets, then
- what is the chance of the tank exploding ? We must
- remember here, that on an impact situation, majority
- of the kinetic energy is transformed into heat, that
- is, raise in temperature. A quick, sudden raise of
- temperature is in many cases enough to burst a
- flammable liquid (such as fuel) into burning. The
- elements are there: enough oxygen, enough burning
- material, and a high enough temperature (only for a
- short while, though. After the explosive start of
- the fire, it becomes self-upholding)
-
- Can you do this in Forgotten Battles with german MGs
- ? Can you start an engine fire on a bomber by
- shooting a fuel leak with MGs ? Again, if you can,
- post a track showing you do it. If not for anything
- else, at least it shows me how to do it.

I use that trick to kill MiG-3's all the time with the non-explosive MG151/15 round from the F-2. Shoot them a fuel leak and then set them ablaze. You need, however, an incendary round for that, as is the case with the russian MGs. I doupt that your "sudden raise of temperature" from a normal 7,62mm bullet would be enough to ignite fuel. Very rarely has a fuel/air mixture in an aircraft tank the right composition to go instantly boom.

- I stand corrected on the issue of 'power'.

- If you want to throw in personal comments, then come
- over and say it to me face to face. Unless you have
- the guts to do that, I suggest you to keep your
- mouth shut or stay on topic.

YOU yourself wouldn't have the guts to wander to Russia and tell Oleg and his hardworking team "You guys programm unrealistic russian bias into your sim". Why should I bother?

-I have, earlier, said
- that Forgotten Battles is an easier game to play for
- the russian side. Can you prove otherwise ?

It's easier for russian players because the russian planes require less tactics, that's the way they were built. the AI also has an easier time flying them.

That's HISTORICAL. If you want to complain about russian planes being historically easier to use, then you'll really need a time maschine 'cuz Stalin is dead already.

- Meanwhile, stay on topic, people. This forum is not
- meant for flaming of other people. However, as a
- side note, the most ineffective way to prove your
- intelligence is by barking at others. It just shows
- that you think that the only way to prove your worth
- is to lessen other's value. This, gentlemen, is
- stupidity at it's most beautiful form.
-
--Celorfie

Wow, a moral lecture from someone who sees himself the defender of the free world against the evil russian bias (TM) in FB....

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 06:47 PM
Celorfie wrote:

- The day Oleg will come back from wherever he is and
- will admit that there are certain aspects in the
- game which need to be fixed.

He's already done that.

- If you do not believe me, watch this track, in which
- I, alone, take down a total of 8 SB-103 bomber
- planes in a single Yak-1. Also note, that first 6
- bombers are taken down with pure MG fire from 7.62
- ShKAS.
- You can even take down a total of 12 bombers in a
- single Yak-1.
-
- If you tell me that this is the way it is supposed
- to be, then I suggest you should do some research
- first.

My research says that Yak-1 pilots never attacked their own bombers. Besides, the SB was not known for having very much durability. They were pretty much hacked to pieces by the Luftwaffe in the opening stages of the war.

- This is an example of a clear bug/bias/evil
- communism, whatever you want to name it.

Clear example? Not in the least.

- However, it is just one. There are more, like the
- shifted/unshifted view differences in allied/VVS and
- LW planes

If you're talking about the "shift to the right" gunsight view in german aircraft, the decision to model it as such is because the gunsight is positioned off-center. Whether the pilot actually "shifted over" IRL I don't know, but I'd certainly not call this an issue of "bias."

So, what other stalinist/communist/collectivist/october revolutionist/socialist biases are programmed into FB? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I/JG54^Lukas
He 162A-2 Cockpit Modeler


Message Edited on 07/06/0312:48PM by JG54_Lukas

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 07:15 PM
Did you know this:

The Shift+F1 of the jerrie crates may to the uninitiated seem a bit unfair.

What happens when you press it is that the pilot moves his head a bit forward (and to the side ?)

This gives you a *seemingly* narrower field of view when you look forward - but (and this is the point) at the same time it gives you a *seemingly* WIDER FOV when looking back.

I use Shift+F1 all the time even though I mostly fly russian crates. Too often I find myself in the defensive - and Shift+F1 allows me to see more of the action behind me.

For the majority of possible encounters between LW and VVS type planes, the LW plane will do well in adopting historical tactics (something AI is not good at - and would be very hard to program). These tactics involve getting altitude and speed advantage and then taking runs on their opponent, instead of trying to have a knife-fight in a phone-booth. This is often the only prudent method for LW fighters to go about it - juuuust like it was in Real Life.

For the hit'nrun attack the Shift+F1 view is perfect because it will easily let you check your rear once you've made your pass - and awareness of rear hemisphere is essential when spiral climbing or extending away after the attack.

SO arguing that the Shift+F1 is a 'russian-bias' thing is wrong. In my opinion it actually facilitates JUST the kind of tactics you need to adopt to be succesful in a jerrie crate (and that guys like Hartmann made their trademark)

Other than that Celorfie - take a break man - you wanna fight ? Go to your local pub - get too much to drink - and you'll find it there I am sure. Sure someone is going to buy a ticket to Finland just to tell you something to your face.... over a flightsim.... tsss...... get real man

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:41 AM
ok , original post was a valid question...alsmost anything else after that is pure trash

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 08:29 AM
Yes totally off-topic, but it´s a sensetive qustion.
If one wants to fly for the Luftwaffe, you get the feeling that the Russian is way superior.
Of corse the VVS or rather the entire Russian Army won over the Third Reich, but in this game one should be able to do something about it.
And like everything else (This is what i have heard) the Germans went for quality rather than quantity, but i get the feeling that Russian fighters are Superior in many ways.
BTW i am about to fly my 10th mission with the same briefing.......well the text changes a bit, but the goal is the same.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 10:53 AM
OK, so now i have completed the 13th mission with the same objective: "Target for today is Lavensaari airfield, inflict as much damage as possible".
This is my 73th mission and i dont want to quit my career because all of the work behind it!
Please Oleg & co!, is this the way it should be?, is it a bug, does anyone have the same problem?
Ok flying is fun but so is change!
It feels like im flying the same mission over and over again, but the mission counter is ticking on, so it isn´t the same!

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 12:36 PM
about the mg issue vs SB,the only problem i see is that germans mg didn't fire incendiary bullets,the question is : why ?

celorfie,try to shoot down the SBs with your 20mm yak cannon,it's less effective than mgs...so it's a question of "incendiary" or not...

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:11 PM
PB0_Roll wrote:
-
- celorfie,try to shoot down the SBs with your 20mm
- yak cannon,it's less effective than mgs...so it's a
- question of "incendiary" or not...
-

This is done in the track. Three 'cycles' of cannon rounds is enough to lit the engine afire. Of course, this can be accomplished with the german cannon as well.

History states that MG 17 did not have incendiary rounds, so we can't expect to see them in-game either. However, when you compare the damage inflicted by the MGs alone, the weigh goes for the VVS side. The under 20 mm autocannons on german aircraft are pea shooters. This issue will be fixed in the patch, or so I believe.

As far as I know, Germany did have one of the most succesfull airforce during the war. If the russian planes, as stated, are so much easier to fly, more durable and have more firepower, then all I can say is that the pilots themselves s*cked flying them. History is in balance, whether you want it, or not.

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:34 PM
IJG54_Nowi wrote:
-
- I couldn't actually care less how to spell the
- nickname of someone who is on a mission to proof
- that "Oleg made this sim so that russians will win".
-

Oh, but you should. It is not of interest to the matter what we are debating upon. However, you should show at least so much respect to the counterpart that you spell his name correctly. It is not a big issue to spell-check your posts.

Oleg himself has stated that offline players are his main interest. I also happen to know, that the game itself is not very expensive in Russia. This gives a suggestion that there just might be many offline players there as well.

We'll wait and see what issues the patch fixes.

-
- Coming here and declaring that german MGs do no
- damage, and ignoring the weigh/MV relation sure does
- a lot to hurt your credibility...if you are going to
- bring data, at least make sure you understand what
- it says before posting it.
-

I have already said that I stand corrected in the power issue. I do not think there's more to say to that matter.

I am still waiting for the track I requested. Show me, in that track that the german MGs actually do damage to those bombers. More than just a small fuel leak.

-
- I got a better suggestion. I have been looking, but
- did find neither ROF nor Ammo Count for the russian
- MGs. I haev a hinch that they carry more rounds than
- german MGs, and I KNOW that their ROF is higher. So
- stop comparing apples with oranges.
-

We are talking about machine guns here. They are not so very different from their internal mechanism. I would believe, that should german engineers have found the russian ones to be utterly superior, they would've copied them without hesitation.

-
- I use that trick to kill MiG-3's all the time with
- the non-explosive MG151/15 round from the F-2.
- Shoot them a fuel leak and then set them ablaze. You
- need, however, an incendary round for that, as is
- the case with the russian MGs. I doupt that your
- "sudden raise of temperature" from a normal 7,62mm
- bullet would be enough to ignite fuel. Very rarely
- has a fuel/air mixture in an aircraft tank the right
- composition to go instantly boom.
-

The MiG-3's DM is correct. When you shoot it, it actually takes damage. Repeat this with Yak-1, LaGG-3 or I-16.

-
- YOU yourself wouldn't have the guts to wander to
- Russia and tell Oleg and his hardworking team "You
- guys programm unrealistic russian bias into your
- sim". Why should I bother?
-

Incorrect. I have been in Russia and have talked about this issue with both russian pilots and game developers. Suprisingly many agree that there is a bias in the game.

-
- That's HISTORICAL. If you want to complain about
- russian planes being historically easier to use,
- then you'll really need a time maschine 'cuz Stalin
- is dead already.
-

It is 'machine'.. Stalin didn't have much to do with the aircraft engineering, by the way.. However, if it is a historical fact that SU's planes were so superior, why did they have so many air losses ? This is, again, historical, like you say.

-
- Wow, a moral lecture from someone who sees himself
- the defender of the free world against the evil
- russian bias (TM) in FB....
-

I am not this 'defender of free world'. I am, however, 'defender of free WORD'. Your posts don't bring on much constructive issues. Basically, you seem to have an obsession to beat me down. How about trying to write a post without so much emotional load ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

You, in addition, have no clue about my moral or ethics. Pretending to know of such things based on a few writings to this forum is a childish belief. I have already requested you to drop personal comments from your posts. You have no right to attack me in person. If you continue to do so, I must remind you of the guidelines of this forum. There is also stated that personal insults are not tolerated. I try to avoid them, but am always ready to defend myself and my opinions if necessary.

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:41 PM
I must remind you that we are flying with Ideal planes here.

In reality Yaks losed wings in high speeds and had all sorts of manufacturing defects. Generally you could say that often russian birds in air werent as good as we see em in FB .. Actually you cannot compare at the moment because FB flight models are way off in all directions, lets check again after patch.

But I agree about the MG:s as they are now, they can be used only to PK pilots and the cannon does the rest.

My opinion only...

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:47 PM
JG54_Lukas wrote:
-
- My research says that Yak-1 pilots never attacked
- their own bombers. Besides, the SB was not known for
- having very much durability. They were pretty much
- hacked to pieces by the Luftwaffe in the opening
- stages of the war.
-

I have taken the SB-103 as the target plane due to it's lack in armoring and durability. The more durable a plane is, the more factors come into play. This was a test track, it was not meant to reflect a historically correct situation.

-
- If you're talking about the "shift to the right"
- gunsight view in german aircraft, the decision to
- model it as such is because the gunsight is
- positioned off-center. Whether the pilot actually
- "shifted over" IRL I don't know, but I'd certainly
- not call this an issue of "bias."
-

Well, it feels strange to me that you must use the "shift to the right" in order to be able to aim with the crosshair in german planes. However, if this is supposed to be this way, then so be it then. I have mistaken /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

-
- So, what other
- stalinist/communist/collectivist/october
- revolutionist/socialist biases are programmed into
- FB?
-

The uber-wood used in the Yak-series planes ? The flight models of certain VVS planes ? Those nifty thumb-sized tracers of VVS MGs ?

Bias means that the game is easier for one side. Do you disagree that it is easier to shoot and do corrections to weapons trajectory on the VVS MGs ? What if they also would have the same, nearly invisible red tracer that germans have ? Of course, it's color can be green if you want to, but it certainly shouldn't be so very large as it is.

Also, the smoke trail for the german MG bullets looks strange to me. I have never heard of a bullet that leaves such a trace. In addition, when you fire the cannon, the spiralling trail is even more weird. If this trail is left by the bullet, I can not understand the technology of the weapon to have the bullet leave this kind of trail. I have never seen such a trail, and seriously doubt it's realism. If you know otherwise, please post a link to a relevant article.

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:53 PM
LOL


You people are funny!

...or sad, maybe.

Go outside and get some exercise and fresh air!

There's a wonderful world out there.

Come back to the game later and all should feel better.

And F19_Lejon, you are right, I bombed those 'derned' islands maybe ten, fifteen times! It seemed that I was stuck in a time loop or something. I decided to stop THAT campaign for a bit and play the Lvov campaign. It seemed less repetitive for a while. Now I'm stuck in a Kerch repetition that hopefully won't last too long. Enjoy your game F19_Lejon, enjoy.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hawk



Message Edited on 07/07/0301:55PM by Hawk-4

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:05 PM
"then all I can say is that the pilots themselves s*cked flying them. "

it's very possible,don't you think so ?

take with you 3 rugged online players flying german planes,fight 4 players having 20 hours on FB (and none on other sim) flying russian planes,you'll see who wins /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



a few days ago may squad was invited by JG5 flying A9s,vs our 4 La7s.

in my team there were 2 very experimented pilots,and 2 a little less experimented.

the fight was VERY tough (30mins or so),our "ace" got 3 of them,while we lost one and i got 1.

when we flew against them previous times,we always (or maybe some of my team won once,not sure) lost,even with planes that "on the paper" were at the advantage of VVS...

and flying a sim is much easier than flying a real plane...experience makes MUCH !


all that said,i don't deny that there is probably a problem with luftwaffe MGs efficiency,and I16 DM.

but please stop with this insulting "bias" theory,your arguments will be listened with more patience and interest then...

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:21 PM
Thank god there is someone who has been where i am, now i know im not alone!

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 09:39 PM
PB0_Roll wrote:
-
- and flying a sim is much easier than flying a real
- plane...experience makes MUCH !
-

True. Forgotten Battles is not a simulation of aircraft behaviour. This is impossible, mostly due to the sheer difficulty to model Bernouli's equations on computers. Modelling such an equation when there's turbulence present is next to impossible.

But, it does it's current job well, I agree. We must remember that you are talking about game experience here. I doubt there are many experienced WW2 era pilots who would have the opportunity to test fly Forgotten Battles. Based on this, it is impossible to know whether it is exactly correct, or not. We must use history, reference material and research work. Always, in these cases, mistakes are made.

-
- but please stop with this insulting "bias"
- theory,your arguments will be listened with more
- patience and interest then...
-

Well, there are certain individuals on this forum who have stated it very clearly that my arguments won't have any weight on their personal scales, whether I presented them with 'bias' or without. They, apparently, have decided that they know best, and everyone else is in some way incorrect or mistaken. This behaviour resembles Oleg's famous quote "Me right, you wrong."

However, I am always ready to discuss things in a constructive and positive way. I have patience to bring my opinions out in a peaceful manner. Regardless of this, it is not logical to use rational discussion to speak a monologue. If I present my opinions on a neutral tone, stating what I think and how I feel, I do hope that they are answered in such a manner as well.

I must admit, though that my way of partaking this conversation was not one of the best. However, had I not brought the cat on the table, this issue might have never came up. It is actually good that it did. Now we can resolve it, again, in a constructive way http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

-Celorfie

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 10:55 PM
Celorfie,

Relax, dude ...

Say, if you need a girl, let me know. I'll help you find one. I know for a fact that women help you worry about a whole new set of problems.

Take a deep breath.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Hawk



Message Edited on 07/07/0309:56PM by Hawk-4

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 11:40 PM
now that the "sentimental thing" is gone,one question remains,why didn't german equip their planes with incendiary bullets,and should a "normal" bullet have incendiary properties on SB DM (it has on migs)... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 12:32 AM
"Also, the smoke trail for the german MG bullets looks strange to me. I have never heard of a bullet that leaves such a trace. In addition, when you fire the cannon, the spiralling trail is even more weird. If this trail is left by the bullet, I can not understand the technology of the weapon to have the bullet leave this kind of trail. I have never seen such a trail, and seriously doubt it's realism. If you know otherwise, please post a link to a relevant article."

Go find some guncam footage. The spiraling is an effect of the rifling in the barrel. The link to the Schiess-Training Movie I used to have is down, but I have seen the footage. It's real, as is the smoke.

You are really quick to dismiss stuff without even taking a look at real WW2 Footage it seems.

You are comparing the power of a full maschine gun loadout of russian and german planes, yet unwilling to research their ROF and Ammo Loadout.

http://www.petrov-petrov.si/~triglav/PEAmmo_FB.htm

Someone did that work for you, actually.

You might notice that your Yak-1 has 750 bullets for MG, while every 109 after the E series only has 500. So your "full ammo loadout" is apples and oranges.

Time to get yourself some more facts before you run around "FB is made for russian players".

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 03:13 AM
The IL-2/FB -series is made for the russian players. This is clearly visible in the certain 'aspects' of the game.

True, just take a look on tracks coming in retail game, or on the victorious la7 over the fw 190D-9 when your start the game (shocking)... WWII was not a shooting gallery for russians. I hope that the Ta-152s will have some respect, even P51 pilots were scared to confront them.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 04:19 AM
LOL!


Honey, did you miss your nap?



Hawk

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 10:47 AM
Wow, now i have completed my 17th mission with the same briefing.....but hear this, they have inserted bombers now.........now who said that this game wasn´t full of surprises.......feels like a completely new mission now............NOT!

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 02:38 PM
IJG54_Nowi wrote:
-
- Go find some guncam footage. The spiraling is an
- effect of the rifling in the barrel. The link to the
- Schiess-Training Movie I used to have is down, but I
- have seen the footage. It's real, as is the smoke.
-

The rifling inside the barrel causes the bullet to roll around it's yaw axis. This leads to two issues, mainly: the bullet's flight trajectory becomes more smoother, and tends to pull to the right or left, depending on the direction of the rifling.

It alone does not cause a spiralling trail. What I am saying here, is that no matter how steep the rifling is, it doesn't cause the bullet to fly in a spiral route. Flying a spiral would require the bullet to have air folds or other flight path correction fins.

The smoke trail can spiral due to wind/turbulence/bullet rotation, but I believe that the bullet itself flies straight.

In conclusion, the bullet flies straight, but the trail might spiral. In Forgotten Battles, it just looks like the bullet itself was spiralling.

-
- You are really quick to dismiss stuff without even
- taking a look at real WW2 Footage it seems.
-

I am, because I have been in the airforce myself. I have witnessed with my own eyes what type of damage a 20mm autocannon round causes into an aluminium plate. The hole is considerably large. This, and the plain reasoning that an airframe with a hole half as big as a man might not be very airborne, make me doubtfull towards FB.

If a 20mm round causes a large hole into an aluminium plate, how big of a hole do you think it would cause into a wooden plate ? Yak-1, as far as I have heard, is made mainly of wood.

-
- You are comparing the power of a full maschine gun
- loadout of russian and german planes, yet unwilling
- to research their ROF and Ammo Loadout.
-

If a 1.5-second burst from the VVS machine gun is enough to lit an engine fire, the ammo loadout of the weapon isn't relevant. ROF is relevant, but it is still far from 'apples and oranges'...

-
- Someone did that work for you, actually.
-

Is this data entirely collected from Forgotten Battles or does it have any historical background ? If it has, where are the links to the source articles ?

The page does not list any technical specifications of the weapons. Neither does it provide information the design of the weapons or any data whatsoever to the actual inner workings of the weapons. This gives me an idea that the information on this page is mainly collected from different sources to function as a quick reference.

When we are talking about the performance and technical issues of weapons, this reference page is far from satisfactionary.

For an example of tech page (modern weaponry, though), go check out http://world.guns.ru/main-e.htm

-
- You might notice that your Yak-1 has 750 bullets for
- MG, while every 109 after the E series only has 500.
- So your "full ammo loadout" is apples and oranges.
-

See above. The full ammo loadout isn't relevant here, when a 1.5-second burst from the ShKAS lits an engine. The ShKAS rounds-per-minute is 1800 according to the link you posted. This would yield about 30 rounds per second. Such ROF should cause a considerable dispersion or at least more recoil than what in the game now.

-
- Time to get yourself some more facts before you run
- around "FB is made for russian players".
-

As we got started now, I would like to present you a question as well. The caliber of a ShKAS is 7.62 mm, and it is firing respective bullets. However, when you look at the tracer it leaves in the game, do you disagree that it is a bit too large ? Compare it to the trace left by a german 7.92 mm tracer bullet. The actual bullet trace on german MG is much more closer to realism.

If you have never seen a rifle-caliber tracer in real life, or fired one yourself, then watching the gunfootage doesn't do you much good. You, basically, lack first-hand experience, which is crucial in this case.

So, go fire a tracer bullet from an assault rifle, see what it looks like, and then scale it to a bullet fired from an aircraft MG mounted to a fast-moving airplane, respectively.

-Celorfie

P.S. Hawk-4, I have a girlfriend, and a life as well. Flying simulators is just a hobby alongside others. So, regretfully I must decline your offer :P

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 06:50 PM
Stuka_87 wrote:
--
- True, just take a look on tracks coming in retail
- game, or on the victorious la7 over the fw 190D-9
- when your start the game (shocking)... WWII was not
- a shooting gallery for russians. I hope that the
- Ta-152s will have some respect, even P51 pilots were
- scared to confront them.
-
-------------------------------------------------------

LOL

Don't like that "victorious la7 over the fw 190D-9" picture ?

But what did you expect ?
A Goering photo ?

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 10:07 PM
Celofire, the bullet rotates, and the smoke obviously for some odd reason extends from the side of the bullet...so you get a spiral streak.

Comparing modern 20mm ammunition with WW2 20mm Ammo won't do us much good either. The quality and amount of explosive is different, and so is the fuse. While a modern shell might detonate perfectly correct on a 20mm aluminium plate, it might detonate late when going trough combarable weaker wooden structure, especially if the fuse is a rather primitive WW2 design.

The technical data page, as far as I can tell, has been collected from the game. It shows that the ROF and Ammo Count of russian MGs is higher, that means a short burst might do more damage, and they can do more short bursts...AND every bullet has more kinetic energy than the german small calibre ammo.

Larger ROF does not necessarily mean more dispersion.

All in all, lots of reasons why russian MGs are more effective.

No one knows what they put in their tracers back then, it certainly was different from modern tracers. So I can not say if the glowing of a russian tracer is to bright or to large...can you for sure? I know that Oleg used original russian manufacturer documents for allmost all ammo modeling.

But the point about tracers seems moot anyway...german smoke tracers are just as good for correcting fire as russian plasma lances.

So no, I still fail to see the amazing russian bias that you think is in the game.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 10:58 PM
- Go find some guncam footage. The spiraling is an
- effect of the rifling in the barrel. The link to the
- Schiess-Training Movie I used to have is down, but I
- have seen the footage. It's real, as is the smoke.

In copys of old guncam footage tracers also seem to wiggle, and just because an aircraft develops contrails under certain meteorological conditions, this isn´t a constant situation. At 30?C you don´t see your own exhalation, at -40?C this is another story.....
Those videoclips you´ve seen and use for your reference neither display altitude, nor meteorological- or flight conditions, in other words they are hardly suited for a conclusion regarding this topic, because they do not display enough information on the outside factors during which rounds have been fired.
Neither by logic, nor by own experience i can affirm to the smokin´rounds we have ingame, and actually we had a long discussion about it before FB hit the shelves. Oleg insisted that a 7.62mm x 39mm tracer bullet would fire up like a rocket from a table if you incenerated it, and my conviction is that the projectile "smoke" could be actually vapor, dependend on altitude, air density, temperature and such. During my military career i operated various small arms and a 20mm cannon system, none of the weapons i´ve personally fired or watched in action displayed smoke along the trajectory. Such smoke development would be highly undesirable, simply because it makes observation and according correction of fire unnecessary difficult, while giving an excellent indication where the shooter is located. Same criticism goes for the muzzle flashes, which outdo even boombastic Hollywood efforts. And it´s not just aircraft guns displaying smoke along the trajectory in FB, Flak guns do suffer from the same illness.

============================
When it comes to testing new aircraft or determining maximum performance, pilots like to talk about "pushing the envelope." They're talking about a two dimensional model: the bottom is zero altitude, the ground; the left is zero speed; the top is max altitude; and the right, maximum velocity, of course. So, the pilots are pushing that upper-right-hand corner of the envelope. What everybody tries not to dwell on is that that's where the postage gets canceled, too.

XyZspineZyX
07-09-2003, 12:02 AM
"You might notice that your Yak-1 has 750 bullets for MG, while every 109 after the E series only has 500. So your "full ammo loadout" is apples and oranges."

True, but that means 1,000 rounds for the 109 and 750 for the Yak-1 which had only one MG. I've done the "test" and the single 7.62 MG on the Yak-1 is much more potent than its 20mm cannon.

My results:
Yak-1 (7.62 MG fire only, all 750 rounds fired)
6 kills (including a whole formation of 4 in a single slow sliding pass)

Yak-1 (20mm fire only, full clip)
1 kill (another left for dead that never crashed, and a third with a fuel leak.

Bf109F-2 (7.92 MG only, all 1,000 rounds fired)
1 fuel leak (camped at 40 meters from the starboard engine and unloaded the whole clip.

Bf109F-2 (20mm fire only... not valid, only about 1/4 clip used)
2 kills (estimate that I could have gotten 5-7 if I could have found the rest of them... forgot to turn on the map icons)

XyZspineZyX
07-09-2003, 01:52 PM
In addition to this, the object viewer states that Yak-1 (standard, not B-model) is supposed to have one 7.62 mm MG. However, when firing, two muzzle flashes are displayed, and two streams of bullets fired.

Either the object viewer is incorrect, or someone slipped and extra MG for the Yak-1.. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

-Celorfie