PDA

View Full Version : Why???



mynameisroland
02-28-2005, 10:58 AM

chaikanut
02-28-2005, 01:53 PM
I didnt vote since I dont know if it is ''historically accurate''. For me it sometimes work and sometimes doesnt; shooting from the dead 6' doesnt do any serious damage, shooting from the sides, up or down can set fuel tanks on fire, kill engines and rip off wings just as well as the other cannons. Up to now, noone has convinced me that it is so weak as to need a major overhaul (though it is weaker from the other two). If you compare it with the other two cannon in terms of muzzle velocity and belt loadout, it has the weakest AP components.

Chuck_Older
02-28-2005, 02:03 PM
The answers are kinda loaded http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I don't know if it's accurate or not, or if it is not, how inaccurate it is.

Many weapons are wrong in the sim. Accuracy is a hard thing to acheive. Absolute accuracy is impossible

Take the .50 cal for instance. I think it's pretty accurately modelled- but only in terms of ultimate destructive power. I think it's about proper the way it can get you kills- but I think that while the result is about right, the manner in which it acheives that result is a bit wrong.

Weapon effectiveness has been an issue since Il-2. Some of the Soviet cannons...now that's a fascinating subject. I can saw off wings with the weaponry that a P-40B has, on any plane. Some of those Soviet weapons, though, they seem very effective indeed on some planes...and on others, the same weapon is not only hard to get hits with, but not as powerful, in my opinion

SpartanHoplite
02-28-2005, 02:07 PM
You forgot a third option - correct or incorrect, the whole Mg151 issue doesn't matter enough to me to continue discussing/pleading/begging/negotiating ad nauseum on the subject.

SH

VW-IceFire
02-28-2005, 02:11 PM
Its simple, the gun is not accurate or is accurate for a very specific purpose and generally hurts the weapon for overall effectiveness.

LEXX_Luthor
02-28-2005, 05:27 PM
Ice, what specific purpose would that be?

Monson74
03-01-2005, 03:11 AM
Can't say because I've never fired a real one but if I aim carefully I can kill a lot with it.

Badsight.
03-01-2005, 03:24 AM
it shouldnt ever have been moddeled without its MG round

i dont care if the Sturmovik killing belt load is now in the nose , if it was changed id take em out even faster

it should be APIT-HE-HE-MG-MG all the time

why ?

because thats also a historical load-out & would change this noticeably weak 20mm back to what it should be

Badsight.
03-01-2005, 03:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Monson74:
if I aim carefully I can kill a lot with it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>& you have too

this gun has to put more rounds into enemy A/C than it should be needing too

just because we have been using it the way it is since FB v1.0 doesnt make it accurate

all hits every single FB player has ever made with this weapon should have done more damadge every single time , its just not fair to hobble the single most important weapon the German A/C have

LeadSpitter_
03-01-2005, 03:37 AM
IBTL, needs to be fixed as well as many other weapon types.

mynameisroland
03-01-2005, 04:31 AM
I always choose the Mg151 loadout over 108, why? because I want a challenge when i fire at an enemy i want to see my rounds hit so i can gauge my accuracy and also to give the other guy a slight chance I could fly the A9 with two 108's in wings and destroy anything in a .5 second blast.

The Mg151 is not correct its vastly weaker than its two contemporaries and this is not correct. In WW2 it was comparable to the destructive power of the Hispano had a faster ROF and fired more destructive high explosive rounds. I dont want an uber cannon I want the gun to be closer to reality than it is. How much of an ask is that?

Why have the Lw pilots had to put up with this for years? It is the most common cannon in the game its importance is huge I dont want a mini Mk108 I just want a cannon that gives me comparable results when compared with what the other guys got - especially as thats what the Lw had in WW2.

Why shoul i have to hit a wooden La5 10 times when he has to only hit me 3 - 5 times? I have played this game for years Im not talking about dead six im talking about deflection shots, head ons , even wing hits.

stubby
03-01-2005, 09:36 AM
i think Oleg and the Il2 series have spoiled simmers beyond rational thought. folks are just greedy and want everything under the sun and I believe Oleg is responsible for this trend. For the most part, the company has pumped out patch after patch, plane after plane, tweak after tweak to make the masses happy. the result are a bunch of spoiled kids that just keep wanting more. I take that back. Probably 1% of the folks that actually fly Il2 on regular basis are the ones that make the most noise about stuff that the big picture of the game, don't mean jack. It's a game not a $100,000 dollar DoD sim running on an array of Crays.

mynameisroland
03-01-2005, 11:55 AM
what is your point stubby? that a WW2 simulator (as it says on the box) should not strive to represent something as best it can. Which is the point here after all im not asking for a miracle.

Its ok for a gun to be moddeled inferior in relation to other weapons that seem to perfom as they should/better than they should?

Is it asking too much that the most used cannon in IL2 the Mg151 which equips virtually every Lw fighter plane from 1941 onwards to be moddeled more accurately> after all how many other things have been 'fixed'

The .50 cal convergence issue was sorted or at least looked at. Oleg has acknowledged the Mg151 issue and hinted that this problem would not arise in BoB. Well thats not much use for Lw fliers now who have bought every release of the IL2 series and have seen this issue be bypassed by each successive patch while other not as important flaws are remedied.

mynameisroland
03-01-2005, 11:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SpartanHoplite:
You forgot a third option - correct or incorrect, the whole Mg151 issue doesn't matter enough to me to continue discussing/pleading/begging/negotiating ad nauseum on the subject.

SH <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Spartan why waste your time and post in that case?

mynameisroland
03-01-2005, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chaikanut:
I didnt vote since I dont know if it is ''historically accurate''. For me it sometimes work and sometimes doesnt; shooting from the dead 6' doesnt do any serious damage, shooting from the sides, up or down can set fuel tanks on fire, kill engines and rip off wings just as well as the other cannons. Up to now, noone has convinced me that it is so weak as to need a major overhaul (though it is weaker from the other two). If you compare it with the other two cannon in terms of muzzle velocity and belt loadout, it has the weakest AP components. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


What you have said is partly true "it sometimes works ans sometimes doesnt"

Correct - however the Hispanno and Shvak have much more consistent results I have never ever had to hit an enemy AC with 10 shells from either of those two guns to see them still flying and manuvering. Why should the MG151 only work a percentage of the time?

It is related to ammo loadout which has been emailed to Oleg but rather than change this it has been reported that this will be customizable for BoB.

So the problem has been admitted and there is no solution offered for this game.... great

Are you red pilots happy being chased around by Lw planes always firing Mk108's?

stubby
03-02-2005, 06:13 AM
mynameisroland,

Don't get me wrong - I want the best possible sim I can get but folks need to keep it real. 1C isn't some huge shop like Bioware, Konami or Blizzard yet folks expect them to have the ability to resolve every possible subjective descrepancy in the game. Then there's the reality that with their limited staff and resources, they have deadlines with the next game - BoB which means IL2 FB/PF gets bumped down. What do folks really expect them to be able to accomplish under these circumstances? They have to prioritize and most of the stuff I hear folks ***** about doesn't pass the litmus test of a crucial fix and add-on. All folks need do when they get their panties in a bunch about some preceived flaw in the game is go play CFS3, EAW or WWII fighters. Then maybe they'll realize how good we truly do have it in Il2.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
what is your point stubby? that a WW2 simulator (as it says on the box) should not strive to represent something as best it can. Which is the point here after all im not asking for a miracle.

Its ok for a gun to be moddeled inferior in relation to other weapons that seem to perfom as they should/better than they should?

Is it asking too much that the most used cannon in IL2 the Mg151 which equips virtually every Lw fighter plane from 1941 onwards to be moddeled more accurately> after all how many other things have been 'fixed'

The .50 cal convergence issue was sorted or at least looked at. Oleg has acknowledged the Mg151 issue and hinted that this problem would not arise in BoB. Well thats not much use for Lw fliers now who have bought every release of the IL2 series and have seen this issue be bypassed by each successive patch while other not as important flaws are remedied. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

JG54_Arnie
03-02-2005, 06:18 AM
I think its better to let the topic rest untill the next patch. The problem now making the non-gunpod 151/20's less effective is already brought to Oleg's attention, so lets just wait and see what Oleg does with that info.

This poll isnt really usefull at the moment.

mynameisroland
03-02-2005, 10:05 AM
non gun pod Mg151's less effective? I dont understand you there.

Im interested to see the results of this poll thats why i put it on. A good measurement of the Mg151's comparitive weaknes is when you compare it to German MgFF 20mm in outer wings of Fw A4 and A5 and also in 109E this gun in game is much more destructive than Mg151. If this was so in WW2 why did the Lw design the Mg151?

knightflyte
03-02-2005, 10:09 AM
Understanding the frustration of the modeled ammo effectiveness, I think we need to put it into perspective.

It's a $40.00 computer game. (Well $150.00 if you have the whole IL2 setup and paid full price) Does the issue effect the ability to have fun? In my experience it doesn't.

Admittedly, I'm not a stickler for 100% accuracy because it could be and, I'd never really know. Maybe I'm lucky I don't know full accuracy verses implied created accuracy. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

We have a product that is 4 years old now. It's time to let the developers concentrate on new products. What we have WORKS very well. Yeah there are issues....but not enough to ruin someones enjoyment. At least it shouldn't impede your overall enjoyment.

Think about it tho.....a FOUR year old product that is STILL being supported by the developers. A four year old game that really isn't a box office bonanza of sales. I can think of quite a few games that have only one patch released and buh bye.

It's not perfect.....but it IS a $40.00 game. We spend more on that for the GFX cards to get the best visual performance.

Just my take on the matter. No insult or arguemement implied. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (I have to much respect for those in the forum that know a whole lot more than me... and do try to make it a better experience for me, and others)

mynameisroland
03-02-2005, 10:16 AM
Stubby I agree that some people whine unreasonably - I dont feel that this falls in to the same catagory.

As ive posted above this gun is possibly the most common gun in the game its present on every Lw fighter from 1941 onwards. Oleg has been very good to us too good to some of us, this poll is to see how people feel about this particular issue.

The dev team ammended the power/ convergence issue of the US .50 cal

Also the issue of taking of from aircraft carriers with max loadout was looked at and fixed.

These are two examples of things that have been fixed once the prob was identifed . Now the Mg151 issue has been on going for ever now yet there is no hope to an end in site other than the introduction of BoB (which presumably will not feature a 1941 cannon initially anyhow?)

I dont feel that this issue is like 'asking for the world' or being a noob or a Luftwhiner its just a case of how long must we wait for an important problem to be fixed?

JG54_Arnie
03-02-2005, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
non gun pod Mg151's less effective? I dont understand you there.

Im interested to see the results of this poll thats why i put it on. A good measurement of the Mg151's comparitive weaknes is when you compare it to German MgFF 20mm in outer wings of Fw A4 and A5 and also in 109E this gun in game is much more destructive than Mg151. If this was so in WW2 why did the Lw design the Mg151? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Check the 151/20 threads in Olegs ready room. Its a long read, but shows what has been discussed already.

Red_Russian13
03-02-2005, 06:36 PM
Mynameisroland;

My kid's middle name IS Roland.

mynameisroland
03-03-2005, 10:49 AM
Arnie ive read the whloe thread, think i also participated in it too.

I still dont recall any solution to the problem or any reason why it cant be / wont be amended. There are some very interesting posts in that thread particularly the ones with screen shots showing the Mg151 shooting a B17 and comparing it to the Hispano. Which clearly shows too large a disparity.

Hi Red Russian why did you name your kid Roland? My dad is half Austrian, think my name is a result of this.