PDA

View Full Version : Whine whiners



zugfuhrer
01-29-2004, 05:38 AM
No smoke without fire they say. There must be a substance in all the whining that the german planes are to weak etc etc.
Have you heard about an Olympic Athlet from Soviet Union named Onishenko?
He was a fencer, a man who compeats by fencing with a rapier. He had a little button on the handle of the rapier. When he hit this button he was counted for a hit.
The other fencer reported that they thought that he cheated. They where met by calls like; learn to fence and stop whining.
Onishenko was discovered when another fencer took the rapier of him and showed it to the referee.
The Soviet manager didnt know anything of course. Look at
http://www.abc.net.au/news/olympics/sports/pentathlon.htm
one of many sources.
When I fly a FW and got my wing shoot of by a few hits from a Flying fortress at the distance of 500 m I think that Onnishenko has made the AI.

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Thu January 29 2004 at 04:49 AM.]

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Thu January 29 2004 at 12:14 PM.]

zugfuhrer
01-29-2004, 05:38 AM
No smoke without fire they say. There must be a substance in all the whining that the german planes are to weak etc etc.
Have you heard about an Olympic Athlet from Soviet Union named Onishenko?
He was a fencer, a man who compeats by fencing with a rapier. He had a little button on the handle of the rapier. When he hit this button he was counted for a hit.
The other fencer reported that they thought that he cheated. They where met by calls like; learn to fence and stop whining.
Onishenko was discovered when another fencer took the rapier of him and showed it to the referee.
The Soviet manager didnt know anything of course. Look at
http://www.abc.net.au/news/olympics/sports/pentathlon.htm
one of many sources.
When I fly a FW and got my wing shoot of by a few hits from a Flying fortress at the distance of 500 m I think that Onnishenko has made the AI.

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Thu January 29 2004 at 04:49 AM.]

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Thu January 29 2004 at 12:14 PM.]

Extreme_One
01-29-2004, 05:52 AM
Just saying; "there's no smoke without fire" is a little like saying "It must be true because they say so"

S! Simon
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''
Download the RAF campaign folder here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-9.html).

Download the USAAF campaign folder here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-9.html). *NEW* Updated for FB 1.21

http://extremeone.4t.com/images/raf_sig.jpg

HansKnappstick
01-29-2004, 06:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Extreme_One:
Just saying; "there's no smoke without fire" is a little like saying "It must be true because they say so"
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. This means "there must be some reason for them saying so".

Extreme_One
01-29-2004, 06:11 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

S! Simon
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''
Download the RAF campaign folder here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-9.html).

Download the USAAF campaign folder here (http://www.netwings.org/library/Forgotten_Battles/Missions/index-9.html). *NEW* Updated for FB 1.21

http://extremeone.4t.com/images/raf_sig.jpg

SeaFireLIV
01-29-2004, 06:32 AM
Zugfuhrer just never gives up!

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/greypilots.jpg
Say cheese!

SpinSpinSugar
01-29-2004, 06:54 AM
Is this another "test data proves that my plane was better than your plane in an idealised non-combat environment" thread?

It's funny how all the German planes are undermodelled and weak. But then from reading other posts, it seems it's all the American planes that are undermodelled and weak? Or perhaps it's those MiGs that handle like pigs?

I know, lets make ALL the planes do 900mph in a climb, with turning circles less than their wingspan. Couple it with titanium armour plating and tank guns. That'll be REALLY fun.

No-one cares about my poor Hurri, I think I'm going to take my ball and go home. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

SSS

Rajvosa
01-29-2004, 07:06 AM
I really doubt that anyone of us have such knowledge as to really know which plane is uber/unter. My only issue is with the AI gunners and their amazing accuracy and tendency to cripple my plane or pilot with a few shots.

Golf GTI Edition 2.0 16v (Rest In Pieces!)

Slush69
01-29-2004, 07:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Extreme_One:
Just saying; "there's no smoke without fire" is a little like saying "It must be true because they say so"

_S! Simon_
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I couldn't agree more. Though I would probably have said "exactly" instead of "a little". But then again: I don't work in diplomacy.

cheers/slush

http://www.wilcks.dk/crap/Eurotrolls.gif

Slush69
01-29-2004, 07:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
Have you heard about an Olympic Athlet from Soviet Union named Onishenko?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. Can't say I have. Nor has Google or any of the Olympics site I visited, so feel free to enlighten me. When and where did this supposedly happen?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
When I fly a FW and got my wing shoot of by a few hits from a Flying fortress at the distance of 500 m I think that Onnishenko has made the AI.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes... there might be a connection between Onishenko, and you thinking that FB is biased against you and the LW in particular. I can't deny that.

cheers/slush


http://www.wilcks.dk/crap/Eurotrolls.gif

Friendly_flyer
01-29-2004, 08:04 AM
There is perhaps some creed to the claim that the AI gunners are too good. I think I would blame them rather than the FW-190.

Fly friendly!

Petter B√¬łckman
Norway

Stille-NachT
01-29-2004, 08:20 AM
The AI being to good I think is utter dross.
I have never been shot by the AI thinking hang on that's not right.

The AI plays the role of seasoned WW2 gunners.
Too easy would be a problem, not to hard.
A B17 is a very big target, with out good gunners it wouldn't last long against the seaguls chasing the whale now wouldn't it.

You have to think of the angle for attack and remember AI or not, you shoot at a gunner position, if you hit right, the gunner will die.

I prefer to use the energy I'd waste whining on brain power in how to judge my foe and look for the weak spots.

Abel29A
01-29-2004, 08:21 AM
All AI tailgunners must be of true masterrace stock - Or something to that effect.... They are rather to good yes :=)

Fair enough, parking yourself behind a b17 should get you riddled, flying in at 600-700kmh at an angle should not... Even flying side by side with a heinkel i get shot to hell in my hurricane, at 500m - I mean, come on...

Oh well, no use complaining, I'd better learn to shoot better, so i can bring down enemy bombers in one frontal pass.... Not quite there yet http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

--

"Wir sehen uns in Walhalla" - Ehrler Heinrich

Stille-NachT
01-29-2004, 08:25 AM
I think you should review your angles...
I have flown directly over a B17 doing a barrel roll at only 380.
A flick of paint lost but nothing serious.
To get an idea of how to aviod the swiss cheese effect is to set up your own little mission in a He, and be just the gunners.
Then you will get an idea how to stay out of a prime target position.

Slush69
01-29-2004, 08:29 AM
Have you guys installed the patch?

Sure, the AI gunners used to be deadly accurate, but that has totally changed. IMHO both AAA and plane gunners are pretty well modelled now. They'll down you if you park a slow plane in their gunsights, but with a bit of evasive manouvering you can avoid them. Of course there's going to be the off chance 1 in a million kill, but hey: There should be.

cheers/slush

http://www.wilcks.dk/crap/Eurotrolls.gif

Stille-NachT
01-29-2004, 08:47 AM
Another tactic I tend to use is never ever fly behind a B17 AT ANY ANGLE, and it's not worth flying straight on at it either remeber the pilots in the B17 are slightly above the front, the front glass area is the navigator and gunner. It's not like shooting head on at the German HE's.

Fly fast side on or if your really daring, fly from above straight down on to it with a good set of cannons blazing. A wing shot should tear it off.

Rajvosa
01-29-2004, 10:17 AM
Ahem!

How did this turn into B-17 thread? I was just saying that all gunner are deadly, and that's plain rubbish. B-17 is naturally a very tough target, but He 111? Or Stuka? I mean, c'mon, they hit you and cripple you from 500+ m.

Golf GTI Edition 2.0 16v (Rest In Pieces!)

Abel29A
01-29-2004, 11:29 AM
I agree the b17 is(and should be) a tough opponent. What I meant by attacking at an angle(i'm always being unprecise http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) is that I come in at a 90 deg angle, from the side, which leaves only the waistgunner to shoot at me, and still I get riddled.... The waist gunners of the b17 where historically speaking dead weight, as they pointed their guns into 200kmh sidewinds trying to shoot targets moving in really complicated angles as related to them... In other words, they missed http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif In FB, they dont ..

I know I know - having different AI's for different positions is probably not modelled tough http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But still - every bomber in FB has laser guided shooters, and it is a tad annoying... I mean I do manage to down them without damage once in a while, but to often they hit me 500meters out with two bullets and it's goodnight lausanne....

Anyways, it might all be down to poor skills on my part, and I admit I am not the shot yet I hope to be, so I'll mainly stick with downing fighters - they dont shoot back, unless I am unobservant :=)

And slush I am up to 1.21 patchwise - but I have used the stock to 1.21 patch on a earlier patched system... It might just be I've messed up some vital filepatching then, I dunno...

--

"Wir sehen uns in Walhalla" - Ehrler Heinrich

Future-
01-29-2004, 11:50 AM
"I agree the b17 is(and should be) a tough opponent. What I meant by attacking at an angle(i'm always being unprecise ) is that I come in at a 90 deg angle, from the side, which leaves only the waistgunner to shoot at me, and still I get riddled.... "

I fly the B-17G mostly, and I have to tell you your statement is incorrect. If you fly in on a 90 deg angle at lvl with the B-17, there's not only the waist gunner, but also the top turret and the belly turret.
I've observed this a few times, if only one enemy is approaching, the turrets also turn towards him, and fire if they can. So instead of one gun you were talking about, you are at the receiving end of up to 5 guns.

No matter from which side you attack, there always at least 2 guns that can point towards you on the B-17G. In THEORY, the worst spot to attack a B-17G is the 10 to 11 oclock angle lvl, along with the 1 - 2 oclock position lvl, as the B-17G can aim with 7 (!) guns into these directions.
However, most of the time, the most dangerous defensive guns are the 4 double .50s, located under the nose, at top turret, belly turret and rear end.

So much for now about the B-17G in FB, thanks for your attention, S! and see you out there.

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

- Future

Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1083.jpg

Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG

horseback
01-29-2004, 12:00 PM
Historically speaking, gunners in aircraft were generally ineffective, particularly in aircraft maneuvering around sharply. B-17 gunners were not nearly as effective on isolated aircraft; it was a function of the formation that maximized the risk to attacking fighters. It's just difficult to model all the factors that enter into the AI equation.

From the early days of Il-2 Sturmovik (almost three years now), the AI gunners have been ludicrously accurate against the human players. It's part of the price you pay for a playable affordable game.

The AI is simply modeled, because if they spent the time necessary to limit gunner accuracy by factor X% when turn Y is C degrees, and 3X% when Y=1.5C degrees, and scaled factor X according to Rookie, Average, Veteran, and Ace, the cost of coding would start going out of sight, and the game itself would slow down quite a bit, as the AI started sucking up more of your RAM.

If you checked carefully you might find that AI fighters have their guns harmonized at all ranges under 600m (frankly, I'm afraid to look).

It is what it is. If you can't convince Oleg that you've come up with the magic two or three lines of code that would fix the problem, you either have to live with it or quit playing offline, and limit your play to strictly live opposition.

It annoys and frustrates all of us, but all the Air Combat flight sims I've played had similar flaws. We vent occasionally, and threaten to take our dollars elsewhere. Nothing coming down the pike appears to be any better in this respect, so what can you do?

Cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

Abel29A
01-29-2004, 12:00 PM
Future: Oh, ok - I've never gotten the b17 model flyable without crashing, so i've never done that... I thought the top and belly gunners coudnt depress/elevate their guns that high.. Oh well, goes to show how little I know... That would explain it then, as 5 guns ripping me apart I can buy... Dammit - so there really is nothing for me to do but train harder then :=)

Horseback - I agree -- getting realistic gunnery would be complex. And it isnt that big a problem... I mean, FB is the closest thing to perfection, and I love every minute of flight time... Even when shot down by bombers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Besides, it makes shooting down bombers even more rewarding....

--

"Wir sehen uns in Walhalla" - Ehrler Heinrich

Future-
01-29-2004, 12:08 PM
The top and belly turret were not able to depress/elevate like that, however even if you fly perfectly lvl with the B-17, there still is some chance they might hit you, as the B-17 is realtively small for it's heavy armament. And even if you really would be out of one turret's firing arc, you are probably near the other turret's firing arc, so there are at least 3 guns pointed at you... and up to 5, depending on your position.

S!

- Future

Commanding Officer of the 530th Bomb Squad
380th Bomb Group 5th AF USAAF

http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1083.jpg

Visit us at http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron , home of the 310th FS and the 380th BG

Friendly_flyer
01-29-2004, 12:14 PM
Now, to return to the original topic:

I find FW 190s just as hard to down as any other plane, more so in fact, than the Hurricane or Me 109. The only real difference I have noted is that the FW 190 does not seem to get cripled as much as the others. It's a bit like they appear to take all I throw at them, untill they suddently fall appart. Perhaps the dammage model is a bit crude.

Fly friendly!

Petter B√¬łckman
Norway

Abel29A
01-29-2004, 12:25 PM
Yes, the fw190 doesnt have complex damage models.... It really is a shame, seeing as it is my favourite....

Hyggelig √¬• se en nordmann her forresten http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

--

"Wir sehen uns in Walhalla" - Ehrler Heinrich