why such difference in hit ability tween il2 and ah guns?

[jihad]

I was very sceptical about Il-2 when I first tried it. Now I simply love it.
Look at this pic (borrowed fromanother board).


I wish I was allowed to post screens of some of the neat stuff in the beta.

Does the demo version allow you to fly the 1943 <late model> IL-2 with the 'cassette' armament?

It's pretty neat to see all those little potato mashers fall on a target.  

[AKSWulfe]

Originally posted by DeeZCamp:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 seconds of ammo, 500 yards away and your bellybutton is on the line. Would you rather have that 109 take the brutal punishment of 3 seconds worth of .50 caliber firing time or piss it all away with long range bursts at 500 yards?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So does the above mean that In aces things are simplified down to the point where we can shoot with abandon? Does it mean that IL2 is trying to simulate Airal combat with a greater degree of realisim? I think yes on the latter.

I was compared all games versus the real air combat of the war.

So basically, all of your assumptions are well... wrong.
-SW

[Kratzer]

Distance matters, especially with rifle caliber bullets, in damage as well - the closer you are, the harder the rounds hit, so close is more destructive as well as more accurate.

Just a thought, but think a minute about how heavy a fighter is... it has a lot of mass, so if you try to make a small adjustment in the flight path, it isn't going to want to do it right away, and it seems to me it would be quite 'squirrely', even without adding in all the variables of flying through wind, different air temperatures, turbulence from the plane in front of you (which has great effects in Il-2 when they come really close, have you noticed?)... it amazes me that anyone was able to hit anything by pointing trying to point the nose of the plane at the target... especially at 500 yards... that's a long, long way with a rifle from a prone position  on a still day... seems that dispersion and luck would be the only things getting you hits at that distance.

The British went into the war thinking that the best way to shoot down a target was with a long burst from about 400 yards (the "Dowding Spread", I believe), the idea being to saturate the air with bullets.  They very quickly discovered that this didn't work at all, and that the real way to bag a target was to shove your nose up its bellybutton and fire quick bursts.  They began to harmonize their guns for much closer ranges and recommend short squirts of fire, and started getting a lot better results.

I tend to agree - I can't hit a barn at 500 yards, but at 100, how can I miss?

just a thought...

[Fishu]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
IL2 gunnery is simply bizzare, yo can be 30 meters behind sombody and miss pretty much every round.

Then there is the fact that the 109 in the beta doesnt have a working gunsight, and then well lets say the AH MG151/20 shell isnt week compared to the IL2 version.

I guess you're talking of 0.30 distance?
I believe that is 300 meters.
Within 100 meters I don't have problems with hitting.
Up to 200 meters I can hit fairly well.

I did damage 109 with IL-2's cannons from 0.78 distance few times  
I was surprised to see couple big black puffs and some smaller debris with other hits.

I could see difference with IL-2 and 109 cannons.. big difference.
IL-2 literally chops the target.
(also more effective against ground targets..)

With 109, how about trying Shift-F1?

What bugs me, is its radio system which couldn't be much more akward when talking about easy-&-fast-to-use radio.
I can't either believe spin modelling.

Wish I could get some more advanced version of IL-2 already.. like retail or beta version, not some sluggish demo.  

[Voss]

Originally posted by Toad:
Deez,

Perhaps...just perhaps... he doesn't play stand alone boxed sims? Only online?

Could that be a valid reason?

Or do you just want to pre-judge him by your standards without really understanding the whole situation?

[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

Pretty close, Toad, although DeeZ might have trouble digesting even that. Let him waste his time offline and learn new gunnery skills that will be ABSOLUTELY USELESS here. Then when he chases my Arado ALL over the map he still won't be able to hit me and I'll watch him auger in the ack AGAIN!  

Gotta love the dweebs around here...

 

[Hristo]

Just give Il-2 a fair try. Or will you rather stay ignorant ? (ears covered, eyes closed)

[Mark Luper]

I tried IL2 and why not? It's a free demo. Not like paying $40 to try something.

I found it a very pretty sim. Best boxed sim I have seen to date. Graphics are really nice and so are some of the details (Joining the group of dirty canopy dislikers here)

I have never flown a P-39, IL2, or 109 in real life and likely never will. I normally just accept what the game producer  models without much thought and if I don't care for it I fly a different plane.

I find it an interesting new view of the war from a perspective other than a western one and it's refreshing from that standpoint to me.

I may buy it when it comes out, probably will but doubt I will spend the time in it to get very good at it or used to all it's quirks (or what I find to be quirks). I have been able to change the mapping so I can use my Aces High mapping for throttle and joystick and that has eased some of the initial difficulty for me.

As far as the difficulty in hitting targets... well... I suck at gunnery anyway  .

[Voss]

Ignoring Hristo, I shall instead answer the initial question.

This game (AH) and IL2 are different because they involve two totally different development teams.  

Now move on with it!  

 

[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Voss ]

[DeeZCamp]

Its really funy how the next level of technology is here, and yet poeple stand firmly behind what they are used to, and feel that nothing is better. lol  

Hey Voss,, Toad, My point is OBVISOUSLY this...

IF it is a FREE DEMO,.... who gives a ##@# that it is going to be a boxed game in the future.  Who knows... you may even be seeing it as we see aces here. (wouldnt that be scary...)

POINT:  if its a free demo, and it is far superior in many aspects of WWII air combat to anything we have currently, Why not try it.??  

I agree with Hiristo..

TO many of you are stuck in a way.. a thought process, and the willingness to learn somthing new, or even look to the future. This is hilarious, I wonder what Ideals and willingness you poeple have when something new is introduced into the world.

Seems like the motto of most here is.. "it hasnt been done that way, wont work, isnt good,, blah.... "  

Hehe whatever.. stay in the past then. While the flight sim market improves and becomes closer to realism, Graphically, and technically.  


About this whole discussion of Flight and Airal gunnery,.... IL2 is simply, in effect recreating BY FAR a more realistic Scenerio here as to what is required to successfully employ your weapons.

I dont see how any of you can argue this.

I highly suggest that all the nay sayers, go watch the history channel or wings. You will not suprisingly see the same effect of how gunnery is achived as is in IL2.

 

[Hristo]

I had doubts about Il-2 too. And I was hesitant to even try the demo. What a mistake would that be.

If you chose to stay ignorant, I can't help you. I gave you an advice in good faith though.

[Trell]

well i will have my say in this too

Deezcamp you seem to think every one should want to try all these games out

lots of people dont have lots of spare time to wast on a large download and a demo that they will never play on a game they dont care about.  

i for one agree with voss.  i doubt i will every try the game . its a box sim
and box sims dont intrest me at all. hell most games overf all dont intrest me.

but yet you seem to think sence you have nothin else to do with you time everyone else must not eather.

btw if they ever come out with a pure online game from il2 i will love to try it out. because that would intrest me. until then i dont care.

[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Trell ]

[Cobra]

I'm surprised nobody has asked this yet, so here goes.....

Deez,
What exactly do you now about realism and aerial combat?

Now before you go off and say the old "well what do you know about it"....understand that I am not the one making claims as to what is more real and what isn't.

So, since you are pontificating like an expert on the subject of WWII Aerial Combat, please tell me what your qualifications are, starting with:

Type of WWII Plane Flown
Hours in Type
Combat Hours in Type
And finally number of planes shot down in each type.

Other than that your opinion is just like everyone else's amazinhunk.  

I'm not saying you shouldn't have an opinion, but, man.....just slow up a little on it.

Actually this board reminds me of an old joke......

If amazinhunks could fly, then the AH BBS would be an airport

Thank you and goodnight  

Deez,
I actually tried Il-2 and I liked it so far.  I do think it has some issues that need to be looked into, but for a game its very entertaining.

Cobra

[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Cobra ]

[715]

Originally posted by Sky Viper:


My guess is that if HTC or any other SIM Programer can not visually model 1:1 due to resolution limitations. I.E. a P51 at 400 yds would only be a few pixels wide.

Viper

There have been flight sims in the past that have rendered the AC much larger than RL but are you sure AH does?  I suspect not.  The AH default view is 90 degrees wide.  A P51 at 400 yds subtends 1.8 degrees (37 ft wingspan).  That's 25 pixels (if you're using 1280x1024), not "a few pixels".

715

[DeeZCamp]

It takes about 0 brain power here folks to understand and know what is more realistic.

Cobra, you seem intellegent, I would hope to know that you are one that has enough hindsight to see what sim (YES between the two) is replicating air to air and air to ground combat.

As far as WWII experience... Why dont ya look to the WWII flyers that are part of the IL2 testing as support.

Wait dont tell me... even though they say that it is VERY representative of it, thier words hold no value right?  

I suggested and will suggest again, by the mere fact of watching WWII combat footage, you see how IL2 spanks aces.

Trell.. You are a Gem, I cant express any greater degree of your ignorance or, for that matter your lack of intellegent decision making in the issue.  

You must be the type that says... if its not name brand, it isnt as good lol.

 

lots of people dont have lots of spare time to wast on a large download and a demo that they will never play on a game they dont care about.

hehe wow,.. lets think alitte man.. How about maybe,... Idunno.. downloading it at nighttime when ya go to sleep?... Is that too far of a stretch?

Lets be alittle more creative on the "how we can get somehting done" here..   wow  


 

i for one agree with voss. i doubt i will every try the game . its a box sim

This is spectacular!! Ignorance is just OoOoOzing from this statement.  

Thats like saying Ill never by nike shoes because they are nike. lol  dumb dumb dumb  


I wonder how many more will come up with Great Ideas as to HOW they cannot, or will not put any effort into trying somthing else.

 

[Toad]

Well, Deez, I just don't qualify for the pasty-skin, squint-when-I-see-the-sun category of computer gamers.

I don't even get to play AH as much as I would like.

So, here I am having a blast in AH, while Oleg is creating the absolute greatest flight sim EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (enough exclamation points?   )

I may buy IL when he's done creating the mostest, bestest ever.

I might even try it when it gets near the END of the beta.

Or I may not do either. (Like a few others, I'm basically an online multi-player type. I like the interaction.)

If it ever goes online MMP, I'll certainly try it.

In any event, I expect my life really won't change much. There's a little more going on in it than ACM games. I wedge those in when I can and as long as I'm having fun, I am stress-free over the "flavor of the month".

You see, apparently as hard as it is for you to believe, people have different priorities and different "tastes".

Probably why they make cars in so many different styles and colors too, eh? Yah think?