Author Topic: More realism  (Read 1684 times)

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
More realism
« Reply #30 on: December 27, 2007, 06:13:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by splitatom
they actualy had winds of like 300 sometimes which ment that the b-29 on some days were going about 600 mph and somedays like about 16 mph thus is why we went to lightiing things on fire which required about no acuracy


No, it is why we started low level bombing runs over Japan.  We compensated for the Jet Stream by flying lower during the bombing missions instead of at normal high altitude.

The fire bombings of Tokyo was purely to terrorize the civilian population and destroy light industry, 50% of which was located in populated areas.  The resulting fire bombing cut down their input by over half, destroyed 16 square miles of the city and killed over 100,000 civilians, many of them working at light industry factories in their neighborhood.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Devonai

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
      • Reckless Faith
More realism
« Reply #31 on: December 27, 2007, 06:50:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gowan
[correct me if wrong]

guns normally jammed from long bursts of fire, in which the barrels would warp and then the round would get jammed...

i like the jamming part, would keep my bombers up longer


Actually warping a MG/cannon barrel would require far more ammunition than any of our birds carry, and after much more sustained fire.  In real life the major cause of a jam involved the feeding mechanism.

I am against random weapons failures in this game as it would add a whole new level of whining from sore losers.
Guns!  Aliens!  Talking cats!  My new Science Fiction adventure, now on Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/David-Kantrowitz/e/B002BMHJPE/

Offline aenigma

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
      • 173rd Guardian Angels
More realism
« Reply #32 on: December 28, 2007, 04:34:26 AM »
IF you want more realism like engine control, stalls, take offs, etc...then look into Targetware. Not for the faint of heart.
173rd Guardian Angels
www.173rdguardianangels.info

Navy Veterans- www.Navyvets.com


Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
More realism
« Reply #33 on: December 28, 2007, 07:30:42 AM »
One thing I'd like to see is a MUCH more robust damage model.

IMO, that's one of only two places where Il-2 is undeniably superior to AH: Damage modeling, and the visuals.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
More realism
« Reply #34 on: December 28, 2007, 09:12:02 AM »
TW is a joke.

Oh, and FYI: The jetsteam was only a problem over Japan. Over Europe it wasn't an issue. It's a gross exaggeration of the issue to simply state "at 20,000 feet you had 200-300mph winds" because most of the time it just wasn't true.