Author Topic: FM - IL-2 vs AH  (Read 1146 times)

Offline Dawvgrid

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 436
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2002, 02:07:00 AM »
Overall, I think the pitch feel in AH is more like what I expect out of a fighter...solid, not "twitchy". Gun tracking in AH is easier...more like what I saw in RL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thank you for that,,I thought i sucked big time ,,,can`t hit a sausage in il2;) .

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2002, 03:44:03 AM »
In IL-2 FM is pretty nice, though, I've also noticed funny rocketing to 170kph and then sudden drop in accerlation.
At faster speed it again gets raise in accerlation.

What is really positive in IL2 vs. AH, is power of cannons.
Those aren't so darn powerful like in AH, can't really expect to hit from 700 meters and drop the plane with two hits.

Damage model is much better; parts aren't either fine or gone, but hits in the wing will reduce lift.
Also engine damage seems to be light and serious.
Engine can last for under a minute or for 20km, depending on damage.

Just flap/gear operation at high speed bugs me.. though, I've sometimes experienced gear ripping off or flap getting stuck when lowering at high speeds. (although, how can flap lower in first place when going way too fast?)

Multiplaying is, at least so far, bit boring when looking at it; can't limit planes for airfields.

Offline MANDOBLE

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1849
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2002, 03:47:28 AM »
Not getting into a pure FM discussion.

Clear IL2 advantages over AH:
- Much better damage modeling.
- Much better graphics and ambient.
- Better engine management.
- Much better flight immersion (you are INTO a plane).
- IMO, Much better gunnery modeling.

Clear AH advantages over IL2:
- Much better online game.
- Objects are more detailed at long ranges.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2002, 03:50:42 AM »
I spent a lot of time with IL-2, because I saw some good aspects and
 great potential within the game. It was definately no 'junk'.

 I tried many different combinations in joy stick calibration before  the
 game.  .... deadband, filtering and scaling you name it.

The filtering is  the  main reason behind the super twitchy roll
 responses. It messes up the response time of "no aileron input"
 status. Thus, even after you centered the stick after a certain bank
 angle, the system doesn't recognize it.

 Another thing is, rudder response is also super twitchy. I use a MS
 Precision Pro (older version) Stick. The rudder function is implemented
 by the 'twisty stick base'. Even a slightest touch of the base sets my
 rudder input to max. I had to practically dampen, smother, and kill this
 response by fiddling with the scale, filter and deadband.

 After this painstaking process was through(I think I recalibrated my
 stick about 20 times), my feel on the planes weren't much different
 from AH like others have said before me. I don't seem to feel any sort
 of strange, or unfamiliar responses. Of course overall, it isn't as crisp
 clear as AH, but it wasn't too wierd either. A little less predictable than
 AH, that was all.

 The overall problem I've noticed with IL-2, the REAL problem behind
 the trickiness in handling, is the fact that some planes accelerate just
 too fast, and other planes(LW planes :rolleyes: ) accelerate like a slug.
 
 I've heard of a phenomenon where a plane's initial acceleration rate
 is determined by how fast you are going. Which means the slower you
 are the lower your accel. rate, the faster you are the higher your accel.
 rate. In some planes, this phenomenon is just too extreme. Perfectly
 trimmed, careful control.. you can barely accelerate it up to 400kph
 in level flight. Give it a slow dive, finally speed up to about 500~600
 kph, the usual speed we would fight in AH... make one move, the speed
 drops to bottom and doesn't come back up. Overheat that damn engine
 and it would still recover only about 70% of the speed before.

 Thus, in IL-2, we usually fly and fight in about 150~250 mph speed
 area. Imagine we fly and fight in 109s at 150~250mph in the AH MA.
 
 These sort of goofy accelerations make it almost impossible to enjoy
 flying, fighting in a plane that responds crisp and well.(IL-2 FM isn't
 that bad if you fly planes that hold constant high speeds...)
 
 There is a possibility that AH, with everyone running their engine at
 max pitch max throttle constantly may be a bit too crisp. Too easy to
 handle planes. But in the case of IL-2, the engine power and acceleration
 factor is just too extreme.

 ..

 ps) Thus, in Multiplayer games, people exclusively fly so called 'ubers'
 , especially La-5FNs, which compared to AH La-5FNs, seem to hold
 low speed sustained turn awfully good. (feels like spitfires, the damn
 basta*ds)

 ps2) conclusions: flying IL-2 multiplayer with plane limit(~1942) is really
 fun, since everybody has trouble maintaining there planes to do
 something. Playing most other FFA games just plain suck.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2002, 03:53:26 AM by Kweassa »

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2002, 06:37:49 AM »
why are you playing ffa? i havent touched ffa in about a month

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2002, 09:11:08 AM »
you forgot the uberness of the IL-2 AI exemple :
(sorry for the quality I add to compress the pictures a maximun ...)






and yes he ditched :D

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2002, 09:59:55 AM »
weave differential braking seems to work by holding the break and moving your js left or right depending on which way you wanna turn.

Atleast for me any way.

I hate box games online I like to just pop in get a few fights in and log. Waitin it the game lobbies and finding a good coop is far too boring.

Maybe its just me but half the guys dont know how to hit the fly button to ready up. Theres never a real good mission description and end up followin the guy in front of.

I had one guy in a full real coop mission stop three quarters the way down the runway. I was number 4 I saw 1 and 2 lift up counted to 10 and rolled I crashed into him and the other 4 crashed into me. 15 min to get a good mission wasted.

It takes me 30 min just to find a potential decent game by then I ready to move on........

EAW was the same just no my deal I guess..........

Hopefully a some decent dedicated servers will pop up after next patch.

Oh il2 trees are gay you can fly under then in certain spots.......:)



but it looks great..................

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2002, 03:19:12 PM »
Quote
- Better engine management.


Not entirely true.  The cowl flaps are nice.  But the prop pitch control model is way off.  And the overheating is ridiculous.  Maybe German and Russian engines were that lousy, but not US/UK.

Offline RebootSequence

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #23 on: February 15, 2002, 12:30:38 AM »
I've spent more time in IL-2 than AH recently, mostly because my time to do either is limited and I appreciate having a pause and an accelerate time key in IL-2 :)

What I have noticed when I get back in AH is my gunnery has immensely improved from IL-2 practice.  Especially my ability to judge lead from angle off and my timing as to when I fire.  I'm getting kills faster and more accurately than ever before.

I was amazed how bad I was when I first tried IL-2 so I spent a lot of time just practicing gunnery on unarmed bombers, first using 1/2 or 1/4 time.  As I got better I'd practice more on fighters and using no ext. views, always show cockpit and nothing but normal time rate.

Doing this seems to have paid off big time in AH for me.
I'd recommend IL-2 just on its merits as a gunnery trainer.  If you can hit it in IL-2 you can hit it in anything :D

-sequence

p.s. While I'm very impressed with IL-2, I still like AH better, you just can't beat the MMP experience with AI opponents.

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #24 on: February 15, 2002, 08:50:58 AM »
And the overheating is ridiculous.
====
Not rediculous maybe.  Too quick to ovht too quick to cool?  probably, but if AH had a decent eng ovht build in the game
it would be a better more immersive and enjoyable game.  

I know..HT, I know...all the dweebs would get pissed if running their LA7s at 100% thrott meant eng ovht.  This would probably send them on their way to FA interfering with the neverending quest to load as many dweebs into AH as is possible.   Hell, AH would pull em in if those damned cockpits would just go away.

Imagine an arena with 1000 people in it.

Y
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2002, 07:36:55 PM »
Yeager, the time limits on high power settings for WWII planes had more to do with reliability and overhaul intervals than they had to do with overheating.  At least for US and UK engines, the limits were often ignored without immediate problems.  I think enforcing the time limits by creating artificial overheating is a lame way to handle it.  Just because it's harder doesn't make it more realistic.  Fortunately for Maddox there is a large segment of the market who can't grasp that concept.

Offline Voss

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1261
      • http://www.bombardieraerospace.com
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #26 on: February 15, 2002, 08:12:30 PM »
Heh, you're all dweebs! :p

Reality on a computer? Man, when that happens I'll have to digitize my brainwaves and become a permanent resident of the internet. I might even save some money on food!

Waste of bandwidth, Andy.

Wotan, you gonna make it to Sun-N-Fun this year? I'm not sure, but I'll either be with the '46 Navion, or some other bare metal machine.

Poof!
« Last Edit: February 15, 2002, 11:21:46 PM by Voss »

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #27 on: February 15, 2002, 10:10:35 PM »
Fortunately for Maddox there is a large segment of the market who can't grasp that concept.
====
I am satisfied with the effort made in IL2 to incorprate engine overheat at "sustained" maximum throttle.  My understanding of aircraft engine mechanics is that this feature is plausible.  AH has no such feature (WEP exempt).

However, suggesting that quality of engine manufacturing would be an appropriate factor in determining engine performance in any given airframe is far more random and open to broad critical speculation than a simple but effective approach to engine overlimits as employed in IL2.  In tandem, the oft suggested" fuel quality should affect engine performance" is just as speculative.  Might just as well factor in the relative experience of ground crews for any given nation in any given theater in any given year.  How about tool quality?  Atmospheric environment?  The amount of covered workspace and time of year (season)?

Hell!  sounds good to me!

Incorporating what IL2 has in the regard of engine degradation at sustained maximum throttle into AH would be welcomed by me but obviously, it would interfere with gameplay and that bodes poorly for attracting the average customer.  Too bad.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2002, 10:14:08 PM by Yeager »
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Sorrow[S=A]

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 62
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2002, 12:53:11 AM »
Hmm
a few things here-

Trim- Porpoise effect is mostly because you cannot fine tune the trim well enough without a rotary! I have an X-36 and never have problems getting "hands off" unless I try to use the buttons on the KB. The "push button" method seems to whack the trim wheel a set amount- which is usually somewhere between hands off for the axis you want. I blame Oleg for this- we told him the problem in Beta many many times. Both AH and Il-2 seem to have wierd issues with trim affecting main flight controls. In Il-2 it gets more apparent because Oleg has trim based on recentering nuetral force on planes with no trim tabs. This leads to frustration where trim can be resettting nuetral to a point where you can't get full deflection in some directions without resetting the trim position. I asked Andy about this at SimHQ before, about trim creating more power than the pilot can exert himself to overcome it. I recieved an inconclusive answer at the time- it was because of this effect that I asked.

Flaps- High speeds opening flaps is whacko in AH not in IL-2. The WWII planes we use almost all had Hydraulic flaps that opened with 500+PSI. These flaps opened up fully in a second or two and at almost any speed (some just bent or broke at higher speeds).
IN AH flaps are auto retracting well below the point where RL ones damaged. In Il-2 flap damage is a fair amount under-modelled. IE he chose to make them jam and refuse to retract instead of actually breaking apart at high speeds. And higher speeds is relative- most us and soviet planes could use the flaps for dive brakes, that means they could hold up under a pretty heavy load without breaking.

Funkedup: Engine overheats at full throttle were a SERIOUS problem!!!! The last time we pestered Pyro about this he dug up a quote on the P&W twin wasp running under high boost for hours. Yeah, the MOST OVER-ENGINEERED and TOUGH engine of WWII does not make a good basis to judge other engines. Liquid cooled engines (especially late war german ones) had issues, even at mil power. Both US and Soviet testing show that they could boil the coolant and start serious overheat and damage. PLS notice that pilots who flew Merlin engines considered it a SERIOUS event to break the wire for WEP. Whereas P&W engines (P-47 or F-4U) barely cared unless it was a maintenance issue. this is missing in AH and most people miss it. At the very least it would establish some parity to people in the relative difference in frailty and power availability the real Radial vs inline angines had in WWII. And I have to admit here- Il-2 model of engine damage and wear-out from over-boost and over heat or enemy fire seems a heck of alot more realistic to me than AH's binary on/off model.

Roll model-
Yeah, this bugs the toejam outta me too. Didn't most of these planes have a preset aileron trim? IE it never gets hands off unless within a certain flight speed? I can never find that speed in Il-2. I love AH's stability. However I do enjoy the bob/weave effect the planes get. kind of like driving a car- you are always making fine control changes to keep precise. just wish they wouldn't drift me right off course.

My own Il-2 peeves?
#1 inaccurate guages. The ball and needle guages bite the big one. Even with my rotary trim, getting rudder trim precise is a squeak. I am almost always in a 1-2 degree per second slide on my yaw axis. and the IAS is goofed above 3000 meters, it doesn't match up mathematically with the TAS in the no-cockpit screen.

Spins- the spin model still seems weak to me. Stalls seem ok, but try for example to get departure in a snap roll. it stalls but won't get the proper cocentric(sp?) motion to get the rotational spin. ditto for low speed high AOA turns.

Damage: ever notice how impossible it seems to destroy an aileron from dead 6? Also penetration is not modelled. Thusly the extremely small area of an Il-2 tail gun makes him almost impossible to hurt. Ditto for other bombers. You also keep yaw  stability by magic even with out a vert. stab?

G FORCES!!!!  Good christ the Il-2 pilot is a tough bastard. He grey's out around 7.5G's or so! up to 9 before he goes lights out!
Makes it bloody hard to judge your turn rate when he never shows you how hard your being shoved into the seat. He also can take "lumps" and loumavack (sp?) far too well (when you get a 6-7 G tug or worse- when it goes 6G positive then 5G negative!)


On the other hand- AH would be amazing with a few of the ideas from Il-2.

Gunnery! I dunno how he did it but shooting in Il-2 feels like every WWII description I have ever read. you need to get close, and it's not easy to land hits especially against a manuevering target. and you need to HAMMER them to knock a plane down. not many two hit wonders. and the mixed ammo belts :)

the LOD models!!!!! AH has no LOD rescale, I wish it did so we could ID planes better at 500-1000 yds and see how they are changing position and orientation.

The sun. nuff said, it's a part of the DX toolkit and more than silly eye candy. MOHAA has it too. AH currently has no serious lighting effects. Would love to see some spiffy ones replace our sprite flashes.

Metric :)

AOA in the FM. ever notice you can ground loop in Il-2 EXACTLY like in a real plane? exceed your AOA and the plane "grabs" and the nose goes up, your COG changes and flippity wham! Also the planes get slide under heavy turns. I notice this happens to acro planes from a movie that had in cockpit cams.

Ahh, I talk too much. I love Il-2...  but mostly for off-line with Starshoy's campaigns.

AH still feels more real in most ways to me.

Offline Nath[BDP]

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
FM - IL-2 vs AH
« Reply #29 on: February 16, 2002, 01:25:46 AM »
Il-2 and AH damage model feels identical to me.

I've dropped Il-2s with 4-5 hits of single MG 151/20. With 30mm one hit usually does it.

I also wanted to try out the Fw 190 vs heavy buffs (Pe-8 in this case). The 4x20mm tears them to shreds and the 190 is quite tough at taking damage from head on. I can't wait till I get an A8 in the game.

Btw, anyone here complete the Axis pilot career? What date will I get a 109G-2? Getting tired of 15mm.
++Blue Knights++
vocalist of the year