Author Topic: IL2 vs. STUKA? (Read 491 times)

JoeDirt · « **on:** July 29, 2002, 11:15:08 AM »

which is better? i never see the IL2 flying anymore...and if that is better than the stuka, why add it?

Soda · « **Reply #1 on:** July 29, 2002, 11:26:09 AM »

The problem with the Il-2 in AH is that the Ostwind can still dismember it with a single hit. Why fly something that is as heavy and slow as an Il-2 because of the armour, only to have it offer no real advantage against even a single ping. If the majority of GV's were M16's then that would be different, but with the free Ostie no attack plane is any more survivable than any other so you may as well take something with some speed/climb/etc.

The chances of the stuka being any more competitive are probably pretty weak. A fair scenario plane but it would probably be totally rare in the MA.

-Soda
The Assassins.

Kweassa · « **Reply #2 on:** July 29, 2002, 12:27:35 PM »

It's got a lot to do with damage modelling, too, which, currently in AH only calculates the amount of damage in "Hit Point" style.

When total damage accumulated goes over the 'hit point' the designated part will be "totally destroyed" - hence, the term "all or nothing". This sort of damage modelling shows more serious problems in GV fights - one such instance being M16 with four .50 guns raking across the surface of the PanzerIV and knocking out every existing 'damageable' part there is.

There is a lot more than this when a plane is supposed to receive damage. For example, the "quality of the hit" - when a .50 round hits, it could be a 'grazing' hit, giving off minor shock but doing not much other than grazing the paint job. Or, a hit from direct 6Oc angle has a higher chance of being 'non-lethal', than a hit from other angles.

I know some people are getting annoyed about IL-2 discussed here, but the truth is, IL-2 DM models a lot more factors when a plane is to receive damage. I've seen the difference between a case of 'empty burst' and a 'direct hit' from a cannon round in IL-2.

For instance, a cannon fired from direct 6Oc angle has a lower probability of getting a good hit in, since the target shows minimum area in that angle. The results are, some cannon shells strike near the surface of the air frame, which shows off 'explosions', but the damage when you see it, is not very serious.

You could see five to ten such explosions and the enemy plane does not go down. On the other hand, a 'direct hit' which digs inside the structure and blows the chemical charge inside the airframe results in huge damage, big holes are soon visible, and the level of damage is totally different than a 'empty burst'. Same thing happens with big cannons such as 30mms. A grazing hit bursts large, but only small holes are visible. A direct hit usually knocks out a wing or a fuselage area in totality.

....

IMO, the largest disadvantage from the 'all-or-nothing' DM is to the planes that were known for 'rigidness'. 5 cannon hits indicated in AH are all the same in damage, while 5 cannon hits indicated in IL-2 all differe in quality. The chances of every hit being a lethal one is 100% in AH, but it differs with each hit in IL-2. As a result, tough planes such as the IL-2 last incredible long, living up to its reputation and boasts amazing structural integrity in withstanding enemy attacks. In AH, the IL-2 simply has a bit higher hit point than other planes, but when all 37mms and .50 AA fired from GVs hit with 100% damage capability, it rarely means anything. Same with 'rigid' planes like the P-47. Two~three hits from a Hispano will dismember the wings easily.

Unless some more factors are put into AH DM and gunnery - such as 'quality of the hit', 'probability of giving out a lethal hit', 'accuracy of gunnery diminishing with distance(300~500 yard hits)', planes like the "IL-2" will continue to be a wall flower in the MA prom.

Karnak · « **Reply #3 on:** July 29, 2002, 03:01:23 PM »

Great post, Kweassa.

I have to say that a more sophisticated damage model is one of the things I want most in AH.

1.11 is bringing the Mission Theatre, so maybe we can hope for a reworked damage model in 1.12.

salem · « **Reply #4 on:** July 29, 2002, 04:32:59 PM »

If you spend a while practising with the RS-132's, the Il-2 is a nice little machine for plinking Ostwinds. Just make sure you fire from at least 1k out, then break off. Any rocket hit with 20 yards or so is usually enough.

ta,
Salem

Wotan · « **Reply #5 on:** July 29, 2002, 10:13:22 PM »

il2s in il2 burn well with a few hits to there oil cooler. Thats all I aim for when coming from 6 oc.

They smoke then burn almost evrytime........

I have seen guys sitting dead six blasting away and doing very little damage. A few hits 3-5 at most an il2 will burn up.

The same with fighters ded 6 shots arent the most effective way to bring umm down quickly.

Just a little deflectiion you can drop and fighter easy.

AH wings jump off at d800 ded 6 shots to the wing "edge"

DM is the onething that to me holds every mmop flight bame back. wb3 suffers the same thing and set lethality to 85%. They also manipulate buff tougness depending on who whines the most.

Bomber in ah suffer greatly by the current DM. They are amazingly weak and at times seem to take less ammo the some fighters (f4f for instance).

NOD2000 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 30, 2002, 12:50:32 PM »

the il-2 is a great plane with speed it can out manuver a zero....its something u just have to catch the zero off gard with ex. like its ina turn fight with another zero u can do alot of damage with 23mm's..........and you can get rid of ostie's by using two one to distract him then the other sneeks behinds and droops a 100kg bomb on him killing him............its quite easy

Hristo · « **Reply #7 on:** July 31, 2002, 12:37:52 AM »

Thanks for explanation on Il-2 (the sim) damage model, Kweassa. BTW, I've read that they are doing new enhancements to the DM and it'll be introduced with Forgotten battles.

SpinDoc1 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 31, 2002, 09:42:40 AM »

So now the real question is: how do we bring this damage model question to the attention of HiTech staff? I think it would be good if the staff could read all these posts and get some great info and suggestions from members like you guys. Just a thought.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #9 on:** July 31, 2002, 01:05:30 PM »

Truth be told, I don't think Il2 is as advanced as Kweassa thinks it is...

I'd venture a guess at saying it's simply AH's damage model with a randomizer running for how much damage is delt out by each round. I've watched 30mms plunge into the aft section of some planes (from 20yards, enough to deal damage to my own plane's engine.. but not to his?) and they fly away unscathed. I don't think it actually detects if a plane comes in at a certain angle on the plane that it may just skim off or ricochet or simply detonate on the surface without any real damage... it appears more to simply be a randomizer that just randomly assigns damage based on where you are in relation to the enemy aircraft.

It's all a points value system, once that critical value is reached, buh-bye object. Il2 just has more intervals at which point a bitmap is applied (or replaced) and some random amount of lift and/or drag is applied to give you the impression that it's more complicated/detailed than it really is.
-SW

Sclew · « **Reply #10 on:** July 31, 2002, 07:14:21 PM »

That would be incorrect Swulfe.

In the new screenshots you can see clearly (actually in arcade mode now it's pretty good..) where rounds are hitting and what happens when they do.

I use "arcade" mode in replays to see where bullets land and what happens when they do. My results are highly consistent( I was investigating gunner kill ability). Something to keep in mind with Il-2 is that shallow hits are calculated and will do little damage (in game you can see them as a light orange flash) while penetrator hits can go quite deep and make a hell of a mess.

Also Il-2 uses a mixed belt ammo. This makes it frustrating if you use ShVAK for instance- unlike AH almost a 1/3 of the rounds are bloody useless slugs.

It has it's quirks though- it also uses the "digital" system AH uses, just a more complex version of it. Fatal damage can be damn hard to achieve esp on AI pilots that have the DM simplified.

Also some of the DM areas are almost impossible to strike- while you can pepper an A8 with MG ammo killing it's engine can be very difficult as only the Penetrators go "deep" enough into the model to cause damage. Similarly most HE shells detonate on impact instead of further in where they would be more devestating.

But Il-2 is Olegs first released sim. By FB add-on many more things should work better. By his next who knows how far he will have taken it?

eskimo2 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 31, 2002, 07:38:45 PM »

I still use and love the IL-2.

From this tour,

eskimo has 21 kills and has been killed 2 times in the Il-2.

eskimo has 12 kills and has been killed 2 times in the Il-2 against the Ostwind.

eskimo

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2002, 11:01:49 PM »

In the new screenshots you can see clearly (actually in arcade mode now it's pretty good..) where rounds are hitting and what happens when they do.

I'm really not sure what the new screenshots (for FB) show, they look like they could be anything, honestly. Do they represent an actual round and it's ability to penetrate, or do they represent the path of the round and where it's expected to impact and probably penetrate? If that's the case, how are they figuring the lose of energy, "deformation"* of the round, and it's potential to do more internal damage? I'm still unsure as to what the new model represents, if you know I am definitely interested in finding out more.

I use "arcade" mode in replays to see where bullets land and what happens when they do. My results are highly consistent( I was investigating gunner kill ability). Something to keep in mind with Il-2 is that shallow hits are calculated and will do little damage (in game you can see them as a light orange flash) while penetrator hits can go quite deep and make a hell of a mess.

I use arcade too, seen where bullets land.. but that's really no different than watching the bullet sprites as they impact the plane model in AH. They hit a particular area on the model, but they don't actually damage that area, they damage the whole structure as it's modelled.

As for the orange flash, do you mean the flash you see when a round ricochets or when you are firing the .30s and .50s on, for example, the P39?

Also Il-2 uses a mixed belt ammo. This makes it frustrating if you use ShVAK for instance- unlike AH almost a 1/3 of the rounds are bloody useless slugs.

True, forgot about that.. but the 30mm on the Mk108 was mine or explosive, right?

Also some of the DM areas are almost impossible to strike- while you can pepper an A8 with MG ammo killing it's engine can be very difficult as only the Penetrators go "deep" enough into the model to cause damage. Similarly most HE shells detonate on impact instead of further in where they would be more devestating.

But there are mine shells, which are AP/HE, I think.. well Germans had them, not sure if their modelled in Il2... but they could penetrate for certain number of (milli)seconds I believe, then detonate. Again, not sure.

But Il-2 is Olegs first released sim. By FB add-on many more things should work better. By his next who knows how far he will have taken it?

Il2 has been in developement for as long as AH. It has been out (on the market) for 7 months and is about to recieve it's final patch with a new FM (I hear). FB has promises of new graphics, damage model, and campaign... I think 1C/Maddox could be the next Dynamix(AOE,AOTP,RB), IMO.
-SW

Sclew · « **Reply #13 on:** August 01, 2002, 01:45:00 AM »

"Do they represent an actual round and it's ability to penetrate, or do they represent the path of the round and where it's expected to impact and probably penetrate? If that's the case, how are they figuring the lose of energy, "deformation"* of the round, and it's potential to do more internal damage? I'm still unsure as to what the new model represents, if you know I am definitely interested in finding out more. "

Yes- it was verified they represent angle of impact, depth and path. Deformation etc isn't modelled- if the round penetrates it "damages" the parts it goes through. Like now, even Il-2 uses a digital type of DM with broken/non broken type but with more areas to break. Deeper it goes more it breaks.

Not quite like AH, unlike sprites you can see how deep the projectile went and a lasting signal of where it landed. The flashes you see with MG hits are rounds that are too shallow and riccochet (sp?) causing little damage.

30 mm was indeed mine or exposive. But shallow hits with 20mm or more still only cause light damage. I personally don't agree with this

Also as I pointed out currently most cannon shells detonate too quick to break enough DM areas properly. This is an Il-2 thing and I think it's why most 20mm shots don't do enough damage even if direct hits.

"Il2 has been in developement for as long as AH. It has been out (on the market) for 7 months and is about to recieve it's final patch with a new FM (I hear). FB has promises of new graphics, damage model, and campaign... I think 1C/Maddox could be the next Dynamix(AOE,AOTP,RB), IMO. "

Longer actually, but only under a proper team for I think about the same time. But Oleg started literally with scratch. HTC had a team, previous experience etc.
FB is sort of Il-2's final patch

I think more impressive will be the upcoming Med theatre game he will be doing after Il-2.

Dynamix? Better comparison would be Ubisoft is the next Dynamix (Lomac, Il-2) 1C is just the russian publisher and Maddox is the studio Oleg built in Russia.