Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on June 10, 2003, 04:16:59 AM
-
AT NIGHT! :rolleyes:
(http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p39-3.jpg)
-
They've seen alot of Hollywood movies though.. :rolleyes:
-
Thanks Grun!
Bout time somebody showed the truth........ not that it will change anything.
-
It show 1/60 or less of the truth :)
-
It shows that muzzle flash isn't a ball of flame six feet in diameter.
I think light speed is still a touch faster than 1/60th.
-
Certainly ,but not knowing the sensibility of the film what can you deduce ?
-
If that has not been touched up, you can make some logical deductions about the film.
The stars are showing in the background. If the film was a low speed film, this would not be possible, due to the bright flashes of the gun fire.
This is true as the F-stop for a low speed film would have to be opened up a bit, which would have caused the gun flashes to be much more pronounced than they are.
Also note, there is an external light source aimed at the fuselage. A low speed film would not have been able to show the background stars along with the other light sources.
I suggest this film was a high speed film, using a fairly open aperature. It nearly got washed out, as you can see from the amount of light on the fuselage from the gun fire.
This also suggests the gun flashes were actually smaller than they appear in this situation, and were exaggerated by the sensitivity of the film.
-
My understanding of the IL2 muzzle flash is that instead of making different graphics for all of the different times of day, they chose to use but one and settled for 7:00.
I do not know if that works out right, re: the photo above, but I DO know that just like the horrendus headshake in AH, you do not see the flashes after a short period of playing the game.
-
Skuzzy where did you learn PI ?
-
But now we know thats too big even for the night...
Funny thing is the only planes I have ever seen have such hughr muzzle flashes as is normal in IL2 for all planes were russian airfraft with big cannon. You see soviet small cannon weapons were made with extremely loose tolerancse so they did indeed have big big flahes from all that unburnt propellant - however other nations weapons did not have this.
-
Well, if all you can complain about is the size of the muzzle-flashes, I'd say you've got a pretty good game/pretty big stick up your prettythang...
-
Why don't you show me actual footage? That photos looks......FAKE.
I've seen video of IL2 firing (23mm). Gun flash was BIGGER then in il2-FB.
I've seen video of P51 firing (6 50cal). Gun flashes were just like in IL2.
How about pictures of 88 firing? That gun flash is 10 meters high?
109 firing at night?
Do a little research before starting squeaking contest.
-
That photo is real - but I guess the truth hurts...
The IL2 muzzle falsh in that video which I refered to also is accurate fot a 23mm soviet cannon which was built to loose tolerances and this was the case with postwar soviet cannon.
The P51 flashes in that color video are waaay smaller than 50 cal flamethrowere in Il2.
Yes I'm sure they did use 88mm artilery to model Il2 fighter muzzle flash - that point we agree on.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Well, if all you can complain about is the size of the muzzle-flashes, I'd say you've got a pretty good game/pretty big stick up your prettythang...
Yea IL2 is pretty good, but the flashes are horrible - imagine 6 foot solid orange fireballs for 20mm cannon...
-
What I'd like to know is how the photographer got that shot.
Was he in a balloon at night and asked for a fly-by with full guns blazing?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yea IL2 is pretty good, but the flashes are horrible - imagine 6 foot solid orange fireballs for 20mm cannon...
I have IL2 and IL2-FB.
Have you seen a real machine gun fire at night? Or assault rifle for that matter? Muzzle flashes can be huge.
As for the photo...it's one photo, not really much to go on. Ive shot alot of rifle calibre MG in the military, and as I said those flashes are huge, but still I could snap a picture of them where they would be small.
-
Ive fired full auto SMG and pistols. The biggest muzzle flash to me was from a 50 caliber Desret Eagle pistol in a dimly lit indoor shooting range. It was pretty big and only some 2 feet in front of my face but was nothing as intense and as distracting as the IL2 stuff.
Plus RL WW2 pilots who saw IL2 game have commented that Bf109 muzzle flasf from external view is laughably ridiculous.
-
Other than that artist picture where they didn't even draw the intake round, or forgot the antenna behind it, I thought this was interesting.
From “The Blond Knight of Germany” The true story of Eric Hartmann, when Hartmann goes to destroy all his ammo and aircraft before surrendering…
“Keep back Bimmel, I’m going to fire the ammunition off into the woods.”
Bimmel sprang clear as Erich pressed Karaya One’s gun buttons for the last time. Sitting in the cockpit, Erich was astonished by the size of the muzzle flashes from the gun muzzles. At high speed in combat they never flared like that.
-
At high speed perhaps a lot of the powder was dispersed before it could ignite.
-
The biggest question is...whats the community's consensus on this huge flame ball on the guns? Yay or nay? If Yay, the developers need to change it to please the customer...thats the bottom line. On a personal note, I neither liked the big flames nor the gunnery in IL-2.
-
Most people seem to hate it, there are many muzzle flash fix requests.
Been reading their forum today, and posted this picture as well, and it seems Oleg is particularly resistant to changing it, even though some ww2 fighter pilots apparently laughed at the muzzle flashes when shown the game by IL2 developers - much to their embarasement.
I really hope they fix it, IL2 is so much fun in eye candy and sensory immersion and the H-Bombs kinda ruin it.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Most people seem to hate it, there are many muzzle flash fix requests.
Been reading their forum today, and posted this picture as well, and it seems Oleg is particularly resistant to changing it, even though some ww2 fighter pilots apparently laughed at the muzzle flashes when shown the game by IL2 developers - much to their embarasement.
.
Then Oleg hasn't learned from HTC..
-
Yah, those realistic cockpit guages will be the end of IL2 sales.
-
Why even debate the issue. Huge numbers of us have fired automatic weapons in day and at night. I have done so for 1000s and 1000s of rounds from 9mm to 50 cal. What happens in IL2 is just silly.
Dont they have any conscripts in Russia that can tell oleg that?
-
Skuzzy, your reasoning is sound, except...
those are not stars; it's dust on the neg.
Even the most miniscule muzzle flash would drown out any stars in the background, especially if the muzzles are close to the camera, especially with a moving subject.
Also, If it was high-speed film, I would expect the prop to be not so blurred.
But it makes the point, doesn't it. Cool picture.
-
Its pointless arguing with you. Just stay in your reality.
(I remember people like you.
Green tracers? That’s fake, IL2 sucks! Oleg is commi bastard. etc)
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
Thats a rather poor photo for demonstrating muzzle flash. Looks touched up. Muzzle flash in IL2 is over done for daylight. In reality nightime muzzle flash, depending on powder type can be horrendous and temporarily blinding.
In any event: IL2FB has so many simulation qualities superior to the current build of AH that any attempt to qualify the latter over the former is merely an excercise in futility.
As a MMO of course, AH has IL2 beat and thats what matters here.
-
I got used to the IL2 muzzle flash pretty quickly. Much like the fantasy cockpit gauges in AH.
And that photo looks fake.
-
Originally posted by Russian
Its pointless arguing with you. Just stay in your reality.
(I remember people like you.
Green tracers? That’s fake, IL2 sucks! Oleg is commi bastard. etc)
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
What on earth are you talking about? Its plainly overdone and people here who have fired 50 Caliber MG and 20mm cannon in REAL LIFE military service at night can testify to that. Why on earth are you so defensive?
Calm down...
-
I don't think the photo looks fake. It looks like any other photo of a fighterplane firing it's guns at night . And if that muzzle flash of the 37mm in the photo isn't helacious then I don't know what is .
-
And if that muzzle flash of the 37mm in the photo isn't helacious then I don't know what is
====
The muzzle flash from a NAVY 16-INCH Cannon is Helacious.
Hope this helps.
-
Who flies battleships around these days ?
-
Who flies battleships around these days ?
====
Ok, wonderful observation. Lets further this subject by discussing how AH treats the muzzle flash from the tank cannons both 75mm and 88mm, the 5-Inch Navy cannon and the larger cannon on the cruisers (what size are they? 12-Inch?). How would people in the game say those visual representations of muzzle flash stacked up against the historical record, say like unaltered photographs and more preferrably, film?
In my estimation AH underplays those visual representations by a rather wide margin. Perhaps one could extrapolate that by further deducing that the muzzle flash from smaller caliber weapons are underplayed visually as well.
And again, there are a plethora of photographs and motion film, black and white as well as colour, that show automatic arms firing at night (as well as day) and I submit that the photo in the starting post is a singular poor represenation on the subject and chosen obviously on the bias that it supported the posters contention that IL2 is flawed in its representation of muzzle flash, which it is, but I would submit that in this instance, 30% too much is better than 30% too little.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
What on earth are you talking about? Its plainly overdone and people here who have fired 50 Caliber MG and 20mm cannon in REAL LIFE military service at night can testify to that. Why on earth are you so defensive?
Calm down...
I'm in military, I have fired weapons at night. I have seen multiple videos of different weapons being fired at night. I speak of my experience. Using one flakey looking photos is very poor argument stand point.
-
Originally posted by Russian
I'm in military, I have fired weapons at night. I have seen multiple videos of different weapons being fired at night. I speak of my experience. Using one flakey looking photos is very poor argument stand point.
Rumor has it you'd soak Olegs socks in your mouth to clean them if given the chance...so I don't think your opinion weighs in as much as your butt kissing. :D
-
The photo is fake or heavily doctored.
- In that situation the guns would be the only light source. That means that anything behind that light source would be shadowed or barely illuminated, but the whole plane is illuminated despite that fact.
- The shadow on the pilots face clearly indicates a powerfull light source coming from in front of the aircraft
- Did P-39 guns fire simultaneously? 4 .50s and the 37mm? Because that picture had to be taken at faster than a 1/60th speed in order to maintain clarity and I don't know of alot of single barrel guns capable of 3600 round per minute (the amount of time necessary for two rounds to get into the picture).
- There should be no stars visible given the required shudder speed and the amount of high intensity light present.
Il-2's muzzle flashes are greatly overexagerated (I think 30% is a modest estimate). This has been pointed out by pilots that have fired the weapons as well as individuals that have experience firing very similar weapons. That is enough to show that Oleg's stance on the situation is either ego based or he doesn't really care enough to fix it.
No need to go making things up.
MiniD
-
How bout this Russain, your buddy Oleg plainly admits the muzzle flashes as modeled are done to represent them only as he thinks they are at NIGHT time.
So by definition the use of those identical graphics for DAYTIME is innaccurate.
And that settles the argument, right there since you place so much faith in Oleg and even he admits they are inaccurate for daylight conditions.
Further the fact is that he indignantly refuses to chenge them, which is foolosh since so many people hate them.
So there, you loose this argument base on your inflexibility.
Neener neener nenner. ;) ( <------ That was a joke - dont get even more mad)
-
MiniD, the photo looks very much like a photo of a P38 doing a static night firing test in Flight Journal not too long ago...so I don't think the actual flash portion of the photo is doctored, unless the P38 photo may have also been doctored for a magazine subscription.
-
I know that during day time muzzle flash is wrong in IL2. My argument was during 1900-0700 IL2FB simulates muzzle flashes better and more realistic then any other simulations. Just as I wrote in last topic about this, Oleg didn’t want to do dynamic muzzle flashes. It would take to long time so he had to compromise between night and day. Neener neener nenner
-
Although GRUN is obviously trolling for a mouth to piss in he inadvertantly brings up a good subject. AH models muzzle flash rather weakly :D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
MiniD, the photo looks very much like a photo of a P38 doing a static night firing test in Flight Journal not too long ago...so I don't think the actual flash portion of the photo is doctored, unless the P38 photo may have also been doctored for a magazine subscription.
It was. The plane was not in motion at the time of firing and the stars were added. Who did it I don't know... but its clearly not an indication of what cannons look like when fired at night, unless you count having a spotlight shining on the aircraft as "realisitic".
MiniD
-
I know that during day time muzzle flash is wrong in IL2. My argument was during 1900-0700 IL2FB simulates muzzle flashes better and more realistic then any other simulations. Just as I wrote in last topic about this, Oleg didn’t want to do dynamic muzzle flashes. It would take to long time so he had to compromise between night and day. Neener neener nenner
sorry but that's BS IMO.
I've fired quite a few large caliber weapons in my life, and Oleg's Hollywood-like attempt isn't even close to RL. Fire a 20mm or 50mm during even dusk and it doesn't look like it does in IL2. Why wouldn't a game developer choose something like twilight or dusk if they are going to 'flat model' muzzle flashes instead of midnight on a moonless night?
The ONLY time that IL2 seems close to RL with muzzle flashes is midnight.. all else is unbelievable and makes an otherwise excellent Simulation seem cheesy.
-
The muzzle flashes from the naval guns in AH are huge. I don't consider the photo doctored just because somebody illuminated the plane with a spot light . Can somebody post that photo of the b25 doing a night fire ?
-
(http://www.geocities.com/weissdr1/il2firingguns.jpg.txt)
-SW
-
Suave, "helacious" and "huge" obviosuly mean two completely different things to you and I. Let us talk about the visual impact of large explosive shells upon the terrain in AH.....you know, those little "plops" that happen all around the airfields under naval barrage.
I wouldnt call the photo "doctored" in the sense that someone edited the muzzle flashes. What I would say is that someone edited the photo to bring clarity to the underside leading edges of the wings/fuselage and that the photo is a singular piss poor representation of muzzle flash.
-
Yep like I said IL2 does a great job of simulating inefficient soviet guns and their huge muzzle flashes.
-
BTW Yeager, since when are you such an Oleg grupie?
-
Originally posted by Suave
The muzzle flashes from the naval guns in AH are huge. I don't consider the photo doctored just because somebody illuminated the plane with a spot light . Can somebody post that photo of the b25 doing a night fire ?
What part wasn't doctored? It may or may not have been taken at night. The image is too clear for the plane to have been in motion long enough for the picture to capture the full length of the muzzle flashes. There is a spotlight on it. The background has obviously been added after the fact.
I mean... other than that, it should be a very clear reference as to the apearance of muzzle flashes on a moving aircraft at night.
I do agree that Il-2 greatly overdoes muzzle flashes. Its just that using bogus "evidence" to support the argument doesn't really help. Its the internet.. you can find a "photo" to support virtually any claim.
MiniD
-
Pongo:
You have fired thousands of rounds of .50 ammo????
Well bring your toys down to Vegas and lets party!
Hooligan
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
(http://www.geocities.com/weissdr1/il2firingguns.jpg.txt)
-SW
nuff said...
-
Only for the For the Il2 and its 23mm cannon. Russians were nutorious for inefficient loose tolerance guns and that was the result.
-
Originally posted by Suave
Skuzzy where did you learn PI ?
PI?
-
Ive been playing AH since Sept99. The past year and a half has seen the community grow in a very different direction that I would have originally hoped for. The actual game itself has certainly stagnated in that time. The attitude of the developers seems to have become much more blase' towards everyone but especially towards the longtime fans/supporters.
IL2 was a breath of very fresh air for me last year.
When I logged on this past weekend and saw pizza and realized it would be here a full week I went to the local store and purchased IL2FB. Its a tremendous and welcome change of pace. Its a pleasure just to look at all the artwork. Just stunning.
I dont know about the FMs, they feel a little bit better than AH on average to me and the P40 and P47 are real pleasures and the upcoming mannable P51 should be sweet.
Hopefully AH2 will make HTC competative on levels other than just MMOL, like it was a few years back, before IL2 :)
-
Don't get too use to FB's flight model... new patch due out sometime in June that will change it.
- Tweaking and perfecting the FM, to match the aircraft landing and altitude characteristics (including climbrates) closer to the original.
- Reworking the code of aircraft engines for more realistic performance (including prop pitch).
- Adjusting aspects of aircraft and engine control.
- Reworking sound to bring up a new quality engine sounds, as well as other effects, and extended support of the EAX.
- Revising weapons lethality and produced effects.
- Revising damage model on some planes.
- Adding new flyable aircraft (in a separate add-on).
- Reworking models and adding more details into the damage models of AI aircraft that are becoming flyable with addition of new cockpits.
- Optimization (rework) of online code for fast transfer of data (especially for modem users and long distance lines).
- Adding more eye-candy into the game."
-SW
-
Originally posted by Dux
Skuzzy, your reasoning is sound, except...
those are not stars; it's dust on the neg.
Even the most miniscule muzzle flash would drown out any stars in the background, especially if the muzzles are close to the camera, especially with a moving subject.
Also, If it was high-speed film, I would expect the prop to be not so blurred.
But it makes the point, doesn't it. Cool picture.
I thought it was dust as well, until I looked closer. Note the light smear to the left and up from them.
It could be ambient particles catching the light from the gun flash as well.
High speed film would not neccessarily catch the prop in low light conditions, if you used a wide aperature and low f-stop, it could miss the prop entirely.
It is a cool pic.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
nuff said...
Actually, that photo is over-exposed, which exaggerates any light source.
-
Doh! You're right about the film... I was confusing high-speed film with high-speed shutter... different things.
Though I still highly doubt they're stars, but I could be wrong.
Oh, and PI = Photographic Interpretation (as used in Intelligence services)
-
Well in AH Yeager the muzzle flash of the 8 inch cruiser guns is about the size of a fighter hanger. I don't think it's exagerating when I say that is huge .
-
Anyway lets post some more photos of planes firing at night .
-
Just remember that a photograph can be misleading. The photographer can control the look of the image very easily.
It is very easy to either exaggerate or minimize the light source in a photograph.
What you see, is not neccessarily what you get.
-
Originally posted by Hooligan
Pongo:
You have fired thousands of rounds of .50 ammo????
Well bring your toys down to Vegas and lets party!
Hooligan
The canadian army made me leave all firearms and ammo used in thier possession when I left.
I have certainly fired 1000s of live fire 50 though.
10s of 1000s of 7.62
10s of 1000s of 5.56
1000s of 9mm
-
Il2 is fun graphically, no doubt, untill you get to the cartoon photon plasma cannon sci-fi muzzle flashes in daylight.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Then Oleg hasn't learned from HTC..
PERK LALA's!!!!
...I had to ... :D
-
Don't most modern weapons have flash supressors? Would not that affect your view of all those 10s of thousands of rounds you have fired?
-
My take on the photo.
* This was not an accidental picture or snapshot, it was planned and executed VERY well.
* It was taken from a leading plane.
* The P-39 was lightly illuminated from the leading plane.
* It was taken with black and white 400 (or +) ASA film.
* The shutter speed was probably between 1/8 and ˝ second.
* The exposure must have been long enough for all of the guns to cycle once and for all tracer rounds to exit the picture frame.
* The exposure also must have been long enough for the propeller to make at least one revolution. (There appears to be a shimmer at the bottom of the arc, probably where the light source was reflected off of the prop, but the prop does not look like it only traveled a few degrees in this shot.)
* The guns and prop suggest a shutter speed of no faster than 1/125, probably much slower.
* The star exposure does make this photo very challenging. If they are indeed stars (and not dust as suggested) then they are very crisp.
* Star picture shutter speeds need to be relatively long, usually several seconds or even minutes. High number (400+) ASA B&W film however, could drop the shutter speed well under a second. It would be very difficult to get a crisp shot of stars from a vibrating aircraft with a long shutter speed.
* The real problem in this kind of a shot would be getting ENOUGH exposure of the stars with out overexposing the P-39. This suggest to me that the light source on the aircraft was VERY minimal, and not a giant floodlight.
* The other serious problem with this kind of a shot would be getting the P-39 and everything beyond (the stars) in focus with a wide aperture needed for such a low light photo. They probably used a relatively wide-angle lens and put the P-39 beyond infinity focus to eliminate a limiting depth of field.
My conclusion,
Probably mostly a real photo, they may have added stars in the lab.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
If that has not been touched up, you can make some logical deductions about the film.
It has been touched up. I have a book on the Aircobra which explains that this was shot with an Aircobra on the ground doing firing tests. They then airbrushed out the landing gear and rotated it to make it look like strafing. I don't think they messed with the muzzle flashes though.
-
Quad 50's(?) in vietnam (http://www.mystae.com/reflections/vietnam/calleys.html)
-
Its a real photo I think I seen it as the Air & Space.... I'll see if I can dig up the story on it. I have it in one of my books somewhere! lol)
If I recall its a live nite fire test on a early model P-39 Q-1 with the wing mounted browning 7.62mg's and the cowl Browning 12.7 mg. and the BFG (T9) 37mm cannon
hehe..yep Funk found it..
-
Shotgun? (http://www.rh.net/dgerst/jack.JPG)
-
Pistol (http://www.plusp.com/images/classroom/Nightmuzlflash.jpg)
Another (http://www.ammolab.com/_borders/50AE%20muzzle%20flash1.jpg)
-
50 cal. (http://guns.connect.fi/rs/la50suul.jpg)
-
7.62 (http://www.specwarnet.com/americas/tracer.jpg)
M-16 (http://www.megalink.net/~dakelly/M16m023.jpg)
-
So what do those photos prove?
Don't use photos to support your idea of muzzle flash, because film doesn't represent what the eye sees very well in those conditions.
-
The M2 HB 50 cals I fired had no flash suppressor.
We never fitted the flash suppressors on our C5 (m1919) gmpgs
The Stirling SMGs I fired had no flash suppressors.
Yes the M16 and the M249 do have flash suppressors.
Post all the pictures you like. I have never lost sight picture firing a 50 cal due to the flash of firing it. Even looking through the sight or an AAMG sight that was mounted 6 inches above the reciever much less 10 feet away.
The only weapons that I have fired that obscured your view to that extent were rockets like the 66mm M72 law or the Tow.
They simply do not obscure your view like they do in IL2. Would the soviets have mounted 3 B20s on the cowl of the La7 if they would totaly obscure your sight picture for a second at least every time you fired?
We have all seen lots of recent live fire footage from the gulf. Did anyone see anything like that? You will not.
Its a photographic trick or something that they have rendered in thier game. The weapons do not flash any where near that badly. Certainly western ones do not.
-
The canadian army made me leave all firearms and ammo used in thier possession when I left.
First they conscripted you, and then they hogged all the goodies? No wonder you Canadians are so grouchy. When you inevitably fell the need to start a revolution, you will have my full sympathy.
Hooligan
-
Uh, Pongo, I was agreeing with your argument.
-
Russains always had looser tolerances in comaprsion others, its what made them simple, relaible and the ever popular soviet stuff adjective "rugged." It also facilitated manufacture by clumsy untrained workers and poor factories. However in cannons this meant inefficient burn of propelant and huge muzzleflash. Powder composition may have played a part too, for example germany had developed a smokless poweder - in fact it was so effective even western armies took notice of its superiority. For example US tankers remarked hidden german panzers were difficult to spot because you could not see the the actual firing whereas if they fired under cover they would be spotted. IRRC the russians had no such powder.
-
Hortlund .. ever hear of photoshop?
one press of the mouse could've created that photo.
what time of day?
what weather?
etc etc
doesn't prove a thing.
although I do believe those flying tanks had large muzzle flashes.
it's simply ludricous to think every weapon on every aircraft had flashes like that photo.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
It has been touched up. I have a book on the Aircobra which explains that this was shot with an Aircobra on the ground doing firing tests. They then airbrushed out the landing gear and rotated it to make it look like strafing. I don't think they messed with the muzzle flashes though.
Funked is right. I now remember seeing the whose series of these phots in some book somewhere, IIRC included was closup of the nose which clearly showed the three nose guns firing and again the flash was not differnt than this photo shows.
The photos are real...
-
fwiw Battleship guns DO produce house-sized muzzle flashes...
now where is that picture...
and Pongo is spot-on.. I've never fired a large cal that obscured the sight picture.. ok.. maybe at midnight on a moonless night.. maybe
-
Originally posted by Pongo
I have never lost sight picture firing a 50 cal due to the flash of firing it. Even looking through the sight or an AAMG sight that was mounted 6 inches above the reciever much less 10 feet away.
For what it's worth, I qualified and instructed on .50 cal, both ground mount and vehicle mount (M4A2E8 Sherman), albeit back in the mid 1960's. I agree with Pongo. I've never seen the sight picture obstructed by muzzle flash, except at night which caused the proverbial "night blindness". The same applies to the .30 cal, even when firing while hanging out the side door of a Huey.
I also think the IL-2 effect is over done, but it's still an outstanding simulation and a very immersive MMP (32 player) on-line experience.
Regards,
Badger
-
Originally posted by funkedup
I don't think they messed with the muzzle flashes though.
That was my take on it.
-
I've always hated the muzzle flashes in IL2 and FB (and always joined threads saying the same on their boards). Its a big drawback to playing on cockpit only servers.
At least FB improved the view system abit (adjustable snap view speed), but the muzzle flashes sure do take away from the game IMO.
Impossible to adjust your aim based on tracers which you can't even see because of the muzzle flash with nose mounted guns.
I really have no fricken clue why Oleg is so resistant to change them...
SKurj
-
also its a long exposure shot. maybe 5 second exposure. I made a living on long exposures. Expose the background for 30 seconds then I would paint the foreground with a hand flash. All on 100 speed and slower film.
-
32 players is not MMP.
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
fwiw Battleship guns DO produce house-sized muzzle flashes...
now where is that picture...
(http://www.warships1.com/USbb61_pic_87_brdsde1.jpg)
this one? ;)
-
WoW!
I guess the water below those guns are pretty damn warm, anyone up for an swim? :)
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
So what do those photos prove?
Don't use photos to support your idea of muzzle flash, because film doesn't represent what the eye sees very well in those conditions.
Exactly. Although Yeager made it clear why this photo was used, and the intent.
Whatever, I don't like them either, 1 because they obscure the sight and the tracers, 2, because of what that book said by a guy that had over 300 kills and would know, and 3 because Im used to AH. However, the 109's in FB aren't all that bad, some with wing mounted guns have no effect at all, so if it's just the general overal effect ruining the game for many, to bad for you.
And AH newbies there, change your Config to-
[HookView Config]
AzimutSpeed=0.1
TangageSpeed=0.1
LenSpeed=1.0
MinLen=1.0
DefaultLen=20.0
MaxLen=3000.0
Speed=15
15 is real close to AH, but make it as fast or slow as you want. Then you'll think it's as good as AH, minus the excorsist 360 head movement, and that you can pan with the mouse and TrackIR.
-
Yeah that's about how big they are in AH. Huge .
Yeager was asking me about them . And I said that in AH the muzzle flash from the 5" and 8" guns are huge, like real life. He didn't agree .
-
He didn't agree .
====
I still dont. I thought about it but forgot to check last night (just to make sure I had my marbles in order), but only lasted about 15 minutes before I logged off. The game is really stagnating for me.
Anyway....Ive aways thought the tank and naval gun muzzle flashes were aweful whimpy in AH. Especially the impact blasts from exposive artillery hits which are modeled as goofy little puffs. Rediculous actually.
I did play IL2FB for a good hour though and payed special attention to the muzzle flashes on the LA7 and P39. They are overcooked for sure but on my Vcard I can actually see the target in between the flashes, like motion film I guess. The muzzle flashes are a bit overdone. Should be scaleable for sure.
-
The muzzle flashes of the 8" guns in AH are longer than the ship is wide, just like photo of the 16" guns above . People don't realize it because they are only that big for 1 frame, the entire animation is only about 4 frames, there is no rolling fire and no illumination effects .
-
hehe.. that's the one RRAM thanks :)
I always get in discussions with people that don't believe it .. until I break out that pic.. kinda settles it all right then and there!
-
hey thanks for the tip Creamo
I have to re-learn flying .. I broke my cougar throttle if you can believe that.. waiting on a repair .. sigh
-
Yeah, it killed the game for me till i found that change. Fast views were the ticket.
Get the mouse button programmed to the scroll/mouse views and you can really overcome the "AH crutch". It can even be better/more realistic.
The one thing I haven't been able to credit IL2 with is the FW "6 kill" strength.
Why the Luftwhiners are global game wide, I dunno, but i can't take a FW out in the 6 quarter. They will disagree and say the Russian aircraft are uber. BS. The FW is actually a bug.
And I stand adimant that FB has stolen AH guns/kill mode. It feels like AH minus the "online gamey" varient for actual kill per distance. In AH you can kill from far out, but in FB it's almost AH too easy to kill if you get in close I guess.
Either it is more realistic, or IL-2 was way wrong, and best not to have to shoot your entire ammo load to get a kill. Anyway. FB made a change. it "Feels" like AH, and it is way improved.
Still, the FW190's. Man, snap shot them or save your Hurricane ammo.
You just can't down them without conciderable effort/ammo from the 6 quarter. Have to hit the cockpit or wings.
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
hehe.. that's the one RRAM thanks :)
I always get in discussions with people that don't believe it .. until I break out that pic.. kinda settles it all right then and there!
well, that's a pretty modern picture. After WWII the US Navy started using a product added to the propellant called "swedish additive" or something like that, that helped bringing down the muzzle flash and barrel wear by something like 50%...
so tell the ones who you show that pic, that during WW2 those flashes were more or less 50% bigger. Even if they're stunned by the pic itself, the idea of even a WAY bigger flash will for sure end the discussion forever ;)
-
Anyway, you all su><><0r and should be |-|4><><0rd off the planet.
Who flies FB on Hyperlobby?
I'm on whenever, but if I know there are other AH fellas flying there- I'll do my best to get there during those times.
I can be available from about 4PM EST until about 9 or 10PM EST during the week, handle is SeaWulfe.
Seen Batz/Wotan there once or twice before... and Zigrat a couple of times, pretty much all.
-SW
Grun is a LostWaffle poonaner.
-
flashless powder was used for night engagements also during wwii. not really flashless but a much reduced flash from normal powder.