• November 18, 2018, 06:27:39 AM
• Welcome, Guest

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

### AuthorTopic: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.  (Read 5462 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Uufflakke

• Modder
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 2079
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2017, 06:41:34 AM »

Have you ever been at BOS site and seen FM discussions there? And did you know they are totally forbidden in DCS forums?

It is even forbidden to criticize DCS at BOS site for instance.
By doing so you get suspended/banned from DCS.
You know the topic: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25533-dcs-news/?p=437312
Even bad tempered SiThSpAwN could not resist to stir the pot.

So take SAS~JGE52's advice to heart (as mentioned before in this thread):
... It is just a game guys .. get a life ....

Logged
"The Best Things In Live Aren't Things"

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 597
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2017, 10:15:27 AM »

When you fly for real, you can feel what the aircraft is doing, and so it is easier to tell if you're pushing it too hard and are on the verge of departure. Unless you have a force feedback stick, it's harder to tell in sim.

This is actually a very good point and bears repeating!

When i had a chance to fly using a very high end force feedback stick (long story short - quite a few years ago i was involved in testing a product that in the end never made to the market, as it was too expensive to compete against what is already there, and on my suggestion we tested using Pacific Fighters among other things), i found my flying got significantly better. I could feel every vibration and was able to "ride" the edge of a stall - turning as hard as possible but not to stall out, which gave me an advantage over opponents. I wasn't able to repeat that kind of a performance with a non-FF stick, i couldn't get nowhere near it. I would either chicken out and ease my turn (with all the consequences of doing so - namely, being shot full of virtual bullet holes), or i would enter a stall (with usually equally disastrous effects). Now, i'm far from an ace pilot, but with the right stick i was at least beginning to look competent. I'm pretty sure that a real life pilot could use that tactile sensation from FF to an even greater effect than i could.

Or to paraphrase - the stick does indeed make a pilot!
Logged
I'm worth a million in prizes

#### tomoose

• Modder
• member
• Online
• Posts: 1064
• Iiiiiiiit's ME! Hurrah!!
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2017, 10:34:30 AM »

4 pages and counting.....see what you started Capt Dawson?  LOL

Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 515
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2017, 06:26:20 PM »

4 pages and counting.....see what you started Capt Dawson?  LOL

Lol

I have even flown a few planes in real life
This sounds interesting, may I ask which planes you flew, where, how often, for how long, business or private aviation, ...

Although I am not a licensed pilot yet, I have had the opportunity to fly a few private and Civil Air Patrol aircraft with assistance, such as the Cessna 172, Cessna 182, a few Piper variants, and GA8 Airvan. (Very nice little 7 seat plane, the Airvan! Got to ride out a few stunts in it too once, not with me as the pilot though!  )   I've just gotten flights with pilot friends who let me fly a little, and Civil Air Patrol who occasionally allow cadets to fly with assistance from their pilots. I've been flying since I was around 15. I'm hoping to solo this summer though.

Re "AI P-51 loses against AI early 109": They don't in my tests.

What I'm referring to here is the P-51's tendency under AI to feebly "wobble" its wings rather than simply fly straight. This causes the AI P-51 to have a reduced ability to hit the 109, and have a real difficulty in escaping a attacking 109, despite the P-51's obvious speed advantage which is completely wasted. In turn, the 109 often has no problem destroying the P-51, because the 109 usually aims straight without wobbling, and the 109 will keep its cool and fly straight during an attack, thereby increasing its speed. I often find that in a P-51D, even under WEP the speed advantage over a 109G is not very impressive (or realistic?) at all. All these not always, but often lead to unnecessary/unrealistic kills of P-51s.

Re "Lerche's incredible flight model": There's no real life data you could rely on, therefore judging the IL-2 Lerche flight model unrealistic is somewhat pointless. Talking about whether this thing would even be able to leave the ground would be a fine topic for a recreational chatter together with a beer or two, but that's it.

Sorry, I'm underage.
Quote
Heinkel Lerche III

We used the Heinkel Lerche II as the basis. However, after modeling the plane we’ve discovered serious deficiencies in design, and were forced to make many changes to make this plane suitable for combat. Modeled precisely to original specifications, this plane would never take off.
Correspondingly, we’ve made the following changes:
1   Increased the fuselage cross-section;
2   Installed more powerful supercharged engines;
3   Used the details of a captured Hs-132 prototype as the basis for the cockpit;
4   Replaced Hs-132’s landing gear well for an access hatch;
5   Installed oil and water radiators into the circular wing;
6   For take-off and landing stability, we’ve added automatic gas-powered control surfaces;
7   Changed the landing gear and tail unit shape (as originally designed, the plane would fall over).

Maddox actually admits to heavily modifying it to cater to the FM! Lol    Of course this is because there are obvious problems with the entire design in general. I'm simply getting this from the Readme, not my own research.

Have you ever been at BOS site and seen FM discussions there? And did you know they are totally forbidden in DCS forums?

It is even forbidden to criticize DCS at BOS site for instance.
By doing so you get suspended/banned from DCS.

Instead of considering real issues, they outright deny the right to free speech?    I don't know much about DCS or BOS, but if so many people think there are issues, maybe there are?

When you fly for real, you can feel what the aircraft is doing, and so it is easier to tell if you're pushing it too hard and are on the verge of departure. Unless you have a force feedback stick, it's harder to tell in sim.

This is actually a very good point and bears repeating!...

...Or to paraphrase - the stick does indeed make a pilot!

Good points. I should consider this in my FM opinions. Maybe when I have some spare cash I will give FF a go!

all I want is to see if there is a solution
Definitely no.
Not for technical reasons, but "a" solution would mean that all would have to agree upon it.
You never get there.
Experience tells (and threads like this one shows) that when you express your opinion of one flight model and ask for others to agree, you get back 50 other opinions and on page 2 latest, the whole debate goes south.
There's two things you can do:
• Pimp the flight models of your favourite planes so they suit your flying style better.
This will become an endless job when you switch planes
• Take the long route: Grab all kind of available real life data, real life specs, test reports etc. and build a flight model upon it.
This is tedious, even easy things take a considerable amount of time, e.g. getting reliable data about control surfaces and their location, the precise center of gravity and center of mass, mass distribution with different fuel loads etc.
But beware: When you finally finished your task and put all historically reasonable data in, you might end up with a flight model that exactly behaves like the one you just complained about.
Best regards - Mike

Ok. That makes sense. I am really not in a position to do these things, as you well know I'm sure. Thank you for clearing this up!

So basically no direct solution. The bias is too strong a force to destroy as it would seem. For now.    BUT ONE DAY WE SHALL BE VICTORIOUS! I dream of a world where American planes are not valued by their biased-against flight models, but by the content of their true character!

I shall have to find ways of minimizing and countering these negative effects. From now on, my dufus P-51 AIs will fight only outnumbered Rookie 109s! Maybe I'll ditch the dufus AI wingmen and go for some lone-wolf attacks. All they do is steal my kills anyways.

Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### Nesher

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 31
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2017, 08:21:39 AM »

Captain Dawson,

which versions of IL-2 do you fly regularly?
Vanilla or modded?

I know HSFX is an older pack now, and very far from being perfect, however from a FM point of view, it has a very well balanced and adjusted system (and well documented for the most part).

I can only comment on this one, since I only fly HSFX regularly these days, but according to your example, the P-51s are a lot more versatile in this modpack (go and see for yourself).

The flying experience was totally different for me coming from DBW to HSFX. Try to give it a go, maybe it will suit your needs or you could try the latest modpacks (like BAT), but I cannot comment on these new arrivals yet.
However I really like the challenging FMs to be honest, they make every kill worth the effort!
Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 515
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2017, 10:18:54 AM »

Captain Dawson,

which versions of IL-2 do you fly regularly?
Vanilla or modded?

I know HSFX is an older pack now, and very far from being perfect, however from a FM point of view, it has a very well balanced and adjusted system (and well documented for the most part).

I can only comment on this one, since I only fly HSFX regularly these days, but according to your example, the P-51s are a lot more versatile in this modpack (go and see for yourself).

The flying experience was totally different for me coming from DBW to HSFX. Try to give it a go, maybe it will suit your needs or you could try the latest modpacks (like BAT), but I cannot comment on these new arrivals yet.
However I really like the challenging FMs to be honest, they make every kill worth the effort!

I've used stock, SAS 5.3, UP3, DBW, HSFX7, CUP, VP, and BAT in the past.    Now I mostly just stick with VP and BAT. BAT for having fun flying different planes, and VP for most of my complicated missions. I never really used HSFX to get a good feel for it, but if you say the FMs are more balanced, I may give it another try. Thanks!
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### Nesher

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 31
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #42 on: February 06, 2017, 10:55:22 AM »

I've used stock, SAS 5.3, UP3, DBW, HSFX7, CUP, VP, and BAT in the past.    Now I mostly just stick with VP and BAT. BAT for having fun flying different planes, and VP for most of my complicated missions. I never really used HSFX to get a good feel for it, but if you say the FMs are more balanced, I may give it another try. Thanks!

I forgot to elaborate for reference that I used stock, AAA, Modact, UP3, DBW then ended up with HSFX.

Regarding HSFX:
This is a matter of personal taste and preference of course but I don't regret the chage-over i made (more than a year ago), and it isn't hard at all to mod HSFX like it was said previously (that was the only thing keeping me away from it for a long time, what a fool I was...).
I absolutely adore the FMs it has (especially the choice for having a simple or a so called expert version depending on the FM precision/difficulty), but as I said, it is up to the user which one he or she likes.

First you may find the FMs hard (in expert mode) in contrast to the other packages (at least I did vs DBW at the time), but as soon as you get used to it, they are really fun and you can definitely win fights in even a stock p-51 vs 109K4 or a D9_late!

I am so said that HSFX is discontinued now, the main FM writing guy (Aachen was his username) put a lot of effort into making/fine tuning the FMs for the most popular planes.
Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 515
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #43 on: February 06, 2017, 12:16:23 PM »

First you may find the FMs hard (in expert mode) in contrast to the other packages (at least I did vs DBW at the time), but as soon as you get used to it, they are really fun and you can definitely win fights in even a stock p-51 vs 109K4 or a D9_late!

I am so said that HSFX is discontinued now, the main FM writing guy (Aachen was his username) put a lot of effort into making/fine tuning the FMs for the most popular planes.

I did not know the FMs in HSFX were different from stock. I'll certainly give this a try sometime!
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### I/JG7_Killerfliege

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 6
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #44 on: March 12, 2018, 04:51:47 AM »

I find this conversation very interesting and since we are currently facing the P51D in our Bf109 Gs over the Gothic front, may I contribute with my experience and quotes from real pilots (Walter Eichhorn in this case) about the match-up between the 109 and the P51:

First, let's hear what the real pilot has got to say:

Walter Eichhorn who flew both the Bf109 G and the P51D (at low and medium altitudes though) states (freely translated):

"The Bf-109 is the better turner at the altitudes he has flown the planes. However, the P51 is easier to fly and seems to be faster and more powerful." (You can find a detailed assessment in his book).

Now, my experience in the game:

2013 we flew a 50vs36 PvP campaign over Ploesti (HSFX 7.03 w Expert) --> High altitude bomber intercept with planeset: Bf109 G2,6,10,14 vs P51B,C and P38s and P47D.
We tested the planes in a fast dogfight mission at above 8 km. Mission settings were: 8km airspawn for both at 5 km distance.
Result: The 109 could not do anything: neither outturn, nor outdive, nor outrun the P51. All participants were really disappointed in the end because of the crushing results against our material. And even in the campaign, we could do very little against the allied fighters. Most of our kills were bomber kills.

Some current experience:
We are currently flying a PvP SEOW campaign over Italy 1944 (same mod as above). Planeset: Bf109 G6,G10C3,G10Erla,G14 against P51D20NT and other variants.
Result: The leading ace of this campaign is a P51 pilot. He shot down 6 aircraft in the last mission and we could not do anything against it. Even with the G14 without gunpods we could simple watch our fellow pilots going down. No way to keep up with the P51, even when coming in with altitude advantage. If they get scared they run, climb and come back later. No chance.
In many missions I was behind this guy but even after stalling his aircraft several times in front of me, I could never catch up to shoot at him.

So we did some testing yesterday:
I flew a P51 at 60% fuel against my brother in  a Bf109G14 with 100% fuel, no GPs. (same skill level) and a fellow pilot in an MC205 VIII. Airspawn 2000m, 3 km apart. Result: Even though I failed to see them in the beginning and the fight started with them being behind me, I simply climbed away in a shallow climb. Once the distance was enough I turned back and picked the MC205 well knowing that the 109 was on my six...but too far...he could not help his wingman when I dove in in a right hand turn on the MC205s six. After a burst I got his controls and he had to bail. Then I simply rebuilt a sufficient altitude advantage with vertical loop manoeuvres and finished off the 109 with a comfortable 3000 ft altitude advantage. And yes...that was a dogfight scenario as you would find it on an Arcade DF server in HL.
At no point I was in danger. Also because of this: Maintaining 150 mph and above, even at full power and 100% pitch and Boost enabled, the 51 does not overheat. The 109 does and moreover burns heck lot of fuel with MW50 enabled.

We did some more flights...always with the same result. I won in the P51 without sweating. All you need to do is to maintain at least 150 mph in a climb and you cannot lose. Another observation: My brother dove away in his 109 and I gave chase in a 90 degrees dive. I reached 570 mph and yet I pulled out of the dive with a relatively tight loop without even getting close to a blackout. Neither did I damage my structure. Try this in a 109. Exceeding 500 km/h, even the slightest turn will cause you to black out and damage the 109s airframe, which is actually impossible as the rudder forces are too high above this speed as you could pull sufficient Gs to case a blackout. Means: When diving in a 109 you simply cannot pull enough Gs to black out. Yet you do in the game.

Now, that being said, when comparing two planes over a battlefield, these factors count:
- Ratio of aircraft
- FUEL used
- Their mission

These factors influence your success considerably.

With that being said, flying the P51 as it was designed will make you almost invincible. Just avoid those don'ts:

- Steep climbing without speed advantage
- Have no more than 60% of fuel in your tanks
- Never go slower than 150 mph
- Don't become inpatient.

If you don't believe me, let's meet in HL and we can test.

Logged

#### SAS~Storebror

• Editor
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 15498
• Ask me if I care.
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #45 on: March 12, 2018, 05:50:52 AM »

Not all that surprising, isn't it?
Two things though:
Nice to hear what Mr. Eichhorn said. Ask 10 more pilots and get 50 more opinions on the same matter, each different from the other.
Concerning the blackout, whether you pull 6G in a Pony or in a Messerschmitt, the blackout comes at the very same time in both of them.
Mind you: There's no distinguishing between plane types in IL-2's base game code.
This is something that has not been added to the game until we rolled out the 1956 pack.

Cheers!
Mike
Logged
Learn. Challenge. Improve. - Storebror on Flickr - In loving memory of the times when I cared...

#### Uzin

• Modder
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 2274
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #46 on: March 13, 2018, 03:48:29 PM »

The problem of overrealism of AI has been tried to solve several times, there is so called AI Mod coming from March 2009, working at 4.10 Il-2 modded versions . Perhaps it would be useful to place here its readme?
Code: [Select]
UPDATE .11:- Added more variability to the maneuvers- Changed pilot settings so their engine management varies by skill level (lower skill levels have slightly reduced highest throttle settings to reduce advantage of the AI having no overheat)- (Hopefully) fixed takeoff bug with bombers in certain situations.- Random chance of enemy aircraft not reacting if you approach from behind with a large energy advantage. This is to simulate the AI getting "bounced". Chance decreases as skill level of enemy pilot increases, almost no chance of this happening vs. an Ace.UPDATE .12:- More adjustments to the maneuvers- AI will only use nav lights when taking off and landingUPDATE .13:- More adjustments to the maneuvers- Head on attacks are favoured vs bombers for 109G6s and later, all 190s, p51s, p47s, p38s, F4Us, F6Fs, F4Fs, YAK9s. Bomber attackers should be generally more cautious, avoid 6 o clock attacks.-AI will no longer begin defensive maneuvers at 300m, distance is randomized within a range.UPDATE .14:- Yet more adjustments to the maneuvers.- Made changes to wingman aggressiveness.- Made changes to bomber attacking behavior. After the initial headon, they should now attack from other angles, instead of just trying to work back into position for another headon. Also, the AI will sometimes now aim for engines in both headon, and other passes. Let me know if this is any good, I don't have a mission with a huge bomber formation to test this with.UPDATE .15:- Yet more adjustments to the maneuvers.- JABOS will no longer drop bombs at the first sign of trouble. Depends on situation/maneuver.- Nav lights now off for emergency landings.- Bomber attacking behavior adjusted. New behaviors seemed to be causing trouble, they'll be readded when I figure out what the problem is.- Toned down AI gunner ability. Ace level is the same, other skill levels have reduced accuracy.- Hopefully fixed landing routine so wingmen don't crash into you (untested).UPDATE .16:- .15 was a bugfest. Takeoff and wingman AI behavior were messed up. Please upgrade.- Added BNZ type aircraft specific attack functions- AI Gunners are now toned down for AI aircraft only. AI Gunners on player controlled aircraft remain with default accuracy, even if co-op host is running AI mod. There's nothing that can currently be done about this.- Aircraft will use landing lights in daytime.UPDATE .17:- Adjustments to AI attack code.- Changed landing light behavior. Will only use nav and landing lights at night, and should now use Nav lights in landing pattern, switch to landing lights on final.UPDATE .20:- Removed .17 AI attack changes.- Adjusted JABO code, hopefully results in less accidents.- Adjusted AI attack code/wingman behavior- "Ace" planes can no longer take 1.5x the damage of a normal plane.UPDATE .30:- (Hopefully?) Fixed foolish bit of code that made planes fly into the side of mountains.- The following fighters now use the Finger Four as a default formation instead of Echelon Right: P-38 P-40 P-47 P-51 F2A F4F F4U F6F SBD. `
Logged

#### vonofterdingen

• Missioneer
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 467
##### Re: Over-realism. Yes there is such a thing.
« Reply #47 on: March 13, 2018, 05:26:48 PM »

There is a fundamental question that people will always raise. Here is my personal version:

When I fly the P-51 I always stall. I toyed with fuel, altitude, personal wine consumption...the works. Is this because the FM is bad or because vonofterdingen is bad? I can't honestly say.

Therefore, we need an unbiased reference. I think that the stance taken here is the best choice: take the existing aircraft FMs and live with it. The discussion is fine but gets us nowhere. Someone will always think some FM or other is unter or uber. Ultimately we need to accept the common ground.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up

Page created in 0.059 seconds with 26 queries.