Request to improve IL2 Destruction MOD - Printable Version

+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: Request to improve IL2 Destruction MOD (/showthread.php?tid=52183)

---

Request to improve IL2 Destruction MOD - BF-109 F4 - 22.01.2008

According to a game called Battlestations Midway (that i have)






the cargo ships (liquid and dry cargo ships) are very very weak when firing to the compartments where is the cargo . The compartments take fire after 2 secs firing or if we have a good angle of fire, 2 or 4 shots are enough to take fire and sink the ship.
Attention: I used Ki-43 and willcat to sink those ships so we dont need much

Ki-43 for who have forgot how its like :roll:


(Battlestations Midway is more a game of ships than planes, its not simulation but action)

---

- Metatron - 22.01.2008

I don't have this game, but by the way you describe it, it doesn't seem like it would simulate these things realistically...

---

- spud - 22.01.2008

The primary rationale for many .50 cals on US strafers was to "clear the decks" of ships. Meaning to get rid of human beings. Kill 'em, or make them take cover, because in either case those people are unable to man open gun mounts.

They had the secondary effect of causing fires. Fires can cripple a ship, but ships can burn tot he waterline and not sink.

Ideally, hitting a ship with enough .50 cal would cause smoke, but I'd not expect many to sink. I could see the wooden sea truck we have (the "fishing boat" (love to remove the sails, BTW...)) sinking if it could happen slowly though.

---

- zaelu - 22.01.2008

According to a game? An arcade one even... C'mon... You've just ruined your argument.

---

- ={TTU}=Tomcat - 22.01.2008

spud Wrote:The primary rationale for many .50 cals on US strafers was to "clear the decks" of ships. Meaning to get rid of human beings. Kill 'em, or make them take cover, because in either case those people are unable to man open gun mounts.

They had the secondary effect of causing fires. Fires can cripple a ship, but ships can burn tot he waterline and not sink.

Ideally, hitting a ship with enough .50 cal would cause smoke, but I'd not expect many to sink. I could see the wooden sea truck we have (the "fishing boat" (love to remove the sails, BTW...)) sinking if it could happen slowly though.

Yes but there are no ppl in Il2 exept on guns ^_^

---

- spud - 22.01.2008

I remember a game once where you flew through poerups in mid air and got "superguns," maybe that needs to be changed, too

ObReality:

Sea Truck set ablaze by 0.50 cal:


Another:



And another:


Note that the target is already smoking and the B-25 hasn't even overflown it yet. 0.50 cals should start fires.

It's also possible for .50 cal to seriously hurt a small warship since they have things like depth charges and torpedos on deck. Given the total lack of fidelity onthe il-2 ground target level, this would be bad though since EVERY attack would blow them up.

Ideally, we'd rework the ship DMs rather a lot.

What I'd prefer to see?

1. We make ships harder to sink. Considerably harder.

2. We clone some guns, and point their meshes at something else appropriate (a human figure?). Others look like the guns they are cloned from (for warships). These "guns" would not shoot (if objects replaced), they would smoke/burn like destroyed guns though. We'd make a few kinds, one that would burn with some .30 cal hits, another with some .50 cal, and another that was harder, perhaps a near miss bomb or cannon fire. We place these on ships without guns, too. Then ships might be easier to get to burn, and harder to sink since we are still stuck with the joke of 60 "instant success" ship kills.

tater

---

- spud - 22.01.2008

Yes, you are right, there are no people on deck. My point was that the primary role of the guns was SUPPRESSION, and the ships were usually to be killed with bombs.

---

- salac_78 - 22.01.2008

The ships could be destroyed by 50 cal by destroying their engines(by shooting through,whats the word,that round thingy from where the smoke comes out in a dive)

---

- spud - 22.01.2008

Destroying a ship by shooting down the smokestack (really, "funnel") didn't happen often if at all. Not for decent sized shipping, anyway.

Fires could certainly effectively destroy a ship, but in il-2 we have either smoking, destroyed guns, or BOOM, the entire ship sinks.

There is little in between.

What we need os for MOST damage to ships to be "in between."

It would be far more realistic for us to leave the area of attack with several ships smoking and none sunk than what we have in game right now. I can sink as many ships as I have bombs. If this was realistic there would have been no merchant marine on earth within a couple days. Allowing MGs to sink ships would make it worse. IMO, cannon shouldn't be sinking ships given the crappy hitpoint damage system ships have.

You can look at the Battle of the Bismark Sea as an example. We could build a similar mission, and put the right number of planes in, but more shipping (so we can compare how many we sink) and fly it coop. If we sink grossly more ships than really sank, something is wrong. I guarantee we'd sink a multiple of the number sunk in RL.

---