hey nerf fancy explaining your nick, it seems to imply that you think the 109 was nerfed, whereas the reality was it flew on GOD MODE for 2 and a half years and had a 3rd wing like a Tie Fighter, and when that was removed it then bevcame modelled as the 109 should have been, a ww2 plane and not a space age star fighter, now some people could never accept that and say it's not fair that they have to learn to fly, and can't have god mode any more, the rest of the ww2 community recognise how pathetic that line of thinking is, surely you don't think god mode was correct do you ?
well i thought i just explained that nerf, they removed the star wars type 3rd wing therefore you had it remoddled to reflect a ww2 fighter and not a tie fighter.
as for the bullets being nerfed wasn't that removing the HE bug that stopped you killing all the Allied Armour with your MG Cannon ? as was supposed to be the case ?
you say nerf'd but the reality is it was modelled as it should have been.
Hmmm thats funny Nerf because I've flown the 109e and f quite a bit after the supposed nerfing and imagine what I found. Your cannon's seemed to work fairly similiarly to other cannon types on the allied side, atleast as much as could be expected considering all planes aside from Hurricane mk2 and Spitfire mk5 have different belt loadouts, and not to mention different fuzing, and exlposive component ammounts, shell casing characteristics, velocity etc.
One thing I did pick up on with discussions with Axis pilots that I respect a great deal is that the 20mm changed ALOT after the HE bug fix and the damage model audit which is still incomplete for single seat fighters, needing Visual Damage Model hooks.
Now I'm not saying there isn't something wrong because I honestly can't do all the math and formulating to come up with physics algorithms that prove or disprove the Rats work. But what I do expect is others who claim it is wrong to provide some proof as to the problem as they see it and then present it to the rats and get their verdict on things, and then if its determined to be a genuine fault as has been proven many times by both players and developers it will get fixed when there is available time given the nature of the problem.
All I know for certain is that the only thing that has been provided as proof to it being wrong, is 50+ year old grainy guncam footage of real life shots versus game guncam's.
Now lets be objective here shall we....
First, one is reality, which is known to have variance, and difference. Even scientific methodology allows for a factor variation because nothing is ever 100% perfectly the same, if you dig far enough this is fact. No plane of the same type ever flies exactly the same as another, no gun of the same type has exactly the same ammount of dispersion etc as another. This very game tries to model this and more by accepting limitations in coding but by still providing a factor of variance in result determined by a multitude of factors.
That alone is what I think causes alot of these discussions. Nothing ever provides a duplicate effect because there is so much being factored in the ballistics calculations against the actions or reactions of the object which can also have variation that a bullet into an engine might kill it, or just as likely only cause a slow oil leak, or ricochet off with no perceptible damage. That is fidelity imo. Not a bug. Please understand that difference.
Now on top of this thre is also other factors, "Rubber-banding" or prediction coding which is required in a game of this size and scope coupled with the fact that both the infantry whocan run so many miles and hour occupies the same world as a plane that travels at 400 mile per hour across that same world and both need to function and interact at some levels together yet apart. Each has different levels of physics operating on them. And that system will over time be improved upon, sometimes as a result of changing the system, sometimes as a result of another inter-related system being changed such as the new Update system in the works, it effects all things but will affect them differently too. See what I'm getting at?
Now lets add in limited Visual cues, because the rats have admitted that they have to limit ammount of detail and feedback for our actions because it would hog up bandwidth reporting all those states to each and every player who can see it change. They hope with a better update system they can increase it but there will always be limitations that must be expected because its a game, not reality, it would be grand to show every bullet that hits the plane perfectly as to its location, but its not feasible. So instead we currently get Puffs or smoke, or mabye a flash or a ricochet, and we see a major damage event, but not small ones.
Also factor in "No Cumulative damage" which means if you shot a spot and it has no noteable damageable effect, for instance shooting a tank with an Armor piercing round, you can shoot that same spot all day and you will never drill through it by wearing it down. For them to track that they would once again require alot of bandwidth and fidelity then their can afford to for CPU and Bandwidth. Its a known and accepted limitation, but yet you still see players complaining that they shot something 50 times and no result. How of those 50 shots hit the exact same place would be my first question.
Add on top this again the fact that no aim is perfect, nor is every shot, even from the same angle, speed etc made from a vehicle travelling at hundreds of miles per hour, targeting another object moving at similiar speeds and you get people who believe that because in days of old the model was much simpler, as well as the damage incurred from hits was tallied more globably to the model as compared to now they still see hits or puffs of smoke but not the same old results that the system is wrong or broken. Well from my perspective I perfer to see it as being more less broken, and interesting because its not an "X ammunt of hits = result" type system.
Now just for the heck of it lets add one of my pet "wants" to the mix. There is no structural damage which is a major part of the equation that sets the damage model apart from reality. In reality a damaged wing is very likely to fail if pushed, in this game a big hole in the wing is not going to stop you from pulling a 3-4G bank turn to avoid that incoming bandit. Its the same reason that bombers are doing barrel rolls with full loads of bombs. Ya its wrong but one day it will be right, and until then players can choose themselves to fly right, if they don't well then they get to relearn how to fly and fight in a bomber when it does happen. Just like many of us had to relearn something else when it changed... change is apart of the game. You either see it coming and prepare for it, or you don't and you feel cheated in the end. The choice is entirely up to you the end-user.
I guess my biggest problems with alot of rants and issues people have with this game is because:
a) Its a game and limitations will always mean that the game will never perfectly mimic reality.
b) Things will change that will make the game more difficult then before or old tricks no longer work as they used to.
c) Players often aren't willing to accept change as a challenge and try to change their gameplay to overcome that change.
If anyone was wondering who I was in WW2OL they very likely know now if they have seen any of my recent posts. Because they all run this same vein of thought. Most of the complainers about what is "broken" in this game are simply players who don't like the fact that this game moves forward and changes becoming more challenging and varied with each patch. Ya sometimes I see changes I don't like too, the difference is that I don't put on a tin-foil hat and start screaming NERF! I sit back and look at it from more then just my perspective, taking in the big picture as it were. That and I've actually had to debug some of my own problems, and deal with players yelling at me because I coded something into a game which they didn't agree with.
I have nothing but mucho respect for the Rats, even though they have made a few decisions along the way that effectively killed off my squad and made the game less fun at times for many of us. I understand they made hard choices and hope that one day when they can things will change once more for the better in those areas. Its very easy to judge others actions when you can pick and choose your the issues, its alot harder when you have to keep your eye on the whole ball of wax.
No game is perfect, but not every change is a nerf or a fix. Its just a change. And change is going to happen wether you like it or not in a system this large, complex, and inter-related. That is a fact.
I like the way light bombers regularly take FOUR 40mm Bofors hits and keep on flying with no problem. And most of the time, tiny little single engine fighters take a 40mm Bofors hit with no problem at all.
Or you can shoot all of your MG ammunition into a light bomber or spitfire, but it wont do anything.
Comments
Still no fix. Been going on 6 months now.
Marine Div CO
Marine Div CO
I wasnt talking about nerfing the lifting surfaces of the 109, I was talking about the nerfing of the cannons.
But if you want to explain how the lift got nerfed on the 109, Del, go right ahead.
well i thought i just explained that nerf, they removed the star wars type 3rd wing therefore you had it remoddled to reflect a ww2 fighter and not a tie fighter.
as for the bullets being nerfed wasn't that removing the HE bug that stopped you killing all the Allied Armour with your MG Cannon ? as was supposed to be the case ?
you say nerf'd but the reality is it was modelled as it should have been.
Marine Div CO
Marine Div CO
Hmmm thats funny Nerf because I've flown the 109e and f quite a bit after the supposed nerfing and imagine what I found. Your cannon's seemed to work fairly similiarly to other cannon types on the allied side, atleast as much as could be expected considering all planes aside from Hurricane mk2 and Spitfire mk5 have different belt loadouts, and not to mention different fuzing, and exlposive component ammounts, shell casing characteristics, velocity etc.
One thing I did pick up on with discussions with Axis pilots that I respect a great deal is that the 20mm changed ALOT after the HE bug fix and the damage model audit which is still incomplete for single seat fighters, needing Visual Damage Model hooks.
Now I'm not saying there isn't something wrong because I honestly can't do all the math and formulating to come up with physics algorithms that prove or disprove the Rats work. But what I do expect is others who claim it is wrong to provide some proof as to the problem as they see it and then present it to the rats and get their verdict on things, and then if its determined to be a genuine fault as has been proven many times by both players and developers it will get fixed when there is available time given the nature of the problem.
All I know for certain is that the only thing that has been provided as proof to it being wrong, is 50+ year old grainy guncam footage of real life shots versus game guncam's.
Now lets be objective here shall we....
First, one is reality, which is known to have variance, and difference. Even scientific methodology allows for a factor variation because nothing is ever 100% perfectly the same, if you dig far enough this is fact. No plane of the same type ever flies exactly the same as another, no gun of the same type has exactly the same ammount of dispersion etc as another. This very game tries to model this and more by accepting limitations in coding but by still providing a factor of variance in result determined by a multitude of factors.
That alone is what I think causes alot of these discussions. Nothing ever provides a duplicate effect because there is so much being factored in the ballistics calculations against the actions or reactions of the object which can also have variation that a bullet into an engine might kill it, or just as likely only cause a slow oil leak, or ricochet off with no perceptible damage. That is fidelity imo. Not a bug. Please understand that difference.
Now on top of this thre is also other factors, "Rubber-banding" or prediction coding which is required in a game of this size and scope coupled with the fact that both the infantry whocan run so many miles and hour occupies the same world as a plane that travels at 400 mile per hour across that same world and both need to function and interact at some levels together yet apart. Each has different levels of physics operating on them. And that system will over time be improved upon, sometimes as a result of changing the system, sometimes as a result of another inter-related system being changed such as the new Update system in the works, it effects all things but will affect them differently too. See what I'm getting at?
Now lets add in limited Visual cues, because the rats have admitted that they have to limit ammount of detail and feedback for our actions because it would hog up bandwidth reporting all those states to each and every player who can see it change. They hope with a better update system they can increase it but there will always be limitations that must be expected because its a game, not reality, it would be grand to show every bullet that hits the plane perfectly as to its location, but its not feasible. So instead we currently get Puffs or smoke, or mabye a flash or a ricochet, and we see a major damage event, but not small ones.
Also factor in "No Cumulative damage" which means if you shot a spot and it has no noteable damageable effect, for instance shooting a tank with an Armor piercing round, you can shoot that same spot all day and you will never drill through it by wearing it down. For them to track that they would once again require alot of bandwidth and fidelity then their can afford to for CPU and Bandwidth. Its a known and accepted limitation, but yet you still see players complaining that they shot something 50 times and no result. How of those 50 shots hit the exact same place would be my first question.
Add on top this again the fact that no aim is perfect, nor is every shot, even from the same angle, speed etc made from a vehicle travelling at hundreds of miles per hour, targeting another object moving at similiar speeds and you get people who believe that because in days of old the model was much simpler, as well as the damage incurred from hits was tallied more globably to the model as compared to now they still see hits or puffs of smoke but not the same old results that the system is wrong or broken. Well from my perspective I perfer to see it as being more less broken, and interesting because its not an "X ammunt of hits = result" type system.
Now just for the heck of it lets add one of my pet "wants" to the mix. There is no structural damage which is a major part of the equation that sets the damage model apart from reality. In reality a damaged wing is very likely to fail if pushed, in this game a big hole in the wing is not going to stop you from pulling a 3-4G bank turn to avoid that incoming bandit. Its the same reason that bombers are doing barrel rolls with full loads of bombs. Ya its wrong but one day it will be right, and until then players can choose themselves to fly right, if they don't well then they get to relearn how to fly and fight in a bomber when it does happen. Just like many of us had to relearn something else when it changed... change is apart of the game. You either see it coming and prepare for it, or you don't and you feel cheated in the end. The choice is entirely up to you the end-user.
I guess my biggest problems with alot of rants and issues people have with this game is because:
a) Its a game and limitations will always mean that the game will never perfectly mimic reality.
b) Things will change that will make the game more difficult then before or old tricks no longer work as they used to.
c) Players often aren't willing to accept change as a challenge and try to change their gameplay to overcome that change.
If anyone was wondering who I was in WW2OL they very likely know now if they have seen any of my recent posts. Because they all run this same vein of thought. Most of the complainers about what is "broken" in this game are simply players who don't like the fact that this game moves forward and changes becoming more challenging and varied with each patch. Ya sometimes I see changes I don't like too, the difference is that I don't put on a tin-foil hat and start screaming NERF! I sit back and look at it from more then just my perspective, taking in the big picture as it were. That and I've actually had to debug some of my own problems, and deal with players yelling at me because I coded something into a game which they didn't agree with.
I have nothing but mucho respect for the Rats, even though they have made a few decisions along the way that effectively killed off my squad and made the game less fun at times for many of us. I understand they made hard choices and hope that one day when they can things will change once more for the better in those areas. Its very easy to judge others actions when you can pick and choose your the issues, its alot harder when you have to keep your eye on the whole ball of wax.
No game is perfect, but not every change is a nerf or a fix. Its just a change. And change is going to happen wether you like it or not in a system this large, complex, and inter-related. That is a fact.
Just my .02 cents on the matter.
I like the way light bombers regularly take FOUR 40mm Bofors hits and keep on flying with no problem. And most of the time, tiny little single engine fighters take a 40mm Bofors hit with no problem at all.
Or you can shoot all of your MG ammunition into a light bomber or spitfire, but it wont do anything.
I also like the way bombers outmaneuver 109s.
nerf09 is not the plane its the pilot
u must suck in the air if u can be outmanuevered with a bomber
The only Hungarian squad in WWII Online
HUN HQ: http://www.wwiionline.hu