COD Bugtracker

Founding grounds of ACG.

Moderator: Board of Directors

Mauf
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:18 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Mauf » Sat May 07, 2016 5:34 pm

Yep. And that thing is actually strong enough to dewing the Hurricane (though you need to hit pretty close to the wingroot front).

User avatar
Dickie
Group Captain
Group Captain
ACG Board
Posts: 13149
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:15 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, England

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Dickie » Mon May 09, 2016 10:26 am

Mauf, I had heard of this stuff but we need to make this a bit of a mission for you if you accept.

1. Get as many ACG to upvote this as possible
2a. Make the Luftwaffe aware that this ammo type is banned from campaign (unenforcible but there is honour here). This ban directive is from me, nobody should be using it.
2b. In order to soften the blow I think we should make it formal that DeWilde is limited to 2 guns maximum. I know some breach this already, but it's unsporting and just not cricket (or historically accurate)
Image

Mauf
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:18 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Mauf » Mon May 09, 2016 11:11 am

Oi.

1. Sure thing, I'll address it next sunday mission before briefing when everyone is around.
2a. Would best be done by you or Pitti?
2b. Agreed. Clearification though: 2 pure belts or the equivalent of up to 2 belts (spread among for example 4 guns)?

Rowns
Posts: 722
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:27 am

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Rowns » Mon May 09, 2016 11:28 am

Kuntz wrote:Mauf, I had heard of this stuff but we need to make this a bit of a mission for you if you accept.

1. Get as many ACG to upvote this as possible
2a. Make the Luftwaffe aware that this ammo type is banned from campaign (unenforcible but there is honour here). This ban directive is from me, nobody should be using it.
2b. In order to soften the blow I think we should make it formal that DeWilde is limited to 2 guns maximum. I know some breach this already, but it's unsporting and just not cricket (or historically accurate)
1. I already upvoted.
2a. I will see what kind of ammo I am using becuase I don't know what ammo I use. Will remove the ammo if needed.
Last edited by Rowns on Mon May 09, 2016 11:41 am, edited 2 times in total.

Macnihilist
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:17 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Macnihilist » Mon May 09, 2016 11:37 am

Kuntz wrote: 2a. Make the Luftwaffe aware that this ammo type is banned from campaign (unenforcible but there is honour here). This ban directive is from me, nobody should be using it.
2b. In order to soften the blow I think we should make it formal that DeWilde is limited to 2 guns maximum. I know some breach this already, but it's unsporting and just not cricket (or historically accurate)
I've been flying around with a good amount of Uebungsmunition in my belts for quite some time and I think I've also been on the receiving end a few times. While I agree that it does more damage than it should, it is nowhere near the rifle-caliber HE superbullet that some make it appear to be.

I don't see the need to restrict single amunition types, but if we start doing that, we might as well go the whole nine yards and agree on a single historical loadout for each plane. Otherwise we might end up discussing each bullet type again and again. Just a suggestion.

Mauf
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:18 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Mauf » Mon May 09, 2016 12:45 pm

Hoi Macnihilist.

Problem is that the Uebungsmunition does a little more than just "more damage". It rides out the strange damage modelling for explosive damage types currently in CloD. 7,92 mm ammo didn't shoot off wings or parts of wings in reality.

While yes, you could start a wholesale discussion about what ammo type to use, a clear and historical recommendation can be given in this situation: DeWilde should remain on 1 to 2 guns max. 7,92mm HE ammo was just not real. One is about the amount of one bullet type, the other is about not using one specific type at all.

To Rowns: Thanks mate, you've been among the earliest LW voters too:)

Macnihilist
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:17 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Macnihilist » Mon May 09, 2016 1:31 pm

I can't remember I've seen a wing shot off by Uebungsmunition. Control surfaces fly off and are shredded and that's probably not correct, but if you compare it with other ammo types the difference is actually not flabbergasting. I don't see Uebungsmunition as HE, more as fragmentation/shredding - a bit like (I imagine) the real B-Patrone was. (O god, it starts already... ;) )

A lot of things are off in CloD, particularly in the damage model, but the Uebungsmunition is definitely not on the top of my list. (But it is _on_ the list. :) ) I just don't see what warrants an official directive in this case.

In my opinion we should either have standardized loadouts or everybody is free to do what they want. So now DeWilde and Uebungsmunition are restricted. What about mineshells? What about AP? You'll soon have to specify limits for pretty much everything, and then you might as well start with a historic standard. If it's a mere recommendation to use historic loadouts there's not need for action, I think we already have that recommendation somewhere. If it's going to be a hard rule, make it a sensible rule. If you introduce official restrictions they have to be consistent and logical. All I'm asking is that the officials really think (and talk) about it and don't make it an impetuous 'quick shot'.
Especially because it probably won't stop with loadouts. What about flying at emergency power for hours (both sides)? What about fighting at altitudes where the performance of a certain plane is hampered by bugs? And so on and so on.

Anyway, do what you want, if it does make sense to me I'll consider it.

Dave
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 8:58 am
Location: Northants, England

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Dave » Mon May 09, 2016 4:32 pm

*Ahem*
Our objective is to provide an unpressurised, non-competitive and friendly environment in which to enjoy combat operations
I agree with Mac. I definitely hope TF fix the ammo in question, but banning certain types of ammo from campaign is going a bit far, IMO. Just my 2 cents but I'd prefer ACG's list of rules and regulations not become needlessly inflated.

Mauf
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:18 pm

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Mauf » Mon May 09, 2016 4:36 pm

Agree with Dave...

For the running campaign until 5.0 we can live with it and the request that LW pilots not use it (in the hopes of good sportsmanship) just as the RAF pilots sticking to the 1-2 guns of DW.

I would reconsider defining mandatory loadouts for both sides if TF 5.0 doesn't touch it though (which would pose the question of enforcibility).

Until then, please upvote the bug to increase the chance of it being addressed:D

User avatar
Dickie
Group Captain
Group Captain
ACG Board
Posts: 13149
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:15 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, England

Re: COD Bugtracker

Post by Dickie » Mon May 09, 2016 8:55 pm

Banning is is the same as asking people not to use it.
Image

Post Reply