Відео

@@jaydeister9305 the La-5 is a big step up with that powerful engine

@СергейГалс I don't remember what I used for this mission but typically for ground attack 350 m sometimes up to 400 m

@Temeluchas interesting. I have tried clusters in the IL-2 and I think they got patched recently so might try a mission with them fir this campaign. I wonder if command was trying to avoid making big craters that would hamper ground forces retaking the territory

@@DunkzGam1ng, To be honest, I have a strong suspicion that the whole "craters made by our aircraft hampered our forces" thing was just an easy way for ground forces commanders to cover up their own screw-ups =) For example, during the third assault on Sevastopol in June 1942, the Germans concentrated a quarter of their bombers on the Eastern front against a target area of roughly 30x30 km, making about 15,000 bomber sorties in a month. There were no complaints about craters or rubble despite the terrain combining mountains and built-up areas with mostly stone buildings. A couple months later, the very same aircraft (VIII Fliegerkorps) bombed Stalingrad. They dropped less bomb tonnage on a wider area and easier terrain with mostly wooden buildings. The ground forces complained about craters and rubble. The difference - Sevastopol was successfully taken, Stalingrad wasn't. And I can't remember any instances of soviet ground commanders complaining about craters hampering them. They also regularly used the Air Force as a convenient scapegoat, just in other ways =) The issue is in hyperfixation on a certain group of targets. Against troops, truck columns, artillery batteries and other relatively soft but dispersed targets, it is better to drop 12x35kg than 2x250kg - a large number of smaller bombs produces a bigger area of effect. If you bomb large hardened targets like buildings - it's the other way around. Why the local command focused so hard on "soft dispersed targets" is unknown. At least the documents explaining this decision have not been found yet. Moreover, since the Black Sea Fleet aviation's logistics was also routed through ground forces, they had to fly anti-shipping strikes in 1943 with essentially anti-personnel munitions (mostly 25-35kg fragmentation bombs, sometimes even with AJ-2 incendiary cluster bombs). By November 1943, they switched to PTABs (anti-tank clusters) as an anti-ship weapon. PTABs weren't good at sinking ships but very good at damaging them and forcing prolonged repairs, so the number of ships available for the Germans rapidly declined. Only by spring 1944 did FAB-100s start being used regularly for anti-shipping strikes. Still not optimal (in the Baltics and in the North, naval aviation switched from 100 kg to 250-500-1000 kg bombs by late 1943) but effective enough to make the evacuation of Crimea painful for the Germans and Romanians.

@Temeluchas Its a shame there are no anti-ship missions in the game for the kuban campaign. I think the devs missed a trick there

@@DunkzGam1ng@DunkzGam1ng Partially, it is for historical reasons - if we exclude the bombing of ports, only 1 regiment of Il-2s and 1 regiment of fighters from the Black Sea Fleet flew anti-ship missions. The "Sea Dragons" campaign is dedicated to this Il-2 regiment. But then again, only a small portion of missions in this campaign are against shipping. Partly for historical reasons - even though the regiment was singled out for anti-shipping duties, only about 1/3 of their sorties were against naval targets. But the campaign's author also complained that creating a historically accurate convoy was virtually impossible due to issues with the ships AI.

the game engine throws in too many limitations i think, i hope for Korea they develop a game engine, environment and mission generation system that can bring the single player experience to life alot more

it was more a case of knowing which direction they were likely to be heading in from and then it helps that they were co-alt. generally i play on balanced graphics settings when flying a mission. playing on a 1080p monitor helps i think, at 1440p everything is smaller lol

@@DunkzGam1ng To know? Unlikely. Even on the UA-cam video, I see planes standing out superbly not only against the background of the sky, but also against the background of the ground. If I had them visible like that, I would have continued to play this game. But I don't have the same visibility of contacts as you do.

i understand the frustration, i do not find it easy to spot in this game and when I watch a flight track recording it often seems like the planes look much clearer compared to when i am actually flying the mission. I often use a 1080p monitor with low to medium settings and i think it helps because i think sometimes the game just doesn't render planes if it is struggling for CPU/GPU resources. One tip is to spot from normal pilot head view without zooming in. When you zoom in, planes will not render unless they are <5km or so. My PC is 7 years old so it should be possible with practice for anyone to improve and tweak graphic settings.

@@DunkzGam1ng Thank you. I'll try to use your advice.

@СергейГалс I use the track recording of the mission, when watching the recording press F11 for free Camera then you can move the camera over target and thats how I take the recon footage. You can also use F11 when you are flying the mission

I see. I thought you had this data before the mission.

@СергейГалс I start the mission to get the recon then I restart and do the mission in full

i had to clench myself...

@lazaglider kuban #9 will release this weekend. Short break nearly over

@old_guard2431 maybe I can add the code myself to the game: IF mountain ahead THEN pull up

@@jonwood8648 devs can't seem to do AI :(

yes one of the biggest problems with the AI is they can sometimes all be going after 1 plane, and sometimes crash into each other as they scramble to get the kill

probably the #1 skill to learn

@BasmatiJones Good point. I have a feeling the AI bombers are not programmed very well in Column formation, the bombs tend to overlap alot , but certainly for this kind of target attacking on the long axis would work

I cant write a comment? Test test

@@Bleihagel worked

Glad you enjoyed it!

Glad you like them!

probably Normandy campaign after Kuban! i started the Spit missions then stopped for Stalingrad

@old_guard2431 correct!

@old_guard2431 There is also a tracking mode in opentrack called "Neuralnet" which tracks your face without the need for the headgear. I've not tried it yet

@@DunkzGam1ng the annoying thing is I have a TrackIR out there in the world somewhere. Bought it back in the dawn of cyber time (6-7 years ago) but they haven’t changed it. Worked pretty well once I took care of windows, electric lights etc. It starts to look like it is easier to finesse TrackIR issues than make another system work. (Or maybe just do DCS for awhile.)

@@old_guard2431 maybe. I never tried trackir. Maybe i try neuralnet and do a video in it

yes ,i would have thought 50% would be a fair split between me and the rocket boats

@old_guard2431 the il-2 is a flying tank after all!

the top and belly guns are 12.7 mm, and yes they can 1-shot a 109. aiming them accurately is v tough tho