PDA

View Full Version : I just got shot down by a Val..



irR4tiOn4L
05-18-2005, 08:46 AM
Hey all a funny story and a little whine about the AI Flight models in PF today. Ive got a track of it too!

I set up a nice quick turkey shoot coop of three P38's scrambling against 15 Vals using the UQMG, then proceeded to test it in game.

All good and well at first, scramble into the air, zoom climb a couple of times to reach the Vals, then proceed to attack..

The Vals in the meantime begin their attack runs, begin to reform afterwards, the P38's give good chase, no AI crashes, so im thinking the missions all good for a quick shoot with friends.

Lazily i begin to shoot at a few Vals myself, attacking a couple, blowing one up when in the process of tearing another Val to bits i find tracers wizzing past my plane.

Thinking nothing of it i bank left and begin to set up a perpendicular attack when i look back and find a Val acting like its a Zero - about 100m back its using its front guns in a futile effort to down my P38.

At first im quite amused. Those peashooters arent doing much, so i tighten the turn moderately and watch the Val, expecting it to drop back. Not so. The Val is handling this like a pro, tighten up and still firing intermittently.

Ok i think, and throw in combat flaps and a lot more elevator - the plane shudders as it goes to the edges of its capabilities. And yet this Val is still sticking to my 6 like glue, 70 or so metres back firing to its heart's content. By now im thinking this is not right.

Looking back at this thing i overdo the tightening a little and the plane lurches back as the aileron controls reverse. May as well i think and roll into a fast right - the roll rate of the Val should be insufficient to follow this meanouver. For once im right - the Val rolls slower and doesnt get a lead, though its still very much right behind me.

So i throw the P38 into a loop under to gain some speed and lose this marauding bomber with an identity crises. However, the cocky thing rolls into a dive after me, pulls after my P38 shooting all the while. Im getting pretty annoyed by now as i enter a loop over straight out of the loop under with all that excess speed - the Val is looking directly down and moving slower, my angle of attack favourable in relation to his - he should not be able to follow.

And of course thats exactly what he does. Leading all the while, the cocky bastard pulls out of his own dive flawlessly and goes vertical shooting all the while.

His incessant gunfire gets to my engine and it catches fire. Im out of there and bail, watching as the Val does its little victory half roll and goes inverted. This guy is flying the wrong occupation!

Conclusions? Moving through the formation of Vals and slowing to fire behind one is of course sloppy and not a serious effort. Thats how the guy got on my tail. I wasnt exactly concentrating on a fight either, but those turns were pretty tight - a lot tighter than a Val should manage. Not to mention those reversals, half rolls, dives and loops - this Val hung on through it all.

Which leads me to ask - what is up with the AI flight models? This isnt the first thing that annoyed me - zeros getting out-turned by hellcats, planes crashing into mountains and bombers getting into infinite barrel rolls following their formation were really getting to me. But this is just ludicrous - i refuse to believe that even with all the silly stuff that i was pulling a Val would be able to hang on to a P38.

So i guess i gotta ask what happened since IL-2?

Buzzsaw-
05-18-2005, 09:18 AM
Salute

The Val will outturn most USN Fighters. Playing their game and trying to turn with them is a recipe for a watery grave.

The Stuka will also outturn a lot of USAAF Fighters, try the Ju-87G with the two 37mm cannon, it will make mincemeat out of a group of P-47's which try to turn.

irR4tiOn4L
05-18-2005, 09:34 AM
The plot thickens!! (Btw if anyone wants tracks of these just ask)

Deciding he didnt have enough action for one day, our mighty Val, this time flown by yours truly, decided he was going to show a lone P38 whos boss - flying over the Pacific Islands at 3000, the mighty Val pulls the P38 to the deck with black smoke billowing from one of the P38's engines and both siezed up, forcing the hapless P38 to land in the sand and ignomiously run away as our Val triumphantly strafes the wreckage. As testimony to the incredible skills of Val, not a single hit was scored upon the warrior in sheep's wings.

No my friends, this is the real deal. Dont like stalls and spins? Thats fine because no matter where you put the stick at full deflection the Val will not spin. Stalls are incredibly mild also, the Val stalls at an incredibly low 120 kmh.

Honestly is this normal?

LEXX_Luthor
05-18-2005, 09:45 AM
the Val will not spin. Stalls are incredibly mild also,
SBD too.


At first im quite amused. Those peashooters arent doing much, so i tighten the turn...
lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

I must say, this community accurately models the 1941 USAAF pilot community. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

irR4tiOn4L
05-18-2005, 10:07 AM
I know these things werent the buses they are made out to be but why bother making it a flyable with such a flight model?

lol i know its funny in a way especially with that initial peashooter impression - the only way that I brought down that P38 when i gave it a shot was by siezing its engines - it barely stratched the skin and cabin proper at all - but i find these inconsistencies very frustrating. I dont have IL-2 FB or AEP, so its either this or IL-2 Demo.. and IL-2 demo is winning at the moment.

MajorBloodnok
05-18-2005, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I must say, this community accurately models the 1941 USAAF pilot community. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif LOL

irR4tiOn4L
05-18-2005, 10:13 AM
hmm yes the American pilots must have thought the same thing coming up against a zero in 42 - though not for long.

Funny that because i am not american.

NORAD_NITRO
05-18-2005, 10:45 AM
More zeros were shot down by hellcats than corsairs. Even though its bigger. Goes to show you that smaller birds dont always turn better than bigger ones

ElAurens
05-18-2005, 10:55 AM
The Val is quite nimble once it is unfettered by bombs. In the early stages of the war the IJN used it as an auxillary fighter.

It's FM is not wrong, your tactics are.

I have bagged a P80 whilst flying the Val online.
The silly buffoon tried to turn with me....

Freycinet
05-18-2005, 11:13 AM
...you just don't turn with a Val in a P-38. Dive away and boom 'n zoom him to death at high speed. This game doesn't have dodgy FM's. What is does is teaching you an aviation history lesson!

DIRTY-MAC
05-18-2005, 11:21 AM
Up to 1942 the Val was a very good fighter after releasing its bombs, and they were often used as this, I shoot down droves of people online with this bird, It can kill everything because everybody underestimate it, its infact a **** good dogfighter, the SBD isnt that bad either it can also dogfight,Its not a good gunplatform, but that SBD reargunner is deadly,

I would like to se wich the Val is closest to in turnrate, Zero or I16? anybody wanna do some tests?

MajorBloodnok
05-18-2005, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Freycinet:
...you just don't turn with a Val in a P-38. Dive away and boom 'n zoom him to death at high speed. This game doesn't have dodgy FM's. What is does is teaching you an aviation history lesson! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

vocatx
05-18-2005, 01:38 PM
I flew the Val for the first time last night, on line. It is a very good T&B'er once you unload the bombs.
If you really want to have fun, do what I did off-line one night. Set up a QMB flying a Sturmovik against ten or fifteen He111s. I knocked down a whole flight of twelve and never got closer than 1 k. I've also shot down FWs and Me 109s with it (off-line).

Atomic_Marten
05-18-2005, 03:41 PM
It's easy to be smart now, but if I were in your place I would firewall the throttle in shallow dive if I got that ego maniac on my 6.

After minute or so, he should be on safe distance and then I can start to climb a bit. After that it is only a matter of patience. D3A should not be able to avoid pathetic fate.

A lot of bomber guys in D3A are using dive brakes for tighter turn and for getting enemy fighter to overshoot them. So they have quite capability in turn fight.

DuxCorvan
05-18-2005, 04:26 PM
Everybody knows that D3As were superb turners and were good dogfighters once they had released ordnance, and that was suicidal to turn n burn Vals in a P-38...

Well, not everybody. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

BTW, yes, a Hellcat could turn with a Zero... at high speeds, where zeros had compressibility problems.

VW-IceFire
05-18-2005, 04:53 PM
irR4tiOn4L, you were doing quite good until I read the bit about trying to turn him. And I guessed the rest of it before I even finished reading.

The Val is really not all that heavy of an aircraft and it has two huge high lift wings. Take one for a spin as you have done and you quickly learn that this plane has no problems turning...I have no idea what the wingloading on this plane is but its very high. Which is also why its QUITE slow.

With a P-38 the proper move to be pulling, once the Val pretended to be fighter (it was actually pressed into service as a fighter on a few occasions), was to go into a shallow dive away and then climb up, over, and back down on the Val. This is the kind of game that the P-38 is very good at pulling...particularly against slower opponents.

Does the AI do some wacky and sometimes unrealistic things? Yes....it annoys me too...but it doesn't do it half as often as people suggest it does here. Does a Hellcat out turn a Zero...only above 350-400mph where the Zero's control surfaces lock up. Does it here....yep! Do most pilots know that? Nope! Does the Hellcat have a perfect FM? Nope...its got some bugs...as does everything.

The key is, had you employed the type of manuvers that P-38 pilots were told to employ...the ones that made several P-38 pilots famous, that Val would have been toast...no matter what the AI was doing.

LEXX is entirely correct. The community mirrors the USAAF fighter community circa 1941.

Freycinet
05-18-2005, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
The Val is really not all that heavy of an aircraft and it has two huge high lift wings. Take one for a spin as you have done and you quickly learn that this plane has no problems turning...I have no idea what the wingloading on this plane is but its very high. Which is also why its QUITE slow.


hmm, that would be LOW wingloading, I'd say...

irR4tiOn4L
05-19-2005, 12:04 AM
I find this totally ludicrous and untill someone shows me something more than opinion to challenge my own opinion I will refuse to believe that the Val could turn as well as it does in this game. It goes against every observation i have ever seen and against every other flight sim out there.

I am not of american descent, i do not care for american fighters (it is my friend who wanted the P38) but i do percieve enough to find inconsistencies in this area. At no point did the Val while under my control even begin producing wingtip trails! The thing never came anywhere near a reversal, spin or stall other than by low speed. The suggestions im hearing that this is normal is ridiculous. The IJN would simply have converted the Vals into a brilliant double crewed fighter.

I am also well aware of the difference between the hellcat, wildcat and zero. The hellcat is arguably what turned the pacific war around. However it did not achieve this with superior turning at speeds less than 300km/h - it used hit and run tactics. US pilot was warned not to dogfight with a zero - and while the player Hellcat FM is great, the AI hellcat FM allows it to outturn a player zero with ease.

Finally i respect everyones opinion but I will not be swayed easily. I am open minded and can be swayed with good proof, not opinion as loosely founded as my own. I will look into this myself in an effort to form a more complete understanding but in the meantime anything else known here by others is very welcome - just dont expect to convince/lecture me easily.

irR4tiOn4L
05-19-2005, 12:13 AM
can i just ask on what a few people based there - "i can down some planes online with the val, therefore it was great up to 42/start of war" - arguments on?

Also please, please spare me the advice - if i wanted to know how a P38 can kill a Val i would have simply kept playing the game. I posted here to pass along a funny story (which seems to have been unappreciated this far) and have a little whine about what i by all of my subjective impressions (that is not a very solid foundation) believe is an incorrect flight model. Many people disagree, and this is good - but we need a lot more evidence here (that goes for me too of course!).

irR4tiOn4L
05-19-2005, 12:26 AM
It seems i should have given more credit to the Val - by the account of some sources it could turn with a zero. So it seems this was no bus of an aircraft.

But thinking objectively, is it really true that the handling of the Val was this good? The thing wont stall or spin, it leaves no wing trails in heavy meanouvers and eats the zero in meanouvrability - was it really that good?

pourshot
05-19-2005, 02:18 AM
The reason the Val can turn so tightly is all down to its wing. Because it has to carry bombs and take off from aircraft carriers it needs a wing with very good lift. The upside to this is when turning hard at low speed it can turn onto its own tail making it one hell of a fighter if anyone was crazy enough to want to dogfight it, the down side is it will be slow because of excess drag. Later in the war speed was more valuable than turning prowess and a trend was started towards thinner faster wings.

I have a story here of a Hurricane pilot almost being out turned by a German Dornier bomber, he was nearly shot down because he was flying slow at tree level and could not turn away to disengage after his ammo ran out.

So even if the flight model for the Val is not 100% historically correct the situation you found your self in is, and the moral is don€t turn with these little buggers instead extend and fight him at a speed where you have the advantage.

reverendkrv1972
05-19-2005, 03:00 AM
notice a pattern in the replies here ?

Time and Time again I fly Zero's & ki43's online to have people blissfully 'unaware'* in their other planes,that they can NOT turn with me,everytime someone does I smile.

you cant turn with the Japanese stuff,dont try it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

spitfire can come close with a decent pilot,but ultimately given enough time,the spit is going down,the only hope these guys have is if their wingmen turn up,even then it will not neccessarily be easy for them.

Regards,


Rev

*read Ignorant?
or 'oh look its a 'rubbish' plane i can take it no problem'?

DIRTY-MAC
05-19-2005, 03:12 AM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
can i just ask on what a few people based there - "i can down some planes online with the val, therefore it was great up to 42/start of war" - arguments on?


That was not my argument!
If you read books and pilot accounts you will
see that it infact could dogfight and sometimes did so,and could manage pretty well, up to 42,

It has nothing to do that I dogfight and shoot down alot of enemys with it online, that is just plain fact, because I do it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
so forget the
I can down some planes online with the val, therefore it was great up to 42/start of war.
that was not what I meant http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Also please, please spare me the advice - if i wanted to know how a P38 can kill a Val i would have simply kept playing the game. I posted here to pass along a funny story (which seems to have been unappreciated this far) and have a little whine about what i by all of my subjective impressions (that is not a very solid foundation) believe is an incorrect flight model. Many people disagree, and this is good - but we need a lot more evidence here (that goes for me too of course!).

If you post here at the "UBIZOO" there is always gonna be alot of childish unpolite answers from whiseguys, who wants to pic a fight,
you just have to learn to ignore it,
and by all means don't end up there your self. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



here i a cool thing:

Quotes - D3A


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Early in 1943, dive bomber units started receiving the new Type 99 dive bombers called model 22. There were not much difference in the airframe, but it had a more powerful engine and was faster than the model 11. We started testing the new planes immediately.

I was ordered to carry out a fuel consumption test with a 250kg (550lb) bomb. I flew for one hour at 5,000 meters as specified, and came back to the base on Takeshima (Truk). It was then that I was struck with a strange idea.

"Can this thing, with the more powerful motor, be looped with the bombload?"

I knew that the unit commander was watching from below, but I could not resist the temptation to put my idea into practice, and decided that this was going to be a part of the testing today.

"Here we go!" I put the plane in a dive, and pushed the throttle lever forward to full throttle. The plane collected airspeed as it dove, and hit 180 knots. This is the normal speed where we start loop maneuvers but I went further and waited until speed came up to 220 knots.

"Now" I pulled back gradually and started the loop. The engine was screaming at full throttle. The airframe seemed to withstand the terrific G. The plane was climbing, drawing a vertical circle. I looked at the wings and on both wings, the outer panels developed small waves on the surface from the stress of the loop. The G effect to my body was not as bad as it would be pulling out of a dive bombing run. Eventaully I was on the top of the loop, fully inverted, and began to see the horizon. Speed was 80 knots.

"It's okay now" I thought. The bomb was still hanging on the belly of the plane which was now going into a dive, drawing a full loop.

"I did it!" I yelled. I was probably the only fool who ever looped a Type 99 with a 250kg bomb.

Kunio Kosemoto, Chief Petty Officer


anybody else has any good info to post about the Val?

irR4tiOn4L
05-19-2005, 09:59 PM
ok lets get a few things straight though - the val could turn with a zero, not twice as rapidly as one. It also could not resist the effects a hard turn would have in creating wing trails and hammering the control surfaces would still result in a reversal, stall and even spin. Why are these not present with the in-game model?

See my biggest gripe here is not that i was killed by a Val - i found it hilarious at the time, even more so now that ive learnt they were great dogfighters - its the way that thing moved in game that got to me - combined with other problems in the game.

I fly the zero more than anything - and i know that it can out-turn a P38 with ease, but even a zero could not manage what i could with that Val. Even worse, if an AI hellcat gets on your tail in the game (when flying a zero) it is nearly impossible to outturn it at all speeds - despite this being historically incorrect for most speeds - yet when you fly the hellcat or a human player uses one, they have no hope of keeping with the zero.

Why do these problems exist? Didnt 1C have enough technical data to produce a proper Val flight model? and why are the AI FM so much more meanouvrable than the player ones?

shinden1974
05-19-2005, 11:41 PM
I was skeptical...but tried it out and your right, stall is very forgiving. SBD same thing, very difficult to put the gladiator into a violent stall, but it goes.

I don't know anything about the D3A technically other than it's wingloading is very low, lower than the zero's, Of course this doesn't help some of the bi-planes which stall rather easily. A big complaint I've read around here is "plane X goes into a hyper-violent stall too easily!!!"

About the AI, I don't think it's really more maneuverable, it's just capable of doing everything perfectly and seeing all around it with the perfect eye. It's a good thing for off line players that the AI seems to have trouble with low angle deflection shots or it would probably get a lot more complaints. It never misses head-on, never misses from the 6 and the vet and elite levels will be nearly perfect with a high angle shot from above.

I've shaken off hellcats below 200 mph, which is a speed you never really want to be at with other bandits hanging around, I outturn the AI all the time, I doubt human players will be that stupid. In fact I tried a 4 vs 4 with the A6M5b and shot down 3 AI hellcats...after they wiped out the rest of my squad in short order. it's dumb tactically and tries to dogfight. I pretty much tear AI zero's apart with the hellcat, by staying high, diving and ignoring hartmann's advice on gunnery. so I'm not all that worried about it.

ku101-Shrike
05-20-2005, 12:23 PM
The val is modelled quite accurately in PF, if you take a look at the history books, you will also see that it fought alongside the zero's after completing its attack mission and was considered just about as deadly, it has better manouverability than a zero in some aspects, but of course is severely lacking the nice powerful pull of the zero engine, thus isnt really a frontline main fighter. I was firstly shocked that you even attempted to dogfight it with a P38, this made me laugh, but when you then switch tactics to turn fighting, i think you have made my week, thank you! i needed a lift.

http://101stkokutai.dogfighters.net/

Badsight.
05-20-2005, 02:09 PM
forget what everyone has said about v3.04 AI

v4.0 should be WAY more realistic

VW-IceFire
05-20-2005, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Freycinet:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
The Val is really not all that heavy of an aircraft and it has two huge high lift wings. Take one for a spin as you have done and you quickly learn that this plane has no problems turning...I have no idea what the wingloading on this plane is but its very high. Which is also why its QUITE slow.


hmm, that would be LOW wingloading, I'd say... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ahh yes...my bad, I get those backwards sometimes.

irR4tiOn4L, we aren't here to convince you of anything but I think we've all said our bit. The Val and the Dauntless were both considered half decent fighters despite their primary role being that of a dive bomber. But they are very slow and thats why they aren't credible frontline fighters...

It comes down to engine power, wing design, wing size, and weight. The Val has a great combination that gives it very high lift and very good AoA abilities. That gives it the awesome turn. So I'm not sure how that runs contrary to what you know but it is http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'm sure someone here can dig up the powerloading and wingloading calculations.

Badsight.
05-20-2005, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
Even worse, if an AI hellcat gets on your tail in the game (when flying a zero) it is nearly impossible to outturn it at all speeds - despite this being historically incorrect for most speeds - yet when you fly the hellcat or a human player uses one, they have no hope of keeping with the zero. unlike you , me & everyone else , AI works the CEM & other flights controls to the max

try 1v1 same plane in the QMB

after a while you will be able to match them

AI are very good at maintaining postion , & are good at making accurate shots quickly

JunkoIfurita
05-21-2005, 12:30 AM
Believe what you want about the flight model, Irrational, but the reason the D3A was used as a trainer for so long (alongside its ground attack duties) was for the exact reason you're attacking it for.

It was VERY forgiving and extremely difficult to put into a stall (even more difficult to put into a spin).

However, you can put the Val into a stall in-game if you try hard enough. For an uncontrolled, spinlike stall (to which the Val will quickly recover, if you've got enough height) - pull right back on the throttle, then Put maximum right rudder, maximum right aeirolon, maximum up elevator. That'll flip you (they don't call it a tumble turn for nothin' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

----

DuxCorvan
05-21-2005, 05:01 AM
Vals could easily outurn a Zero, only that they're too much slower and less armed to be viable fighters. Read the sources -which often compares Val manoeuverability with that of Ki-27- before criticize relying in your own misconceptions.

It's a dive bomber, but definitely not a Stuka. A P-38 pilot 'dancing' with a Val is just declaring himself too self-confident. If you are an allied pilot, NEVER lower your speed in the Pacific. High speed passes are the way to go against those clear tanned ballarinas.

Even Betties can give you a nasty surprise if you treat them as Liberators: they didn't keep their bombers so dangerously light in exchange for nothing.

92SqnGCJimbo
05-21-2005, 04:16 PM
high wingloading = fast and poor turn
low wingloading = slow and good turn

Badsight.
05-21-2005, 04:22 PM
Spitfires have low wing loading

real low

but they were the fastest pair of wings during WW2

irR4tiOn4L
05-21-2005, 09:31 PM
ok people I have said it was silly to try and turn away from the Val, and that in reality it turned with a zero - but that does not make it a good Flight Model.

Fly the Val - try it in quick mission builder or something, against any plane you like really, and observe how the flight model reacts to your inputs.

In my observation it does not develop wing tip trails (indicating a problem with the FM), it does not spin (except if you really want it to), it seems to have an artificial speed limit (as in it accelerates quickly but stops at maximum speed) and i still think it turns far too well.

Of course noone has to believe a word of this, but just as i was ignorant to not research the val and make my comments, its ignorant to declare the FM good but not try the Val in game.

Anyways i dont really care about this - its still a very easy plane to kill in any fighter - but the AI does give me grieves sometimes offline - ive seen B29s do rolls to evade and i dont know with those hellcats, but 4 vs 4 AI between veteran zeros and hellcats the hellcats always win - by turning with the zeros. I dont think the AI represents real world piloting very well at all, i suspect it uses a simplified FM though many here have said they dont - perhaps its just down to their inhuman proficiency.

DuxCorvan
05-22-2005, 05:27 AM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
In my observation it does not develop wing tip trails (indicating a problem with the FM).

In FB/PF engine, wing tip trails have to be programmed for every aircraft, and their absence have nothing to do with FM, but that they forgot to include the trails visual effects for hard pressure manoeuvers in this concrete aircraft. It's just eye-candy -FB/PF air isn't physical.


the AI does give me grieves sometimes offline - ive seen B29s do rolls to evade and i dont know with those hellcats, but 4 vs 4 AI between veteran zeros and hellcats the hellcats always win - by turning with the zeros. I dont think the AI represents real world piloting very well at all, i suspect it uses a simplified FM though many here have said they dont.

You have a point here, and, yes, FB/PF use simplified FMs for AI, allowing them to do things human pilots just can't do. They turn better, climb better, have better acceleration and never spin -unless they're damaged.

They made this for:

1) Saving processor resources. Calculating a lot of complex FM behaviors at the same time in a single PC would make FPS drop drastically in human vs AI games. Onliners have not this problem: every FM is calculated 'at home'.

2) Overcome the sheer shortcomings of the AI. I doubt FB/PF AI is able to deal with too complex FMs and physics without crashing. I doubt they would be even able to take off with a simulated torque.

3) Give AI a chance to win. AI poor tactics -always turning even in fast, poorly turning mounts- would convert them into mincemeat if they played 'fair'.

So, my concern is: Patch 4.00 is supposed to introduce new FMs, and a new better FM programming that allows AI to use the same FMs than humans without a terrible drop in performance. But:

Will be able the poor 'superturning', limits-ignoring AI to manage realistic FMs without spinning and crashing at the first time they attempt to bat-turn behind our Gladiator in a Fw 190?

If realistic FMs are applied to AI, they have to overhaul all AI processes so they use every aircraft according to more demanding FM limits and every aircraft way-to-use, and still be able to pose a threat for human players. In other words: a smarter AI -maybe something they're also working for BoB.

If true, it isn't surprising the patch is dalaying so long.

Asgeir_Strips
05-22-2005, 06:28 AM
Well i think the Val should be capable of out turning your P38, Of course not at speeds closing 600 km/h But if you were flying in like 250-300 km/h i think it should be possible..

I've heard many stories about the Val downing Wildcats after they've dropped their ordnance etc..

Because of the Val's long wings it has excellent stability and maneuvering abilities..

The worst thing you can do with ANY japanese fighter is turn..

Strictly B 'n Z !

As long as you keep your speed up, you shouldn't have any problems with Japanese fighters at all.. Even when you set the difficulty to Ace .. (im not counting that the AI doesn't get affected by G forces and can see trough clouds..)

Covino
05-22-2005, 07:37 AM
First, I better mention that I believe all bombers will act like fighters if their target is another fighter (like in the QMB). Secondly, is this a complaint about the AI, the Val, the P-38, all three maybe??? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Also...
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3421088913

VW-IceFire
05-22-2005, 08:21 AM
So I flew it. It seems that it doesn't have much elevator deflection...at maximum pull (its 100 input on my joystick setup) it can't stall the plane at maximum throttle. It likes to ride along at about 180kph in such a manuever. I'm not sure what the stall speed is but it seems the elevator can't push it past its maximum AoA without a bombload (didn't test with). This may be historical or may not be.

Its a lovely little dogfighter but you have very few options open to you. Very slow, turns fairly well but not violently so (you can be out turned if another pilot is more violent and holds his plane into a slight stall turn depending on the plane). I don't know a whole lot about the Val's flying characteristics but it doesn't seem to be a huge problem.

Wing tip vortecies are visually modeled...I saw them when I did a hammerhead.

BTW: A fully loaded Val is still a few thousand pounds lighter than a Tempest Mark V (and only a bit heavier than a A6M2) and the Val has a HUGE wing to generate lift from so I'm still not surprised that its a good turner.

irR4tiOn4L
05-22-2005, 08:38 AM
lol haha yes it is funny how uninformed that Val fight was, but dont worry,im not after help flying this game. No it started with an uninformed rant, a funny story and a fishy FM and has evolved to include atypical AI!

Its kinda just throwing my thoughts out all at once - the human FMs in this game are fantastic - human vs human fights are incredibly dynamic, fast paced and entertaining. However i am dissapointed with the AI and some inconsistent presentation (eg lack of torpedo bombers) - the campaigns are pretty unengaging and there are very few single player missions.

I have a problem with these things because i mostly play offline and find that Pacific Fighters, while it looks and flies great, is underwhelming in comparison to the kick i get out of even the IL-2 demo. While the AI there is still cheated, the AI FM were far more balanced and the AI seemed more cunning - its a wonderful kick to fly against them. They also dont manage the amazing high deflection shots that PF AI do - does the AI even run out of ammo?
This is the other problem i have with this game - things seem to catch on fire very easily. Too easily for my tastes, but then im no expert. Some things, such as the 6 gun hurricane mark 1, seem to barely even leave bullet marks (indicators of damage) on even another hurricane mark 1. The machine guns on the KI43, however, have no trouble ripping through B24s - from behind. While some planes lose a wing or blow up from a single cannon hit, eg the zero, others, such as the hellcat, take many cannon hits to even lose performance. Wings seem to come off spontaneously and very easily. Explosions are incredibly rapid - just today i cornered a zero aiming high with my own zero about 25 meters behind - a single cannon hit to the leading edge of its wings and i was flying through a massive explosion.

Now it could be that most of these are historically correct and not problems at all, but what i positively do know is that the AI provide an inconsistent performance and dont reflect a player flying - and that detracts from the fun greatly.

When i first tried the IL2 Demo (before buying PF), i was wowed by the cunning AI - they stalled, span (one wingmate FW-190 did this three times - the third time was his last) and zoomed from the clouds. They shot a bit too poorly, but resembled the accuracy of real pilots in WWII. Things seemed to take a little too much punishment, but then i doubt wings snap off all that easily. All in all they were fun, cunning and seemed far more human than their incarnation in Pacific Fighters. If their accuracy had been boosted they would have provided a stiff challenge - though to be fair the PF AI seem to have knowledge of more aerial maneouvres.

Most people here seem to fly the combined FB+AEP+PF - i havent got FB and AEP because they are tough to find in Australia and the asking price is pretty steep for old games - but its fast becoming obvious that without them Pacific Fighters is not a complete game..

DIRTY-MAC
05-23-2005, 03:05 PM
Most people here seem to fly the combined FB+AEP+PF - i havent got FB and AEP because they are tough to find in Australia and the asking price is pretty steep for old games - but its fast becoming obvious that without them Pacific Fighters is not a complete game..
It really is amust to have them all you are really missing out on something,
About the damage model, the result depends on were you hit, you can empty you whole ammo load if you are unlucky, and if your lucky,
one bullet can do the trick, you have to learn each planes individual wurnabilities,
I myself am not so good on remembering were to put the lead, so I usually aim at the cockpit, thats a spot thats always wurnable http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LEXX_Luthor
05-23-2005, 06:10 PM
IceFire::
So I flew it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

I wonder what so many here are Missing.

I fly them all after first Releace, a few times, and pick one I like...usually one that holds histerical interest.

flemsha
05-23-2005, 08:06 PM
I still don't get it, I mean is it so inapparent that a Val will outturn a P-38 no matter what (in fact I would complain if a P-38 outturned a Val).

It doesn't make the Val a better fighter than a P-38, because it lacks the speed to keep up, and those big wings probably don't help the roll rate any (haven't checked this myself).

Turning tactics are the simplest tactics, they require little patience, just pointing the nose towards the enemy. However that relies on you having the tightest turning plane. If you want to use those tactics than choose an appropriate mount.

On the other hand if you are going to fly an allied fighter against the Japanese then you will have to adapt your tactics. Boom and Zoom, use speed, climb and dive, group tactics. Speed is life.

VW-IceFire
05-23-2005, 09:31 PM
The SP experience of PF is pretty bad yes...I highly highly highly recommend playing some of the user created campaigns.

Like mine! *plug*

But really, there are good campaigns out there that are well crafted and make the SP experience alot better than the dynamic campaign experience...particularly the one thats presented in PF. FB's dynamic campaign was still canned but it was alot more fun!

Jumoschwanz
05-24-2005, 05:44 AM
I read an article in a book that said yes, the Val was used as a fighter in early war. And it is also a fact the Japanese valued manueverability over all other aspects of aircraft design.

A bit ago I was in a one-on-one with a guy who was in a zero, I was in a P-40. I shot him down over and over again by doing what I was supposed to do, using the P-40s speed to hit and run him. He switched to a P-40 and I was able to do the same thing again because he flew the P-40 like he flew his zero.

I jumped in the zero against his P-40 and ate him alive for the same reason, he tried to turn fight the jap plane with the p-40.

Some guys in spits, wildcats, P-39s and Hellcats can give a zero a good run for the money sometimes, but if the zero pilot is good they are usually toast. For this reason the only thing to do against the jap planes is to hit and run them. This is what they did back in the day, and this is what works in this sim.

I shoot down all kinds of dummies with jap planes because they do not use thier planes speed or rolling ability.

If you told any old WWII ace what you tried to do in the P-38 he would laugh his a$$ off probably.
That the allied planes are superior to the Japanese is a sure thing, but only when they are used how they should be. They will not beat the japs at thier own game, nothing will. S!

Jumoschwanz

irR4tiOn4L
05-24-2005, 06:50 AM
jumo you should read the rest of the thread first. When playing against other players this game is indeed fantastic, accurate and fun (though im still not convinced the Val FM is strictly accurate) - its also been established quite a while back that i was indeed the fool who didnt know enough about the Val. The thing is though, against AI this game is not much fun at all - they dont perform like a human player does - and this is very annoying - I started this thread at least partly because i thought the Val was innacurate in the AI FM - and only then found out that the player FM was the same and i was wrong. Still this thread is essentially about cheated AI.

irR4tiOn4L
05-24-2005, 06:52 AM
btw icefire i will check out some custom scenarios now! thanks for pointing that out! Im really expecting good things from BOB when it comes out, but i guess i gotta go find FB and AEP in the meantime. If only Australia had more shipped over here..

chris455
05-24-2005, 12:36 PM
I've heard many stories about the Val downing Wildcats after they've dropped their ordnance etc..


I've never heard of even one story to that effect. Can you post such an account here? (Or a link to it at least?)
Thanks!

DIRTY-MAC
05-24-2005, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by chris455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I've heard many stories about the Val downing Wildcats after they've dropped their ordnance etc..


I've never heard of even one story to that effect. Can you post such an account here? (Or a link to it at least?)
Thanks! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

he he http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif