PDA

View Full Version : Any Raiden pilots out their?



zardozid
08-31-2007, 10:15 PM
Dose anyone have any suggestions for taking on the Mustang and the F4U-1D with the Raiden?
And what about the "lead" distance when shooting 90 AoT deflection?

For the most part I enjoy flying early war fighters, but recently I have been checking out some of the late war "Heavy Hitters". I have been researching the Raiden and have been comparing flying stats between the J2M3 and the J2M5. After reading around the message board I have been under the impression that more people are flying the J2M3, but the J2M5 seems to have better overall specs. Am I missing something, or maybe I got the wrong impression's on pilot preferences...

The other question I had was about cannon convergence...the Type99 1 and Type 2 have very different velocity specs and apparently would make leading the target in a 90 AoT deflection difficult(impossible?). I have checked out the lead/deflection solutions with "sniper's corner" and it makes hitting almost any target with BOTH guns at once almost impossible...Any thoughts or experience out their???


<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">EDIT: I just double checked my facts and discovered that the above cannon/lead problem was only on the J2M3. The J2M5 has matching Type 2 cannons...</span>

DKoor
08-31-2007, 11:37 PM
J2M is one of the finest Japanese fighters all around.
J2M5 in my eyes is without doubt superior fighter to version 3.
You should not have a problems with Ai, only smart human players who knows that they can outrun you in late war American fighters.

Cannons.....well it packs about hardest hitting a2a weapons combo you'll find anywhere during ww2 so I doubt that you should have some probs with that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Call me crazy but I prefer Ki-43 to all other Japanese fighters even late war - I'm simply fan of that aircraft.
I know it doesn't have a real chance in late war enviroment human vs human but still.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Since this thread is dedicated to the J2M pilots I must say that I've been guilty of that too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
I flew J2M but almost all the time exclusively offline, and found it to be the best fighter in that enviroment.....online it's still Ki-84 IMO.

zardozid
09-01-2007, 12:19 AM
Cannons.....well it packs about hardest hitting a2a weapons combo you'll find anywhere during ww2 so I doubt that you should have some probs with that Big Grin

I realize that four 20mm cannons is about as much firepower as anyone could hope for (you know what I mean http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif). But my question is about the two different types of cannons that seem to be mounted on the Raiden wings. Assuming that IL2 accurately model's the velocity of each type of cannon (found on the Raiden) you would need a different amount of "lead" to reach the same spot on a single target at a 90 AoT deflection shot. I have tested this supposition with the "snipers corner" application and according to the solution provided by the application in order to "just hit" a B17 at 300m their is a difference of almost an entire B17 in the amount of lead required at 90 AoT deflection...That makes trying to hit a single engine (or wing with all the guns) almost impossible.

And if you just want to hit "the side" a fighter with all the guns you have to shoot from less then 200m. This lands 2 sets of guns on the motor and the other 2 guns somewhere near the tail.

I'm wondering why Oleg didn't model the respective "A" variants of each model in the game. This would have provided four matching cannons for the J2M3 and the J2M5.

DKoor
09-01-2007, 01:04 AM
Of all 20mms I "feel" Japanese have weakest ones.
Again I may be wrong but...I tested this on airquake server and found out that 109 survived several, what appeared to be under normal circumstances, lethal hits.

About your issue (cannon type) I really don't know much.
But sure if cannons have different RoF and/or different velocity, deflection is harder (to hit with all guns) relatively speaking than with all same cannons mounted.

Korolov1986
09-01-2007, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
You should not have a problems with Ai, only smart human players who knows that they can outrun you in late war American fighters.

Neither the U-Bird nor the Pony will outrun either J2M type at any altitude. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The J2M can defeat most - if not all - of the late war US fighter planes in both BnZ and TnB. There's no real trick to it; you should strive to use traditional IJ tactics (maneuver fighting) against all types of US planes. It's a guaranteed win. You can usually nullify any tactical advantages they have provided you keep an eye on them and avoid any attacks they make.

DKoor
09-01-2007, 03:48 PM
Don't know from where you get that info...here's what IL-2 Compare says:

http://i5.tinypic.com/4z8w1ad.jpg
http://i13.tinypic.com/4ukwlcg.jpg
http://i14.tinypic.com/6bubkf8.jpg

Korolov1986
09-01-2007, 05:52 PM
I don't use silly number games when I talk about relative performance.

I draw my conclusions from experience with the aircraft - both fighting it and flying it.

JG52Karaya-X
09-02-2007, 05:44 AM
Those "silly number games" are the only hard data to back up any kind of performance claim, and not your "silly feelings and experiences" which are also largely dependent on pilot skill...

lowfighter
09-02-2007, 09:38 AM
I think it was just silly words in Korolov's post, but I kind of agree with him and at the same time with DKoor and you. In my way of handling the game, there are planes which are easier to handle and some are harder. Even though if you look at the charts and 2 planes might look similar in performance, one of them might be easier to handle.

Korolov1986
09-02-2007, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Those "silly number games" are the only hard data to back up any kind of performance claim, and not your "silly feelings and experiences" which are also largely dependent on pilot skill...

Knowing the rate of climb of your opponent doesn't do any good if they still outclimb you. Unless of course, you're one of those math crazies that calculates every single performance value of every plane in a dogfight. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Argue numbers all you want; once you get into a real fight, it comes down to the interesting little things in the cockpit that, by some miracle, are able to manipulate the controls and make the whole shebang do what it was designed to do.

JG52Karaya-X
09-02-2007, 12:14 PM
An experienced pilot in an inferior plane will always win over an inexperienced noob in a supposedly better performing plane, so what, the initial poster was asking for advice when flying the Raiden against late war USAAF and USN fighters. What DKoor did present is hard factual performance data which shows, given that both pilots are of equal skill levels will leave the US birds as fast or faster at some altitudes compared to the Raiden. Any questions?

Bremspropeller
09-02-2007, 12:18 PM
Knowing the rate of climb of your opponent doesn't do any good if they still outclimb you.

LoL, that's the dumbest thing I've read since Hayate-Ace's last post http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

mortoma
09-02-2007, 01:58 PM
There are a lot of people saying that the J2M5 is way better than the J2M3. Actually their performance and handling are nearly identical except at over 5000 meters, where the M5 shows a bit more speed. Even that is not significant, especially in light of the fact that few of us fight up there, either online of offline. There is a tiny bit more speed from the M5 from about 2200 to 5000 meters, but in the real world it's just not noticable. And the M3 has a hair better climb at all altitudes below 5000 meters.

Korolov1986
09-02-2007, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
LoL, that's the dumbest thing I've read since Hayate-Ace's last post http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

Do I get a cookie now?

@JG52Karaya-X

And I'm saying hard performance facts go out the window once you get in a real fight. Whether or not you agree with that - I don't care. You fly the way you want to, and I'll fly the way I want to. Cool?

Apologies to zardozid for the thread hijack.

Drawing from *my* experience in the game, regardless of what the algorithm analysts say, the J2M is probably one of the best - if not the best - late war IJ plane in the game. It has a high VNE that allows it to make up for the poor diving ability of earlier IJ planes; it does so without sacrificing the maneuverability advantage over most of the allied planes except at opposite ends of the speed spectrum. Per the F4U-1D and P-51, neither of these aircraft will turn as well as the J2M, and both types won't be able to hold a dive long enough to shake it off.

The real trouble comes when the Pony or the U-Bird have a tactical advantage (and if they're smart, they'll also have a numbers advantage). This also gets to be an issue if you're fighting over 16,000ft (roughly 5km); at this point both the U-Bird and the Pony get much better performance - especially the U-Bird. The trick is, of course, to turn sharply or dive under them. If you do this while attempting to climb at every chance you get, you can eventually nullify the tactical advantage they may have. Also, don't be afraid to use WEP + boost; you can ride the J2M pretty hard in regards to engine management.

Now, you guys quit raggin' on my *** because my point of view conflicts with yours. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

zardozid
09-03-2007, 08:39 AM
o I get a cookie now?

@JG52Karaya-X

And I'm saying hard performance facts go out the window once you get in a real fight. Whether or not you agree with that - I don't care. You fly the way you want to, and I'll fly the way I want to. Cool?

Apologies to zardozid for the thread hijack.

Drawing from *my* experience in the game, regardless of what the algorithm analysts say, the J2M is probably one of the best - if not the best - late war IJ plane in the game. It has a high VNE that allows it to make up for the poor diving ability of earlier IJ planes; it does so without sacrificing the maneuverability advantage over most of the allied planes except at opposite ends of the speed spectrum. Per the F4U-1D and P-51, neither of these aircraft will turn as well as the J2M, and both types won't be able to hold a dive long enough to shake it off.

The real trouble comes when the Pony or the U-Bird have a tactical advantage (and if they're smart, they'll also have a numbers advantage). This also gets to be an issue if you're fighting over 16,000ft (roughly 5km); at this point both the U-Bird and the Pony get much better performance - especially the U-Bird. The trick is, of course, to turn sharply or dive under them. If you do this while attempting to climb at every chance you get, you can eventually nullify the tactical advantage they may have. Also, don't be afraid to use WEP + boost; you can ride the J2M pretty hard in regards to engine management.

Now, you guys quit raggin' on my *** because my point of view conflicts with yours. Tongue


It happens...thanks.


<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Does anyone have any experience with the Raiden damage model? I read the "Government technical data report" and it says that they never found any armor protection on the J2M3...</span>

Korolov1986
09-03-2007, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by zardozid:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Does anyone have any experience with the Raiden damage model? I read the "Government technical data report" and it says that they never found any armor protection on the J2M3...</span>

I'm pretty sure the J2M did have some armor plates, although where they are and how many - don't know.

In the game, the J2M isn't very sturdy; it's tougher than the A6M but not nearly as durable as lot of other planes out there. The biggest problem lies from fire damage - a couple of hits can likely light you up.

ake109
09-24-2007, 01:56 AM
I like the J2Ms. Find that the Japanese 20mm guns rather weak though.

Was online once, first sortie, expanded ALL the ammo on an A-20 who flew home smoking and pitted with holes all over. Gunstat showed I landed 74 hits on him.

VW-IceFire
09-24-2007, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by zardozid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">o I get a cookie now?

@JG52Karaya-X

And I'm saying hard performance facts go out the window once you get in a real fight. Whether or not you agree with that - I don't care. You fly the way you want to, and I'll fly the way I want to. Cool?

Apologies to zardozid for the thread hijack.

Drawing from *my* experience in the game, regardless of what the algorithm analysts say, the J2M is probably one of the best - if not the best - late war IJ plane in the game. It has a high VNE that allows it to make up for the poor diving ability of earlier IJ planes; it does so without sacrificing the maneuverability advantage over most of the allied planes except at opposite ends of the speed spectrum. Per the F4U-1D and P-51, neither of these aircraft will turn as well as the J2M, and both types won't be able to hold a dive long enough to shake it off.

The real trouble comes when the Pony or the U-Bird have a tactical advantage (and if they're smart, they'll also have a numbers advantage). This also gets to be an issue if you're fighting over 16,000ft (roughly 5km); at this point both the U-Bird and the Pony get much better performance - especially the U-Bird. The trick is, of course, to turn sharply or dive under them. If you do this while attempting to climb at every chance you get, you can eventually nullify the tactical advantage they may have. Also, don't be afraid to use WEP + boost; you can ride the J2M pretty hard in regards to engine management.

Now, you guys quit raggin' on my *** because my point of view conflicts with yours. Tongue


It happens...thanks.


<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Does anyone have any experience with the Raiden damage model? I read the "Government technical data report" and it says that they never found any armor protection on the J2M3...</span> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just game experience...they seem to be structurally strong but weak in the fuel tanks and a few I've managed to explode (fiery explosion into nothingness) spectacularly. Hits to the outer wings and part of the rear fuselage seem to do less damage so I tend to focus my fire on the inner wing like I do with the Ki-84.

In general late war Japanese fighters tended to benefit from more structural strength than planes like the Oscar, Betty, and Zero which give most Japanese planes a bad reputation. We know that the Ki-61 and Ki-100 were reasonably strong if not terribly well protected and the N1K design was extremely sturdy for a Japanese plane and was known to rival western designs.