PDA

View Full Version : Weapon effectiveness bug in 3.03?



anarchy52
12-26-2004, 02:25 PM
First of all I wish Merry Christmass to all & all the best in new year.

The thing that motivated me to post was a lengthy dogfight session I had today:
Game was lag-free and fluent, Normandy map, classic DF bunch of mostly Spits IX and ponys vs late 109s.

I flew FW-190A6 with little success I wondered what was wrong, so I checked user STAT - it turned out that i fired ~3500 rounds and scored 347 airhits (~10%, about my usual rate) shooting down 3 aircrafts. So visual representation of target strikes (HE explosions on the target) was correct, no lag, pings between 100 and 180ms and stable, hits logged yet even with long bursts I only managed to do minor damage.

Then I switched to 109G2 and to my astonishment I soon scored ~100 more hits and shot down 5 more aircraft (mostly Spits IX).

I checked some more: the guy with best score (respected member of this community) flew pony fired 13000 rds scored 706 airhits and shot down 20 aircraft.

So we have the following data from a long dogfight session:

FW-190A6 4x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
347 hits, 3 kills = 116 hits/kill

Bf-109G2 1x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
~100 hits, 5 kills = 20 hits/kill

P-51 6x.50
-----------------------------------
706 hits, 20 kills = 35 hits/kill

Relative performance between 109G2 arnament pack and pony's is more or less what you could expect, supported by WWII stats which favor cannon arnament.

BUT THE FW-190 IS SOMETHING ELSE!

4 MG151/20 and 2 MGs are 5,8 TIMES less effective then single MG151/20 cannon and 2 MGs?

It is not my intention to discuss MG151/20 effectiveness as such but it seems very wrong to me that same 4 cannons in FW are far less efective then single cannon of the same type in 109G2.
Could it possibly be a bug of some sort?

karost
12-26-2004, 03:05 PM
Hi,anarchy52 and Merry Christmass http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Well ... this is good topic and good idea coz we have alot of gun to share idea to each other


Ok ... for me IMHO 2x151/20 in fw-190 are syncronized to fire through the prop then "should" more weak for produce a damange to a plane.

too bad we don't have demage log file like TW to see a details of damage report but if you have track file that will be a good material for us coz damage's position is a "major key" to analysis for this bug.

S!

p1ngu666
12-26-2004, 03:05 PM
maybe the 190 driver did more overkill than the others?

also whats the ROF of 190 mg guns? perhaps alot of those hit?

need a sample of more than 1, but this topic will run and run, be sure http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

anarchy52
12-26-2004, 03:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by karost:
Ok ... for me IMHO 2x151/20 in fw-190 are syncronized to fire through the prop then "should" more weak for produce a damange to a plane.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Synchronization doesn't play a role here: doesn't matter really because 109's MGs are also synchronized with prop. So that leaves us with 2 synched and 2 unsynched versus one unsynched cannon.

On the other hand, 109's cannon is not synched so hits by 109 might have more 20mm hits in it. But, 190 has 4 cannons of which outer are not synched if I'm not mistaking.
But visually I saw many more hits when I shot with 190's 4 cannons producing less effect.

Anyone have exact numbers on ROF or german synched cannons and MGs?

clint-ruin
12-26-2004, 03:25 PM
Don't have 303 down yet so no comment on the bug, but it might be better to run your tests with another squad member or some other friendly person with both of you recording at the same time. Last I looked - the most ShVAK shells I could make a Bf109 eat was around 37 rear aspect shots plinking each DM section, or one single AP round through the engine or pilot. Which particular DM section you hit is incredibly important.

The stat command will also show up hits on aircraft that are already effectively "dead" AFAIK.

The other thing I would mention is that with the 190, the fact that you are firing off 6 guns at once spread all over the planes DM practically guarantees more hits per kill vs the 109.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
12-26-2004, 03:32 PM
i have an average of 14 rounds per downed A/C.
> P38

i do think i got pretty the same (maybe 20) in a FW190A6.

haven't checked in the 303 version jet.

but i think it has pretty much to do with your gun-settings vs shooting distance + overall accuarry (eg. spraying your target from wingtip to wingtip)

anarchy52
12-26-2004, 04:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
The stat command will also show up hits on aircraft that are already effectively "dead" AFAIK.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It seems that it shows hits regardless of target's status, but kills - sometimes you'll get "Enemy aircraft destroyed" even if the ac you damaged successfully landed.

We were slugging it out for few hours so that makes anough samples to rule out any "unfortunate" or "lucky" attacks, what is left are averages and they seem wrong to me.


DM issue or not - I'm not much more precise with 109...I still get scattered hits on wings, nose tail...yet the results are much more convincing. Definitelly deserves more testing. I was shocked.

Irish_JG26
12-26-2004, 05:26 PM
S~

What was your range? and at what distance were your 190 cannons set to converge? Both will affect the leathality of the 190's weapons.

I have found that the 190 and to some degree all planes with wing mounted guns are affected by the convergence more than planes whose guns are nose mounted like the 109, and others.

I have noticed little difference in the 190 in v3.03 but will check this again. What might be happening is that your fuselage mounted MG's are scoring hits while your wing mounted cannons are not. Try setting gun convergence at 250 or 200 or 150m. I have found that 150m works best but settings out to 250 are still ok. Only fire when at 250m or less and you will then concentrate your fire for good effect.

JG26_Irish

Irish_JG26
12-26-2004, 07:06 PM
S~

In the interest of being objective, I went back and did a bit of testing. Set up two identical coops with four C47 target planes in each and a single Bf109G2 in the first and a single FW190A4 in the second.

Test Run #1 Bf109G2
In the fist test with the 109 the convergence was set to 250m (my normal setting) and the bulk of the firing was from 250m or less dead astern with most fired aimed at the engine nacelles, and the wing roots. I got 3 kills with 1200 shots fired scoring 457 hits for 38.1% hit ratio (better than normal for me but I was being careful and they were not shooting back http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif This worked out to 152 hits per kill.

Test Run #2 FW190A4
Convergence was set to 150m (normal for me in the 190) and the same attack angle and firing ranges were observed. Point of aim was again concentrated on the engine nacelles and wing roots. I got 4 kills with 508 round fired and scored 261 rounds hit for a hit ratio of 51.4%. This worked out to 65 hits per kill which is as would be expected since at least twice as many 20mm cannon rounds should have hit the target as at least twice as many should have been fired. It is worth noting that the first two kills were with MG's and inboard 20mm cannons only. Also, I observed a significantly faster destruction of each aircraft with some catching fire from the first pass.

Test Run #3 Bf109G2
Since I felt that I might have learned a thing or two on the first set of tests, I decided to repeat Test #1 with the 109 but re-set the convergence to 150m. This was something that I had never tried in the 109. I scored 4 kills with 909 rounds fired, getting hits with 428 rounds for a hit ratio of 47.1%. This worked out to 107 hits per kill. Overall the results were better than the first test but still were less effective than the 190 on the same set of aircraft. I did fire several bursts with MG only which may have in part accounted for the high hits required per kill. This was both in an attempt to inflice fuel leaks as well as to effectively kill all four AC with the ammo supply.

Conclusion: While not at all statistically significant, these tests would indicate to me that the killing power of the 20mm cannons in the 190 are at least as effective as the armament in the 109 if not more so. In my opinion, the 190 is more effective if employed correctly. I often attack in it from 4 or 8 oclock high and close to near contact distance before firing with all guns raking fire across the entire aircraft. This often results in one pass kills. It is not unheard of to score four or more B17's in this manner. We all know the B17 is a tough ship.

Just for grins, I did one more test with the P51 as the attacking craft.

Test #4 P51D
Set convergence at 250m, that is closer than my normal 350m but for consistency sake, I used that as I planned to do most shooting at 250m and less. I scored 4 kills with 1232 rds fired hitting with 440 of those for a hit ratio of 35.7%. This worked out to 110 hits per kill which was on par with the best results from the 109. What is not visible from those statistics is that the P51 was at least as effective at killing the C47s as the FW190 and that most kills required only a single pass. The impressive rate of fire from 6-.50 cal MG's accounted for the higher round count. Where the 109 was nearly out of ammo after four kills the P51 still had more to go.

JG26_Irish

Bearcat99
12-26-2004, 08:44 PM
Remember all weapons tests should be done offline. Online tests leave too much room for things like lag,packet loss and differing connections.

VW-IceFire
12-26-2004, 09:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by karost:
Ok ... for me IMHO 2x151/20 in fw-190 are syncronized to fire through the prop then "should" more weak for produce a damange to a plane.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Synchronization doesn't play a role here: doesn't matter really because 109's MGs are also synchronized with prop. So that leaves us with 2 synched and 2 unsynched versus one unsynched cannon.

On the other hand, 109's cannon is not synched so hits by 109 might have more 20mm hits in it. But, 190 has 4 cannons of which outer are not synched if I'm not mistaking.
But visually I saw many more hits when I shot with 190's 4 cannons producing less effect.

Anyone have exact numbers on ROF or german synched cannons and MGs? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually it would...the FW190 has 4 syncronized weapons and 2 unsyncronized ones.

The outboard MG151/20's (or MG-FF in earlier models) are the only unsynced. The inner MG151/20's are...and so are the machine guns. So in theory, the inboard cannons on the FW190 should be slightly less potent individually than the 109s single cannon firing through the prop hub. The machine guns are virtually uselss until the A-8 anyways.

faustnik
12-26-2004, 11:07 PM
According to Flying Guns of World War Two, by Williams and Gustin, precise timing due to electrical priming of the Mg151/20 only reduced the rate of fire from 700 to 650 rpm when sychronized to fire through the propeller arc.

(page 104)

Enofinu
12-27-2004, 12:08 AM
why not remove mg151/20 from all german planes, so have only machineguns left, no more cannon whine!!! those are really USELESS now. THX.

and 109 FM, heh. joke.

anarchy52
12-27-2004, 02:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Enofinu:
why not remove mg151/20 from all german planes, so have only machineguns left, no more cannon whine!!! those are really USELESS now. THX.

and 109 FM, heh. joke. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We are not discussing FM here, I feel that MG151/20 issue is a real show stopper. Good pilot/team will create the opportunity to shoot. (I remember getting my a$$ kicked in VWF by P-38s flown by good coordinated squad S! 303 - also I remember Spits MkIX being massacred by 190A8). FM's are flamebait and I would kindly ask You all to keep this thread on topic.

I can ensure the fireing solution, hit the target but "crippleing" effect is often missing. On the other hand Spits, Ponys and even Yak's have the ability to cripple 109/190 with a few scattered hits (remember that even a single 20mm round in the wing makes FW-190 hard to control, slower by 30km/h and fuel tank leak is unstoppable).

In the other MG151/20 thread it has been debated that MG151/20 should be just as lethal (or even more powerfull) as Hispano which is not the case in the game. To cut a long story short although hispano has mor kinetic energy due to heavier round and higher muzzle velocity, MG151/20 is superior in terms of chemical (HE) effect. As for rifle caliber MGs they are pretty useless, especially against some aircraft ( LaGG-3 is the shining example).

I flew the Spitfire occasionally (although it's not my favourite ride) and found that it takes far less precision and grouping of hits to kill a target with hispanos.

anarchy52
12-27-2004, 03:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Irish_JG26:
S~

What was your range? and at what distance were your 190 cannons set to converge? Both will affect the leathality of the 190's weapons.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
S!
I use 250m convergence on cannons and 350 on MG's (I use MG's to "scare" the running target and motivate it to evade, bleed speed or commit to fight). I fired between 300 - 80 m can not say exactly (icons off, full real).

The thing is - I feel that with four cannons fireing 750 + 750 + 650 + 650 = 2800 rpm (that's 47 20mm shells per second) effect on target is lacking. The whole idea of cannon arnament is that you need less hits to kill/cripple the target (spray & pray if you will).
I do not have to hit at convergence range with hispano to kill target...

KGr.HH-Gotcha
12-27-2004, 04:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>FW-190A6 4x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
347 hits, 3 kills = 116 hits/kill

Bf-109G2 1x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
~100 hits, 5 kills = 20 hits/kill

P-51 6x.50
-----------------------------------
706 hits, 20 kills = 35 hits/kill
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whether we are looking on synched or unsynched guns is of no interest here.
The man provided the stats which count HITS.
Unsynched guns would only allow for even MORE hits. Or MORE HITS in less time.

I fly the 190s often and the hitting performance varies.
Yetserday (flying a4 and a8) I had an avaerage of 35 hits PER kill which is more or less ok.
On bad days this may way higher.
It largely depends on the plane and where you hit it.

To make the tests more accurate I think we need information like

- How many hits required to rip off wing.
- To make an P47 explode (without an mk108...)

And finally: it's a lot easier to aim and hit effectively with an 109 than a 190.
Defelction shooting (therefore inflicting critical damage) is much easier due to unBARred view. In Dogfights you tend to TnB with enemies until they slow down to a crawl. etc.

The area you hit is however very important. Yesterday I blew up a spit on the first pass. The p47 i was chasing was eating a total of 2 mk108 hits (into the wing) and half of my center-guns ammunition before he finally had mercy and crashed after a manouever....
It all varies..

and well, we can't all have 20mm his-rail-pano guns eh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Jaws2002
12-27-2004, 07:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Actually it would...the FW190 has 4 syncronized weapons and 2 unsyncronized ones.

The outboard MG151/20's (or MG-FF in earlier models) are the only unsynced. The inner MG151/20's are...and so are the machine guns. So in theory, the inboard cannons on the FW190 should be slightly less potent individually than the 109s single cannon firing through the prop hub. The machine guns are virtually uselss until the A-8 anyways. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only thing the synchronized weapons loose is rate of fire. They fire the same ammo, and the guns have the same ballistic quality.

Oleg_Maddox
12-27-2004, 08:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by anarchy52:
First of all I wish Merry Christmass to all & all the best in new year.

The thing that motivated me to post was a lengthy dogfight session I had today:
Game was lag-free and fluent, Normandy map, classic DF bunch of mostly Spits IX and ponys vs late 109s.

I flew FW-190A6 with little success I wondered what was wrong, so I checked user STAT - it turned out that i fired ~3500 rounds and scored 347 airhits (~10%, about my usual rate) shooting down 3 aircrafts. So visual representation of target strikes (HE explosions on the target) was correct, no lag, pings between 100 and 180ms and stable, hits logged yet even with long bursts I only managed to do minor damage.

Then I switched to 109G2 and to my astonishment I soon scored ~100 more hits and shot down 5 more aircraft (mostly Spits IX).

I checked some more: the guy with best score (respected member of this community) flew pony fired 13000 rds scored 706 airhits and shot down 20 aircraft.

So we have the following data from a long dogfight session:

FW-190A6 4x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
347 hits, 3 kills = 116 hits/kill

Bf-109G2 1x MG151/20 + 2x7,9 MG17
----------------------------------
~100 hits, 5 kills = 20 hits/kill

P-51 6x.50
-----------------------------------
706 hits, 20 kills = 35 hits/kill

Relative performance between 109G2 arnament pack and pony's is more or less what you could expect, supported by WWII stats which favor cannon arnament.

BUT THE FW-190 IS SOMETHING ELSE!

4 MG151/20 and 2 MGs are 5,8 TIMES less effective then single MG151/20 cannon and 2 MGs?

It is not my intention to discuss MG151/20 effectiveness as such but it seems very wrong to me that same 4 cannons in FW are far less efective then single cannon of the same type in 109G2.
Could it possibly be a bug of some sort? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There was absolutely no changes in weapon and DM.
The last change was only for MG17 (changed load of bullet types) and not in this update, but in one of previous...

So I don't know how someone find what we never changed.....

anarchy52
12-27-2004, 08:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
There was absolutely no changes in weapon and DM.
The last change was only for MG17 (changed load of bullet types) and not in this update, but in one of previous...

So I don't know how someone find what we never changed..... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Merry Christmas Oleg

No, I didn't say it changed (I have just noticed it), just that I feel that 4 cannons should be more...effective then one cannon of the same type. Unfortunatelly I wasn't recording a track http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
I will take your advice and send an email to PF@1c.ru as you suggested with my ideas - hopefully you'll find some of them usefull.

I wish you success in business and good health to you and your family in 2005. S Novim Godom
Regards,
15/JG52_Riddler

faustnik
12-27-2004, 10:01 AM
Oleg,

There are so many people using the sim that see this issue. It is obvious to anyone spending a lot of time flying this sim and using both Mg151/20 and Hispano 20mm. You mention compromise and perhaps that is what needs to be done. The damage effects of the Mg151/20 should be increased. We all see the damage inflicted by the Hispano 20mm. Surely you can make a compromise solution to bring the damage done by the Mg151/20 somewhat closer to the Hispano 20mm. Perhaps switching belt loads to another historic option, like 1AP/1HE/1MgL would do the trick.