PDA

View Full Version : Stunded, yet confused



BSS_Vidar
06-02-2005, 12:52 AM
Got in to one of those weird servers with Pac Fighters against German fighters a few days back. I was completely stund at the effectiveness of the F4F-3 Wildcats .50 cals on German Damage Models. I cut a 110 in half with a Wildcat during a short burst! 109's and 190 were loosing their wings without having to camp out back behind them like I have to do in a P-51.

These Wildcat .50 cals reflect alot more like the actual gun footage I've seen .50 cals do than the current guns in the P-51. Hope v4.0 will be more consistant.

faustnik
06-02-2005, 12:54 AM
I think you just had a good day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Fennec_P
06-02-2005, 01:22 AM
People used to say the same thing about the P-40 and P-47. Some vehemently claimed that the P-40 guns were more powerful... http://i.somethingawful.com/mjolnir/images/livestock~06-01-05-coffee.gif

It's just easier to aim, score hits in some planes. The P-51 is notoriously twitchy, and it's a pain to get good tracking shots. In the little planes, its easy.

Guns are much closer together on the little planes too, and their manueverability gives you better firing opportunities.

PlaneEater
06-02-2005, 01:31 AM
The Wildcat's also a much more stable plane.

I consider it a beer keg with planks for wings, but it does what it does well (not fall out of the sky when hit / fly steady).

HayateAce
06-02-2005, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:
People used to say the same thing about the P-40 and P-47. Some vehemently claimed that the P-40 guns were more powerful... http://i.somethingawful.com/mjolnir/images/livestock~06-01-05-coffee.gif

It's just easier to aim, score hits in some planes. The P-51 is notoriously twitchy, and it's a pain to get good tracking shots. In the little planes, its easy.

Guns are much closer together on the little planes too, and their manueverability gives you better firing opportunities.

Notoriously twitchy according to WHO? Oleg? I've not read any P51 pilot accounts who said the guns were difficult to keep on target? These P51 shakey guns are mismodelled, and some planes .50s ARE better than others. P40 has the most effective .50s in the game.

And yes, it is fun to hand Fw190's their back-sides with the F4U!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

http://www.airventuremuseum.org/images/Chance%20Vought%20F4U%20Corsair-1.jpg

anarchy52
06-02-2005, 02:40 AM
I was stunned when I flew Brewster with twin .50 against Ratas (I-16 - probably one of the silliest DMs in the game). I thought they'll be useless, but it turned out I was waisting ratas easily...maybe the trick was that with nimble brewster I could actually track the little bastards in a turn for a while and hose them with fifties instead of just plinking them here and there.

Strangelly, a bit later I hozed rata with MGFF(M) from Emil, scored 5-6 20mm hits and Rata happily flew on like nothing happened...

SeaFireLIV
06-02-2005, 03:06 AM
The I16 damage model isn`t silly, why do you say that. Chances are you were missing or suffering lag - it`s easy to blown up an I16 if you hit it a few times. It`s an eggshell if not flown properly in a dogfight.

The B239(Brewster) is the one Jerry plane I fear when I go up in the I16. It turns easily as well, doesn`t suffer from neg-G (unlike we in the I16) so we can`t really dive like it can. It`s only disadvantages are it`s weak guns, but it stays long enough behind you to make up for it. I really have to work hard to lose one. Fortunately, few people seem to realise this, taking far more powerful planes that can`t turn (lesson 1 : more powerful planes doesn`t mean better turners), so I don`t meet it much. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif (uh oh, I`ve blown it now!)

The B239 is the Arch enemy of the I16! I hate the little gits B239!

x6BL_Brando
06-02-2005, 03:24 AM
(uh oh, I`ve blown it now!)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

"Come along, Comrade Seafire, the firing squad is getting cold"

Fehler
06-02-2005, 03:56 AM
Originally posted by HayateAce:

Notoriously twitchy according to WHO? Oleg? I've not read any P51 pilot accounts who said the guns were difficult to keep on target? These P51 shakey guns are mismodelled, and some planes .50s ARE better than others. P40 has the most effective .50s in the game.

Perhaps you should take a lesson or two in reading comprehension. Vidar was talking about (In the game) the P-51 is twitchy.

A lot of that has to do with stick settings and the extreme effectiveness of the elevator of the pixel P-51. Any of the planes that have extremely effective control surfaces are twitchy in the game; ie. P-51, FW-190, etc.

It all has to do with the way the game simulates stick forces.

That is why I have always thought it would have been a good idea to have the ability to switch stick profiles while in the game, but it has never been implimented. I personally fly with a dumbed down stick configuration because I fly the FW-190 most of the time. Consequently, I have a difficult time when I switch to other planes that dont have as effective control surfaces.

Now, unless you can see some other text in Vidar's post that the rest of us are not pivilaged to, I recommend that you stop putting words in other people's mouth, and keep your foot out of yours.

VW-IceFire
06-02-2005, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
Got in to one of those weird servers with Pac Fighters against German fighters a few days back. I was completely stund at the effectiveness of the F4F-3 Wildcats .50 cals on German Damage Models. I cut a 110 in half with a Wildcat during a short burst! 109's and 190 were loosing their wings without having to camp out back behind them like I have to do in a P-51.

These Wildcat .50 cals reflect alot more like the actual gun footage I've seen .50 cals do than the current guns in the P-51. Hope v4.0 will be more consistant.
They are no different...the difference is that they are fairly tightly spaced (like the P-40s) and that the Wildcat is a fairly mundane and stable aircraft to fly with a good gunsight view that makes deflection shooting and the like very easy.

That or the server had easy gunnery on.

The .50cal is deffinately harder to kill with but not that bad. I like it for the excellent deflection shooting characteristics.

No difference that I can see between the P-40, the P-51, Wildcat, Corsair and others...its just a matter of the plane, aim, deflection angle, and convergence. Some planes like the P-40 have a very tight array of guns mounted just outboard of the prop spinner. Others like the P-47 have them far out on the wing...bigger gaps and harder to hit inside convergence.

rummyrum
06-02-2005, 08:04 AM
Get'em Fehler http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jaws2002
06-02-2005, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fennec_P:
People used to say the same thing about the P-40 and P-47. Some vehemently claimed that the P-40 guns were more powerful... http://i.somethingawful.com/mjolnir/images/livestock~06-01-05-coffee.gif

It's just easier to aim, score hits in some planes. The P-51 is notoriously twitchy, and it's a pain to get good tracking shots. In the little planes, its easy.

Guns are much closer together on the little planes too, and their manueverability gives you better firing opportunities.

Notoriously twitchy according to WHO? Oleg? I've not read any P51 pilot accounts who said the guns were difficult to keep on target? These P51 shakey guns are mismodelled, and some planes .50s ARE better than others. P40 has the most effective .50s in the game.

And yes, it is fun to hand Fw190's their back-sides with the F4U!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

http://www.airventuremuseum.org/images/Chance%20Vought%20F4U%20Corsair-1.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You actually can read?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Danschnell
06-02-2005, 09:58 AM
I think the .50s are correctly modelled in this game. Oleg has done a good job. The problems are with guns like the Hispano 20mm which are clearly too powerful, especially when compared to their German equivalent, the MG151, which is undermodelled. There is a really stark contrast. .303s cause fires and pilot kills too easily too, yet its German counterpart the MG81Z has a range of only about 200m. Rediculous really.

Urufu_Shinjiro
06-02-2005, 10:19 AM
I don't see the point in getting into this kind of "version specific" debates this close to 4.0 release. I think we all know by now that the MG151/20's have been fixed and who knows what else. Also with the way people have been talking about the momentum and inertia effects in the new FM aiming is going to be a whole new ballgame.

edgflyer
06-02-2005, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:
People used to say the same thing about the P-40 and P-47. Some vehemently claimed that the P-40 guns were more powerful... http://i.somethingawful.com/mjolnir/images/livestock~06-01-05-coffee.gif

It's just easier to aim, score hits in some planes. The P-51 is notoriously twitchy, and it's a pain to get good tracking shots. In the little planes, its easy.

Guns are much closer together on the little planes too, and their manueverability gives you better firing opportunities.

The Wildcat has a bigger spread on the guns than the P51, 47, Corsair, and Hellcat. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Bull_dog_
06-02-2005, 11:26 AM
I follow these damage threads with interest cause I don't think there is a damage model out there in a sim that even comes close to modelling what happens with guns and bullets.

There are purely empirical figures of ft/pounds of energy to deal with and there are the more abstract characteristics of ammo that is rarely discussed...just blank statements of this and that.

In lightly armored or unarmored aircraft...or armored aircraft at certain angles...i'd expect .303's to get WAAAY more pilot kills...no problem with that ammo penatrating lots of aluminum and glass and got lots more bullets.

A cannon round is heavier and has explosive qualities so when it impacts something, it will go boom and blow a big hole and do lots of damage to the area around it.

Penatretion is a function of the energy of the projectial, its ability to retain weight and the density/frictional properties of the material being penetrated.

HMG rounds do little damage unless they hit somehthing solid like a wing spar, fuel tank, engine block etc...then they will shatter the wing spar likely causing periphreal damage, penetrate through the fuel tank creating two leaks and cracking an engine block. That is where .50 cals shine...more bullets, more penetration than cannons.

The only question becomes how to model this. What happens when a .50 or .30 or 20mm hits an enemy's ammo box full of 20 or 30 mm? Sometimes it detonates blowing off the wing, sometimes it doesn't. These kinds of things are missing from modelling.

The advantages of .50's were that they were, in real life, more than adequate for single engined fighters. They were easier for gunnery purposes for pilots to use...opposite in game...i find HMG's do be very difficult to aim with and highly effective once you get it down and of course there are more projectiles so your chances of detonating ammo, fuel, pilot kills, hydraulics damage etc is very high relative to say 2 hispanos...the hispanos, once they find their mark blow big holes in whatever they touch.

I think in real life, the .50's x 6 were only slightly inferior to a spitfire's armament taking all those things into consideration.

Also the point made about instability in certain planes is valid and correct. The effect seems to be reversed from real physics and real life. The faster the aircraft flew, higher wingloading etc created more stability not less. Early war aircraft don't pitch like late war aircraft and I think the effect should be reversed. Planes like the Lightning, Mustang, Fw and Jug were great gunnery platforms...which translates to being steady. Planes like the 109, Airacobra, Spitfire etc were "twitchy" with lots of pitch especially at slow speeds.

We miss the stick forces of real aircraft unfortunately and I think it is a real shortcoming of sims without good force feedback... i'd like to see some of the pitch toned way down for heavy, high wingloaded aircraft at medium to high speeds.

enough...by the way, bugs to exist and it is possible, but improbable that there is a difference in the power of the wildcat. I tend to agree that it is a stable gun platform and Zeroes are not "twitchy" targets like Yaks, La's, and Fw's so killing them is pretty easy. Tracking shots are more common due to lower rate of rolls and gunnery is easier.

Same thing with P-47 vs Mustang

BSS_Vidar
06-04-2005, 01:06 AM
So much for that theory.

I flew the Pony vs 109/190's and had wonderfull paintball splats all over untill maybe, an engine smoked or cuts off. Went into the "Full Real" - except speed bar server with F4F's/Spits vs 109/110's and was sawing fuselages in half and made wings snap off.

That's the way a .50 cal is suppose to hit folks. Like a friggin' buzz-saw. I'm so tired of that paintball in the Pony.

HayateAce
06-04-2005, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
who knows what

Feeler, your hurt feelings have clouded your thinking. Twitchy p51s and twitchy guns ARE the topic. Reading comprehension test is in order for you or is it just your sukky 190 front view that you can't see the posts?

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/401Squadron/FW190-1.jpg

Badsight.
06-05-2005, 05:58 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
Perhaps you should take a lesson or two in reading comprehension. Vidar was talking about (In the game) the P-51 is twitchy. learn to READ Hayate_Noob

http://img2.uploadimages.net/499365Hayate_Noob.jpg

HayateAce
06-05-2005, 02:11 PM
Well Hello Tardsight, long time no see P.A.L.

http://www.buyagift.co.uk/Images/product/large/5118_hypno.jpg