Author Topic: guns dispersion, D9 tested (Read 1771 times)

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #15 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:15:46 PM »

Tracers on, select plane, appear in hangar, turn engine off, zoom gunsite to full max, fire single-shots and short bursts (so you can see the pattern).

I can't say how much of what I observed is due to the "shake" when firing guns. That will obviously have some effect when firing bursts. But with the 38 you kind of expect a cone of fire which will move around as the plane shakes ... that's not really what it looked like.

Longer bursts - like what would be typical in the MA - really show promounced effects.

Again ... I've only been back flying a few weeks ... not saying what's right or wrong, just what I observed. I'm on a mailing list with a bunch of other old-timers and we're all struggling with gunnery - so this topic interests me as it could help explain why we're not clicking like we used to.

SlapShot · « **Reply #16 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:29:15 PM »

Again ... I've only been back flying a few weeks ... not saying what's right or wrong, just what I observed. I'm on a mailing list with a bunch of other old-timers and we're all struggling with gunnery - so this topic interests me as it could help explain why we're not clicking like we used to.

Dok ... Could multiple layers of rust be a contributing factor to not "clicking" yet ?

Karnak · « **Reply #17 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:33:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Again ... I've only been back flying a few weeks ... not saying what's right or wrong, just what I observed. I'm on a mailing list with a bunch of other old-timers and we're all struggling with gunnery - so this topic interests me as it could help explain why we're not clicking like we used to.

Nearly everybody is struggling with gunnery. The hit detection changed, making it harder to score hits.

I'll admit that I don't fly the Fw190D-9 much, but when I took it up last Tour I scored 6 kills and didn't notice anything about it's guns that stood out one way or another.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #18 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:36:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SlapShot

Dok ... Could multiple layers of rust be a contributing factor to not "clicking" yet ?

I'm sure that's a big part.

It was just surprising to see as many rounds as I saw whizzing off like that. And now having seen it know why some of my shooting was wasted.

JB73 · « **Reply #19 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:42:39 PM »

hey Dok.. if you are wondering more about the hit "zone" on planes (don't know exactly what to call it) do a BBS search for posts from pyro.

there was an excellent discussion on the new damage model and how the planes recieve hits.

pyro said something to the effect (and i am probably going to rape this LOL)

the new models of the planes are more "detailed" where in the past some parts of the plane were only a pixel wide and would take "hits" based on the proximity of the round.

now those parts are mroe realistic, and the round hat to directly hit the object.

basically it sounded to me like a plane running level before the tail looked only a pixel or 2 wide, but tooks hits from a wider area than that. now the actual width of the tail for ecample is modeled and you have to hit it directly.

the post from pyro explains it ALOT better.

Furious · « **Reply #20 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:48:30 PM »

To test this best, I think you would need to do the following:

.target xxx (your convergence)
roll plane down a hill until the plane is level and facing north.
stop, fire and screenshot.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #21 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:48:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak

I'll admit that I don't fly the Fw190D-9 much, but when I took it up last Tour I scored 6 kills and didn't notice anything about it's guns that stood out one way or another.

Well, what I observed on the 190 was that the shot pattern was more like a V, with the top-center of the V being the gunsight center. That's different than a point of convergence somewhere below the gunsight center. If you're firing under D200, you may not notice it. But for longer shots you aren't getting the concentration of fire you expect.

Having also tried the 38, I don't think any one plane is more affected than the rest. Just the way this manifests itself varies with each gun configuration.

If the max deflection were throttled in a little (for those 20mm curve-balls). and the overall dispersion scaling were toned down a hair, it'd probably be balls-on.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #22 on:** August 05, 2004, 02:58:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by JB73
hey Dok.. if you are wondering more about the hit "zone" on planes (don't know exactly what to call it) do a BBS search for posts from pyro.

The hit model feels pretty good - save for the relative ease of head-ons.

I have vague recollections of how the gunnery patterns used to look and I don't recall them being this loose. Maybe this is right ... I can't say for sure ... it'd be interesting to see film footage (or photos) of a WW2 fighter having it's guns harmonized to see just how much spread there was.

SlapShot · « **Reply #23 on:** August 05, 2004, 03:42:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pyro
AH has never used a "hit bubble". AFAIK, that's only ever existed in AW. What has changed between AH1 and AH2 is the hit resolution. AH1 had finite hit resolution and AH2 doesn't(for all practical purposes, I really don't know if it works down at the micron level).

Quote

Originally posted by Pyro
Hit resolution is not quite the right term. I guess target resolution would be a more accurate description. In AH1, there was a granularity to it which you don't have in AH2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by TweetyBird
Like if you were to have a 3d sphere defijned at a high resolution (thousands of triangles), it looks smooth. But a sphere described with 50-100 triangles can get blocky. Superimpose the blocky sphere over the smooth sphere and you get an error region or hit bubble.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pyro's response ...

Correct, except that hit bubble really describes something else and comes from a different era of online flight sims. The blocky part that you describe doesn't just occur outside of the actual shape, it can fall within it as well.

==============================================

The way I see it was that the actual pixel widths in AH1 to render that plane were not as detailed as they are now rendered in AH2. With that, where we were scoring hits before are now flying by the wings/rudder/etc. So, there is no thing as a "hit bubble" in AH, you actually have to hit the pixels that represent the plane. It just now, the plane is more finely defined with pixels and appears to be harder to hit than what we were use to.

All of this still does not discredit the fact that there truly could be something wrong with the dispersion and flight of the bullets. It was just a patch or 2 ago that HT introduced gun shake, so maybe it needs to be fine tuned. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am still killing as much as I was before, but my hit % has definately gone down the tubes ...

JB73 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 05, 2004, 04:05:04 PM »

thats the post slapshot.. got the link to the full version?

hit% .. yeah in the dumper here too.

worked hard to get to around 10% best i could, now finished last tour @ 4% or so. EEEEKKK LOL

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #25 on:** August 05, 2004, 05:05:08 PM »

The P38 is the easiest to try since it sits level. Just get bursts of 4 tracers from the 50's (1 per gun) and see if that looks like what you'd expect. Do you get early convergence on guns that are more or less next to each other? Do you get divergence where tracers fall well outside the expected cone?

Then try the 20mm and see how many wild rounds you get. That is, you fire off 10 tracers and most will pass through the same basic place. But then you get these wild ones which just don't.

It really isn't that bad, and probably isn't affecting gameplay that much. Under D200 it likely don't matter at all.

GODO · « **Reply #26 on:** August 05, 2004, 08:05:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Under D200 it likely don't matter at all.

It matters, and it matters a lot. Currently we have a flight combat sim where gunsight is useless at all. Dispersion is applied randomly as soon as you shot, not along the bullet trajectory. It does not consider where the guns are placed, it doesnt consider the fire rate. That is the funny point, ballistics seem correct, but fully porked by current random gun dispersion. Firing as close as 100 yards, you press the trigger aimming at the right wign and surprise, the bullets go low and below left wing, with a static target, probably AFK. The best you can do is to delete the gunsight and spray&pray until the target smokes.

GODO · « **Reply #27 on:** August 05, 2004, 08:12:18 PM »

Go and test 109 mk108, you will have good laughts. Not a single tracer passing near the center, not a single tracer even going in the vertical of the center, all to the left or to the right. That with the 109 stoped and bullet by bullet. Is that the new way to increase gunnery difficulty??

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #28 on:** August 05, 2004, 08:35:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GODO
The best you can do is to delete the gunsight and spray&pray until the target smokes.

No giving away my secrets.

What I meant was that the dispersion isn't so great that at very close range you still can't land a lethal burst. Which may be why this went un-noticed until you looked into it.

I would think wing-mounted guns would be more likely to show this kind of dispersion. So I too was surprised to see how pronounced it was on fuselage mounted guns (109's, P38).

GODO · « **Reply #29 on:** August 05, 2004, 09:08:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I would think wing-mounted guns would be more likely to show this kind of dispersion.

D9 guns are wing-root mounted, not many more places are more rigid thant these.