Author Topic: P-38 Gun Dissapointment (Read 1881 times)

LEDPIG · « **on:** June 25, 2006, 09:26:26 AM »

I've always been led to believe that the P-38 gun arrangement was pretty deadly, but i've been pretty dissapointed by the stopping power in the game. You have to spray them a number of times to get a kill whereas a Spit will cheew you up on first pass. I've always heard the 38's guns in the Pacific would eat a Jap plane alive, Japanese planes being sawed in half was not uncommon, even German planes bit the dust. Does the fact that the guns are so concentrated make up for the fact it has one hispano, other planes have more than one cannon and 6 or 8 50 cal's while the 38 only has 4 50's and one hispano. Does the concentration make up for it's lack of guns?

Schatzi · « **Reply #1 on:** June 25, 2006, 09:34:37 AM »

Yep. P38 J only has *one* cannon. Since its in the nose, your concentration of bullets is a lot better then on wing guns and you dont have to worry about convergence. Youll still have to hit with the same amount of rounds, meaning compared to a Spitty with two cannons youll have to hit twice as long (provided the Spit hits you in convergence). The advantage of the P38 gun is that you can shoot long range (up to 1000 yards) as well as close up.

Compared to the Japanese cannons, the PJs ballistics are a lot better.

Hoarach · « **Reply #2 on:** June 25, 2006, 09:43:08 AM »

Your kidding right Ledpig?

The guns are very deadly on the 38. You can get 10-12 kills when the cannon runs out and the other 1200 mgs can get you another 6 kills. Its all about accuracy. If you know the weakspots of each plane you know where to aim. Such as a spit aim for the wings or a 51 aim for the engine. Its all about knowing a planes strength spots and weak spots. But like you said about a zeke just drop a match on the zeke and it will go boom so saying something about a jap plane isnt all that good of an example.

Just pray that HT puts in a 38L super strafer (38 with 12x50s). Ill at least settle for a 38 with 6x50s.

LEDPIG · « **Reply #3 on:** June 25, 2006, 10:07:38 AM »

I have seen a fair share of wings being rip off, entire tails being blown off, but that's up close. My aim sucks so bad i don't start shooting till i'm 200 out. One hit at that range and that's it. I used to be able to hit stuff at long range but i quit cause i felt it was wasting ammo when i could get a definite hit at maximum damage and be done with it. I'm not that accurate Hoarach, plus 10-12 kills, what usually happens is i dogfight 1 target and after i'm done with him all the MA sees me and i've got 10-12 Spitfires on my tail and no e, a 2 kill mission is lucky for me. Seems you have to bleed your E to get a shot at all those turny little planes they in the Ma nowadays. Anyway i've been a little dissapointed by all i've heard historically about the P-38's guns and then see how it acts in the Ma. Maybe AH is not totally accurate

LEDPIG · « **Reply #4 on:** June 25, 2006, 10:09:02 AM »

Oh yea i sometimes wonder why the Army air corp didn't mount two Hispanos in the nose, Too heavy you think?

Soulyss · « **Reply #5 on:** June 25, 2006, 11:06:31 AM »

I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment here Led. What source did you get this impression from? Probably pilots telling stories I'm guessing... think about what they're saying and look @ what they had to complare it to. The 38 has arguably the best gun package in the stable of US frontline fighters.. you can argue the P47 I'm sure. But the 4 .50 x 1 20mm centrally mounted is pretty potent compared to the usual 4 or 6 wing mounted .50's. Plus anyone going from a trainer w/ 1-2 guns to the 38 would be amazed by it's firepower. That coupled w/ human tendency to exagerate and 50-60 years. You kinda gotta take it w/ a grain of salt.

Also I think wing mounted guns here in AH had a slight advantage of the ranger finder on the icon so you can hit @ convergence.. I think you could guage distance by using the ring and bead gunsights but I still think our little cartoon pilots have a edge in range guestamation.

Krusty · « **Reply #6 on:** June 25, 2006, 11:08:35 AM »

P-38 guns are one of the most lethal MG setups in the game. It's one of the few planes you can consistently (and easily) get kills after you run out of cannon ammo.

uvwpvW · « **Reply #7 on:** June 25, 2006, 12:19:30 PM »

I have yet to see guncam footage of .50 cals doing catastrophic structural damage. I believe it to be a myth. All I’ve seen are engine smoke, radiator hits and fuel fires. In AH, fuel fires are the oddities while structural failures are the norm.

Krusty · « **Reply #8 on:** June 25, 2006, 01:24:39 PM »

Madman, you forget that AH is but a game, a game without the hundreds of thousands of vital components that -- in real life -- are necessary to keeping that plane functioning. Without said components, AH cannot simulate their damage -- the next best way (and the same end result) is to rip the wing off after so much damage. Hey it's not the best, but there's no way you can simulate real life damage in AH. Just not possible with any team and with any hardware.

uvwpvW · « **Reply #9 on:** June 25, 2006, 02:59:31 PM »

Actually there are plenty of better ways to model it. Look at Il2FB for instance. Wing strikes could easily be modeled to have a % chance of disabling control surfaces and equipment in that wing without the components actually falling off. In fact if you shoot someone’s flaps off in AH they are actually still there, just jammed, but we see them fall off. Makes no sense at all. Having a 10-ton bomber fall apart like aluminum confetti because you shoot at it with a machinegun is nothing but laughable. Only heavy cannon did that kind of damage.

Krusty · « **Reply #10 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:06:33 PM »

IL2 is primarily an offline game. It was designed for that. Offline games can keep track of thousands of more components, because they only have one thing to track -- the player craft.

AH has 500+ people logged in at any given time. The amount of info being sent back and forth (nonstop) needs to be balanced big time -- same goes for any online game. You simply can't have a "realistic" damage model because you have to track everything, whether it's on, off, broken, damaged, holed, leaking, smoking, shredded, etc etc.

So IL2's damage model (which I have issues with anyways) will not work in AH, due to how much info is tracked.

uvwpvW · « **Reply #11 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:20:12 PM »

You’re mistaken. AH’s damage modeling is done on the front-end. The different damage states are transmitted when the damage occurs. It doesn’t matter if you have 10 components or 100.

Btw. Il2FB is now running 128 players in the same game. 128 players in the same area in AH still strangle the net code and we get massive warping and disappearing planes.

Schutt · « **Reply #12 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:29:37 PM »

128 player in the same game in il2 and 750 in the same game in ah2, compare what goes together.

P38 guns are great. Try to fly a C202 or a P40b for a few month and you ll get tons of kills with the p38 guns afterwards.

Kweassa · « **Reply #13 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:31:02 PM »

Quote

IL2 is primarily an offline game. It was designed for that. Offline games can keep track of thousands of more components, because they only have one thing to track -- the player craft.

AH has 500+ people logged in at any given time. The amount of info being sent back and forth (nonstop) needs to be balanced big time -- same goes for any online game. You simply can't have a "realistic" damage model because you have to track everything, whether it's on, off, broken, damaged, holed, leaking, smoking, shredded, etc etc.

You grossly underestimate the power of the net.

AH already (probably) deals in as much information which you'd presume 'too many track'. It already deals in plenty of complex equations involving many factors such as penetration, bullet strike angles, kinetics, and etc etc.. Besides, IL-2 itself deals in as many as 128 people on-line with no problems at all in depicting detailed damage situations, as long as a mere player-downloaded dedicated server program is in place. I'd sincerely doubt the equipment at HTC offices would not be anything more powerful than a dedicated server program.

The perceived problem at hand is concerned with in which manner the information is manifested into in-game reality, not the number of variables to calculate. The only reason AH doesn't have a 'realistic damage model' is it started off without it in the first place, and it would need a total overhaul in the DM system to depict damage in that manner. And when the developers are already hard-pressed with the development of the CT, the new interface, and redoing 3D modelling which has got a long long long long long long long long way to go, it's no wonder they could hardly find time to start another fundamentally influential change such as redoing the DM from scratch.

Krusty · « **Reply #14 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:36:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
The only reason AH doesn't have a 'realistic damage model' is it started off without it in the first place, and it would need a total overhaul in the DM system to depict damage in that manner. And when the developers are already hard-pressed with the development of the CT, the new interface, and redoing 3D modelling which has got a long long long long long long long long way to go, it's no wonder they could hardly find time to start another fundamentally influential change such as redoing the DM from scratch.

I think you've got a big point there