Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on January 23, 2002, 02:21:35 AM
-
... to kill La7s.
Yesterday, 190A8 (4x20mm) vs La7, direct (only 20mm) and long burst covering the upper frontal zone of the La7 and part of the right wingroot, La7 was set on fire, no more visual damage. Some minutes later vs another La, another burst at 250 yards, this time there were about 10 dispersed 20mm hits. Dispersed hits, ok, but no damage at all.
Later in a 262 vs La7, first 30mm ping and white smoke on the La7, second 30mm ping and La7 was set on fire, third 30mm and La7 right wing went away (every ping caused damage, so, no rubber bullets involved).
Same, flight, some minutes later, 262 vs P51D, first 30mm ping and P51 was cut in half ...
It is only me or do you have same problems to cause damage to La7s?
-
Here's a pic what a shell from 30mm MK108 does to Blenheim...
http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/mk108blenheim.jpg
-
LA7 is made of wood, not metal though. Wood was supposedly better at taking damage than metal.
-
mandoble vaya con el garrote para matar el La-7
-
For sure LA7's are the toughest to kill in the arena.
They take a LOT of hits from any caliber gun, they're small, fast and if they warp.. well.
I've had to give la7's 6-7 snapshots opposed to 2-3 on any other planes maybe f6f excluded.
OTOH a well placed burst from the jug rips even la7 in half, it just doesn't go down from snapshots.
-
fdiron, if a small fighter absorbs two 30mm HE rounds without structural damage, the only explanation is that it is made of concrete or mithril, nor metal and much less wood. Wood could be good against small AP rounds, but 30mm HE is simply too much.
The first described 190A8 20mm burst was more than enough to disintegrate a Lancaster.
-
Staga. Great pic, if Blenheim RTB was very lucky, the crew and the pilot had braves if They don't chute.
-
AFAIR that pic was taken in test shootings in England so no harm was done to RAF pilots :)
-
"LA7 is made of wood"
A WITCH!! A WITCH!!!
BURN'UMmmmmmmmmm !!!!!!!
-
B17's were sometimes knocked down from single 30mm hits in the rear fuselage, it took about 3-5 30mm hits on a B17 to bring it down, with 1 hit in the wing you could literly shave off the skin of the plane of bout 1/4 or 1/3 of the wing. Seriously doubt a fighter will take 3 of them before going down, this have happaned vs F6F for me aswell, F6F and La7's can take ALOT of dammage.
-
I remember smacking an La-7 with 10+ hits from my Tiffie's "lazer guns" (as some are wont to refer to Hispano MkII cannon) that are supposed to kill with one ping (a few pings are usually required in my experience) and getting absolutely nothing for it. No flight controls came off and no smoke was produced.
Once when I was flying an La-7 I made a sloppy attack on a B-17 and he drilled me. There were pinging noises, without letup, from well before I reached him until I was past his nose. The only damage that cause was a pilot wound. I returned to base successfully.
It seems to me that the La-7 is the toughest fighter in AH. That is just my personal experience though.
-
...while IL2s disintegrate after a short burst....
-
I would expect 30mm mk108 being a "One Shot, One Kill"-type of gun when used against fighters thought I've seen a pic of Me-109 after getting a hit from P-39's 37mm just behind the cockpit.
Pilot was able to fly back to the base with a plane missing couple squaremeters of aluminium plates.
-
The new guys need an easy ride folks :) Give it a rest lol
-
It's a moot point since you didn't say where those 30mms impacted. Same spot? More than likely not. Same region of the aircraft? More than likely not. If you hit the tail section with a 30mm, the vert and horiz stab will fall off a La7. Hit a wing, and it will come off. Hit the fuselage though, and you will more than likely damage one of the internals rather than the actualy fuselage.
-SW
-
I don't think that anybody here is asking for the La-7 to be perked. I'm certainly not.
What I think we are asking for is the La-7's damage model to be looked at, and if problems are found to be fixed.
-
Originally posted by deSelys
...while IL2s disintegrate after a short burst....
That is most disturbing, "wooden" La7s absorbing several 30mm hits and IL2s disintegrating with five 20mm hits ...
Even more, if you are lucky enough to hit the La7 oil ducts, it will fly forever smoking black.
Almost every La7 I've shotdown was because they catch on fire without any other visual damage (structural). I've never been able to kill a La7 engine and I've never seen one smoking grey, only black (and forever) and once white.
Some months ago I was fighting a mate whose squad switched to knights. I was flying F4U1D and he was in La7. At the first moves I managed to damage his oil ducts, then the combat continued for several minutes. Later my WEP went off and I started to loose the advantage and energy. After some minutes, he got a snapshot and I lost several surface controls, tried to ditch but finally crashed. All the combat was about five miles of my base. He returned, still smoking, to his base and landed. That was an ethernity leaking oil and the most surprised was him.
-
Wulfe, with the La7 and from my FE, the first and second 30mm bullets impacted at La7 tail, first one -> white smoke, second one -> La7 on fire. The last one impacted (again from my FE) at the La7 right wingtip.
With the P51, the first and only 30mm shell impacted (from my FE) also at the P51 tail, and P51 was cut in half.
-
Well I dunno what to make of it, other than you didn't see it hit where it did the damage.
A hit to the tail will produce only one result- no tail section. You apparently hit it forward of the tail where the fuel tank is and caused the fuel leak. The second one must of impacted the same area or close to it and ignited the fuel leak. The third one obviously did not hit the wingtip, or maybe just hit the aileron.
Either way, I've always seen 30mm do the damage it's supposed to do when you hit plane's in the right place.
-SW
-
...I've never had to complain with the 109's 30mm so far. Almost every fighter goes down with 1 ping. If they don't, they're crippled and can't continue the fight.
OTOH, with the 190, it always possible to hit only with the 20s due to the different shells speed/drop.
EDIT: oops I just re-read your post, you were flying the 262 so the 190 comment doesn't apply :o
Anyway, a burning plane is already dead, no?
Another experience I had: 1x30mm ping on a P47: white smoke. He flies 2 more seconds than explodes (prolly network lag). Have you hit the La7 with 3 pings in short succession? If yes, it is possible that he was already dead at 1st ping....
-
Not long ago, I hit an F6F with a 30mm ping right behind the cockpit, this, in R/L would most likely have killed the pilot if the plane had kept flying at all. The 30mm had a blast of a hand grenade. What happaned to the F6F was that he started leaking fuel, had to put one more 30mm, this time in his wing to knock him down. A b17 is fairly easy to kill with a single 30mm hit, aim for the fuselage fuel tank and hit with just 1x30mm and it will be put on fire.
What i think AH needs, although this sounds a bit like a dammage modell bug on some planes, is an improved dammage modell. Something like Il2's, in AH, we've had more or less the same dammage modell since the start, except for some touches on the GV's and such. It is still the "Hit the aileron with 1 or 2 20mm's and it will blow off" modell, existed allready some years before AH came, and although AH is more advanced then that I think it would do good with a "loose 15% of the wing sufrafce and get affacted". In AH, you can put 2 or 3 20mm in the left wing of a fighter, and as long as the wing doesn't lose an aileron or half the wing, the performance isn't affected at all. In R/L, the plane would lose quite much performance.
-
AKSWulfe, IMO, a single 30mm HE hit in the fuel depot would cause a fire or an explosion instead a single fuel leak. We are not talking about 20mm AP rounds, we are talking about rounds able to make one meter diameter holes in a B17 wing.
-
I've never had a problem killing La7's in my Jug. A snapshot at close to convergence will de-wing them no problem.
If some of you folks think there is a problem, the best thing to do is some online testing. Grab a buddy and go to some far corner of the main or the CT and do some testing. Without some real controlled tests, you can't really tell if there is a problem or not. If you can do tests and show that there is a problem, HTC has proven in the past they will look at the issue.
-
deSelys, the La7 never exploded.
With first ping there was an (typing mistake -> oil) fuel leak, with the second one (2 or 3 secs later) a fire, and then the last hit cut the La7 right wingtip. The la7 finally crashed with the ground.
In any case, I exposed some personal experiences against La7. As far as they are only my experiences, I could be wrong.
My question is, again: it is me, or most of you are having problems trying to cause critical damage to the Las?
-
Proves that the US 50 cal is way better then german 20mm and 30mm too! ;) (J/K).
Seriously though, a 30mm impact in the fuselage of a small plane like tha LA7 should bring it down, many modern jet fighters even today will go down from 1 or 2 30mm hits, it is not as if it makes a nice 30mm big hole in the wing, these things are packed with High Explosives.
A10 can take it, SU25/39 can take it too, during the SU39 tests they required 30x20mm hits to bring it down, pretty cool ;)
Nothing to do with AH though, just pretty cool.
Will see if I can post some 30mm hits.
-
Okay, now your story is changing Mandoble.
At first it was a fuel leak, then fire, then right wing falls away. Now it's oil leak (dark color), fire, then right wingtip.
The first hit caused an oil leak? I see nothing wrong with that. Radial engines can have several cylinders blown away and keep running.
The second hit caused a fuel leak? Sometimes shells don't detonate. Sometimes they pass through the plane leaving only a hole. While other times, the shell will blow up but could very well only send shrapnel into the fuel tank causing the fuel leak while the actual fuel tank will not blow up.
There's many possible things that could happen in RL, so you don't get the effect you thought it should produce... but you want a more in-depth and realistic model?
30mm hits the right wingtip and goes down- I'm assuming you see nothing wrong with that.
-SW
-
IMO the P-38 is the toughest fighter in AH. I am sometimes flabbergasted at how much lead that thing can absorb.
Mandoble, do you have a film of these encounters? I am privating my e-mail address for you to send them to me. I am interested to see those.
edit-- I guess PM's are disabled?? if you have the films I will get the addy to you.
-
1 - fuel (WHITE)
2 - Fire
3 - wingtip gone -> La7 goes down spiraling and crashed.
The 262 case is disturbing, but the 190A8 long burst was much, much more disturbing. With the 262 we are talking about 3 sequential 30mm hits, with the 190A8 there were A LOT of hits concentrated in the frontal La7 side and wing root, and, as final result, only a fire. Anyother plane would just exploded with half these hits.
sorry -ammo- not filmed. But I'm not interested into proving that to the comunity, if it is only me, then no matter to have it filmed or not. It could have been due bad cnx, etc. What I have is a single question, do most of you find La7 "extremely" hard to damage or not?
-
Mandoble, why do you encounter so many problems with certain planes- SpitIX, La7- while others are flying around killing them no problem flying planes just as bad, or worse, than yours?
Why is it, that if you run into these peculiar occurances enough to think it's a problem, you never manage to catch any of these things on film?
I have never had a problem downing a La7 with a short burst in AH. Probably because I aim for the tail or wings-it's a guarnateed kill.
-SW
-
Ammo, the P38 takes ALOT and ALOT of dammage, it goes down by a 30mm hit though, atleast I have never seen one that hasn't. I've put 30mm in both the LA7 and F6F without them going down, P38 is close to them, and it can take lots of led (flew one the other day, got jumped by a 109 while typing, heard a ton of 13mm and 20mm hits but lost nothing but an engine and a flap).
Allso, radial engines can take alot of dmmage yes, but if the LA7 engine can, why does the 190 engine still die after a 20mm?
-
Why does the P47 take so much more damage than the 190?
I don't know Wilbus, and I take it you don't either. Other than you think they should take the same amount of damage.
Are you judging how many 20mm hits it took to destroy the 190's engine by visual or by audio? I know that neither are reliable.
-SW
-
If your IL2 disintegrates, it's facing the wrong direction.
Haven't noticed any problem killing LA7s, but chutes have been a lot harder for about 6 versions now.
-
In my experience the LA7 seems amybe a tad bit tougher than others. But when i hit it good in a snapshot or solid tracking shot with my P-47 under 350 yds, then the thing comes apart or blows up. It doesnt seem as fragile as an IL2, I agree completely...whats is wrong with the DM of the IL2??
I contend that the P-38 is the "flying tank" IME. That thing gives me fits. i hit one with a solid snapshot and it flies off. I dont fly enough 30 MM birds to comment wil. Recently I have flown a few 262 sorties and that thing is brutal on Bombers. I get a couple of hits and the bomber falls apart. I hit a tiffy the other day, it blew up. I hit a pony, it blew up. that thing is fun:)
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
B17's were sometimes knocked down from single 30mm hits in the rear fuselage, it took about 3-5 30mm hits on a B17 to bring it down, with 1 hit in the wing you could literly shave off the skin of the plane of bout 1/4 or 1/3 of the wing. Seriously doubt a fighter will take 3 of them before going down, this have happaned vs F6F for me aswell, F6F and La7's can take ALOT of dammage.
Funny... i remember hearing FIRST HAND from Franz Stigler at WB converntion answer to the same question... it was actually such a riot.. :)
Question asked by a known LW pilot in WB community:
Sir, how many hits of 30mm cannons would it require to kill a B17
Answer:
7 to 9 in same area
You should have seen the faces of the waffels that day :D
-
Ski how do you comment pic I linked earlier in this topic?
-
A B17 isn't a Blenheim Staga.
I've seen several pictures of B17s that were visually less damaged from a 30mm hit, while having it's midsection crippled by an 88 but managed to fly to base.
-SW
-
1 - I have no problem at all killing spits If I manage to hit them.
2 - Dont talk about "others" killing with no problems, this will lead to nowhere, I also can talk about others having a lot of problems with the La.
3 - What you call "particular occurances" are common occurances to me. With this and the past tour I have 82 La7 kills, more than enough experiences to have a clear idea about how easy or hard is to cause damage to it (at least, with Mg151/20).
4 - Ok, that is just what I want, your personal experience. In your case, it is clear you dont find La7 harder to kill than anyother plane, even with short bursts (suppose you are not talking only about using hispanos).
-
MANDOBLE,
About the Hispanos, read my account of my Tiffie vs La-7 encounter. The Hispanos don't do it either.
-
Let's suppose I'm not talking about Hispanos.
Let's suppose I'm talking about MG151/20, MK108, and whatever cannons come loaded on the 205.
Let's pretend for a minute that while my hit % is low, I still hit what I aim for on a plane.
In my experience the only planes that have survived a direct 30mm hit to a vital part of the airplane (wing or tail structure), it went down. In my experience, with all planes, a sustained burst to the wing, engine, or tail will produce either a dead or disabled plane.
You are simply aiming for the wrong area, don't aim for the plane- aim for a part of the plane you know isn't heavily armored.
In the case of the Il-2, it's natural for it to fall apart if you hit it from above or behind. It's only heavily armored to the front and bottom. The radiator is still exposed though, and that was the way to down Il-2s after rear gunners were added in WWII.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Why does the P47 take so much more damage than the 190?
Regarding the damage that a P47 could take, I was watching something on Discovery Wings and they were profiling the “best” aircraft in certain periods. For the air to ground attack roll during WWII they picked the P47 as best in its class. They had a few interviews with actual 47 pilots. One was pretty interesting.
He was talking about attacking a train when on his dive the sides of boxcar opened up and what faced him was a 20mm AA gun. Long story short he didn’t pull off and took a round square in the engine. Terrible sound I think he said but it was still flying. He throttled back and was able to fly all the way back to base. The round chipped one of the blades and took out about 2 pistons but it made it back. Everyone was surprised.
On a side note there was also a 47 pilot who said they were given orders to fire in front of or behind German tanks when they were on paved roads. You see the armor underneath could be penetrated by the .50’s. I had to throw this in hehe. I’ve seen an argument about it in the past. Not that I totally agree that it would work, I’m just mentioning that it was said.
Zippatuh
-
la7 fall apart pretty easy if you can actually get guns on em.
they are also great for shooting harmless burning wreckage after someone else has braved the guns as i found out today.
-
Just wondering...
if 30mm causes such structural damage to Blenheims fuselage where detonation wave has lots of space to expand what would it do if it hit the fighter with smaller fuselage ?
Blast would focus to smaller area thus increasing blast effect in nearby structures.
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
You are simply aiming for the wrong area, don't aim for the plane- aim for a part of the plane you know isn't heavily armored.
Are you telling I was aiming at the wrong areas of these 113 La7 kills in 3 tours? Really? Really are you trying to say that? Do you really think that I need to be teached about where to aim to make a plane to explode????
Ok, lets be more DIRECT, how many La7 kills do you have to be so sure that it is as easy to kill as anyother plane? Of course, I'm only interested in the oppinion of people having really enough experience killing Las.
-
You need experience killing them for it to be valid? Just because you've shot down 113 in 3 tours only means, you have shot down 113, NOT that you are shooting down the quickest and easiest way.
Kills of La7/Deaths By La7
Tour 22-24
Mandoble:
24: 38/5
23: 44/8
22: 31/7
Total: 113/16
7.0623 k/d
AKSWulfe
24: 2/0
23: 8/1
22: 10/3
Total: 20/3
6.66666666 k/d
Num of Hours flown in fighters
Mandoble:
24: 47hours
23: 54hours
22: 26hours
Total: 127hours
AKSWulfe:
24: 4hours
23: 8hours
22: 14 hours
Total: 26hours
Relative to you, I don't have the time... but that does not mean I don't have the experience to know where and what to aim for.
-SW
-
Hey Mand.... did you read my post above?
Just test it all ready. Anecdotal evidence is a complete waste of time, and you know it.
Until you test it and get SOME kind of data, you are just wasting everyone's time. Coming here and asking for more anecdotal evidence to support your anecdotal evidence is just silly. Please just do a quick bit of testing first before you bother posting.
Now back to your regularly scheduled pointless bickering. :rolleyes:
-
You are wrong Lephturn, I exposed two examples, there are 111 more in the last moth. These are, for me, enough experience and online testing. I was only asking for your own experience about damaging Las, not just trying to demostrate that I'm right. Just because I'm not 100% sure that I'm right, I'm asking about the global community "feeling" with the La7 damage model.
I have an opinion, Wulfe has the opposite one, but I'm not asking him to post any video to demostrate he has no problem at all causing critical damage to La7 with short bursts.
In this thread, I'm looking for people experience, and it seems there are some ones that, as me, notice that La7 "inmunity". As I've said earlier, most of these 113 La7 kills where due fire, not due structural neither engine damage.
My experience is, in fact, extremely limited, not because I've killed only few La7, 113 is a good number of them, but because I always used same guns against it (151/20). It seems that Karnak has same results with hispanos.
Wulfe, K/D or time online means nothing, number of kills means a lot when you try to have a "feeling" about how easy or hard is to damage a plane.
In my personal experience, F6F or F4U1(C/D) are much easier to "break" than La7. Same case with 190A8, and it was supposed to be a very well armoured plane.
-
Franz Stigler told me it took 6 to 8 MK 108 hits on the wing of a B-17 to ruin the wing. If the hits were tightly grouped the wing would fail.
-
La7 is impossible to bring down unless you hit its wings. Its harder to shoot down than the P-47.
Mandoble: There's a bug in the la7 that makes it smoke when you shoot its flap off. Just like the Ju88 smokes when you shoot its gear or the C202's main fuel tank can be hit, you leaving a fuel stream behind your plane, and you main fuel tank not losing a drop of gas.
Smoking la7 means its got no flaps, thats it. Shoot it some more.
P-38 takes damage now. It takes the same amount of lead to kill it as it does to kill any other fighter. 4 20mm's will whack it in one snapshot, 50 cals need to hit it in an area with a short burst to snap something off. It just looks tougher because its wing roots no longer snap as easily (need 30mm for that).
-
Originally posted by Zippatuh
On a side note there was also a 47 pilot who said they were given orders to fire in front of or behind German tanks when they were on paved roads. You see the armor underneath could be penetrated by the .50’s. I had to throw this in hehe. I’ve seen an argument about it in the past. Not that I totally agree that it would work, I’m just mentioning that it was said.
Zippatuh
This can be classified as one of those things that had no basis in fact, yet was believed whole-heartedly by many pilots. Simply stated, bullets striking the ground will be badly mangled and lose considerable energy. Considering that the underside of a typical tank is between 15 and 25mm thick, penetration was extremely unlikely. Especially when you consider that the geometry is all wrong anyway. All German tanks were vunerable (to a varying degree) on their upper rear decking. Getting a few rounds into the radiator was enough to stop the tank within a few minutes. The shear volume of fire from multiple .50 cal MGs created the reasonable probablility that several of them would find their way through exhaust vent louvers and do some level of damage within the engine compartment. Some German tankers fear the MGs more than rockets for the simple reason that rockets were not especially accurate, but gunfire could be placed with much greater accuracy and concentration.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
My question is, again: it is me, or most of you are having problems trying to cause critical damage to the Las?
I fly the la7 some, I get wingtips shot off, gear damage, control surface losses...the whole gamut of damage and, to me, the la7 is just about as vulnerable to mg or cannon as most planes are. A bit more durrable to mg's but cannons rip it apart in just a few pings. Yaks or 109's kill me instantly if I give them a shot w/ their big cannons. I've shot just about every plane in the planeset with the 40mm bofors gun on the PT and have noticed lately that it takes up to 2 seconds for damage to show on my FE, I suspect that lag is more of a culprit than the evil deamon some think the La7 is :rolleyes:
-
Mandoble, I am asking for a film to see what you are seeing relative to what I see. You want me to make a film? Okey dokey, just as soon as I got some flight time and find me a La7, I'll make you a film. The 262 is moot, I've downed La7s with a single hit before- but that was a direct hit to the tail (not the aft fuselage) and this caused his horiz stab to flutter away.
The 190A8, I will load up the 4 MG151/20 option, and film it for you. A few weeks ago I shot down LLBM's La7 with a single (or maybe it was 2) hit(s) from the MG151/20 to his horiz stab. He fell away.
I can even do it in the 205. My point is, if you want to see what I see... I'll do it. If I want to see what you are seeing, I'd like to see it.
The k/d has nothing, I know. I just wanted to show you how we compare in that category. Overall, you get more La7 kills than me- in fact you get more kills total- but that is more because I don't fly nearly as much as you do.
The thing that is obvious here, is that I have no problem killing them. But the lack of flight time, hinders any real comparrison we could actually do.
I have been fighting them long enough(since they came to be in AH), however, to know where to aim and what to aim for. As long as how long of a burst I will need.
-SW
-
Wulfe, it is you that cant read or it is me that cant write correctly???
What I've said is just that I'm not going to ask you any film, screenshot or whatever to believe what you are telling to us.
I believe you, but I've said, and I say again that you have not enough experience killing La7s. That doesnt mean that you are unskilled or that you dont know where to aim. Just that these kills in 3 tours are too few, IMO, to have a reliable "feeling" about how hard or easy is to destroy a plane.
It is just like if you ask me how easy is to kill a Mosquito, having only 13 kills in the last 3 tours I, sincerely, cant answer this question.
[Edit]
Ups, forgot your initial question. Well, to see what I see, I would need to send you about 120 films, and I have none, in fact I think that I have the "recording" key re-assigned to something else.
Just one, two, three films are also too few to have the "feeling" I'm talking about. And remember, I'm not saying that La7 is undestructible, just that it requires much more ammo than anyother plane and that most of the time it will catch on fire without structural damage.
It seems that Tac, flying mainly P38 (very concentrated fire and 1 hispano) has a hell of problems to kill one hitting at the La7 main body.
-
maybe the 30mm are not hitting with the power they should be?
I have read time and time again that one 30mm is enough to destroy a fighter but i dont see that very often. I mostly see 2 or 3 make a kill of a fighter.4 or 5 for a b17 or similar.
I dont think 30m are as deadly in AH as they used to be.The days of 1 hit equaled a kill 90% of the time seem to have gone but im not even sure if thats because AH has had 30mm toned down or its just a percieved change.
-
F6F
LA7
P47
The three toughest fighters in AH in order. The F6F just eats up 20mm MG151 especially the fuselage, the LA7 has an unusual resistance to 30mm and the P47 is pretty tough all around. Plus the LA7 is about 1/3 the target either of the P47 or F6F.
IMHO I think there may reason to think there is a bug in the LA7 DM, sometimes it just smokes or leaks with no damage to anything and didnt anyone say that some damage was not represented accurately.
Anyway who cares the LA7 is a crappy fighter and no real threat to any skilled pilot in any decent plane........
-
Well, having fought the thing since it came to be in AH, I do believe that I have this "experience" you want so bad. It's been, 8 months?, since AH modelled it. I've flown against it often enough to accumulate enough kills to be considered "experienced" against it.
Is it the problem that I don't have 50 kills a tour against it that makes you believe I'm not experienced against it? Because if that's it, then someone should tell them WWII vets that they aren't "experienced".
The fact that every one of those kills in each tour was as every bit as predictable as the last one- shoot it up, watch it go down- then that leads me to believe that it ain't the plane.
The damage model hasn't been changed since it first arrived, why now does it need to be revised? Too many of them around and you can't get that snapshot kill on it?
Oh, and I'm not asking to see the film to believe- I'm asking to see any film because it's much easier to tell what's going on.
Or am I mistaken and there's a conspiracy against the LostWaffles to disprove any of their claims.... again?
EDIT: And as for what Tac says, hell, the poor guy still complains about the N1K2.... I don't take anything he says seriously... especially since I have experience in the P38 and know just what it can and can't do.
-SW
-
As a matter of fact,I just found a film in which I shoot the tail off of an La7- the whole tail section- using the 4x20mm option in the 190A8.
Comes out to roughly 400kb zipped up.
If you want to see it from my end, you're welcome to it.
-SW
-
Took off an La-7s tail at 500 yards today using just the twin Mgs on the G-10s nose. Granted, he was afk, but it only took 100 rounds fired. I don't think the plane is any tougher than any other one. The P-47 and F6F get my vote for toughest planes, but they are also massive planes with large radial engines. I think the 190A could be a little tougher, but then I'm probably biased :).
-
Well, since you wanted other people's experiences, here's mine from last night: Met a La7 in a zero, he tried to turn with me, i got a short burst in. Saw several hits flash briefly, his wingtip and stab came off and he went down. In my experience, its a durable plane but nothing special.
Only durability related thing that really got my attention while flying the La 5 and 7 was that the engine can take some punishment and still bring you back. It withstands oil leaks especially well but still stops eventually.
Lapa
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
You are wrong Lephturn, I exposed two examples, there are 111 more in the last moth. These are, for me, enough experience and online testing. I was only asking for your own experience about damaging Las, not just trying to demostrate that I'm right. Just because I'm not 100% sure that I'm right, I'm asking about the global community "feeling" with the La7 damage model.
Yep, and the global community "feeling" is completely worthless, even if that was what you got. What you get is other people that had a problem downing an La7 for one of a host of reasons remembering that experience. It's not a valid survey and it certainly doesn't give you the "global community feeling", even if that was worth something. Without some sort of controlled testing, all that "experience" is completely meaningless. I can give you "experience" or anecdotal evidence of just about anything, even colflicting things based on my experience. The only way to get any useful info is to do some controlled tests. There are just too many variables in normal online flying to get any meaningfull results.
You can whine all you want, disagree all you want, but the fact remains that unless you test and put up some data, it's not likely that HTC will bother to look for a real problem. They can't chase every whine on this BBS or they'd do nothing else but chase whines. The fact is that if you don't do some tests, you are just wasting everybody's time. If you really think something is wrong and should be fixed, do some quick tests. It's real simple, are you looking to get something fixed, or just whine? So far it's obvious.
Lephturn
-
Is it possible that Mandoble is Ram in an Armani suit?
-
Lephturn, I didnt ask HTC to revise LA7 damage model, I ask to have AMRAAMS to fight against it ;)
20 kills in three tours is anecdotal experience, more than 100 is anything but anecdotal. Based on that, I dont consider this thread an empty of sense "whine".
And, tell me, what do you mean when you say "disagree all you want"? Disagree with what? with you? with Tac? with wulfe? with karnak?
Even more, what do you mean with "wasting everybody's time", am I wasting your time? Am I asking you to even take time to reply this thread? Do you have some real experience based on numbers to even reply to my initial post? Perhaps, like the Wulfe case, what is anecdotal is just your own experience against La7, think on that... For your knowledge, Tac alone have, probably, more twice the La7 kills of yours plus Wulfe ones, and that IS a fact for me, not just anecdotal experience.
If some people with a realy lot of La7 kills comes here to tell you, hey, we really find some problems damaging La7, and some others with almost no La7 kills come here to tell us, hey, we dont have any problem killing that plane, what would be the correct step, to give credit to the first ones or to the second ones?
As in the example I gave earlier, if some one comes here to tell us he found a lot of problems to "break" a mosquito, I'll be the last one to tell he is wrong, based on the few mosquitos I've killed.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
If some people with a realy lot of La7 kills comes here to tell you, hey, we really find some problems damaging La7, and some others with almost no La7 kills come here to tell us, hey, we dont have any problem killing that plane, what would be the correct step, to give credit to the first ones or to the second ones?
How 'bout someone that has both killed and been killed in La7's. I fly it alot and there doesn't seem to be anything uber about it except it's speed and acceleration. Factual data is needed IMO in order to prove your point since the view on the La7's ability to absorb damage depends on which end of it's guns you're on.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Lephturn, I didnt ask HTC to revise LA7 damage model, I ask to have AMRAAMS to fight against it ;)
20 kills in three tours is anecdotal experience, more than 100 is anything but anecdotal. Based on that, I dont consider this thread an empty of sense "whine".
And, tell me, what do you mean when you say "disagree all you want"? Disagree with what? with you? with Tac? with wulfe? with karnak?
Even more, what do you mean with "wasting everybody's time", am I wasting your time? Am I asking you to even take time to reply this thread? Do you have some real experience based on numbers to even reply to my initial post? Perhaps, like the Wulfe case, what is anecdotal is just your own experience against La7, think on that... For your knowledge, Tac alone have, probably, more twice the La7 kills of yours plus Wulfe ones, and that IS a fact for me, not just anecdotal experience.
If some people with a realy lot of La7 kills comes here to tell you, hey, we really find some problems damaging La7, and some others with almost no La7 kills come here to tell us, hey, we dont have any problem killing that plane, what would be the correct step, to give credit to the first ones or to the second ones?
As in the example I gave earlier, if some one comes here to tell us he found a lot of problems to "break" a mosquito, I'll be the last one to tell he is wrong, based on the few mosquitos I've killed.
Sigh, you just don't get it. I don't care how many of your "experiences" you have, they are not controlled tests and they don't mean a damn thing, other than you might want to do some controlled tests on that topic to see if there really is a problem. Until you do, you are pissing in the wind, and that's a fact. The only thing you will accomplish is to get folks all stirred up over something that you don't even know is a real problem. I don't care who comes here with what "experience", until somebody does some controlled tests to collect some actual data, it's not likely anything will get changed. Period.
Also, this is a waste of MY time because I don't want folks reading this to be taken in and bother HTC about a supposed La7 durability problem when nobody has bothered to see if there really IS a problem at all. It's called FUD, and you spanish fellows seem to be very adept at it. If you do take the time to test and there really is a problem you can demonstrate ... wow HTC might take a look at it and fix it as they have in the past. Imagine that. I'm spending my time trying to minimize the pointless whining and encourage people to do some tests instead. One of those things will get results, and the other is useless. You choose.
Lephturn
-
Lephturn, add a big "IMO" at the beginning of your posts.
You dont what folks reading this, so this is a waste of your time? Are you a censor, right?
And, please, clarify, what are you telling us about the SPANISH people?
I suppose, you know that we are NOT telling that La7 is undestructible, just that it is noticieably harder to break that any other one. A controlled test will be too complex, you must select a plane, and try to kill a lot of times the rest of the planeset fighters to achieve a clear result. Then select another plane and so on. As a final result, you probably will have some idea about what plane is the hardest to kill with each other plane. Repeat the test from a lot of angles and ranges and so on. The test would be so time-consuming that I consider a better way just to ask people with a lot of experience killing La7s and every other plane. If they find La7 the hardest to kill, then they share my feeling.
As an example about "laboratory tests", here is a post in A&V about Breda MGs, I had no experience with them, so I did a controled test, the result was that these MGs can kill, with no much effort, the drones. Now go to the MA, pick up a 202 and start trying to get kills... ...surprise, "real" world is much different than the controled test one, no way to kill a single fighter.
The one than dont get it seems to be just you. Here there are several possible, perfectly valid, and civilized replies to the thread topic:
1 - Yes, I have killed a lot of planes, and La7 is really hard to break (dont know whether it is right or not, MY CASE).
2 - Yes, I have killed a lot of planes, and La7 is really hard to break. And it is wrong modeled BECAUSE (some good reason).
3 - Yes, La7 is the hardest fighter to destroy, AS IT SHOULD BE, BECAUSE (some good reason, and punt).
4 - Disagree, I've killed a lot of planes, and La7 is as easy to break as anyother else (MrLars reply, and what should have been your reply, without the rest of the crap comments).
5 - Disagree, I've killed a lot of planes, and La7 is as easy to break as anyother else. And this is wrong, because La7 should be much more durable, BECAUSE (some good reasson, and punt).
MrLars, if you have enough kills with this plane, then your point is perfectly valid for me (no need to prove you have that feeling). My post has not the "perverse" intention of force all the people to have the same "feeling" as me. Just the opposite.
-
"It's called FUD, and you spanish fellows seem to be very adept at it"
Below the belt :(
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
MrLars, if you have enough kills with this plane, then your point is perfectly valid for me (no need to prove you have that feeling). My post has not the "perverse" intention of force all the people to have the same "feeling" as me. Just the opposite.
I tried to pull my stats vs the La7 but it seems the score page is hosed. Your position that the La7 is more durrable than it should be, while being strictly anecdotal, does have some validity if you are consistantly seeing this. I, on the other hand do not see it one bit but that is still more anectdotal evidence. Until there is some empirical evidence of what you speak then, given all the varibles associated with an MMOG and the rather inconsistant nature of the net these days, I guess the best thing to do is either run tests to prove one or the other or just let the problem stay inplace since HTC will not make changes because of some peoples perceptions.
-
Lars, I haven't said that La7 is more durrable than it should be, just because I dont really know how durable was the real La7. What I said is that if find disturbing that durability, now there are two main points:
1 - My appreciation is bad (even having more than 100 La7 kills).
2 - My appreciation is right, but nothing is wrong cause La7 was a very durable plane.
Tac, while waiting for LTurn clear explanation, what does FUD mean?
-
Whatever, you just don't get it. You could just test it and save all this hassle. I'll stop trying to explain that now since it seems to be pointless.
TAC, your right, that was not a good remark. I should have been more specific. RAM and MANDOBLE... asuming they are not the same person... seem to engage in a lot of FUD. I shouldn't generalize, as I'm sure there are plenty of Spanish folks that doesn't apply to. I appologize to all the other Spanish folks I painted with that same brush. No matter how simple it is to test something, or even what the tests show, Mand and RAM both seem to ignore it and keep building that FUD. I doubt they do so with intent, but the effect is the same. All Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, with little to no facts or evidence.
And this part's just for you Mand. IMO
Lephturn
-
Whatever FUD means, I preffer one thousand of spanish FUD posts than a single insulting one like yours.
I can find out barely what FUD means, and that is a direct insult to:
1 - ALL the AH spanish comunity, even more, all the spanish.
2 - Then to RAM, not present here to deffend himself.
3 - A public insult personally to ME.
In any case, a deplorable, coward and pathetic (imagine I insert here "american", "russian" or "whatever country") attitude. mostly after Tac post, being the detonator of an empty apology message.
Go back to the school and pay for some "manners" leassons.
-
LOL, don't take an appology well do you. Well I suppose I didn't really appologies to you, but to all the other Spanish folks I may have offended. :) My mistake was generalization, not innacuracy in my view. I'll try to be more specific in the future.
FUD, as I wrote above, simply means Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. It's a term used for when somebody tries to use means other than factual, normally to sway public opinion. As I mentioned, although I don't believe that you and RAM did that intentionally, I think the effect is the same.
Lephturn
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Lars, I haven't said that La7 is more durrable than it should be, just because I dont really know how durable was the real La7. What I said is that if find disturbing that durability, now there are two main points:
That's why I said percieved, I understand that you hadn't ment that there WAS a problem but rather there was the perception of a problem on your part. Asking if there were other people having this same perception is a valid question for this NG IMO.
1 - My appreciation is bad (even having more than 100 La7 kills).
2 - My appreciation is right, but nothing is wrong cause La7 was a very durable plane.[/B]
There needs to be a bit more leeway here to account for net lag and such IMO. So either of those conclusions need to be qualified with all the variables included.
-
Originally posted by Lephturn
FUD, as I wrote above, simply means Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.
LOL! And here I thought it was fediddleing Useless Debate.:D
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
I suppose, you know that we are NOT telling that La7 is undestructible, just that it is noticieably harder to break that any other one.
who is the "we" in that statement. More anectdotal evidence..I see no difference in how much effort on my it takes to down a LA7 in AH, than any other comparable fighter.
Seems to me that Leph is just telling it like it is mandoble. It "feels" this way or that doesnt cut the logic test.
You feel insulted, you feel that the entire Spanish community is insulted, I say blahh. You throw a whine about the LA7's durability and try to convince all that frequenht this board and he calls you on it. Nothing more. This whine resembles one of our old compadre's--- RAM's. That is what he is refering to.
I have enjoyed the online company of several Spanish guys here, and this has nothing to do with them, it only has to do with this nonsense of a post.
(it seems to me that the P-38 is more than durable after its rework...but I havent whined to the community over it.)
-
Here's that film. I think the La7 is the first kill, but I could be wrong. Either way, watch how many cannon rounds impact him before his plane is disabled. Watch how many cannon rounds impact the Zero later in the film, and nothing falls off.
It's all about the angles you hit them with and where you hit them. Like I been sayin' the whole time.
I don't need a 100 kills of each plane type to see that the damage model is a little different than what you think it is.
http://www.geocities.com/weissdr1/download.html
-SW
-
IMHO chutes are too hard to kill.
Chit, yah hose the silk, put 500 rounds into his risers and STILL the guy wont plummet. :(
And whats with all the suicidal parachuteist bomb laden terrorist former fighter pilots? One round into the torso, and BOOM! the fediddleers all blow up!
-
Ammo, "we " are, for example, me, Karnak, Tac and GRUNHERZ.
Lars, connection problems should be considered, right, but these problems affect to any plane, not just to La7. And, as I find very easy to destroy a SpitIX, I also find very hard to damage a La7.
If Tac comments about smoke and flaps are correct, then it seems there was a known problem in the La7 damage model. What is that exactly? If you break a La7 flap the result is white/black smoke? Then what is the result of hitting La7 engine? Any other known bug there?
Wulfe, as I said before, a video doesnt demostrate anything. For example, If I had the 262 video with 3 30mm impacts in the La7 what would you say? Cause that, I prefer to know the general "feeling" of the people based on numerous kills/assist or even unsuccsessful kill attempts. A single video is only one case, and one case could be considered as "anecdotal". I'm 100% that if I had posted some of the videos of these more than 100 La7 kills, people like ammo or Lepth would insist that these are "anecdotal" cases based on net lag or whatever excuse.
Leph and ammo, it is funny how you think that my post is a whine, even a typical "spanish" whine while nothing is said about Grunherz, Hazed, Tac and karnak commets. It seems they agree with that "anecdotal and biased perception of the reality".
-
I found out about the la7's smoking bug when I tried it in a furball. I took an amazing dose of pings from 2 spit, a n1k, a 190 and from another la7.
After the spits and the n1k had wasted half their cannon ammo hitting me, I heard something break and I started smoking. Checked damage and saw the flap gone. *shrug*. A moment later the 190 sneaked behind me and shot the hell out of me, but didnt rip anything out. Finally the other la7 managed to shoot my wing out with a burst. The 190 pilot privd me, he was using 4X20mm loadout and hit me so much he was surprised I kept flying. I told him he didnt know half of it.
I have yet to be able to shoot down an la7 without shooting its wing out. That just dont happen.
-
Watch the film I posted above Tac.
And Mandoble, that film isn't the exception. That's the norm for me.
Argue it all you want, but it ain't the damage model.
-SW
-
Tac, do you have a film of that encounter? If so, send it to Wulfe (I dont need it) and then say: "Argue it all you want, but it IS the damage model".
Wulfe, I suppose you dont believe in my experiences (some of them described here), also you dont believe in the karnak ones, or Tac ones, etc, right? And your video is the definitive demostration of how easy to destroy a La7 is.
Well, if you are trying to convince me about La7 vulnerability, dont waste your time, I have seen just too many cases of "concrete" La7s.
Was the real La7 an extremely hard to damage plane? More resistant than a IL2? If not, then, IMO, we have a problem with the DM.
-
Let's see Mandoble. You claim "we have a problem with the DM" because YOU, Tac, and Karnak- without showing us what you are seeing- are commenting on second hand experiences that can easily be misconstrued.
*I* offered up a film, there are clearly 4 concentrated MG151/20 hits on the tail section and it rips away. I've seen the Il-2 in game take more than that. And I can reproduce it too.
"problem", not at all.
-SW
-
Not, Wulfe, I'm not claimming that we have a problem with the DM because I have no idea about how resistant was the real La7.
I'm claimming that, based on my experience, La7 is the most durable fighter of our planeset. Do you find P47D30 or 190A8 (a supposed flying tank) more durable planes? If not, was the real La7 more durable than these planes? If not, are P47 or 190A8 underarmoured? If not ...
-
I find the P47 more durable than the La7.
The 190A8 depends on where it's hit.
-SW
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Leph and ammo, it is funny how you think that my post is a whine, even a typical "spanish" whine while nothing is said about Grunherz, Hazed, Tac and karnak comments. It seems they agree with that "anecdotal and biased perception of the reality".
I dont think its a typical "Spanish" whine, whatever that is... Looks like an attempt to make me look like I am some sort of biggot...Hope not. More like its typical for you or RAM..who happen to be Spanish.
Its jus hard for me to believe this. The LA7 is one of the top 3 AC in the arena, I see thme all the time, shoot alot of them down, and DO NOT see what you see.
The reason we are talking to you, is you are center stage.
-
I'm up for testing the various guns under controlled circumstances. I need someone to join me though. So gimme a holler if anyone wants to participate in this little experiment.
-
Look for me in MA.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
[BWell, if you are trying to convince me about La7 vulnerability, dont waste your time, I have seen just too many cases of "concrete" La7s.
[/B]
OK, now that the score page is fixed here's my stats vs the La7 since it's been introduced...
160 kills v 56 deaths...hince my anecdotal evedence shows I have no problem killing these concrete uber planes. I just don't see what the deal is, they are NO problem for me to kill.