Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Yeager on May 26, 2000, 11:44:00 PM
-
Took this bird up for the first time since its release tour (beta tour 2?).
Wow.....a five kill sortie as smooth as glass.
Point is: Dont neglect this saphire blue gem.
Yeager
-
Point is: How many kills would you have gotten in the same sortie flying the F4U-1C? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Yeag..
unfortunately most who fly it couldnt care less about its "gem" qualities, and therein lies the reason the D is so ignored. I flew a D the other day just for kicks, and enjoyed it even though I don't fly hawgs well. Then I flew a c and almost felt like I had a "two free kills" ticket in my hand, as even the luckiest and briefest of shot opportunities means doom for my target, despite the fact that I don't fly that particular plane well. I have been flyin mainly the 190 lately, but today I even went up in a 'stang.. the first time in a long time, and it was truly sweet.. knocked out 3 pretty easily before someone perforated the paper wings for me. The D will be ignored by the masses as long as the masses want the "big blue plane with the BFG mounted on it." Sad as it is, it is all too true. Guess we just have to see what else comes along in the future. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Skorpyon
I/JG2 ~Richthofen~
"Feel the Sting......"
-
ahhhhh good to hear from sbdy driving a D too
The D-Hog has it's own die-hard fan section (we even have our secret hand shake .. the blue bent wing waggle)
it ain't not as easy to get a kill in it but if you blast a hard manouvering target outta the sky with a hail of cal.050's at convergence that's just a good feeling (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Cyas UP there
DW6
-
Last time I flew it, an Me 109 dove from 10k above me and HOed me LOL!!!
-
I don't see the point.... The 1D turns even worse for some odd reason than the bizzare turn of the 1C.... Sheesh, even the P51 and (LOL)190A8 outturns the poor AH Corsair so why bother? Just take the P51 if you want a U.S. plane with 6 50's. If you are a huge fan of the 1D like I am then IMO, the P51 is the plane to take anyway since the AH Corsair is modeled so poorly in the turn that it is blasphemy to fly it. I have seen Army and Navy comparitive tests on the -1 against the P51B the F6F and FM2, the FW 190A 5 and the Zero 52. These are all side by side comparisons with multiple pilots and they all say pretty much the same thing.... The -1 should outturn the 51... Be fairly even with the Hellcat, lose 1 turn in 3 to the zeke and gain one turn in three on the 190 A5. The poor 190A8 would be even worse.
I don't get it... If they fixed the 1D turn rate it would just make it slightly more popular and a little more competitive in the AH planeset. Perhaps they feel that a 1C that turned realisticaly would be unbalancing? I thought the 1D came out long before the C in AH anyway tho?
lazs
[This message has been edited by -lazs- (edited 05-27-2000).]
-
Originally posted by -lazs-:
Sheesh, even the P51 and (LOL)190A8 outturns the poor AH Corsair so why bother?
Now you prove my point that you NEVER flew Fw190A8 in Aces High. You dont know Fw190A8 modelling, nor the F4U one
only for your information LAZS...I once managed to outturn and kill a Spitfire in a close fun fight (Minotaur can confirm you that, he was the spit) and I was flying Cannonhawg. I remember that Mino was very surprised.
BTW it was when I had NO rudder pedals. With them F4U turns better,as can compensate torque effects.
You dont know a toejam about Aces High and you prove it time after time. Please say something constructive or SHUDDUP! again.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-27-2000).]
-
Gotta agree with RAM. My arena experience with both planes is that the F4U turns better.
Look at Wells' numbers again - the speed for that 190 turn rate is much higher than the F4U speed. When you get low and slow, the F4U makes easy work of the 190.
-
SALUTE! Yeager
Just say NO to cannon dweebery (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I took a -1D up a couple of days ago and ran into Chappy (also in a -1D, though I dinnae know that til after the fight). It was one helluva a fight. We started roughly coalt-coE around 23k and ended up around 7k. We picked at each other the whole way, with several near collisions. It ended when I pulled the nose around a little faster than he did and got a solid burst on him (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
SALUTE! Chappy
Then I went on to pick up another kill, finishing off a bandit a couple of countrymen had been chasing, deadstick and ditched it.
The -1D and -1C seem pretty similary, but neither turns like they should I think. But a -1D CAN out turn a pony. So can the -1C for that matter. Turning with ponies a hawg driver has to remember the pony holds E better than the hawg. But if both are low and slow, the hawg can outscissors the pony. I've done it before (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Never been in a knife fight with an A8 while flying a hawg, but I've never had a problem with one either, unless he had a large alt/E advantage on me at the start.
-
Yeager, ata boy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Been flying the f4u 1d & puttin time in on the Typhoon.
And juzz, dont kid yourself. Flow well the D can equal the C in kills per sortie. The C has a better chance a the long range shot but the D is deadly under 700yrds. Anyone who flys the p51 on a regular basis stand a damn good chance in the D.
As for flying the Tiffy, well this plane is probably the only one we have now that is going to have the same (or close) Flight Modeling of the p47 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Im just getting ready for the future (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/cool.gif)
-
yea lasz .. The HOG has ne of the best INSTANTANEOUS turn rates in the game (that what you think as bizzare turns ?)
Also it will out turn a Poyn and FW any time give useage of flaps .. the only problem with thet is that the FW and Pony still out-accelerate the hog and therfore can get away or at least prevent a convvergence shot when diving just above the deck ..
-
Sorry for this loooong post.
Dinger's leathatlity tests against a hangar show that the FW and the F4U-1C are essentially equal against that type of target. That may hold true against aircraft; if we can figure out a way to test it, I suspect it will.
Therefore, if there is a major difference in the F4U-1C guns and the FW guns it is most likely in trajectory. The two most important components here are muzzle velocity and ballistic coefficient. The HS has a higher MV which would give it some advantage. I have no data on BC for either round, but I know Pyro is looking into this stuff. I'll wager he has more data than any of us.
It may turn out that HS trajectory is too good; if so I'm SURE it would be adjusted. Maybe the FW trajectory is not quite as good as it should be; I'm SURE it would be adjusted.
How about we just temporarily suspend all the gun complaints until Pyro finishes his review? These guys do a lot of work for a small shop. There's that old saying "Every day we do more and more with less and less and soon we'll do everything with nothing!" Let's give them just a bit of time, OK? The guns review is work in progress; be a little patient.
As far as the Hog flight model, some
interesting data has been posted concerning an "official" comparison with the FW that was flown in WW2. From that data, it would seem the Hog FM may a bit undermodeled.
Funny we don't hear a major outcry from all hands asking that this situation be investigated, isn't it?
After all, ALL of us want accurate flight models for ALL planes, right? Looks like we have some hard data showing the Hog is a bit anemic.
So let's all bombard Pyro with requests to review the Hog FM! Make his day! Bury him with more complaints! Threaten to leave!
At least it would be a NEW topic! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
There will always be aircraft that are better than others. This can be because the aircraft is better than the other in THAT situation (like B&Z) or because it was just a generally superior aircraft (Spit XIV springs to mind) or because there are problems in the way it is modeled in the game (hey, it happens and who amongst us is REALLY qualified in any of these aircraft?)
Why not have fun, play the game and learn to use the airplane you like to fly?
There are NO planes in this game that are "Totally Uber" in every situation. So, avoid them until you have the advantage! All part of SA, I think!
Have a really nice day!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by RAM:
<snip>
only for your information LAZS...I once managed to outturn and kill a Spitfire in a close fun fight (Minotaur can confirm you that, he was the spit) and I was flying Cannonhawg. I remember that Mino was very surprised.
<snip>
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 05-27-2000).]
LOL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't remember that at all Ram, must have been another Mino! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I remember the last time I was in a Spit. It was a Spit V and that was some time ago. I was slow, on the deck, trying to cover my squadmate and in SA overload. I believe it was Hangtime in his P-51 that so amazed me.
I don't remember the last time I flew a Spit before that.
At any rate "Good Kill"... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
-
I love to fly the 1D. I die alot but it makes it worthwhile to get the kill knowing that it has the 2nd worst climb rate and its accel rate isn't exactly greased lightning. As long as I stay fast and shoot at convergence I get my kills. Poor SA causes me alot of deaths along with trying to push a bad situation.
Keep the trim adjusted and she will retain enough E to surprise more than a few.
I want the challenge of flying a plane that doesn't have the deck stacked for it.
I don't see the point....
Grab the most beautiful plane in the arena. Take time to get some alt and a head of steam. Fly in trim and fast. Fire at convergence. NEVER turn more than 90 degrees. Pick your fights and enjoy. The satisfaction of seeing "You have killed Hangtime" is awesome (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (He is one up on me but it stills feels great to see the kill once in a while (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) )
If you fly for the quick kills grab a spitfire but if you want the challenge of the most beautiful plane in the AH skies and more satisfaction grab a 1D. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
S!
Rocket
------------------
(http://www.reddragons.de/images/sig.jpg)
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________
www.reddragons.de (http://www.reddragons.de)
[This message has been edited by Rocket (edited 05-27-2000).]
-
Alas the 1d was my mount in WB for the last 2.5 yrs I was there. T2 turned me on to it and started my love affair with big blue. I still fly her ever now and again. And I suspect you see me in her ALOT the first weeks after 1.03 is released (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I hope the zeke becomes popular (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Udie
-
It's all about having cannon, and lots of them.
Guess which plane scores better, but is mostly inferior to the F4U-1D in all but firepower...?
Imagine if the USAAF had chosen to fit four 20mm Hispano to the P-51D... Can you say "Aluminium overcast"? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Juzz:
I believe that excepting firepower, durability and roll-rate the P-51D does everything better than the F4U-1D in this game. I certainly find it to be a far superior ride.
Also the US did experiment with 20mm armament for nearly every US fighter type,
but they preferred the 6x.50 weapon set. This indicates to me that the difference in effectiveness between 6x.50 and 4xHispano in the real world was much less than it is in AH.
Some of the Allison-engined P-51s were armed with 4x20mm Hispano with 125 rounds per gun. These are lighter slightly more agile aircraft than the P-51D and would make wicked arena aircraft under 15k.
Hooligan
-
I was talking about the Fw 190A-8...
And an Arena chock full of cannon-toting Mustangs...
-
It is not proked .50 cals. They are lethal enough, just ask all the 190s losing wings with a short burts.
What makes Hispanos so uber are icons. If you do not believe it, go fly Hog in iconless setup and record your K/D. You might be surprised indeed.
------------------
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/hristo.gif)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 05-27-2000).]
-
Also the US did experiment with 20mm armament for nearly every US fighter type, but they preferred the 6x.50 weapon set. This indicates to me that the difference in effectiveness between 6x.50 and 4xHispano in the real world was much less than it is in AH.
Bureaucratic decisions are never valid premises for conclusions about "the real world." This is especially true concerning the military. (cf. e.g., the Somme).
Dinger
(No I donīt want to start the MG/cannon debate.)
-
The -1D is a great bird in it's own right, but why fly it when you can fly the -1C with the exact same performance but 2 or 3 times the firepower? That's my main gripe about the -1C, it completely negates the value of the -1D, which it did not do in the real world. Rant mode off...
ra
-
yes, the 190 and F4u have nearly the same 'rate' of turn, but the Corsair does turn inside it and can hold a firing solution. The 190 should always use the vertical to cut across the circle or else force the F4u to bleed even more E in lead pursuit. Lasz, in that report, the inital speeds are not given so we don't know anything about the initial turn rates or G loads. I believe that the relative performance for a sustained turn is accurate though. Clearly, the 190 can't pull as many G's as the F4u from a fast attack speed (300+), but in a sustained turn, the G's are about the same (the Fw flying the circle faster).
-
Ra. (why fly it if 1C...)
One reason. The challenge.... There are a number of people who fly different AC for the challenge.
-
Originally posted by funked:
Last time I flew it, an Me 109 dove from 10k above me and HOed me LOL!!!
I was only 1k above ya..and I had the 30mm on...gota use what you have.. I didnt dare turn I thought it was a 1c....
-
LOL Pongo stop stalking me!!!!!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
funked... Maybe low and slow the 1C will outurn the 190 but if you get that slow in this game you are dead unless the arena is deserted. I still say that the 1D seems to turn slightly worse than the 1C also.
ram.. Few too many head butts? Do you really believe that a well flown Hog will outturn a well flown spit? Do you really believe that a P51 turns worse than a Hog? Why don't you SHUDDUP until you have something accurate to say?
toad... I have not heard any outcry to fix the FM of the Hog despite the real world comparison testing.. I don't think too many really care. I maintain that if the fifties and the FM were fixed the 1C would not be as popular. This game is very cannon biased. With the slow gameplay from the mushy turns it becomes a game of firepower and patience. Firepower is number one tho... An impatient person with cannon can get kills even if it costs him a death by "wading in" and not being concerned about getting out. A very patient person with fifties can pick his kills and take only the shots that will result in a good sustained burst on the target. Snapshots or short bursts from fifties result in the kill being stolen by a cannon bird. People with average patience will do far better in cannon planes than the fifties equipped ones....
Which brings us full circle... For the vast majority of players, cannon planes are the only option in the arena. for a very few skilled players who also have a lot of patience... The added ammo of .50's planes can be an asset over the cannon.
lazs
-
I would love to have 6 fifties in my Spitfire. Unfortunately the RAF didn't think that was the best setup. I wonder why...
-
Hey,
It has been mentioned a couple of times in this thread that there has been no major out cry to fix the F4U's FM. Well guy's I am one person who has been screaming since December.
I will not get into the gorey details in this post as I am tired of hearing myself complain. However I am the person that posted the actual flight test between the F4U-1D vrs the Fw-190A5 as well as the P-51B. Which for people who may not know this are two A/C that had what is generally better performance IE speed, climb and turn radius than the Fw-190A8 and P-51D modeled in AH.
http://members.home.net/markw4/FW190_F4U.html (http://members.home.net/markw4/FW190_F4U.html) http://members.home.net/markw4/index2.html (http://members.home.net/markw4/index2.html)
Pay attention to climb acceleration and turn radius. Then compare against the AH flight model and judge for yourself instead of complaining about the 1C's cannons you can wine about the porked FM. I am tired of being the only one.
Later
F4UDOA
[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 05-28-2000).]
-
Wardog,
I dont need to be told about wanting a challenge.
You make my point. The only reason to choose the -1D over the -1C is for the extra challenge. The -1D was a fine fighter in the war and is good in AH. The -1C makes the -1D the choice for Hog drivers who want a little extra challenge.
The Navy was not interested in challenge, yet they chose the -1D over the -1C. That has always been my gripe sbout the -1C, in AH it renders the -1D moot.
ra
-
I bet by the end no one will read what i have to say here. This out turning your oponet, yes on paper it sounds good, but flying in circles is dumb. I fly the P51 pretty much all the time now. But i can make it out trun anougher P51. In real life people dont use the same plane like others would. So it is going to act diffrent for every one. Im thinkin that Pyro and company have tried very hard to get this planes to ack like thay would in real life. But still in a game or real life it is all up to the pilot and his skill with a plane. You can out trun anything if the other pilot dont know what the hell he is doing. Because in tests it is just pilots going around in circles but not geting shot at. Its not a matter of geting right on ones 6 its a matter of being half way close to get a shot on him. Thats not out turning anouther. Any plane can be a death trap or at the same time be a UFO. Once again it is the PILOT.
I dont read what the real life planes can do, cause im not flying a real aircraft. I do try very hard to learn the way theses planes fly. And stop triing to compare im to real life. If you dont than you spend more time squeaking about what the should do rather than what thay realy do in the game. The only reason for saying any of this is to get some Heat from it. I like a good chalange. Like i said in one last post i wish some one would start some thing with me. COME on people im begging. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
VMF-212 Lancers
-
Toad....
Thank God someone has echoed what I have been saying all along... uber, shmuber, let's just check the accuracy of the modeling of the cannons. I have asked a few times on the board if anyone has any data that shows the Hispanos to be as much more damaging as a comparable axis cannon set is, but no one has been able to provide such info. If indeed the Hispanos on a 1-c were truly as powerful as they are modeled here, then by all means leave them. If any of the other cannons are under modeled, by all means, improve them. If the 1-c Hispanos are over modeled, by all means correct them. Let's just encourage ACCURACY in the modeling. HTC has been very responsive to so many other modeling concerns provided by the community, and I am hoping this issue is being looked into as well, if nothing else for the sake of the game. As no one else has provided any data, maybe it is difficult to find... I don't know. But let us ALL quit the bickering and ALL work toward encouraging an accurate model, whether it be as currently exists or after modification.
As always, my two cents, given free of charge! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Skorpyon
I/JG2 ~Richthofen~
"Feel the Sting......"
-
Originally posted by -lazs-:
Which brings us full circle... For the vast majority of players, cannon planes are the only option in the arena. for a very few skilled players who also have a lot of patience... The added ammo of .50's planes can be an asset over the cannon.
lazs
Skilled players like you...
Most of the cannons in the game dont have an aquisition tone. Most of us have to work for our kills and show some patience. 50s work well at the top and bottom of the accuracy scale. For guys in the 4 % range the ammo load gives them lots of chance to hit. For guys in the 12% range they can pick there shots and be deadly with 6 50s at a better range then MOST of the cannons. for the rest the typical cannon is probably better. In the case of the HS cannon it surrenders nothing to the 50 in accuracy and range. So it is signifigantly more useful then the 50.
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
Juzz:
I believe that excepting firepower, durability and roll-rate the P-51D does everything better than the F4U-1D in this game. I certainly find it to be a far superior ride.
Also the US did experiment with 20mm armament for nearly every US fighter type,
but they preferred the 6x.50 weapon set. This indicates to me that the difference in effectiveness between 6x.50 and 4xHispano in the real world was much less than it is in AH.
Some of the Allison-engined P-51s were armed with 4x20mm Hispano with 125 rounds per gun. These are lighter slightly more agile aircraft than the P-51D and would make wicked arena aircraft under 15k.
Hooligan
Hooligan that is the kind of reasoning that gets me in trouble.
In this case some of the major disadvantages of the HS are not in the game. For much of its early mid war carrer it was not considered as reliable as the mgs that it was going to replace. The US in particulare seemed to feel this. That is a big reason for the 303s on the spit. They were worried that the HS would jam. For strafing it is not as signifigant. But for air to air you gotta have a gun. As the us was against mixed gun packages. It was either the powerful HS which they did not trust or 50s which they did. I dont know if it was the HS use in the 38 ro 39 that black balled it for Air to Air use in the US but it definatly was black balled.
In the case of the 51 the US went so far as to build a P51B with 4 20s....ouch.
-
Just on the subject of .50 's vs cannons.. I must be the worst pilot to date in AH but I can tell you what my experiences are. I've been flying cannon AC for a while and since a week or so I've givin my heart to the pony. You see, I can easily stay on the tail of most pilots, but my aiming sux. And I found that with most cannon AC's I just realy realy have to work to get 1 or 2 pings in there. With the .50 you don't have to be so accurate, you just squeeze and make 'm ping like fireworks. Hey, I even did my first 3 kill sortie in a P51-D.. I guess what I want to say is, it's a matter of taste or technique what type of guns you like...
I'd rather have a fast turning fast flying 6 x .50 AC .. than a tank with wings..
-
funked... 6 .50's wouldn't fit in that sissy wing.
sox... you are of course right about turning being a last option but even "real" WWII pilots spent a lot of time having fun in mock combat with their buds and doing a lot of turning. When things got low in actual combat(like they do a lot in AH), these guys did a lot of turning. Real pilots were aggressive and there would be a lot of turning when they fought in such a small combat area.
This is a game of fun with artificial short combat distances to speed up the action. I believe that the AH turn rates are off 50% from "real life" numbers. The artificially slow turn rates take away the option to turn and slow down the gameplay.
pongo... did I say I was "skilled"?.
Certainly you can work around the poor turn rates of AH planes. You can also make the .50's work well with the right technique. does that negate making these things more realistic?
lazs
[This message has been edited by -lazs- (edited 05-29-2000).]
-
Lazs, if 8 x 303 could fit, I'm sure 6 x 50 would be no problem.
-
In talking with HT in the arena some time ago he stated ALL guns are historically accurate on modeling #s.
What we seem to lack is some type of jamming or overheating causing the barrels to spit shells all over the place.
If the reason the navy didn't want the cannon hogs was unreliability due to gun jams then maybe this could be added to the game. You want a cannon ride then take the chance of a gun(s) jamming. Of course this should apply to the non cannon guns.
This may cut down on some 1k spray and pray kills and standing on the trigger till the ammo is gone.
HTC has taken a lot of time and effort to give us historical bullet data in the gunnery model and the have tried to insure that it is as accurate as possible. The only thing that could make it more historic IMHO is adding the random failures real pilots had to worry about.
And I will continue to fly my 1D for the challenge. I know the ride has great guns, poor climb, poor turning and no way to out run anything here if you get in trouble. But to me it makes it more worthwhile when I get my kill. And if I feel like a quick set of kills I will dust off my barbiefire and kill like a madman (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
S!
Rocket
-
To me it's pretty obvious.
In WW2 it was not so easy to score a hit.
So rate of fire and ballistics were preferred over hitting power. The important thing was to get bullets on target. With the exception of rifle-caliber MG's, if they could get hits they could get a kill.
In here, I think my grandma could score hits at 300 yds. Everybody can get hits, so the deciding factor is which hits do more damage.
And in the real deal, they didn't have to blow a wing off to get a kill. When there was real fire and real fear, and a real ground coming up, pilots would abandon a damaged plane in cases where a sim pilot would keep fighting.
And even if there wasn't enough damage to require a bailout, there could be enough damage to require a ditch. And if a pilot saw the bad guy ditch after damaging him, the pilot got a kill.
In here there are (incredibly) no kills for ditches. Even if there were, we'd still go for total destruction of the enemy because we are score hounds. If we let him ditch, some other guy might steal our glory, so we pump ammo into him until he goes blooey.
In the real deal the goal was to protect bombers, or protect a ground target, or protect one's ass! If the enemy was damaged enough to be out of combat, he was ignored.
So it's two problems:
1. In AH it's easy to get hits, so the emphasis is on damage caused per hit.
2. AH Kills are much different from real kills.
-
The Spit wing had room for 4 20mm AND 4 303s.
If that lot could fit in there all at once then I am sure 6 40cal would have been no problem.
Of course, if the RAF had been shooting don B17s like in AH then 4 20mm would have been a lot more common on Spits.
-
You think about the the F4u -1C fuss then imagine this (in a RPS!)
=================================
On the 4th December 1939 Supermarine produced their specification for the Mk IV, the main characteristics being an aircraft, powered by the new Griffon engine, capable of reaching 420 mph and able to climb to 15,000 ft in only 4 1/2 minutes. Endurance was also increased by half an hour. With modifications carried out on the Mk III airframe, the only major changes to be done to the new Spitfire were to design new engine mountings and add an additional fuel tank in the fuselage. After seeing the results of the wind tunnel tests at Farnborough, the Air Ministry announced its plans to introduce the Mk IV into the RAF by the end of 1941. The RAF requested that the new spitfire carried either 6 X 20 mm cannons, 2 X 20 mm cannons and 8 X .303 Browning machine guns or 12 X .303 Brownings. Supermarine elected to go for the six cannon requirement and it was planned to have the aircraft airworthy by August 1941. This was rather over ambitious and the first Mk IV did not fly until 27th November 1941.
====================================
-
Hehehe, I seen photos of that beasty too. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
funked.. i agree. I think it is too easy to get hits placing too much emphisis on the power of the munitions. More dispertion would help the fifties. A hit with a couple fifty rounds is a whole lot better than a bunch of misses with 20's.
i still feel that the leathiality of the fifties is off a little comparitively. The damage model is slightly beter in AH than WB and the leathiality is higher but the ratio of leathiality between fifties and 20mm is still allmost the same in both sims at around 3/1. Both sims fail to model a lot of vital components in the ac's that would be damaged by AP rounds/penetration. Things like oxygen bottles, ammo boxes, and electrical and hyd. leaks. I think that if more things were modeled the fifties and AP rounds would creep up some in leathiality comparitively speaking. At least AH models coolant hits tho.
lazs
-
In WW2 it was not so easy to score a hit.
Are you sure funked?
Or could it be that a more correct statement would be "In WW2 it was not so easy for the average WWII pilot to score a hit"?
If the ballistics are correct, and for the purposes of this debate lets assume they are, and dispersion is definitely in the system as Funked himself points out so often, where is the difference?
Hit detection is always an area to scrutinize, but I haven't seen any shots that I thought should/shouldn't have hit, that have, so I don't think we are "shooting beachballs". Anyone else seen a problem here?
So again where is the difference between our game and WWII? I think its simple.
It the players, and the "game" environment we play in. Not necessarily the modeling.
In one week of playing Aces High, the average player has more gunnery experience and skill, than all but the "Hartmann Quality" of Ace. And we all know that in the game (and in RL for that matter) gunnery is an aquired skill. The more you do it, the better you get.
We also play in an environment where we get perfect ranging information via the icons, and we also have a perfect hit feedback system, via the "hit flash". So we know exactly how far away the badguy is, and we can adjust fire easily since we know exactly when we hit him.
So you basically have two choices.
1.) Change the gunnery system to produce "historic" results. In other words, no matter how skilled the sim pilot is, he must get into "average historic parameters" (100-200 yards) to get hits. This is the route that WB's has taken, and the reason for the past year of their constant tinkering with the gun system.
or
2.) You model the guns, aircraft, environment, and hit detection, as accurately as you can and see what happens.
So it comes down to , which do you want?
Real Guns? or Historic results?
Personally, I like the Real Guns approach.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Vermillion, I have some doubts about the hit detection code. But I can't "prove" my doubts so I won't rant about it.
However there are several other factors at play:
The fact that we can see gigantic hit flashes at ridiculous ranges.
Plus the laser range finder.
Plus the fact that we can see hit flashes THROUGH OUR INSTRUMENT PANEL.
Plus the fact that we can use the icon to aim at a con that is under our nose.
Plus the fact that we can use long bursts without increasing dispersion and wear on the barrel.
Plus the fact that there is no turbulence or prop wash.
Add those up, and Yes, I think it's much easier to hit in here than it was in the real deal.
However your point is well taken regarding the distribution of pilot gunnery skill. I'm sure that is a factor.
I like the Real Guns approach too, but because of the factors I outlined above (plus a few that I'm surely forgetting), we don't have Real Guns.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-30-2000).]
-
Real air to air gunnery probably has 10000 factors effecting that round impacting that d1.1 target and damaging it. Of those proably 100 are quite signifigant. Of those 10 are probably critical. HTC probably models 9 of the 10.
Every plane is a carbon copy of some ideal version of that plane. Every gun is likewise a carbon copy of the perfect realized spec for that gun. Like wise for each round. Even without considering stopages the small differences between the battey and the 9991 things that HTC cannot include in the game as they are individually to insignifigant are the difference between hitting a fighter at 900 and wasting your rounds and probably ruining your guns with that long burst.
As all of us know the biggest thing missing from the top 10 factors is the rangefinding.
From what I have seen of the range finding gunsights they didnt have a concept of shooting at 1k. I guess they must have had a > 600 setting. When you set the wingspan indicators to that small they probably showed a get "GET REAL" warning.
We all know that this is deliberate.
So no we dont have realisic guns. But they are more realistic than any I have seen in a game.
-
Oh yea and i want to have a 840lb weight pushing on me every time i pull a 8G turn ..