Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

160 Excellent

About Mauf

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

541 profile views
  1. Maybe it's a LOD model effect. Could be the longer range LODs have less volume than closer ones?
  2. The 30mm M-Geschoss had a terrible and clever destructive power. It basically used the strength of the airframe against itself. The stronger and resilient the hull structure was, the better the gas shock effect could apply. Funny enough, this meant that weaker constructions like canvas wrapped planes or planked constructions were less susciptible to it. That's why the pictures and the often cited movie from the OP can be a bit misleading. It shows a Spit, which was very vulnerable against the M-Geschoss at what I assume a perfect hit situation. People like to extrapolate this to all airframes out there but it doesn't have to be like that necessarily. The german report mentiond this and there also was a US study that shows that not every first hit immidiately lead to a destroyed aircraft (though the percentage was still quite high for the 30mm).
  3. Again, be careful with jumping to conclusions. The issue with the M-Geschoss in the game is more complex than "clearly underpowered". Don't fall for the "look at these pictures!" fallacy. The pics show potential, not that 100% of hits in the field are guaranteed to be that lethal. Also you need to differentiate visual DM and under the hood modelling. Visual in game often looks less critical than they really are.
  4. Needs more camshake and blur filters. About shooting the already defeated: You can do it... be mindful though that you'll be A. using up ammo on a target that is effectively already out of the fight and B. sacrificing altitude to do so, putting you at a disadvantage for the joy of mincing the enemy pilot. Your call but be assured, many people just LOVE to see those juicy targets that come up from having just bounced a dead engine gliding teammate.
  5. That is not entirely correct. The "normal" HEs in the game I guess work mostly correct. While the M-Geschoss did create shrapnell, it wasn't the main source of damage as it usually was too light to have much penetration power. The big whopper was the gas shock. And even that had varying degress of effectiveness. Depending on the construction of the plane being hit, it could be devastating or locally minimized. Drawn full shell constructions like the Spit or the 109 used were extremely susceptible to it. Smaller patch covers were less as they would get blown off and therefore open the compartment for pressure release, saving surrounding compartments. With the lack of cell modelling and everything needed to get it right, the "emulation" of a M-Geschoss spawning loads of fragments that travel short distance in a spherical shape from the explosion site is the best we will get for the time being.
  6. Should be this one: http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Messerschmitt/Diverses/Flugwerkschutzes.pdf Hope you know German:) The report also mentions that in order for the M-Geschoss to develop its full potential, the hit cell has to have a strong enough shell that gas pressure from the blast can build up. That's why some hits didn't do as much damage as others as cells were hit in such a fashion that the shell was already ruptured too much and gas pressure couldn't build up to cause those massive structural damages. But to make no mistake: all damages shown in the reports are at the very least crippling and a plane with such damage was not able to continue fighting. It's just not that "everything that the 30mm vaguely touches instantly disintegrates". I'm gonna ping @unreasonable as well, he had some US trial statistics that showed that not every 30mm hit was instantly lethal. About the changed fuses, I'll ping @Panthera, he mentioned it to me and I think he has more info on that. It's mentioned in the report I linked but no details given. Then again, you should look through the complaints section, there are at least 4 threads dealing with the M-Geschoss topic already and they all have material posted throughout. In case this was a reply to me: I don't demand or expect anything further done in damage modelling with regards to the M-Geschoss. I'm just stating that the current modelling is not modelling the principle on which the projectile worked and uses an "emulation" (to my knowledge). I also always state (if you look at my previous posts relating to the topic) that a proper modelling would effectively require the devs to completely build a second DM just for the effect. While I would love the game to get closer to reality in this regard, I'm under no delusion that it would require an enormous amount of time for a very small improvement in the overall scale of things and isn't something the devs have resources for. Also, to me, the current modelling of the M-Geschoss is probably the closest to reality we have. Other sims are much more off in my opinion.
  7. Strike angle is a factor. That hit shown in the video is probably a very optimal hit where the projectile explodes in just the right spot to cause tremendous damage. More angled hits or even top-down hits on the wing, while still devastating, weren't so critical (Luftwaffe tested that themselves. Later M-Geschoss designs improved this by a changed fuse). Second big factor is the modelling in game. Currently, M-Geschoss modelling piggy-backs on the normal bullet and frag modelling by being something like a big frag grenade that emulates the blast effect through a huge number of fragments. A proper modelling (and that doesn't try to insinuate it's easy, far from it) would model the cells and compartments of the planes as well as the blast of the M-Geschoss. Effectively it would require something like a whole secondary damage model just for this ammo type. Probably not going to happen (any time soon?). All things being said: The 30mm M-Geschoss is far from weak in the game. In most situations, one hit is already enough to disable or at least render an opponent unable to fight back. It's just not as "flashy" as the movies depict. And sometimes you just get these weird odd ones out where a hit seems to do little damage.
  8. Take the P40 for example: There you can overboost the engine because no automatic map regulator. So if you slam the throttle to 100% at SL, your engine will go pop in a matter of seconds. Do the same in a SpitIX. No popping because the needle will stop at 18 pounds. The magic of the regulator. That's what the term refers to. A quite clever thing as it avoids untimely engine death in hectic situations. Yes, many use them because they either have to (P40) or the automatic is not pure optimum for example in some combat situations (109). Fine pitch is usually best when it comes to accelerating, so it's used in take-off and the vets use it in dogfight situations where you have to accelerate quickly (example: avoiding an overshoot and then accelerating again to chase a diver). Staying fine pitch gives you better response but the automatic prop governor will have coarsened the pitch a bit due to having throttled back. About floatiness: usually that happens either in planes that lack regulators (e.g. P40) where you have to constantly readjust everything or in low settings you normally don't use in normal flight or combat (landing for example). As mentioned above, there are situations for a 109 where the automatic is not better than the manual (from a min-maxing perspective).
  9. True to a certain level. The problem often is the application. It's what many people call the "and then it clicked for me"-moment. Training with others and discussion only gives you pieces. Putting it all together so people get this little "enlightenment" can't be communicated by my experiences. You just have to expose people over and over until "it clicks" for them.
  10. From my experience: People don't teach you because they don't want to but because they can't teach you really. The problem is that a lot of what makes a "good" pilot good is practically ingrained in them due to extensive use over the years. What many of us do is by now unconscious and we can't point it out even if we wanted to. It's the knowledge of "This enemy moves like that, I know I can get to him" or "Nah, this enemy is too fast, turning angle too sharp, I can't reach him". Same with gunnery. E.g. by now, most of my shots are taken by feeling rather than counting crosshair diameters. "This pattern of flight path, aspect and size of the enemy plane feels good -> fire". This stuff is trained up mostly without teaching but by a long process of weeding out "what works" and "what doesn't". Basically, get out there and fly. Fly, fly and fly more. Berloga is a good place to start because it allows for a very quick learning rate on many aspects. Enemies there are more foolhardy though and navigation is mostly a non-issue, so the big open mission servers are important as well. If you feel brave and resilient, record your flying, successes and most importantly failures, put it on youtube and ask people here for feedback. You'll get the snide remarks here and there but most are nice chaps who'll point you in the right direction.
  11. Lost my first pilot on fourth sortie. 109 F2, attacking a river crossing. Dropped my bomb, pulled up slightly into a soft right hand turn, looked back and there was this plane, nose pointed directly at my face.Thought train: "That's not a 109... Shit" -> BANG, pilot dead. Wonderful deer-caught-in-headlights moment:P
  12. Yes, the Charles Lindbergh hint. According to Wikipedia: Doesn't mention what MAP was used. And as with everything, there is no hard "Too much boost" line I guess. I bet one of the better educated boffins on the forum will be able to illuminate us to this:)
  13. There is something that isn't mentioned often (and I think it isn't modelled in BoX but another sim): Your RPM and boost/manifold pressure should stay within range of each other. You can't really go high RPM and low boost because the boost will limit how high the RPM can go effectively. Neither do you want to go high boost, low RPM as that will increase wear on the engine to the point it'll fail pretty quickly. The rule is: When you increase power, you first increase the RPM, then increase the boost and when you reduce power, you first lower boost and then RPM. While it isn't really necessary for BoX, it's a good idea to train that behaviour just in case (and because we want to sim)
  14. Hurricane, pre-order price is two bottles of single-malt, sent to Jason's house.
  15. You sir are an uncouth knave who does not appreciate the greatness that is that reliable, stable warhorse called Hawker Hurricane:D
  • Create New...