Stukas fighting like 109s

[smink1701]

Took on a swarm of Stukas in my Lagg 5 and they were out climbing and turning me and generally kicking my ass. I felt like we swapped FMs. I really hope the developers change the bomber AI so they remember what they're flying.

[ACG_KaiLae]

If they outclimbed you that's because you engaged at low energy. A stuka will out turn you, it's quite maneuverable. It can't sustain that for long however. Attack with an energy advantage and move off, rinse and repeat. Don't turn with it.

[VR-DriftaholiC]

They can out turn you. However they can't out climb you. There must be something wrong with your technique. No offence intended.

[Gambit21]

Yeah if you're even coming close to losing to Stukas in the La5, let alone getting your arse handed to you then you're not flying the La5 correctly/to it's advantages.

[touchdown42]

Yes, it's true that you can outclimb and outspeed a Stuka, He111 or Pe-2 in a fighter but the moves those planes do, with bomb load of 500-1000kg still attached !!!, makes me wonder, if they really use the same FM as the player, especially in regards to G load and structural integrity.

 

They simply don't behave like big, heavy planes and that is a major distraction.

I really, really hope, that there is a lot of improvement regarding AI in the release version of the game.

[LoneMerc]

I fly Stuka almost all the time, and yeah when I have the altitude and energy I will tangle with a fighter as soon as I lose both I'm running. I took down a few fighters but the conditions got to be in my favor.

[LukeFF]

 

 

makes me wonder, if they really use the same FM as the player, especially in regards to G load and structural integrity.

 

They do. 

[I./ZG1_Juno11]

I shot down a Yak1 myself with a stuka a few days back. On the SYN Server I think. He thought hes smart by turning He was dead and burning 2mins later, and I shot with my front guns btw.

[Finkeren]

I don't get, why people keep thinking, that the Ju 87 was some kind of lumbering mule? It weighs just slightly more than the Fw 190, has as good a powerloading as the LaGG-3 and has a wing area the size of a two bedroom apartment.

[SYN_Ricky]

Took a Yak-1 1vs1 against a He-111 in Quick Mission, I must admit I was quite surprised at how the Heinkel behaved, he was turnfighting with me, I can't do such tight turns when flying the 111 myself....

[Trinkof]

With la-5 if trapped at low speed :

 

Enable boost

Close cowl engine

 

Most important : drop flaps , 20°. They drop and retract really quick wich is very useful in dogfight.

Just remember : 1 second on flap button = 10°flaps.

 

With this, you will be able to turn with 109 and ju87 at low speed.

 

BUT : it is better to not be trapped in this situation, use this procedure in emergency case, not in main doctrine.

[E69_Luke]

The AI He-111, Pe-2 and Stukas behave like fighters. I think this is a bug. A bomber must act like a bomber, not like a fighter.  They should do evasive movements, but at the same time, trying to stay in formation again, to accomplish their bombing objetives. IMHO.

[keeno]

Hi,

 

I've got to agree, the HE111 and Ju87 AI seems much too aggressive for what the planes roles actually are. It the Ju87 was as good in real life as it is in BoS, would it have been withdrawn from the Battle of Britain due to heavy losses?

 

Cheers

[Gambit21]

They simply don't behave like big, heavy planes and that is a major distraction.

 

...and just what are you assuming about the weight of the Stuka and wing loading?

What are you basing this opinion on? It's looks? The fact that it could carry a bomb? What?

You're assumptions whatever they're basis are likely false.

[TheBlackPenguin]

I suspect the bombers in the quick missions are using a Fighter based AI rather than a Bomber based one because they will actively select and engage enemy fighters, rather than sticking to formation, hitting a ground target, maintaining a formation and heading for home. They will still engage a target on the ground if they have available along with the ordinance.

[Willy__]

Its already been said many times. Right noe the AI behavior is not complete, so all the ai behave like fighters, independently of which plane theyre flying.

 

About the handling if the stuka. They can and they will outturn you. But they cant keep for long. After a couple of turns it will bleed too much energy due to its massive drag. Just keep fast and go vertical, the stukas wont be able to touch you.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I don't get, why people keep thinking, that the Ju 87 was some kind of lumbering mule? It weighs just slightly more than the Fw 190, has as good a powerloading as the LaGG-3 and has a wing area the size of a two bedroom apartment.

 

It also has drag equal to what the sun has in mass... A whole **** load.

 

I could be wrong, but airframe drag is typically undesirable...

...and just what are you assuming about the weight of the Stuka and wing loading?

What are you basing this opinion on? It's looks? The fact that it could carry a bomb? What?

You're assumptions whatever they're basis are likely false.

 

What is your opinion based on? I doubt it's much else...

 

Where's that "stukadriver" guy... He's flown a replica Stuka - I'll take his word over yours.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Rama
removed personal stuff

[SCG_Neun]

I suspect the bombers in the quick missions are using a Fighter based AI rather than a Bomber based one because they will actively select and engage enemy fighters, rather than sticking to formation, hitting a ground target, maintaining a formation and heading for home. They will still engage a target on the ground if they have available along with the ordinance.

+1

[Finkeren]

I don't get, why people keep thinking, that the Ju 87 was some kind of lumbering mule? It weighs just slightly more than the Fw 190, has as good a powerloading as the LaGG-3 and has a wing area the size of a two bedroom apartment.

 

 

It also has drag equal to what the sun has in mass... A whole **** load.

 

I could be wrong, but airframe drag is typically undesirable...

 

Sure, and the result of the Stukas drag-heavy design is pretty obvious: It has an extremely low top speed for its power and poor acceleration once you get above 200 km/h (parasitic drag increases with air speed) That says nothing about its maneuverability or overall handling.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Sure, and the result of the Stukas drag-heavy design is pretty obvious: It has an extremely low top speed for its power and poor acceleration once you get above 200 km/h (parasitic drag increases with air speed) That says nothing about its maneuverability or overall handling.

 

If it wallows, it wallows.

 

I haven't flown one - I am certainly not qualified to assess its real world handling characteristics. On that note, the physical characteristics (those that I can interpret with common sense and visual stimulus) would dictate that it wallows.

 

Not being argumentative, Finkeren, I am just pointing out that everything I have ever read about the Stuka cites slow airspeed and poor maneuverability - typically negative variables induced by drag.

Edited September 15, 2014 by FalkeEins

[LukeFF]

Apparently, they use the same FM. Just be sure to take LukeFF's word for it... After all... He is LukeFF. (Sigh... I actually sat through being told this once...)

 

It was confirmed long ago by the team that the AI uses the same flight model as the player. It's your issue if you don't believe me, not mine.

[Finkeren]

Not being argumentative, Finkeren, I am just pointing out that everything I have ever read about the Stuka cites slow airspeed and poor maneuverability - typically negative variables induced by drag.

 

I'm not trying to be argumentative either, but I would like to know your sources for the Stuka being particularly lacking in maneuverability, I've never seen that. Drag by itself does nothing to inhibit maneuverability, otherwise most of the worlds stunt aircraft in aerobatics competetitions propably wouldn't have fixed landing gears (practically the only design field where biplanes are still being developed).

 

Yes, the Stuka was slow as hell, and even the engine upgrade for the D-model did little to increase top speed, but sluggish and unh-maneuverable? I'd have to see hard evidence to believe that. Your argument, no offense, seems to be "it looks ugly and clumsy, therefore it must be sluggish".

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

It was confirmed long ago by the team that the AI uses the same flight model as the player. It's your issue if you don't believe me, not mine.

 

Just going to point out that it was quoted that AI will use the FM used by the player.

 

Actions (rather than old words) would dictate that this isn't the current case.

 

Side note: I don't have an issue other than Person A,B,C constantly referring to Person D,E,F as the omniscient, go-to guy. I just think that concept is a tad silly and this thread presented a fine example to illustrate that.

I'm not trying to be argumentative either, but I would like to know your sources for the Stuka being particularly lacking in maneuverability, I've never seen that. Drag by itself does nothing to inhibit maneuverability, otherwise most of the worlds stunt aircraft in aerobatics competetitions propably wouldn't have fixed landing gears (practically the only design field where biplanes are still being developed).

 

Yes, the Stuka was slow as hell, and even the engine upgrade for the D-model did little to increase top speed, but sluggish and unh-maneuverable? I'd have to see hard evidence to believe that. Your argument, no offense, seems to be "it looks ugly and clumsy, therefore it must be sluggish".

 

Probably not the greatest example, but I am in the office and can't dig out books that aren't in my current presence:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=stuka%20slow%20and%20unmaneuverable

 

The only physical documentation I have ever read that hasn't mentioned these faults was H.U. Rudel's autobio - he loved the thing and preferred it over his short service in the 190.

Edited September 15, 2014 by FalkeEins

[jarg1]

While I am know Stuka rear gunners got a fair number kills during the war, I don't find any references to Stukas successfully engaging in dogfights.  Which isn't to say it never happened, but must have been rare enough to indicate that the Stuka was not capable in that regard.  So the behavior of the AI alone may not solve this as the FM may well be giving the AI capabilities it did not actually have.

Edited September 15, 2014 by jarg1

[Finkeren]

While I am know Stuka rear gunners got a fair number kills during the war, I don't find any references to Stukas successfully engaging in dogfights.  Which isn't to say it never happened, but must have been rare enough to indicate that the Stuka was not capable in that regard. 

 

Well, the Stuka in BoS isn't capable in that regard. It's slow as hell, has poor acceleration, weak armament, middeling climb rate and mediocre energy retention. The one thing it has going for it is passable maneuverability on all axis'. Everything else makes it completely unsuitable for a dogfight.

 

Sure, if you're in a LaGG and has bled off all your energy in a slow-ass turn fight at tree top level (didn't I just describe BoS multiplayer there?) you might lose to a Stuka in a dogfight, but in that situation you'd lose to a Sopwith Camel as well.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Finkeren

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

Sure, if you're in a LaGG and has bled off all your energy in a slow-ass turn fight at tree top level (didn't I just describe BoS multiplayer there?) you might lose to a Stuka in a dogfight, but in that situation you'd lose to a Sopwith Camel as well.

 

Just have to use the Ju87's instantaneous turn rate to cut inside him before you bleed off too much energy. Now, that I can agree with!

 

She isn't built to turn circles, but she sure can cut corners when she has to.

Edited September 15, 2014 by FalkeEins

[Finkeren]

Just have to use the Ju87's instantaneous turn rate to cut inside him before you bleed off too much energy. Now, that I can agree with!

 

She isn't built to turn circles, but she sure can cut corners when she has to.

 

This I agree with. But for a dive bomber it should really come as no surprise, that you can pull back the stick and change direction pretty damn quickly and safely. Imagine if the Stuka did unexpected accelerated stalls when the stick is pulled hard back like on the La-5.

[Matt]

Yes, it's true that you can outclimb and outspeed a Stuka, He111 or Pe-2 in a fighter but the moves those planes do, with bomb load of 500-1000kg still attached !!!, makes me wonder, if they really use the same FM as the player, especially in regards to G load and structural integrity.

 

If you want to test that, just take the exact same plane and loadout as the AI and see if you can keep up with him.

[Juri_JS]

While I am know Stuka rear gunners got a fair number kills during the war, I don't find any references to Stukas successfully engaging in dogfights.  Which isn't to say it never happened, but must have been rare enough to indicate that the Stuka was not capable in that regard.  So the behavior of the AI alone may not solve this as the FM may well be giving the AI capabilities it did not actually have.

It was rare, but it happened. For example a Stuka flown by Frank Neubert from I./StG2 probably scored the first Luftwaffe air victory during the war, when he shot down a PLZ P-11 on 1 September 1939.

[jarg1]

It was rare, but it happened. For example a Stuka flown by Frank Neubert from I./StG2 probably scored the first Luftwaffe air victory during the war, when he shot down a PLZ P-11 on 1 September 1939.

 

I just read the story which stated the Polish plane was shot down shortly after takeoff so that may not have been a dogfight either.

[SYN_Ricky]

In his book Rudel writes about how they often caused trouble to russian fighters that tried to mix with them in slow turning combats.

I agree about the fact that probably bombers are using a "fighter's AI" now. I don't have too much problems with the performance of the Ju-87, I was able to shoot down a couple of russians fighters that tried to turn in front of me in MP myself.

But I was really surprised at how well the He-111 turns when flown by the AI, you really have to try and see for yourself

[J2_Trupobaw]

Rudel shot down more than five planes in his Stuka himself, and mentions at least one Stuka pilot that was purposefully hunting enemy planes like he was flying a fighter. I remember reading Rudel claiming that Stukas were well able to defend themselves as long as their pilots believed the plane is not hopeless targets and can be used to fight, so he had to make sure to inspire  hunter mentality rather than victim mentality in replacement pilots. With fighter AI playing Stukas, it's not surprising  they fight back and do the plane justice.

(Accidentally, my only fighter kill (out of one sortie flown) on Syndicate was when flying Stuka; make of it what you want  .) 

Edited September 16, 2014 by Trupobaw

[unreasonable]

If you want to have a good laugh at the current AI go for a quick mission, with the enemy in a bomber with maximum bomb load. I used a Fw 190 vs an AI Pe2, the first time I have used a Fw 190 in the sim. Try to make high side attacks and stay in the vertical. The bomber will go into the vertical as well. Quite a sight. Eventually it will be unable to pull out and dive into the ground.

 

I am prepared to believe that it is using the same FM, but right now it looks as though it is using the something like RoF AI logic: that is to say keep rolling and pulling until the target is in front of the nose.

 

The old Il2 1946 bomber AI was, I thought, rather good. Hope this is coming soon.

[SYN_Ricky]

The old Il2 1946 bomber AI was, I thought, rather good. Hope this is coming soon.

 

I remember heavy bombers doing quite some strange things like trying to go vertical or doing 90°+ bank turns in Il-2 1946 too. We really have to see how they behave in a properly set mission with waypoints and goals.

Edited September 16, 2014 by SYN_Ricky

[Finkeren]

Well, if RoF AI is any indication, bomber AI will be fine once it's properly implemented. Bombers and recon aircraft in RoF stayed nicely in formation, doing evasive maneuvers when threatened and generally behaved realistically.

 

The problem in RoF was (is) that the fighter AI was notoriously bad at handling the bombers, doing nothing to avoid gunner fire and forming a "conga line of death" behind the bombers and getting shot out of the sky one by one.

[Tyberan]

As for a fighting a formation of He-111 you don't even need to shoot them down. Just play with them until they burn out the engines and watch them crash due to lack of speed. 

 

Haven't noticed with the Ju87 though, i'm thinking the AI gets some sort of over revving engine for this plane.

[unreasonable]

I remember heavy bombers doing quite some strange things like trying to go vertical or doing 90°+ bank turns in Il-2 1946 too. We really have to see how they behave in a properly set mission with waypoints and goals.

 

I was thinking of how they behaved in my DCG campaigns, but yes you are right the quick mission builder at the moment is in effect a dogfight generator, so I suppose the the AI does not know what else to do.

 

But it still amusing to see them dive vertically into the ground at full power from 3,000 metres!

[unreasonable]

Well, if RoF AI is any indication, bomber AI will be fine once it's properly implemented. Bombers and recon aircraft in RoF stayed nicely in formation, doing evasive maneuvers when threatened and generally behaved realistically.

 

The problem in RoF was (is) that the fighter AI was notoriously bad at handling the bombers, doing nothing to avoid gunner fire and forming a "conga line of death" behind the bombers and getting shot out of the sky one by one.

Agreed, although this may not be as unrealistic as it might seem, given that the fighters are often barely, if at all, faster than the bombers. Once you have made your initial interception you may as well break off, but an inexperienced pilot might not realise this. The LW lost 109s to Pe2s the same way.

 

Shooting down a Stuka, on the other hand, once it has seen you and is evading, is probably better thought of as strafing a moving ground target. So you stay above it, keep your E and accept lower % shots but make life very hard for the rear gunner.

[I/JG27_Rollo]

I don't find any references to Stukas successfully engaging in dogfights. Which isn't to say it never happened, but must have been rare enough to indicate that the Stuka was not capable in that regard.

 

When reading this thread, another thought came to my mind. Maybe it's not so much the capability of the aircraft but that of the pilot.

@  mentioned it in his post. With the according mentaliy one could shoot down aircraft in Stukas.

 

Most of us are experienced fighter pilots so when we hop into a Stuka, we know how to keep track of enemy aircraft and how to pull off deflection shots.

If you're a Stuka pilot in '42 you fly pretty much nothing else than Stukas. You don't drive to the next fighter airfield, get into a 109 and go intercept some bombers as we can do in the game. Your main concerns are to stay with the group, spot and identify ground targets and drop your bombs on them as precisely as possible. Sure you scan the sky for threats but I'd guess that they were often happy enough to evade an attack and then go on with the flight. Keeping an enemy a/c in sight and shooting at it was difficult enough for fighter pilots so if you're a bomber pilot, you probably didn't try that too often.

 

tl:dr: when discussing what the Stuka (or any plane really) could(n't) do historically, we should also consider the pilots who flew them (and couldn't hit refly btw so that whole "fear of dying" thing came into play as well).

[smink1701]

Stukas I believe were considered easy pickings when not accompanied by fighter support.  I just think they need to behave like it.