Jump to content

Combat Box by Red Flight


Alonzo
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, 69th_Bazzer said:

Double checked on the map again tonight. I can only find the one re-arm key binding, it says guns are reloaded in tech chat, and it works fine reloading guns if that's all you have. However, if you also carry bombs, it will only reload the bombs, and not the guns.

 

A video from Sketch detailing how to RRR:

 

 

 

Edited by Alonzo_
Swap in video.
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you still have questions about RRR, ask in Discord. 👍

Edited by [TWB]Sketch
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=FEW=ayamoth89

Hello! Today I would like to show a quite long duel that took place on Combat Box against an incredibly skilled Tempest piloted by Valkyrie77 where we both had to push our skills to the limit and the prey became the hunter several times, like a true old-fashion ww1 dogfight! Enjoy

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
14 hours ago, Alonzo_ said:

Server has been updated to the latest patch. I know I'm excited to fly the new patch, as this includes a much-anticipated damage model update.

 

The developers have issued a warning that the damage calculations may be heavier on server resources, and that we might need to remove objects from the maps. Of course we like all of our objects, they're what make the maps so lively and realistic! We will keep a close watch on server performance throughout the day. If you notice a problem on the server, our Discord is the best place to get our attention. Use the #support channel and an admin will pick up the request.

Its impossible flying Rhineland Campaign. Usually my fs its 80 but near the towns that we need defend or atack, for examle Venlo or the GasStation, the map froozen and my FPS down to 30.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depend how it suits you.

In my case I will fly it as long as I can/want (not sure I will do it all month :wacko: ), and the main goal is trying to find the fun in flying an inferior aircraft, compensate the lack of performance with more ""brain"" and more SA. And try to survive but it's a balance between taking few risks and not camping all the time at 5k over german objectives :rolleyes:

Edited by JG300_Faucon
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

69th_Mobile_BBQ
4 hours ago, JG300_Faucon said:

Depend how it suits you.

 …...and the main goal is trying to find the fun in flying an inferior aircraft, compensate the lack of performance with more ""brain"" and more SA. And try to survive but it's a balance between taking few risks and not camping all the time at 5k over german objectives :rolleyes:

 

Laughs in Yak1 ser.69 

 

Seriously, you can fly the "inferior" aircraft all you want.  Just make sure the "current" aircraft offered for your side are watching over you.  That's a bit different than flying a scenario where the only "top of the line" aircraft that are available to your team are also the "inferior" craft of the map, like a BoM, or BoS scenario for Allies.  Such a brave, brave challenge.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

Such a brave, brave challenge.  

 

I never said it was a brave challenge, or the hardest one. I said it was a challenge. 

I don't get your useless message. G6 still has some potential on BOBP maps but it's outperformed by all reds fighters, at least in term of speed (there is a difference of 100kph between G6 and P51/Tempest).

 

So yes, it's a challenge to fly G6 on BOBP,

just like it's a challenge to fly the P39 on BOBP,

just like it's a challenge to fly the Yak1s69, Mig3 and Lagg3 against the mighties 109F,

just like it's a challenge to fight 109K and Doras with a P47 at low altitudes, 

just like it's a challenge to fly the Stuka on BOBP, 

just like ... *add anything you want*

Edited by JG300_Faucon
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi there, @Alonzo_

 

quick question:  do you host the "Training Combat Box" server?  It's a great playground for us and I view it as a brother server to Berloga. :)  But I'm wondering if there's a reason for the plane icons on it whereas in combatbox they are disabled...  When I first started flying there it took me about a week to realize that the icons are enabled, and I was always surprised how certain pilots were able to pick me out from the crowd... If the icons are for the accessibility sake I get it, however there's already a couple of servers available "DED normal", I think that offer the icons.. Anyway, just felt like asking. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=gRiJ=ToReRo
On 4/6/2020 at 6:27 PM, Alonzo_ said:

 

The bomber waves go in a random order each map, but each wave goes to a designated target. There's also a call-out from 'radar' about halfway to German territory giving a north or east general direction, then spotted messages when they hit the front line.

 

It's intended that the Germans at least have a chance to get in position, it's totally unfair otherwise and you'll have people climbing 10 minutes to barely get into the fight. I would expect to see Germans posted over the incoming B-25s in order to intercept them. I was flying yesterday and I built the map, know what I'm doing, got a call-out from a friendly when the bombers were over Venlo and *still* just about missed them, so I'd say things are in ok shape right now.

 

Still a bit one-sided, easier for blue to kill the waves than red to kill ground targets, so might need to adjust. But ignoring the "who wins the map" portion it's creating some great high altitude fights. Glad you like it 😉

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU COMMENT TO WHOM

 

Edited by =gRiJ=ToReRo
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great video from @=gRiJ=ToReRo -- I was just about to post it in the thread!

 

@Count_de_Money we have icons on since it makes training a lot easier, you can spend time thinking about your position and tactics rather than trying to worry whether you saw everyone and whether they are friendlies. If you want to practice IDing stuff, then you can turn the icons off. It does mean the dogfight areas can induce unusual behavior, though, for example players ignoring the Ai and just going straight for enemy players. Since it's just a practice server I figure it's ok, but we're always happy to re-evaluate if player feedback says icons off would be better.

 

Also, this week, new map rotation! We're bringing back another classic map, Operation Frantic, updated to include USAF planes from Bodenplatte. The mission has an unconventional "shuttle bombing" mechanic, so be sure to read the briefing to find out more. This week's map rotation looks like this:

  • Legend-of-Y-29-Jan-1945
  • Operation-Frantic-June-1944
  • The_Rhineland_Campaign_Feb_1945
  • Crossing_the_Rhine_Mar_1945
  • Battle_of_the_Scheldt_Sep_1944
  • Closing_of_the_Ruhr_Pocket_Apr_1945
  • Mitchells_Men_Mar_1945

@KW_1979 I know you were looking for Operation Frantic, please check it out sometime this week.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alonzo_ said:

 

@Count_de_Money we have icons on since it makes training a lot easier, you can spend time thinking about your position and tactics rather than trying to worry whether you saw everyone and whether they are friendlies. If you want to practice IDing stuff, then you can turn the icons off. It does mean the dogfight areas can induce unusual behavior, though, for example players ignoring the Ai and just going straight for enemy players. Since it's just a practice server I figure it's ok, but we're always happy to re-evaluate if player feedback says icons off would be better.

 

thank you for the prompt response, @Alonzo_ , I appreciate it. 

 

1) Does the map builder or server config allow you to have certain zones with icons and others without whilst on the same map/server?   Probably not.. but wanted to ask..

2) can you turn off the 'distance' under the plane icons at least?   I found it that alot of folks tend to rely on the distance indicator a) when to open fire rather than on the sight profile/size of the plane in crosshairs  and b) when to run away/extend

 

 

Edited by Count_de_Money
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
52 minutes ago, Alonzo_ said:

Great video from @=gRiJ=ToReRo -- I was just about to post it in the thread!

 

@Count_de_Money we have icons on since it makes training a lot easier, you can spend time thinking about your position and tactics rather than trying to worry whether you saw everyone and whether they are friendlies. If you want to practice IDing stuff, then you can turn the icons off. It does mean the dogfight areas can induce unusual behavior, though, for example players ignoring the Ai and just going straight for enemy players. Since it's just a practice server I figure it's ok, but we're always happy to re-evaluate if player feedback says icons off would be better.

 

Also, this week, new map rotation! We're bringing back another classic map, Operation Frantic, updated to include USAF planes from Bodenplatte. The mission has an unconventional "shuttle bombing" mechanic, so be sure to read the briefing to find out more. This week's map rotation looks like this:

  • Legend-of-Y-29-Jan-1945
  • Operation-Frantic-June-1944
  • The_Rhineland_Campaign_Feb_1945
  • Crossing_the_Rhine_Mar_1945
  • Battle_of_the_Scheldt_Sep_1944
  • Closing_of_the_Ruhr_Pocket_Apr_1945
  • Mitchells_Men_Mar_1945

@KW_1979 I know you were looking for Operation Frantic, please check it out sometime this week.

 

Nice. I enjoy Frantic. One question, are all British planes still included for the Western Allies side? Or can we simply expect Russians to only have a limited number of lend-lease Spitfires?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TBAS=Sshadow14

He is not getting kills with no effort or without resistance he is busy working his little butt off so hard after 5-6 hours of flying his brain will be fried.

When someone Says Dogfighting with a 110 takes not effort ill just laugh and start walking away. 
Xjammers work in that plane is great (now he dont take too much fuel ;) ) 

DogFighting in a 110 Is physically Tiring and taxing, 
Your rudders get one hell of a workout when dogfighting with 110. 
and no the gunner nearly never helps its 2 x 30cal

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2019 at 12:54 AM, Alonzo_ said:

We had a player griefing this evening, by joining bombers as a tail gunner and shooting the tails off. We are investigating, but I am already reasonably confident I know the culprit. This kind of thing ruins everyone else's fun and we take it very seriously. Expect a ban for that player in due course.

 

What makes some such jerks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

StaB/Tomio_VR***
On 4/9/2020 at 6:56 PM, JG300_Faucon said:

Anyone to join me in the " #G6challenge "? :P 

https://combatbox.net/fr/sortie/518491/?tour=21

 

Just another way to seek for adrenalin.

 

The kind of thing i could do in 2D.

VR imply some flying restrictions

also you need to see more than 90% of things first. Hard in VR as of now

 

but i remember doing the same with Ki-43 I and optical gunsight back in Pacific Fighters against Spit IX or La-7

 

 

Edited by StaB/Tomio_VR***
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2020 at 11:29 AM, =FEW=ayamoth89 said:

Hello! Today I would like to show a quite long duel that took place on Combat Box against an incredibly skilled Tempest piloted by Valkyrie77 where we both had to push our skills to the limit and the prey became the hunter several times, like a true old-fashion ww1 dogfight! Enjoy

 

 

 

Great dog fight thanks for the post

Edited by J2_Seya
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CIA_Elanski

Maybe someone can help me.  I can't find the post where Alonzo said there was a mission calculator for number of flights per map win etc....  Since the axis now have freedom to roam the skies while only being tickled by the NERFed .50 cals I dont see why the maps aren't updated.

 

Maps like Crossing the Rhine.  axis have to go at the most one grid deep to strike an allied ground unit while the arty position at Hackenburg are 4 grids deep.  The Asbach airfield is deeper than any target the axis have to fly to.  Seriously...i took a hit in the end of the p51 wing and the thing was almost unflyable.  The left aileron worked but with the damage model with the new patch it would not roll the plane.   I shot the left stab off a FW190 and he was still out rolling me...very funny.  I can't believe the devs put out such a crap patch.  Yes i know you cant move airfields but you can move front lines right?

 

So how many months is this going to continue?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aurora_Stealth
1 hour ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Maybe someone can help me.  I can't find the post where Alonzo said there was a mission calculator for number of flights per map win etc....  Since the axis now have freedom to roam the skies while only being tickled by the NERFed .50 cals I dont see why the maps aren't updated.

 

Maps like Crossing the Rhine.  axis have to go at the most one grid deep to strike an allied ground unit while the arty position at Hackenburg are 4 grids deep.  The Asbach airfield is deeper than any target the axis have to fly to.  Seriously...i took a hit in the end of the p51 wing and the thing was almost unflyable.  The left aileron worked but with the damage model with the new patch it would not roll the plane.   I shot the left stab off a FW190 and he was still out rolling me...very funny.  I can't believe the devs put out such a crap patch.  Yes i know you cant move airfields but you can move front lines right?

 

So how many months is this going to continue?

 

Appreciate you're having a hard time with certain maps Elanski, and I sympathise with that - I really do, but to go as far as dismissing the whole patch / update as 'crap' is really not okay.

 

As expected.. this change has completely re-written the typical combat experiences for people including online in MP with people perceiving this differently - although generally very positively and progressively.

 

There are still issues yes (but more with FC) and already the team is providing hotfixes covering specific problems.

 

It's going to take time for people, map changes and tactics to adapt to these new dynamics and that includes the gameplay balance on maps.

 

I can tell you from experiencing the back end of the .50 cals from P-51's online (and other aircraft) since the update they are still very deadly and have in certain cases had my '109 burning in a quick pass within seconds. But you now have to be more deliberate, and mindful of convergence and accuracy, especially with wing-mounted weapons - do not expect a quick burst and enemy fighter downed with .50 cals - they were never that effective in real life regardless of how the game's DM interpreted them before.

 

Quite rightly the 30mm MK108, 20mm MG151 or even the 13mm MG131 should and will give you a higher probability of a fatal hit per round than a .50 cal generally speaking. That was why the Germans developed these guns and their HE is designed for maximum damage. This is factually correct, well documented and explicitly defined even in USAAF technical reports - and is going to come as hard news to many. That is obviously a hard pill to swallow compared to before the update, but it is I'm afraid factually correct.

 

Also please don't forget that the damage you see, may not be the damage actually incurred within the airframe. The damage visualisation is still an area of development as the team stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Snake9

Maps will have to be refined.  You can still kill with 50s but man its much more difficult than it was.  The temp is still a killer.  Took out three 110s in 30 seconds with those cannons.  It would have took me 3 or four passes to kill one with 50s.  Hell took the 38 out last flight and downed three fighters so easy with just the one 20 it has.  Big different between 50s and cannons.  Is is correct?  Don't know, but man it changed things big time.  Cannon armed fighters rule now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
2 hours ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

Maps will have to be refined.  You can still kill with 50s but man its much more difficult than it was.  The temp is still a killer.  Took out three 110s in 30 seconds with those cannons.  It would have took me 3 or four passes to kill one with 50s.  Hell took the 38 out last flight and downed three fighters so easy with just the one 20 it has.  Big different between 50s and cannons.  Is is correct?  Don't know, but man it changed things big time.  Cannon armed fighters rule now.  

 

4 hours ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Maybe someone can help me.  I can't find the post where Alonzo said there was a mission calculator for number of flights per map win etc....  Since the axis now have freedom to roam the skies while only being tickled by the NERFed .50 cals I dont see why the maps aren't updated.

 

Maps like Crossing the Rhine.  axis have to go at the most one grid deep to strike an allied ground unit while the arty position at Hackenburg are 4 grids deep.  The Asbach airfield is deeper than any target the axis have to fly to.  Seriously...i took a hit in the end of the p51 wing and the thing was almost unflyable.  The left aileron worked but with the damage model with the new patch it would not roll the plane.   I shot the left stab off a FW190 and he was still out rolling me...very funny.  I can't believe the devs put out such a crap patch.  Yes i know you cant move airfields but you can move front lines right?

 

So how many months is this going to continue?

 

I'm personally appalled at how little many WW2 flight sim enthusiasts know about the difference between a large rifle cartridge and a cannon. I have quite a bit of experience using .50BMG weapons in real life so I feel like I have a bit of authority on the issue here. The .50BMG projectile doesn't even come close to the destructive capability of a cannon shell. The .50BMG uses basically an scaled up spitzer rifle projectile based on the design of the 30.06 rifle cartridge. It is usually a lead or bimetal (steel/lead alloy) core. The API does include a hardened penetrator with an extremely small incindiary filler. Incindiary fillers simply burn, they do not deflagrate like an explosive. Cannon shells are vastly different, being a drawn or extruded thin walled casing with explosive filler which is detonated by a fuse.

Edited by III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson,

I don't think its players complaining that the .50's ought to have the same punch as as a 30mm, most everyone here knows that there's a difference between an up-scaled rifle cartridge, and a 30mm shell with so much explosive filler that it feels like you're throwing it instead of shooting it out of your barrel. 

I think most of the salt from .50's comes for direct 6 shots. When pulling lead, I have no issue with the M2's. They chew through most things just fine. Yeah, they're machine guns, so you need more hits, but their ballistic properties are highly favorable, so you can hit whats important, and hit it a lot. 

But when you come from right behind the guy and lay into him with a solid burst of what should be API, and he just chuggs some coolant and fuel instead of going up in flames, I can see where the anger might arise from.

Overall I think the .50's are fine, hopefully proper modeling of API in the future will clean up any issues around the gun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray
2 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

 

Appreciate you're having a hard time with certain maps Elanski, and I sympathise with that - I really do, but to go as far as dismissing the whole patch / update as 'crap' is really not okay.

 

As expected.. this change has completely re-written the typical combat experiences for people including online in MP with people perceiving this differently - although generally very positively and progressively.

 

There are still issues yes (but more with FC) and already the team is providing hotfixes covering specific problems.

 

It's going to take time for people, map changes and tactics to adapt to these new dynamics and that includes the gameplay balance on maps.

 

I can tell you from experiencing the back end of the .50 cals from P-51's online (and other aircraft) since the update they are still very deadly and have in certain cases had my '109 burning in a quick pass within seconds. But you now have to be more deliberate, and mindful of convergence and accuracy, especially with wing-mounted weapons - do not expect a quick burst and enemy fighter downed with .50 cals - they were never that effective in real life regardless of how the game's DM interpreted them before.

 

Quite rightly the 30mm MK108, 20mm MG151 or even the 13mm MG131 should and will give you a higher probability of a fatal hit per round than a .50 cal generally speaking. That was why the Germans developed these guns and their HE is designed for maximum damage. This is factually correct, well documented and explicitly defined even in USAAF technical reports - and is going to come as hard news to many. That is obviously a hard pill to swallow compared to before the update, but it is I'm afraid factually correct.

 

Also please don't forget that the damage you see, may not be the damage actually incurred within the airframe. The damage visualisation is still an area of development as the team stated.

 

Why would the 131 be more effective than the M2? I'm not an armorer or anything like that but from what I can tell the round from the M2 flies significantly faster and is heavier than the 131 round. Physics would seem to indicate that a heavier bullet flying faster should hit harder, mass times acceleration and all that. Granted the 131 round can sometimes be found to have an HE charge but I can't imagine a .3 gram charge making that much difference in effectiveness. I well understand why the cannon should hit harder but I can't see why it should be so for the German HMG rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
13 minutes ago, -SF-Disarray said:

 

Why would the 131 be more effective than the M2? I'm not an armorer or anything like that but from what I can tell the round from the M2 flies significantly faster and is heavier than the 131 round. Physics would seem to indicate that a heavier bullet flying faster should hit harder, mass times acceleration and all that. Granted the 131 round can sometimes be found to have an HE charge but I can't imagine a .3 gram charge making that much difference in effectiveness. I well understand why the cannon should hit harder but I can't see why it should be so for the German HMG rounds.

 

You may not use the energy argument. Energy only matters when it is transfered to the target medium. If a solid projectile (M2) fully penetrates the medium, then not all of its energy was discarded into the target. Having an HE filler detonated by a fuse (MG131) alleviates this problem. When the projectile hits, it's detonated. When an M2 API hits, it's still penetrates like a normal solid projectile. If it only goes through skin or structure without hitting a vital component, then it really did hardly anything to effect real damage to the target.

 

The physics of external ballistics is quite a bit more complex than simple (mass)x(velocity) equations.

Edited by III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray
37 minutes ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

You may not use the energy argument. Energy only matters when it is transfered to the target medium. If a solid projectile (M2) fully penetrates the medium, then not all of its energy was discarded into the target. Having an HE filler detonated by a fuse (MG131) alleviates this problem. When the projectile hits, it's detonated. When an M2 API hits, it's still penetrates like a normal solid projectile. If it only goes through skin or structure without hitting a vital component, then it really did hardly anything to effect real damage to the target.

 

The physics of external ballistics is quite a bit more complex than simple (mass)x(velocity) equations.

 

I see. Perhaps you could help me to better understand this? I did some looking into the force produced by the HE filler of a 131 round, 300 mg of PTEN as I understand it; as it seems that is the principle difference between the two rounds aside from muzzle energy. Now, unless I've misunderstood something or miscalculated that produces a blast force around 50 kPa. Is that correct? Because that seems like a small force, people can punch harder than that. I can't see how that makes it so much more effective even given the loss of effective energy by the target not absorbing a portion of the M2 round's energy. Is there some other factor at play here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Snake9
2 hours ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

 

I'm personally appalled at how little many WW2 flight sim enthusiasts know about the difference between a large rifle cartridge and a cannon. I have quite a bit of experience using .50BMG weapons in real life so I feel like I have a bit of authority on the issue here. The .50BMG projectile doesn't even come close to the destructive capability of a cannon shell. The .50BMG uses basically an scaled up spitzer rifle projectile based on the design of the 30.06 rifle cartridge. It is usually a lead or bimetal (steel/lead alloy) core. The API does include a hardened penetrator with an extremely small incindiary filler. Incindiary fillers simply burn, they do not deflagrate like an explosive. Cannon shells are vastly different, being a drawn or extruded thin walled casing with explosive filler which is detonated by a fuse.

Dude I was just comparing what we had before to what we have after.  I wasn't trying to be some kind of bullet expert.  (I guess that's you huh, lol)  I am half gamer and half love of history.  That's it.  

 

The gamer side of me says, if the game is not fun for everyone, gamers won't play.  That's why the maps need to be reworked.  That's it.  It's nothing about bullet computations and crap like that.  Maps have to be fun for each side.  

 

I'm sorry I appalled you.  lol  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
6 hours ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Maybe someone can help me.  I can't find the post where Alonzo said there was a mission calculator for number of flights per map win etc....  Since the axis now have freedom to roam the skies while only being tickled by the NERFed .50 cals I dont see why the maps aren't updated.

 

Maps like Crossing the Rhine.  axis have to go at the most one grid deep to strike an allied ground unit while the arty position at Hackenburg are 4 grids deep.  The Asbach airfield is deeper than any target the axis have to fly to.  Seriously...i took a hit in the end of the p51 wing and the thing was almost unflyable.  The left aileron worked but with the damage model with the new patch it would not roll the plane.   I shot the left stab off a FW190 and he was still out rolling me...very funny.  I can't believe the devs put out such a crap patch.  Yes i know you cant move airfields but you can move front lines right?

 

So how many months is this going to continue?

 

20 minutes ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

Dude I was just comparing what we had before to what we have after.  I wasn't trying to be some kind of bullet expert.  (I guess that's you huh, lol)  I am half gamer and half love of history.  That's it.  

 

The gamer side of me says, if the game is not fun for everyone, gamers won't play.  That's why the maps need to be reworked.  That's it.  It's nothing about bullet computations and crap like that.  Maps have to be fun for each side.  

 

I'm sorry I appalled you.  lol  

 

Elanski and Snake9, about the map Crossing the Rhine is not just those points that Elanski published.

The axis has 180 Bf 109 K-4 with DB-605C (and 180 G-14 and 180 D-9)  and after time a  "x" plus a number of 262, and the allies has only 18 Tempest with the Saber IIA 11 pounds. 18 x 180 !!! Compare Tempest with 262 ?!?!

Before the new patch, it was possible that Tempest FM was better than the K-4, but now, after the new patch, this is not true. The K-4 is faster and the effect of the cannons is the same as that of the Tempest amno and the effects of the G Force on Tempest are much more difficult.

18 x 180, really?

 

And this problem is not only in this map, unfortunately.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether the new patch is great, terrible or somewhere in between isn’t the issue.  The game has changed substantially.  We’re seeing ground attackers leaving bombs in the hangar in favor of strafing.  Server balance has been heavily impacted.  One glance at the stats for the month makes that very clear.  Given this, it would seem to be a good time to think about plane and mod availability, as well as target locations and distance from airfields.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
45 minutes ago, -SF-Disarray said:

 

I see. Perhaps you could help me to better understand this? I did some looking into the force produced by the HE filler of a 131 round, 300 mg of PTEN as I understand it; as it seems that is the principle difference between the two rounds aside from muzzle energy. Now, unless I've misunderstood something or miscalculated that produces a blast force around 50 kPa. Is that correct? Because that seems like a small force, people can punch harder than that. I can't see how that makes it so much more effective even given the loss of effective energy by the target not absorbing a portion of the M2 round's energy. Is there some other factor at play here?

 

If a projectile has passed completely through the medium, you can approximate how much energy has been deposited by knowing the velocity of the projectile after it has made an exit. There is no way we can know these things for sure in game, so let's use two arbitrary numbers which I believe to be somewhat close to what we would see if these were measurable in game. Let us assume that a 750gr projectile has hit aircraft skin at 2500fps. It has passed completely through and upon exit it is now only going 2300fps. Upon impact it carried a bit over 10400ft.lbs of energy. After passing through, if it has lost 200fps, it now carries 8800ft.lbs of energy. We can approximate that it has deposited 1600ft.lbs of energy into the target medium. This is about as much as the 55gr 5.56x45 has at the muzzle of a 20" barrel. Not much for a large object such as a plane. As you can see, this is the reason why shot placement is so important when using .50BMG against aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=ABr=Jambock_Polaco
3 hours ago, =ABr=422nd_RedSkull said:

 

 

Elanski and Snake9, about the map Crossing the Rhine is not just those points that Elanski published.

The axis has 180 Bf 109 K-4 with DB-605C (and 180 G-14 and 180 D-9)  and after time a  "x" plus a number of 262, and the allies has only 18 Tempest with the Saber IIA 11 pounds. 18 x 180 !!! Compare Tempest with 262 ?!?!

Before the new patch, it was possible that Tempest FM was better than the K-4, but now, after the new patch, this is not true. The K-4 is faster and the effect of the cannons is the same as that of the Tempest amno and the effects of the G Force on Tempest are much more difficult.

18 x 180, really?

 

And this problem is not only in this map, unfortunately.

This became the playground of the axis, it's time to take things seriously and stop favoring a group that shits for the historical facts and just wants to stay at the advantage at any cost, there is no difficulty in balancing the maps in a rational way even my 8 year old son manages to create something impartial that can be balanced for both sides!

image.png

Edited by =ABr=Jambock_Polaco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray
25 minutes ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

If a projectile has passed completely through the medium, you can approximate how much energy has been deposited by knowing the velocity of the projectile after it has made an exit. There is no way we can know these things for sure in game, so let's use two arbitrary numbers which I believe to be somewhat close to what we would see if these were measurable in game. Let us assume that a 750gr projectile has hit aircraft skin at 2500fps. It has passed completely through and upon exit it is now only going 2300fps. Upon impact it carried a bit over 10400ft.lbs of energy. After passing through, if it has lost 200fps, it now carries 8800ft.lbs of energy. We can approximate that it has deposited 1600ft.lbs of energy into the target medium. This is about as much as the 55gr 5.56x45 has at the muzzle of a 20" barrel. Not much for a large object such as a plane. As you can see, this is the reason why shot placement is so important when using .50BMG against aircraft.

 

Ah, that helps. I was also able to better determine the explosive power of the HE filler and I can see why the rounds with HE filler are considered to be more effective in raw power; though I'm not sure how much of this power is absorbed by the target directly and how much of it is lost to the air around the target. Thanks for clarifying this somewhat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
6 minutes ago, -SF-Disarray said:

 

Ah, that helps. I was also able to better determine the explosive power of the HE filler and I can see why the rounds with HE filler are considered to be more effective in raw power; though I'm not sure how much of this power is absorbed by the target directly and how much of it is lost to the air around the target. Thanks for clarifying this somewhat.

 

How were you able to figure out the explosive power of the filler? We know that PETN has approximately 1.66x the explosive power of TNT and there is 1.4 grams of this inside of an MG131 projectile case along with 300mg of Thermite. 

 

Also, I believe that the fuse design of the MG131 and MG151 cartridges had a delayed action which allowed the projectile to enter the target before detonation. 

1 hour ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

Dude I was just comparing what we had before to what we have after.  I wasn't trying to be some kind of bullet expert.  (I guess that's you huh, lol)  I am half gamer and half love of history.  That's it.  

 

The gamer side of me says, if the game is not fun for everyone, gamers won't play.  That's why the maps need to be reworked.  That's it.  It's nothing about bullet computations and crap like that.  Maps have to be fun for each side.  

 

I'm sorry I appalled you.  lol  

 

I wasn't meaning to be offensive; apologies if my comment came off as rude or otherwise.

Edited by III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray

Well, I looked up the explosive compound. PETN has an explosive energy of 5810 kJ/kg. I divide that by 1000 to get 5.81 kJ/g. Multiply that by the 1.4 grams in the round and you get 8.134 kJ; about 4 times the energy of your hypothetical M2 through and through shot. Math isn't my strong suit but I think I did that all correctly. My numbers in earlier posts were wrong as I had the amount of explosive wrong by a lot. Chem 101 class was a while back but I don't think the thermite would produce any real explosive force but if a chem guy knows better, by all means correct me.

 

I don't know what kind of fuse they used but it looks a lot like a contact fuse in game, as the shots puff visibly on contact. I'd assume we wouldn't be able to see much of the detonation. I would also expect an internal detonation to cause much more damage than we are seeing, even in this new damage model. Anyone have solid info on this?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Maybe someone can help me.  I can't find the post where Alonzo said there was a mission calculator for number of flights per map win etc....  Since the axis now have freedom to roam the skies while only being tickled by the NERFed .50 cals I dont see why the maps aren't updated.

 

Maps like Crossing the Rhine.  axis have to go at the most one grid deep to strike an allied ground unit while the arty position at Hackenburg are 4 grids deep.  The Asbach airfield is deeper than any target the axis have to fly to.  Seriously...i took a hit in the end of the p51 wing and the thing was almost unflyable.  The left aileron worked but with the damage model with the new patch it would not roll the plane.   I shot the left stab off a FW190 and he was still out rolling me...very funny.  I can't believe the devs put out such a crap patch.  Yes i know you cant move airfields but you can move front lines right?

 

So how many months is this going to continue?

Its works both ways , loads of hits on P51 and still flying .

NO one is going to be happy . Got to learn and rethink .

P51 was uber before patch . Nothing could keep up nothing can out turn it . little tickle from 50 cal,  equals fire seen many times . 

The patch is far better than the way its has been .  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=ABr=422nd_RedSkull
2 hours ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

Dude I was just comparing what we had before to what we have after.  I wasn't trying to be some kind of bullet expert.  (I guess that's you huh, lol)  I am half gamer and half love of history.  That's it.  

 

The gamer side of me says, if the game is not fun for everyone, gamers won't play.  That's why the maps need to be reworked.  That's it.  It's nothing about bullet computations and crap like that.  Maps have to be fun for each side.  

 

I'm sorry I appalled you.  lol  

 

Other example of "balanced planeset". Axis - 102 Bf 109 K4 with DB 605C and 500lbs bomb option (12 airstart). Allies - 24 Tempest 11 lbs no bombs. 

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had high hopes for this update to bring out the skill of dogfighting, and bring my interest back to this Sim as an allied fighter, but in my first test in SP mode shooting the control surfaces off a 109 and it still out manoeuvring a Spitfire, then first time out in MP getting killed after hearing the same old single shot from a 109 on my 6, so first impressions unfortunately its the same old same. 🙄

 

For Combat Box, for sure some of the best MP games of what there is on offer, even though suspicious why many/ most maps have 150 oct fuel, mirrors and bombs etc disabled.

 

Oh well, back to the AV-8B, F/A-18C 😀

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the avoidance of adversity I'm seeing, you think most players would have a better time if they loaded up a campaign and ticked the "invulnerability" box. Everyone is being stepped on by the boot, blues, reds, whoever. I have a suspicion that 90% of folks who are complaining that the game is unbalanced heavily favor playing one side.

(2 minutes on the stats site has pretty much proven me correct. Take your heads out of the sand and take a stroll on the other side.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
49 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

With the avoidance of adversity I'm seeing, you think most players would have a better time if they loaded up a campaign and ticked the "invulnerability" box. Everyone is being stepped on by the boot, blues, reds, whoever. I have a suspicion that 90% of folks who are complaining that the game is unbalanced heavily favor playing one side.

(2 minutes on the stats site has pretty much proven me correct. Take your heads out of the sand and take a stroll on the other side.

Nobody should care what side people play on. I play axis only in Combat Box and WoL, but US P38 and P51 a lot on the dogfight servers. What side i play on has ZERO bearing on what I'm saying in this forum. I work in the aerospace and automotive engineering industry and have extensive experience with various weapons in the real world. THAT is the position from whence I bring my opinion and stance. What pisses me off is people acting like they know what is correct when they have no idea. I give major respect to @-SF-Disarray for their effort to gather data and understand these issue further instead of just "feeling" like things are wrong.

As far as what people are saying here about the prevalence of the K4 on the server, I have constantly advocated for a restriction on the K4. The somewhat historically accurate plane set for late 1944-45 would be as follows; out of every 6 BF109s, 1 is a K4, 1 is a late G6 (when it arrives) and 4 are G14s. 

Edited by III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SYN_Haashashin pinned this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...