Jump to content

Combat Box by Red Flight


Alonzo
 Share

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

 

Have you been on WoL ūüėĄ , I don¬īt think there is a limitation to locking things

On WoL they lock the rockets on the PO2, because it would be sooooo OP with them.

 

11 hours ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Shallot,

 

The 110 rear gunner hit my tempest as I crossed at 350mph from 3 oclock of 110 to 8 oclock in a diving turn...I took a crossing shot.  His .30 cal set me on fire.  It was Hipster diving on the AF target.  REALLY?  Ace gunners like that are not the norm.  Many 110s have gunners that wont hardly fire.  Other 110 gunners from SOME people set you on fire at really stupid speeds and angles.  Have we all not been flying for years and noticed this?  I see it in chat weekly, why is one 110 gunner an ACE and several others are just so so?  We know the answer to that question.  They have a cheat but it is a white elephant in this game.  It is worse to say there is a cheat than to be a cheat.  So the white elephant is staying put.  Don't think for a moment I believe it isnt.  Luth and I both came across tail of 110.  He shot I was just trying to distract the gunner.  He killed Luth and destroyed my plane engine.  AT THE SAME TIME.  It was our first pass and high speed.  We only got one pass and that .30cal did us in.  Do I think it is stock?  No but there are enough people using ACE rear gunners to make it a real no no to come in behind 110.  And those same 110s are so fast you cant get in front of them without having three grids to do it so they almost always get their bombs down.   The 110 could not survive un-escorted....historical fact.  Yet in here many brag often about killing 3 or 4 planes before being brought down.   Not so for allied.  

 

Say what you want, think and feel what you want.  The axis firepower is now over powering since patch, allied bombs suck and our ammo sucks.  So escorting to target sucks because you cant stop fighters from killing your bombers unless you happen to be one of the guys using (white elephant) assist and shoot 20percent when the 109 rolls in on the A20.  Then guys get tired of the constant PKs which is about as fun as getting shot in Wings in your spawn point.  So yup, there goes any interest in going 5 grids deep to a target placed way behind enemy lines.  Y29 every deep target is a death trap.  I took P47 to 20,000 ft.  I full speed dove on target, dropped at 10,000 feet.  Zoomed level, even slight dive.  Got caught by F'ing 109 within a grid, 10km.  Scissor, bang, plane dead.  So we have our thoughts Shallot and you have yours.


:)

I think the miracle gunner shots have something to do with *"$t ping and out of date hit data. I too have experienced this BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ACG_KoN said:

I wonder how many Red pilots are making it home after the new DM updates . 

As a sample size of 1, I am making it home somewhat more often than before, but getting fewer ground kills even after riskier attack runs. Previously my attack profile usually involved a single pass with bomb load, then scoot to try and save my butt. Now I am getting roughly the same number of ground kills by doing a pass with bombs, a pass with rockets, and if no one has killed me yet, several strafing runs on any soft targets. The higher damage resistance of the Jug's frame and engine under the new DM has been a real game changer and for that alone I am a huge fan of this patch - the Jug finally feels like it should in terms of damage absorption. 

Making it home does not win the map, but it is better for my personal stats.

 

14 hours ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Not with 7 vs 7

 

bombers spawn at minimum 10 on either side iirc


Right,¬†it‚Äôs always the plane never the pilot ūüėČ

 Maybe all 7 guys just flew fighter missions - with those numbers the allies just didn't have any rugged, handsome ground pounders on there doing the Lord's work, just a bunch of glory-hog fighter jocks. Or maybe they flew missions and got no ground kills. But even on that mission there was some ground kills for the allies (maybe when you weren't online). Drawing conclusions from small server populations isn't going to get you good results. 

When its the same pilots, flying the same missions, and it's confirmed that the planes are the things that changed, then that indicates that it IS the plane. When you consider things on aggregate, with all other things being equal, it IS the plane that makes the difference. If it wasn't, we would never build new fighters or bombers. 

If the Allies (or the Luftwaffe) had had a sudden decline in win-rate without a patch or change I would just say "git gud" and move on but that is clearly not the case. Everyone kept doing things the same but the DM meant that certain tactics were suddenly much more viable, and others were not. Tweaks were previously made to missions way back when the Allies were constantly steamrolling targets with P-38s and Tempests with huge bombs - and back then it was the Allies claiming that the Luftwaffe was simply not bothering with ground attack. It was not that the Luftwaffe suddenly didn't know how to move mud, it was that the Allies got weapons and platforms that changed the ground-attack game. 

The pilot part of the equation here is re-learning the most effective way to deploy their weapons and the best tactics to roll a target - which if last night is any indication, the Allies are able to do given time, since we have an allied win streak where ground attack has been roughly equal by the sides. It just took some time, some tweaks, and some hotfixes. If things swing too much the other way in favour of the allies then I would be supportive of tweaks to fix that as well. If we see the same kind of win streaks over the next week for the Allies then we will know. 

Anyway its not the end of the world, the admins do a good job getting things right, it just takes time and data. The main thing is we can't expect the admins to move heaven and earth over the course of a few days when the devs might change something again very soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

I see vbf12 attacking ground targets a lot, don’t get me wrong, but many of your allies just sit at 6k with their finger in their ?!@ all day.

 

btw flight time is NOT equal allies even have more...ūüėā that‚Äôs pretty defining IMO

Is this before update or after DM patches . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO.20_Krispy_Duck
45 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

As a sample size of 1, I am making it home somewhat more often than before, but getting fewer ground kills even after riskier attack runs. Previously my attack profile usually involved a single pass with bomb load, then scoot to try and save my butt. Now I am getting roughly the same number of ground kills by doing a pass with bombs, a pass with rockets, and if no one has killed me yet, several strafing runs on any soft targets. The higher damage resistance of the Jug's frame and engine under the new DM has been a real game changer and for that alone I am a huge fan of this patch - the Jug finally feels like it should in terms of damage absorption. 

Making it home does not win the map, but it is better for my personal stats.

 

 Maybe all 7 guys just flew fighter missions - with those numbers the allies just didn't have any rugged, handsome ground pounders on there doing the Lord's work, just a bunch of glory-hog fighter jocks. Or maybe they flew missions and got no ground kills. But even on that mission there was some ground kills for the allies (maybe when you weren't online). Drawing conclusions from small server populations isn't going to get you good results. 

When its the same pilots, flying the same missions, and it's confirmed that the planes are the things that changed, then that indicates that it IS the plane. When you consider things on aggregate, with all other things being equal, it IS the plane that makes the difference. If it wasn't, we would never build new fighters or bombers. 

If the Allies (or the Luftwaffe) had had a sudden decline in win-rate without a patch or change I would just say "git gud" and move on but that is clearly not the case. Everyone kept doing things the same but the DM meant that certain tactics were suddenly much more viable, and others were not. Tweaks were previously made to missions way back when the Allies were constantly steamrolling targets with P-38s and Tempests with huge bombs - and back then it was the Allies claiming that the Luftwaffe was simply not bothering with ground attack. It was not that the Luftwaffe suddenly didn't know how to move mud, it was that the Allies got weapons and platforms that changed the ground-attack game. 

The pilot part of the equation here is re-learning the most effective way to deploy their weapons and the best tactics to roll a target - which if last night is any indication, the Allies are able to do given time, since we have an allied win streak where ground attack has been roughly equal by the sides. It just took some time, some tweaks, and some hotfixes. If things swing too much the other way in favour of the allies then I would be supportive of tweaks to fix that as well. If we see the same kind of win streaks over the next week for the Allies then we will know. 

Anyway its not the end of the world, the admins do a good job getting things right, it just takes time and data. The main thing is we can't expect the admins to move heaven and earth over the course of a few days when the devs might change something again very soon. 

 

Same here when I fly the P-40: takes quite a bit of punishment now. Engine can still get knocked out, but it's not as wimpy as before when it gets hit. So survivability seems a little better, but ground targets are proving harder to destroy. Your chances of falling apart are lower, but your chances of a strong attack run are lower. With the P-38, I haven't had the snapping elevator or the plane folding in half anymore. Again, same issue with the P-38 and attack runs, though with the extra bombs you can do a little better. Still, a strong single pass ground attack run has been taken out of play unless you're taking a heavier plane like the A-20 or the 110. The more confusing issues with the damage models on the P-38 and P-47 from before seem much better now. The ground attack issues and issues with the wings in Flying Circus make the last patch a mixed bag, in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2020 at 9:13 PM, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

1). I think that would change if Allies had a similar amount of variety in bombers and attackers to choose from that are usable in the BoBp time frame.  

 

P-38 drops bombs and 4 109s latch onto the tail.  P-47 drops bombs and same.  A-20, same.  All usually insta-kills from spray and pray 30mm.  That is of course if they're not actually intercepted 11km outside of their spawn base.  Out of all those, the A-20 is the only dedicated bomber and it's rearward defense is totally inadequate.  Very few people are comfortable with every flight having a nearly zero chance of not dying. 

 

2). So basically WoL, but the tables have turned. ¬†ūüėĄ

 

 

I think your right about the instant kills PK , there seems to be a lot , But ive not tested Axis yet not fully that`s next month . 

Ive had more deaths since update though Allied . P51 .

But i feel Allied has the right tools to do the job , P38 , P47 even P51 can carry and fight on after . I just think its the allied players not wanting to win the maps . 

and tail gunners , well, i even got sniped by a 110 tail gunner at 280-mph in a tempest not even on his six . Not funny .¬†ūüėÜ

Lets see what happens . 

Edited by ACG_KoN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

 

I agree, but a decrease in win rate is not a argument for or against an update. Realism is. Maybe blue has been better all along. Now it just shows.

I'm not arguing against the update. Or realism. I like the update. Now the server has to be tweaked to take into account the new normal - it was tweaked before when the Allies were steamrolling  to keep things competitive, by balancing targets and reducing certain allied capabilities. The tweaks already done may very well be enough, or maybe they will be too much, in which case things may be tweaked again. I will play along and see regardless. Anyone who looks at my stats knows I can't get too broken up over losing, or I would never play.


 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray

Not that I'm trying to derail things and shift gears rapidly here, but that is kind of what I'm going to do. How common were Mk 108 cannons? I don't think I've ever seen them locked on this server on any plane that is capable of mounting them. As I understand the weapon it was intended for bomber destruction and was issued to those units that were tasked with destroying bombers primarily. But it seems like every G14 and A8 can have them if they want them. I know this can be adjusted in server set up, but should it be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, -SF-Disarray said:

Not that I'm trying to derail things and shift gears rapidly here, but that is kind of what I'm going to do. How common were Mk 108 cannons? I don't think I've ever seen them locked on this server on any plane that is capable of mounting them. As I understand the weapon it was intended for bomber destruction and was issued to those units that were tasked with destroying bombers primarily. But it seems like every G14 and A8 can have them if they want them. I know this can be adjusted in server set up, but should it be?

They're never locked. I had a quick look on the internet and I found nothing to suggest that they were a particularly rare weapon, also even if it was, it would only affect the A8 and G14, and if you make those less attractive to fly, you are more likely to encounter K4 spam.

Arguably the 151/20 has quite a few advantages over the 108 too with the new DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
2 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

Now the server has to be tweaked to take into account the new normal -


Absolutely 

29 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

Arguably the 151/20 has quite a few advantages over the 108 too with the new DM

Yes, now planes drastically lose performance when hit with MInengeschoss 20mm it makes the 20mm more effective than before.

Still I would take the 30mm over it any day, because you only need that 1 hit, - if not taking it down immediately almost always crippling the plane extensively -most of the time. 

Edited by =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Absolutely 

Yes, now planes drastically lose performance when hit with MInengeschoss 20mm it makes the 20mm more effective than before.

Still I would take the 30mm over it any day, because you only need that 1 hit most of the time.

Skillpods are the best though ūüėĄ

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

69th_Mobile_BBQ
3 hours ago, ACG_KoN said:

I think your right about the instant kills PK , there seems to be a lot , But ive not tested Axis yet not fully that`s next month . 

Ive had more deaths since update though Allied .

But i feel Allied has the right tools to do the job , P38 , P47 even P51 can carry and fight on after . I just think its the allied players not wanting to win the maps . 

and tail gunners , well, i even got sniped by a 110 tail gunner at 280-mph in a tempest not even on his six . Not funny .¬†ūüėÜ

Lets see what happens . 

 

I agree the Allied planes are good, but there's a much more challenging level to learning how to fly them and using the right tactics.  I've been caught in many energy traps using the 51 for example, I've learned there's certain maneuvers you just can't stick with Axis fighters when they do them.  An example would be the at-will spins and tumbles 109s and 190s can do with near-perfect recovery and almost no loss of energy and altitude. Trying to follow or even stick with them usually results in going totally out of control in the 51.  

 

I'm not saying the Axis planes are better or unequal. What I am saying is that I believe a lot of pilots using the American planes are still learning that they need to be 1 step ahead of the enemy and 2 steps ahead of their own plane whereas the German planes are pretty much capable of "if you think it, you can fly it."  

 

What I think the result is, is that the escorts are getting trapped by Axis pilots who are well experienced in their planes and are getting mopped up while the bombers are simply standing by to await their turn in front of the guns.  

 

I've admittedly have had a very slow learning curve with the American planes.  Once more pilots, who are like me, really start to learn what their planes can, and cannot do, and make the most of it, I think that the argument "The sim shows America mostly won because of mass production", will become more and more invalid.  It really depends on the level of time and patience the Allied pilots are willing to put into focusing on one plane at a time.  

 

Granted, there are "naturals" who just get in the plane and fly it correctly right off the bat, but I'd argue that it's far less likely to happen in a plane like the 51, 47 or 38 vs. the 109 or 190 or 110.  

Edited by 69th_Mobile_BBQ
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

I agree the Allied planes are good, but there's a much more challenging level to learning how to fly them and using the right tactics.  I've been caught in many energy traps using the 51 for example, I've learned there's certain maneuvers you just can't stick with Axis fighters when they do them.  An example would be the at-will spins and tumbles 109s and 190s can do with near-perfect recovery and almost no loss of energy and altitude. Trying to follow or even stick with them usually results in going totally out of control in the 51.  

 

I'm not saying the Axis planes are better or unequal. What I am saying is that I believe a lot of pilots using the American planes are still learning that they need to be 1 step ahead of the enemy and 2 steps ahead of their own plane whereas the German planes are pretty much capable of "if you think it, you can fly it."  

 

What I think the result is, is that the escorts are getting trapped by Axis pilots who are well experienced in their planes and are getting mopped up while the bombers are simply standing by to await their turn in front of the guns.  

 

I've admittedly have had a very slow learning curve with the American planes.  Once more pilots, who are like me, really start to learn what their planes can, and cannot do, and make the most of it, I think that the argument "The sim shows America mostly won because of mass production", will become more and more invalid.  It really depends on the level of time and patience the Allied pilots are willing to put into focusing on one plane at a time.  

 

Granted, there are "naturals" who just get in the plane and fly it correctly right off the bat, but I'd argue that it's far less likely to happen in a plane like the 51, 47 or 38 vs. the 109 or 190 or 110.  

 

The axis planes have been around for much longer in the BOX environment. People have been practicing 109s and 190s online for what 6 years now ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

I agree the Allied planes are good, but there's a much more challenging level to learning how to fly them and using the right tactics.  I've been caught in many energy traps using the 51 for example, I've learned there's certain maneuvers you just can't stick with Axis fighters when they do them.  An example would be the at-will spins and tumbles 109s and 190s can do with near-perfect recovery and almost no loss of energy and altitude. Trying to follow or even stick with them usually results in going totally out of control in the 51.  

 

I'm not saying the Axis planes are better or unequal. What I am saying is that I believe a lot of pilots using the American planes are still learning that they need to be 1 step ahead of the enemy and 2 steps ahead of their own plane whereas the German planes are pretty much capable of "if you think it, you can fly it."  

 

What I think the result is, is that the escorts are getting trapped by Axis pilots who are well experienced in their planes and are getting mopped up while the bombers are simply standing by to await their turn in front of the guns.  

 

I've admittedly have had a very slow learning curve with the American planes.  Once more pilots, who are like me, really start to learn what their planes can, and cannot do, and make the most of it, I think that the argument "The sim shows America mostly won because of mass production", will become more and more invalid.  It really depends on the level of time and patience the Allied pilots are willing to put into focusing on one plane at a time.  

 

Granted, there are "naturals" who just get in the plane and fly it correctly right off the bat, but I'd argue that it's far less likely to happen in a plane like the 51, 47 or 38 vs. the 109 or 190 or 110.  

The 109 I think is more forgiving than the American planes, in the sense that every model has a good climb rate and acceleration, and good low speed handling, so if you screw up and blow all your energy you can still get it back or knife fight at low speeds if need be. If you blow your E in a P-47 there's no coming back from that (ask me how I know). The 190s I think are closer to the American planes in difficulty to use - or at least, to use well. Not great at accelerating, climbing or turning, but high speed, good roll rate, and good dive. That sounds a lot like the P-51 and P-47 in terms of characteristics. Of course the engine management is much easier in the 190, but once you are in combat you are probably going balls to the wall anyway.

The 190 seems polarizing in a way - when I run into them online it seems like they are either excellent pilots or they try and climb and turn too much, blow their energy and get nailed by other fighters. When that happens it makes me think that they are normally 109 guys flying the 190 occasionally, not used to its quirks and going instinctively with what works in the 109. Whereas the experts live and breath Focke-Wulf and will butcher you as soon as look at you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thatguy said:

Can someone point me to a month where allies have more or equal air kills?

 

I'm sure you can check the stats for yourself, however, I'm guessing you are trying to draw people to a certain conclusion.

That said, I would be interested to see what the break-down of loses for fighter/bomber ratio looks like.

I guess IRL, the Luftwaffe shot down more Allied bombers than they lost aircraft, but still lost, therefore, perhaps if CB had a system similar to TAW where a certain number of aircraft (fighter and bomber) lost rolls the map, this might change the approach taken by either side, although I certainly wouldn't want to see this as I like the approach that the winner is the attacking side trying to take-out objectives.

 

Regards

 

 

5 hours ago, -SF-Disarray said:

Not that I'm trying to derail things and shift gears rapidly here, but that is kind of what I'm going to do. How common were Mk 108 cannons? I don't think I've ever seen them locked on this server on any plane that is capable of mounting them. As I understand the weapon it was intended for bomber destruction and was issued to those units that were tasked with destroying bombers primarily. But it seems like every G14 and A8 can have them if they want them. I know this can be adjusted in server set up, but should it be?

 

Are you suggesting that only these weapons are made available when there are the high alt AI bombers?

I think this is a great idea and while these weapons are locked, the Allies shouldn't be able have access to bomber type aircraft (A-20/Pe-2).

 

Regards

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

69th_Mobile_BBQ
3 hours ago, Birdman said:

 

The axis planes have been around for much longer in the BOX environment. People have been practicing 109s and 190s online for what 6 years now ?

 

 

 

True story - Which is why I said that for those that stick with the new Allied planes (and if enough regular players do) we might see more even-ing of results over time. 

 

20 minutes ago, Haza said:

 

That said, I would be interested to see what the break-down of loses for fighter/bomber ratio looks like.

 

 

That really depends on what the stats classify as a "bomber".  Technically speaking, the Allies only have 1 bomber to use in the BoBP time frame and location, the A-20.  

Yes, there are a few Eastern Front maps on CB but not many.  Pe-2 adds would probably not be significant.  

 

Axis has 2 bomber types the 111 and 88.  I'm unsure if the 87 counts as a bomber or attacker.  All other planes with strike package options are technically "attackers".  

 

The only exception I could think of is if the stats count all planes spawned from a "bomber base"-labeled spawn point as bombers.  

 

Assuming the A-20. He-111 and Ju-88 would be the only bombers listed in fighter/bomber ratio stats, I'd suspect that the Axis planes would appear to be taking quite a beating.  But... It appears to me that there would not be enough contextual factors present with that stat to make any other correlation as to why except "Allies have 1 true bomber type and Axis has 2". 

 

Unfortunately, it seems to be a dead-end stat with no useful data to get from it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

True story - Which is why I said that for those that stick with the new Allied planes (and if enough regular players do) we might see more even-ing of results over time. 

 

 

That really depends on what the stats classify as a "bomber".  Technically speaking, the Allies only have 1 bomber to use in the BoBP time frame and location, the A-20.  

Yes, there are a few Eastern Front maps on CB but not many.  Pe-2 adds would probably not be significant.  

 

Axis has 2 bomber types the 111 and 88.  I'm unsure if the 87 counts as a bomber or attacker.  All other planes with strike package options are technically "attackers".  

 

The only exception I could think of is if the stats count all planes spawned from a "bomber base"-labeled spawn point as bombers.  

 

Assuming the A-20. He-111 and Ju-88 would be the only bombers listed in fighter/bomber ratio stats, I'd suspect that the Axis planes would appear to be taking quite a beating.  But... It appears to me that there would not be enough contextual factors present with that stat to make any other correlation as to why except "Allies have 1 true bomber type and Axis has 2". 

 

Unfortunately, it seems to be a dead-end stat with no useful data to get from it. 

Oh I agree to your points, wanted to add that.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having run a whole mission's worth of ground attack tonight, with 15 ground kills across 5 GA sorties (LOL, god I need practice), my thoughts are mostly unchanged. Bombs require nearly pinpoint accuracy to destroy dugouts but other structures are not as sturdy it appears. Splash damage is still there from bombs, just reduced and I think modeled as fragments hitting nearby structures rather than blast (as evidenced by dozens of small percentage hits on targets I bombed). Rockets can kill damaged dugouts so a pass with bombs followed up by a pass with rockets can be effective. Guns can take out airfield ammo storage and other soft targets. The Jug still holds up better to damage now but solo attacks on uncovered targets are STILL suicidal because of the necessity for multiple runs leaves you low and slow, and even the jug cant soak up 30mm rounds for long.

It is extremely important to focus team efforts on a couple targets, since it is very difficult to roll more than a couple targets in a map. The Allies just won Legend of Y-29 by destroying Deurne AA alone, with only 40 ground kills total. I hit it with 5 sorties and several others hit it as well. Axis was attacking spread out across  4 ground airfields, got way more ground kills, but didn't do enough damage to roll an individual target. If they had focused all their efforts on only two airfields they would have won, since we only barely touched Weert at the very end and didn't effectively hit any other targets. I think with another half hour they would have knocked out a few of the airfields while we would still be struggling against Weert. Previously the axis strategy would have resulted in 3 or 4 targets all getting rolled before the end of the map and made perfect sense, they just ran out of time.

We had fewer ground attackers on allied side but I think that was mostly because in the beginning we were so outnumbered that there was no way to attack ground targets, provide CAP, and defend our own at the same time. 

The big downside with the necessity to focus is that a lot of the interesting targets go untouched because you have to generate a lot of sorties and taking out the nearest couple targets is more likely to win you the map than trying to kill 4 or 5 and rolling none.

I think the bombs are a little too 'nerfed' against buildings but its hard to say for sure since I am only hitting dugouts for the most part...but when I watch videos and footage of bomb damage to buildings I have to say it is not THAT far off. Hopefully the devs will give bomb blast damage a nudge against buildings in the next patch, but I don't think we will, or should, see an order of magnitude. Until then it is still possible to successfully bomb as the Allies. My accuracy was quite poor tonight with bombs and rockets, a better attacker could have rolled Deurne earlier. 
 

2 hours ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

 

True story - Which is why I said that for those that stick with the new Allied planes (and if enough regular players do) we might see more even-ing of results over time. 

 

 

That really depends on what the stats classify as a "bomber".  Technically speaking, the Allies only have 1 bomber to use in the BoBP time frame and location, the A-20.  

Yes, there are a few Eastern Front maps on CB but not many.  Pe-2 adds would probably not be significant.  

 

Axis has 2 bomber types the 111 and 88.  I'm unsure if the 87 counts as a bomber or attacker.  All other planes with strike package options are technically "attackers".  

 

The only exception I could think of is if the stats count all planes spawned from a "bomber base"-labeled spawn point as bombers.  

 

Assuming the A-20. He-111 and Ju-88 would be the only bombers listed in fighter/bomber ratio stats, I'd suspect that the Axis planes would appear to be taking quite a beating.  But... It appears to me that there would not be enough contextual factors present with that stat to make any other correlation as to why except "Allies have 1 true bomber type and Axis has 2". 

 

Unfortunately, it seems to be a dead-end stat with no useful data to get from it. 

Yeah, the stat considers all my ground attack sorties as "Fighter" sorties, as the P-47 is considered a fighter, but I did nothing but rearrange the landscape with bombs. The stats would have to be aggregated by loadout rather than aircraft type to really determine the difference between a ground attack and fighter sorties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I installed the 4k Cockpit mod and I honestly think the server should allowed 3rd party mods like this one. Hard to go back with the original cockpit textures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56RAF_Roblex
8 hours ago, DISCODAN said:

I installed the 4k Cockpit mod and I honestly think the server should allowed 3rd party mods like this one. Hard to go back with the original cockpit textures.

 

I may be wrong but I don't think the server creator has any control over individual mods.   It is either 'Mods Off' or it is "Allow people to fly with transparent cockpits & seeing enemies through cloud cover'

 

No offense to the man who wrote it but personally¬†I did not find the mod you mention very useful to me.¬† It mostly just made red buttons & labels redder ūüôā

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=ABr=422nd_RedSkull

Is it my impression or have the changes in the map targets that had restored a certain balance been changed again?

 

I realized that until yesterday the B-25s at Mitchell's Men had been successfully attacking the targets in two waves, and today it turned out to be like before, a wave easily destroyed.

 

It also caught my attention that the balance of victories on the maps from side to side had been restored and is now again as before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Server was very laggy tonight , impossible to dogfight . Very odd . Noticed hardly any flack now , when enemy came over front lines , its very hard to see  aircraft with this awful visibility we have . Can we get flak back . 

Lots of comms on lost sight of target yet its right in front of us . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2020 at 9:55 AM, -SF-Disarray said:

Not that I'm trying to derail things and shift gears rapidly here, but that is kind of what I'm going to do. How common were Mk 108 cannons? I don't think I've ever seen them locked on this server on any plane that is capable of mounting them. As I understand the weapon it was intended for bomber destruction and was issued to those units that were tasked with destroying bombers primarily. But it seems like every G14 and A8 can have them if they want them. I know this can be adjusted in server set up, but should it be?

 

Sadly I don't think there are any real hard numbers on these things as German production and unit records are incomplete.  From what little digging I did on the subject a while back it seems like the 30mm on the 109s (U4 mod) was quite rare on the G6, but became much more common later on the G14 (maybe 1/4 or 1/3rd?) and was standard on the K-4.  For the FW190A, it was apparently only used by the Sturmgruppen of Luftflotte Reich and would have been very rare on our geographical map.  However, given that Mitchell's Men is trying to represent a daylight bomber raid in Feb 1945, 190As with 30mms would have been regular participants in that context so it makes sense for them to be available as bomber interceptors.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2020 at 3:21 PM, Haza said:

I guess IRL, the Luftwaffe shot down more Allied bombers than they lost aircraft, but still lost,

 

 

Donald Caldwell  put together a bunch of data on the subject in one of his most recent works.  Comparing just 8th AF losses with Luftwaffe losses suffered by units opposing those raids, this was definitely not the case in 1944 and 1945.  The Luftwaffe fighter forces lost just over 4,000 interceptors opposing the 8th AF in 44-45.  In exchange the 8th AF lost 1,714 bombers to enemy aircraft (along with about 930 to flak and about 250 to accidents), and a total of 1,405 fighters to all causes.  Of the fighter losses, the 8th FC attributed 644 losses for their entire operations (1942-1945) to enemy fighters.  Even with some unknowns that were really due to enemy aircraft, its safe to say at least 50% of fighter losses were to flak and accidents.  If you were to look at just the BoBP timeframe (roughly Sept 44 - Apr 45) an even smaller percentage of losses would be to enemy aircraft.  So if we stick with 50% on the escorts, somewhere around 4000 interceptors lost vs 1700 bombers and around 700 escorts lost for 1944 and 1945 total.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
3 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

 

Donald Caldwell  put together a bunch of data on the subject in one of his most recent works.  Comparing just 8th AF losses with Luftwaffe losses suffered by units opposing those raids, this was definitely not the case in 1944 and 1945.  The Luftwaffe fighter forces lost just over 4,000 interceptors opposing the 8th AF in 44-45.  In exchange the 8th AF lost 1,714 bombers to enemy aircraft (along with about 930 to flak and about 250 to accidents), and a total of 1,405 fighters to all causes.  Of the fighter losses, the 8th FC attributed 644 losses for their entire operations (1942-1945) to enemy fighters.  Even with some unknowns that were really due to enemy aircraft, its safe to say at least 50% of fighter losses were to flak and accidents.  If you were to look at just the BoBP timeframe (roughly Sept 44 - Apr 45) an even smaller percentage of losses would be to enemy aircraft.  So if we stick with 50% on the escorts, somewhere around 4000 interceptors lost vs 1700 bombers and around 700 escorts lost for 1944 and 1945 total.

 

 

 

Not too shabby for being outnumbered as bad as they were. At times, a single raid escort size was larger than the entire LW haha.

 

3 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

 

Sadly I don't think there are any real hard numbers on these things as German production and unit records are incomplete.  From what little digging I did on the subject a while back it seems like the 30mm on the 109s (U4 mod) was quite rare on the G6, but became much more common later on the G14 (maybe 1/4 or 1/3rd?) and was standard on the K-4.  For the FW190A, it was apparently only used by the Sturmgruppen of Luftflotte Reich and would have been very rare on our geographical map.  However, given that Mitchell's Men is trying to represent a daylight bomber raid in Feb 1945, 190As with 30mms would have been regular participants in that context so it makes sense for them to be available as bomber interceptors.

 

On 4/24/2020 at 9:55 AM, -SF-Disarray said:

Not that I'm trying to derail things and shift gears rapidly here, but that is kind of what I'm going to do. How common were Mk 108 cannons? I don't think I've ever seen them locked on this server on any plane that is capable of mounting them. As I understand the weapon it was intended for bomber destruction and was issued to those units that were tasked with destroying bombers primarily. But it seems like every G14 and A8 can have them if they want them. I know this can be adjusted in server set up, but should it be?

 

I believe the A8 was the most produced 190 variant and I'm very certain that the twin MK108 guns in the wings was the most widely seen modification to the A8 series.

 

Can't point you to data right now as I'm at work but I'm sure somebody with better detail and info than me will post it soon.

Edited by ProfesseurDePhysique
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ACG_KoN said:

Server was very laggy tonight , impossible to dogfight . Very odd . Noticed hardly any flack now , when enemy came over front lines , its very hard to see  aircraft with this awful visibility we have . Can we get flak back . 

Lots of comms on lost sight of target yet its right in front of us . 

When I played around midday I did not notice too much lag but player numbers may have been lower - I think around 40-60 when I was playing. And when hitting the Bonn Airlift on the Crossing the Rhine mission there was a crapton of flak and I soaked up most of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EAF19_Charlie

I see that the Project R server has replaced the Combat Box Dogfight and Training server.

Is this a permanent move of will the Dogfight and Training server return at some point?

TIA

Charlie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, KW_1979 said:

 

Sadly I don't think there are any real hard numbers on these things as German production and unit records are incomplete.  From what little digging I did on the subject a while back it seems like the 30mm on the 109s (U4 mod) was quite rare on the G6, but became much more common later on the G14 (maybe 1/4 or 1/3rd?) and was standard on the K-4.  For the FW190A, it was apparently only used by the Sturmgruppen of Luftflotte Reich and would have been very rare on our geographical map.  However, given that Mitchell's Men is trying to represent a daylight bomber raid in Feb 1945, 190As with 30mms would have been regular participants in that context so it makes sense for them to be available as bomber interceptors.

 

This may not have just been due to supply.  From what i recall the 108s were not preferred for fighter to fighter combat due to their tenancy to jam, especially under high G load.  Not a big deal for shooting bombers, but if you're in a turn fight I'd pick something that was going to actually work.  I can't recall where i heard it, but there was mention some K-4s were downgraded to the 20mm for just that reason

 

Obviously in this game, no such issue exists, so there isn't a reason to not take it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feathered_IV

I really like this server.  It has some very fresh ideas and clever ways of creating new gameplay options.

 

One thing I particularly enjoyed on the WW1 Flugpark server was the Recon option for selected aircraft.  Have the Combat Box team considered something similar for WW2 scenarios.  An unarmed Spitfire Ju-88 or P-38 for example? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
8 hours ago, thatguy said:

 

This may not have just been due to supply.  From what i recall the 108s were not preferred for fighter to fighter combat due to their tenancy to jam, especially under high G load.  Not a big deal for shooting bombers, but if you're in a turn fight I'd pick something that was going to actually work.  I can't recall where i heard it, but there was mention some K-4s were downgraded to the 20mm for just that reason

 

Obviously in this game, no such issue exists, so there isn't a reason to not take it

 

This issue was mostly solved towards the end of 1943. The problem is why we see the 109G6 which was capable of using the MK108 enter service earlier in 1943 but not feature the MK108 until later that year. Many G6s went east with the MK108 but trials showed this jamming issue was a problem, they stopped installing it for several months.

Edited by ProfesseurDePhysique
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aurora_Stealth
10 hours ago, thatguy said:

 

This may not have just been due to supply.  From what i recall the 108s were not preferred for fighter to fighter combat due to their tenancy to jam, especially under high G load.  Not a big deal for shooting bombers, but if you're in a turn fight I'd pick something that was going to actually work.  I can't recall where i heard it, but there was mention some K-4s were downgraded to the 20mm for just that reason

 

Obviously in this game, no such issue exists, so there isn't a reason to not take it

 

That's a very good point regarding the MK108 - I think also the much lower muzzle velocity (and thus the time taken to hit target) and lesser quantity of ammunition were cited as requiring much more skill and finesse to make those fleeting shots.. where opening fire on a maneuvering fighter might waste the precious ammunition. I'm curious to know how many of the Bf 109 K-4's had their central armament reverted to the MG 151 (20mm).

 

We know it was done for the G-6, and the K-4 was really another attempt at standardising the further development from the G series.

 

Its mentioned on wikipedia (yeah yeah) but it does reference a book by Prien and Rodeike (1995) and I'm certain its not the only one I've read about it. I know it was common for the Bf 109's to be the high altitude escort (Begleitgruppen) for the Fw 190's (Sturmböcke) when flying against the USAAF bomber formations and I can't imagine a high altitude escort specifically for tackling the fighters wanting to take the 30mm cannon knowing all of the above.

 

Knowing the similarities between the G and K.. it would make some sense to have the MG 151/20 as a modification for the K-4 although perhaps limited by the server settings (?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2020 at 3:43 PM, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


Played an hour today. 7 reds 7 blues. Allied didn’t attack any ground targets. Axis took out 2 targets without ever seeing an allied plane.  What allies were doing is a mystery to me.

The problem is not blue not giving red the chance to win, but reds seemingly having no interest in winning.

 

Anecdotal evidence should be taken with a grain of salt. I noticed that you and your squad typically play on Combat Box between 14:00 - 16:00 UTC - the server isn't heavily populated during those times, so I don't think it is a good representation of what occurs when the server is full (which is typically 18:00 - 02:00 UTC, give or take). 

I think it is also worth pointing out the strength of an organized group like your own, particularly when the server isn't populated. Instead of 3-4 guys working together against 30+ opponents, it ends up being 3-4 guys working together against a total of 6 or 7 opponents. That is a tremendous advantage and a big deterrent to the opposing force if they know you guys are working over an objective. I don't blame them for not confronting you guys head-on in a scenario like the one presented in the attached screenshot.

Screen Shot 2020-04-28 at 9.55.47 AM.png

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
53 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

Anecdotal evidence should be taken with a grain of salt.


check the "ground targets destroyed" of the cb stats page for the data backing it up.

Edited by =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


check the "ground targets destroyed" of the cb stats page for the data backing it up.

 

I believe that there are more ground targets on the Allied side that have tents than there are on the Axis side - that skews the numbers considerably (or at least it did before the damage model update). Even though tents don't add to score, they do add to total ground targets destroyed for player and coalition.

Also it looks like you guys destroy a lot of ground targets on Axis side only... and you do it at times that the server isn't as populated.

Now that I dig in a little deeper, I see that the #1 guy for ground targets destroyed this month flies Axis 98% of the time. And almost all of his sorties occur during non-peak hours. That looks like shooting fish in a barrel to me.

Edited by QB.Creep
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand

The screenshot you postet is anecdotal as well 1 he later we were outnumbered. The problem is not the allies not being there, it’s them not showing up to the fight.

btw it’s not fair for you to belittle hutzs ground pounding, you are not there at these times, so what do you know?

Edited by =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:


check the "ground targets destroyed" of the cb stats page for the data backing it up.

Mostly tents I'm afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

The screenshot you postet is anecdotal as well 1 he later we were outnumbered. The problem is not the allies not being there, it’s them not showing up to the fight.

btw it’s not fair for you to belittle hutzs ground pounding, you are not there at these times, so what do you know?


I did not intend to belittle anyone - just making an observation. And I didn't call him out - you did that. I didn't have to be there - the stats tell the story. Just look at the most recent mission that includes said ground pounding: https://combatbox.net/en/mission/4846/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

 

Anecdotal evidence should be taken with a grain of salt. I noticed that you and your squad typically play on Combat Box between 14:00 - 16:00 UTC - the server isn't heavily populated during those times, so I don't think it is a good representation of what occurs when the server is full (which is typically 18:00 - 02:00 UTC, give or take). 

I think it is also worth pointing out the strength of an organized group like your own, particularly when the server isn't populated. Instead of 3-4 guys working together against 30+ opponents, it ends up being 3-4 guys working together against a total of 6 or 7 opponents. That is a tremendous advantage and a big deterrent to the opposing force if they know you guys are working over an objective. I don't blame them for not confronting you guys head-on in a scenario like the one presented in the attached screenshot.

Screen Shot 2020-04-28 at 9.55.47 AM.png

With smaller player numbers like that its not uncommon to see no ground attackers present. With low numbers, I can see how a bunch of solo players may decide its not worth attacking ground targets as they might have to work the whole mission time just to take out one. Or you just happen to get a bunch of fighter-only guys. This, and the outsized impact coordinated squads make on low-population maps, is why the admin team doesn't use low-pop missions when they consider balancing the server. 

It does seem, looking at the stats, that the allies have fewer people running ground attack missions now than before. Part of it could be people just not doing it out of frustration, and part of it could be people trying ground attack and getting no kills from the bombs, since you have to get so much closer to kill things. Previously a mediocre bomb run with the big allied bombs at least netted you a ground kill or two, now it might get you nothing at all. 

As for coordination, I had the dubious honour of trying to run ground attack against =Expend= on the Crossing the Rhine map a few days back, With a 262 and I think a pair of K-4s covering the Bonn Airlift and other targets in the area, ground attack was largely a suicide mission.  But the Allies still, as they say, 'showed up', and I have the smoking crater in the ground where my P-47 used to be to prove it. With a contested target and our friendly air cover dead or elsewhere defending their own targets, you can't stick around and strafe soft targets, so its a matter of putting explosives on target ASAP and scooting. Which means your per-sortie ground kill rate is often abysmal.

Now, I wasn't flying on Discord since Windows 10 just plain hates keeping my microphone working and on top of that I have to be quiet not to disturb the rest of the family. Solo flying has its limitations but at the end of the day even coordinated attacks with fighter-bombers can be heavily disrupted by a single enemy in a high-performance fighter. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-SF-Disarray

I think there may be something to this notion that people are attempting ground strike missions and just not coming back with any kills. I'm no slouch when it comes to bomb accuracy but even I can come back with little to no kills using bomb load outs that would net me 6 kills at a minimum. People I play with are seeing similar results at times. Some of it will work itself out as we figure out the new best way to use bombs but such a dramatic shift tells me it is not entirely on the player's end.

  • Upvote 1
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...