View Full Version : 1000m convergence

07-31-2009, 05:16 PM
I'm trying to improve my gunnery skills. So far the IG training, Dart and Bag the Hun have been helpful and opened me up to leading shots and deflection. And Nuggets thread

I found out alot of posts in that closer range deflection (100-200 m) is better. (I find that for me 200-ish is a good range).

But I notice w/ 200 m convergence, I miss more at 400 meter shots than when IL-2 default conv settings (500 m).

Also I'm practicing both ground and air, and with 200 m convergence my strafing runs don't hit as often as 500 m convergence.

But air to air 200 m just tears things up (even w/ flying Italian birds and Japanese origami planes) when you open up at 200 meters.

In the P-38 and FW 190 I can hit better (as more often) at 500 default conversion than 200 m for ground or air to air beyond 300 m.

I then stumbled on a few people using 1000 m convergence through the many convergence posts, and opening fire around 300 m or closer. I notice on the FW 190, the BF 109 Z (that weird twin 109 thingy), the Bf 110 and the P-38 love longer conversions (outside of 200m).

So I'm figuring that longer ranged convergence with nose mounted planes work better?

I notice at 300+ meters with convergence 1000 m the long range shots score more than 100-200 convergence.

I saw some post that said its boresighting at 1000 m . To me boresighting is some method to match the line of barrel with the sights.

So if I set convergence at 1000 m the guns have max range and less drop (until the game model limit is reached) ? Granted if you open up at 200 m, you won't have everything impacting (together) at that point.

Anyone else shed some light on 1000 m convergence used when opening around 300 m?

07-31-2009, 05:26 PM
Simply put, at 1,000 meters you will never be able to get all your guns hitting at once as the target will be too far away and out of range.
You want to find a convergence that you can effectively engage.
If you want all your guns hitting at once, even 400 is pushing it. I use 200-250 myself for fighters.
You can go out to 500, maybe further if all you are doing is bomber intercept, but that is way too much for engaging fighters in a furball.
Sometimes all you get is a split second snap-shot and in that time you want all of your guns hitting.

07-31-2009, 05:29 PM
If you have machine guns equipped plane you want to get that convergence very low...

Theory behind this is that during (dog)fight you only need to damage E/A slightly, then catch up with it and then rake it from close distance with short convergence (that really works).
If you catch E/A by surprise - the better.

The issue of convergence is very important on machine guns equipped planes. As in this game most damage you will be dealing is structure damage, then fires, pk's and whatnot.
VS Japanese, fires are actually very frequent but only if you fly .303cal equipped plane. With .50cal you will be cutting them in half etc., but wont set them on fire so often.

Anyhow you can do a quick test of what I'm mumbling about in QMB vs friendly planes (they wont evade). Simple shoot 10 planes with close conv and 10 with medium/long conv.
See what takes less bullets.

After I downed 4 ace AI FW-190A's with P-51C without much probs I grow to be a very strong fan of 120m convergence.

See what fits you best.

With cannons you cannot go very wrong with any conv... as one shell makes structure damage especially in case of HE shells.
But somewhere around 250m would be reasonable.

07-31-2009, 05:30 PM
I've used 700M for ground attacks, but for air to air i keep it between 200-300M.

As for 1000M, it just doesn't have any place for air to air gunnery work. i find it difficult to follow the tracers beyond 400-500m unless i'm shooting straight ahead. at that range the bullets only seem to chip the paint, so its probably still worth it to keep them at 500M max, for longe range air to air gunnery. i've found that it will make closer shots under 200M a bit more difficult to place if you have wing mounted guns.

Aside from effectiveness, i place my convergence at the distance where i'm usually engaging an enemy.

07-31-2009, 05:53 PM
You really shouldn't be firing at an enemy fighter anywhere further than 250m from them unless you are maybe trying to scare an enemy off the tail of your wingman--being further than 250 means you're just wasting most of your ammo. Being closer makes your bullets have that much more power and means more of them hit the target.

To me convergence isn't as important as getting in as close as possible to fire before smashing into the enemy or letting him get away from you. I set it to 250 or 200 and it works fine. Bombers you can start more like 400 to 500 meters away with short bursts then steadier fire when closer in.

07-31-2009, 08:54 PM
back when i still flew in World War 2 Online, i used to setup my 109E with a 60m convergance. Utterly obliterating.

lowest in IL2 is 100m though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

for my nose mounted 109's i stick with default 200m.

for the FW's i usually go about 150 for a decent tradeoff with the outboard and inboard cannons.

08-01-2009, 12:47 AM
I think you guys are missing what the OP is talking about. He isn't talking about making 1km shots, he is talking about making up to 500m shots with a 1km convergence.

Hiro, The only times I've used 1000m convergences in the past were with planes that were purely nose weapons. 109s, -38s, B-25s, A-20s, etc. If it had anything in the wings, no matter how close to the centerline, I would drop everything back to 200.

The key is to *not* engage enemies beyond the range at which you have a chance to hit them. With 200m convergence, I never open fire until the enemy is within 300m. With a 1km convergence, you can basically open up whenever you want.

Also, drop is the same no matter your convergence, what changes is the perceived drop at a given range. with a 200m zero, at 1000m there is a perceived drop in the 10s of feet. But if you zero it at a klick, the perceived drop is zero, but at any range b/w 0 and 1000, the bullets will be ABOVE the aircraft centerline (ie, negative "drop").

Really, you need to find a convergence that works for you, and to stick with it no matter what plane you use. I would say stick with 200-400m for starters.

08-01-2009, 11:14 AM
I use 150m. With that setting I'm pretty much good from point blank range to 300m. Shooting at a fighter that is beyond 300m away is a waste of ammo, IMO.

Yes, 150m is probably a bit clsoe for ground pounding. I'll typically adjust my convergance out some if my primary role in a mission is ground attack.

08-01-2009, 11:39 AM
The further out your convergence, the weaker your bullet pentration will be until they`re literally bouncing off the enemy plane. 1000 conv often come from people who have never changed their convergence from default and fly on arcade no ammo-limit servers. Bad practise.
On limted ammo servers it`s a waste of bullets.
1000 should never be used.

08-01-2009, 06:12 PM
Cool, thanks all for the replies . . .

Panzer Ace thanks for clarifying it.

Should have said I was wondering if 1000m convergence hits better when opening up around 300, NOT trying to hit something at 1000m .

I'm starting to find out I like 300 4 cannons, and the machine g even closer at 200.

Nose mounted I find easier to shoot with.

And default 500 seems to work for strafing, will try 400.

Also I turned on icons and realized the true distances. I got the graphics turned down as this machine is last of the singles (core) so I'm chasing dots and then blocks, the blocks with triangles @ 500m on out.

I was using the half circle fighter sized is ~200 m , wingtips on circle (in reticle) is ~100 and firing @ 200 or closer really increases the hits.

Still more experimenting to do.

08-01-2009, 06:19 PM
The thing to remember is that the "convergence" setting in this game controls both horizontal and vertical aiming:


When you set the convergence for very long range, your bullets will be concentrated between your widest gun spacing out to twice that range and will cross the sight line twice. At medium ranges, it will also result in an effective increase in lead for the same sight picture. I suspect that you're getting more hits using 1000m convergence for targets in the 200-400m range is that you weren't pulling enough lead.

08-01-2009, 06:36 PM
using 1km conv on the fw allows you to better see your tracers because it raises your line of fire over the stupid bar.

08-01-2009, 09:06 PM
With the FW if you keep the target above your pipper then lead shooting isn't a problem. Example is to approach off
to one side and back, roll into the target aiming well ahead and time his apparent motion against the pipper then
time the shot. It's not easy but it's not fantastically difficult at good range -- at least it works for me and I
have gotten really slow due to age and condition.

Hey, I've even rolled FW's inverted to get visibility to shoot just in testing to find ways that can work. It okay
against bombers and people who don't know you're there or maybe think you're not a threat yet.

08-02-2009, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by MD_Titus:
i find a variety of convergences have good effects. primarily with nose mounted guns like the p-38 or 109f and above - 300 or 500m. guns have sufficient muzzle velocity that they are still useful out to that range, and if clustered on the centreline like the p38 they're all going to hit fairly close together

except the la-5f and above - 700m. believe it or not i used to hate flying the la. sure, you were hard to kill, but actually doing any damage was a hit or (largely) miss affair. sticking the convergence out that little bit more made it lethal for me.

fw- 190a/d, ta-152c/h, 500m. the guns are clustered around the engine, with the exception of the outboard anton and ta-152c guns. however i find that even in that case the increased spread of 20mm is perfect for booming and zooming, where you inevitably open up further away. if firing from closer then it is not uncommon to see the outboard guns remove both wings whilet you pound the cockpit/engine with the inboard and cowling guns. find the best way to shoot is to track a target, then pull through it's path at a given point, fire then relax and pull out, rudder control and roll is stupendous for this.

spit, p-40, hurricane, gladiator, all those with wingmounted mg/cannons - between 170 and 190, depending on speeds of the aircraft. with glads you're going to be getting closer, with the later spits 190 works way better for me.

tempests and f4u-1c are the oddities, 2 pairs of closely mounted 20mm, find that 200-220 depending on mission profile works best.

it's all about where you want to be able to shoot from, how good your shooting is and how good you are at guessing

08-03-2009, 02:06 PM
Awesome, that chart helps explain things + thanks for the rest of the replies.

08-03-2009, 02:26 PM
Tully I like that chart better than the one in The Nugget's Guide... I think I'll use that one...

08-03-2009, 02:52 PM
I use a number of different converengences(sp?).

For any centerline mounted weapons it's 1,000m. Those weapons are already concentrated, and I want them to stay that way as long as possible.

For wing mounted weapons, I use 200m, with one notable exception...the P-47. Since 4 of the '47s .50's fire using the MG button, and the other 4 use the Cannon button, I use 250m for MG, and 150 for Cannon on the '47. That gives something similar to a "Box Convergence" setting, and something of a longer "Sweet spot" for doing maximum damage

08-03-2009, 02:56 PM
plus with .50's you usually do catastrophic damage to controls, engine or pilot with all those bits of metal flying into it, so the shotgun approach, whilst not de-winging, is certainly enough to cripple a plane and render it capable of little more than losing height and vainly trying to run away.

08-03-2009, 08:11 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Tully I like that chart better than the one in The Nugget's Guide... I think I'll use that one...
By all means, but make sure you keep a copy. My ISP is taking our free 10MB storage of us and the link will stop working in a few weeks.