PDA

View Full Version : Val damage model



rmorgansmith
01-11-2007, 07:33 AM
Just wondering if anyone else thinks the Val is one of the toughest planes to shoot down. I have been playing a DCG Marianas campaign and can't believe how tough they are. All the reading I have done on the subject and last Friday's Dogfight program would indicate they are pretty flimsy.

So I did a few hours of experiments with various aircraft against the Val and an Il-2. I found it easier to shoot down the Il-2!

Was using planes like the FW-190A, four cannons two .30 cal., Mosquito, four cannons,four .303. and yes that works but one time I got right up to the Val with my Mossie and let him have it point blank with all eight guns and him square and he went down but it seems to me he should have just disintegrated.

On the Dogfight show a pilot was telling about the time he shot down three of four Vals in one mission and each time one or two short bursts with the .50 cals did it.?

Interested in others experiences.

tigertalon
01-11-2007, 09:36 AM
I have to agree.

Val is one of the planes with most questionable DM (besides Ki-27 and beaufighter). Once I layed over 200 .50 cal hits into a val, only to see him fly away with a fuel leak after I ran out of ammo - it was online so net could contribute the packet loss (the server still counted over 200 hits). I know one-time accounts prove nothing, still on average Val seems too sturdy. However, there are instances when they burn like a torch after the slightest touch of a trigger (but those cases are very rare).

On the other occasion I have seen Beaufighter suck up an incredible 121 20mm hits from Ki-84-1b before going down. If I remember correctly it was Xiola who shoot him down. This planes DM (to me at least) also seems quite overmodelled.

Also IL-10 is nearly impossible to bring down with anything smaller than 30mm in a reasonable time. Eats 20mm shells like candy. But this plane at least should be sturdy.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK"><pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">?Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany.

Tator_Totts
01-11-2007, 09:43 AM
I was wondering when someone would bring this up. I saw the same show. I Know it was only one pilot but I wonder if other piolts had the same opinion of the Val. http://home.carolina.rr.com/squad/popcorn.gif <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.carolina.rr.com/squad/AG-51/Stanger.gif

Tater-SW-
01-11-2007, 09:44 AM
Val is far tougher than it should be, I agree. On top of that, it has one of the deadliest gunners. I swear a val is a tougher opponent than a B-29, tailgun wise.

tater

zoinks_
01-11-2007, 10:48 AM
i used to fly this plane a lot on the Pacific Conflict server. especially on the wake island map. it was rare if i made it back to my carrier. in fact if i was hit by anything - aaa or aircraft fire - i was in big trouble.

as a val pilot, i knew i was on a one way trip.

get in the pit and fly it and see if your view of its damage model changes. are things different since 4.04? the AI aircraft in this sim don't follow the same rules as non AI aircraft, imho.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________________________________________ ____________________________
learning curve: about 2 hours (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/pacificfighters/review.html)

rmorgansmith
01-11-2007, 12:42 PM
Nice to hear from everyone. As far as flying the Val online Zoinks at least you were still in one piece to try to make it back to the carrier. The tail gunner is deadly and as a matter of fact the fellow on the dogfight show did get shot down after shooting down a number of Vals.

I have heard on the forums from time to time that the .50 cal is not modelled with AP/ Incendiary ammo. So is it just ball ammmo that is modelled?

Is the Il-10 tougher that the Il-2. Still waiting for my 46 DVD to get here.

The Il-2 I was testing on I swear went down easier than the Val. I sawed his wing half off with a FW-190, tried it on the Val and he went down but in one flaming piece.

zoinks_
01-11-2007, 01:48 PM
i never shot down a plane controlling the rear gunner in my val. never.

quite a different story controlling the rear gunner of my sbd. i had more online kills in the dauntless than any other aircraft. i was very good flying the plane with stick and rudder from the back seat.

my favorite tactic was to hold fire as an enemy plane closed while turning into his path (making them think i was out of ammo) causing them to bank harder to get lined up for a shot, then filling their engine full of lead. zekes flame up nicely at close range.


AI controlled gunners from AI controlled vals are uber good.

but i was mostly shot down flying vals, rarely getting a chance to rtb. just a few hits and my tail was usually missing pieces or controls rendered useless. and too many times i couldn't pull out of a dive after the aaa had their way with me.


sneaking past fighter cover, avoiding aaa, and placing your bomb on target from an 80 - 90 degree dive that started over 10,000 feet is literally "the bomb".<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________________________________________ ____________________________
learning curve: about 2 hours (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/pacificfighters/review.html)

LEBillfish
01-11-2007, 02:03 PM
I disagree.....The D3A1 however is a VERY stable platform, so when damaged remains more flyable then most, same with Ki-27.....Odd Beaufighter is mentioned, I love taking them out with 20mm from a Ki-61 Hei...5 my best in online combat, very easy to kill and that with others to deal with.

Yet it's a lot like the indestructable SBD & Avenger.....Those of late I have been wasting with even light ammo (7.7).....Yet it's all in where you hit them.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

VW-IceFire
01-11-2007, 03:06 PM
I find that when you shoot at the Val it "seems" to absorb quite a bit of fire...but the guy actually flying it is not having a good time at all. What seems like an innocuous machine gun hit is actually a death sentence because you've cut control cables, wounded or killed pilot or gunner, and so forth.

Its all about shot placement.

On the other hand...the Mosquito could probably use a bit of what the Val has. A bit more durability structure wise would be great. Maybe just trade up and meet in the middle http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/icefire-tempestv.jpg
Find my missions at Flying Legends (http://www.flying-legends.net/php/downloads/downloads.php?cat_id=19) and Mission4Today.com (http://www.mission4today.com).

Tator_Totts
01-11-2007, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
I disagree.....The D3A1 however is a VERY stable platform, so when damaged remains more flyable then most, same with Ki-27.....Odd Beaufighter is mentioned, I love taking them out with 20mm from a Ki-61 Hei...5 my best in online combat, very easy to kill and that with others to deal with.

Yet it's a lot like the indestructable SBD & Avenger.....Those of late I have been wasting with even light ammo (7.7).....Yet it's all in where you hit them.

So you disagree with the real pilot account.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.carolina.rr.com/squad/AG-51/Stanger.gif

Zeus-cat
01-11-2007, 07:00 PM
My best effort was shooting down Vals is 14 in one mission using a Beaufighter. Get underneath them and put a short burst of anything into their belly. They go up in flames in no time.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Zeus-cat

My Campaigns:
Straight Shot (9 missions in the Japanese Seaplane - A6M2-N "Rufe")
Straight Into an Icy Hell (14 missions for the Rufe in the Aleutians)
Straight Down (26 dive-bombing missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight Down Some More (19 more missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight and True (30 torpedo bomber missions in an IL-2T)

My campaign page at Miision4Today
http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&c=22

FritzGryphon
01-11-2007, 07:47 PM
using a Beaufighter

You may as well be Zeus throwing lightning bolts. With just MGs, different story.

Zeus-cat
01-11-2007, 08:18 PM
I was in a hurry when I wrote that. I used cannons until I ran out and then MGs for the rest. They light up easily from below with anything you throw at them. At least they used to.

Actually, the Zeke is/used to be the same way. A lot tougher to get underneath a Zeke and shoot at the belly, but when you do get a belly shot they flame up real nice.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Zeus-cat

My Campaigns:
Straight Shot (9 missions in the Japanese Seaplane - A6M2-N "Rufe")
Straight Into an Icy Hell (14 missions for the Rufe in the Aleutians)
Straight Down (26 dive-bombing missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight Down Some More (19 more missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight and True (30 torpedo bomber missions in an IL-2T)

My campaign page at Miision4Today
http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&c=22

LEBillfish
01-11-2007, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Tator_Totts:
So you disagree with the real pilot account.

Not at all, as I said before, it depends on where you hit them just like with the SBD.....Besides the fact we're speaking of the game not r/l. However, 200 rounds with .50 caliber?....That quite simply has to be poor hits. Aim for the engine or fuel tanks, they go down quite well.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

Tator_Totts
01-11-2007, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by Zeus-cat:
My best effort was shooting down Vals is 14 in one mission using a Beaufighter. Get underneath them and put a short burst of anything into their belly. They go up in flames in no time.

Might explain the pilot account. He came in low and 4 short burst he shot the first four down. He said he got cocky and went higher on fith and gunner got him. Pilot did say the gunners were good on the Val.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.carolina.rr.com/squad/AG-51/Stanger.gif

Waldo.Pepper
01-11-2007, 11:07 PM
Re the real pilot account. Here is the type of fighting that could have been taking place - that could explain how he could have achieved multiple kills in a single sortie.

=====

On October 23, 1944, McCampbell led seven fighters off the Essex to intercept an incoming raid. About 22 miles from the task group they found 20 bombers escorted by an estimated 40 fighters. Due to a misundertanding, five fighters went down on the bombers, leaving McCampbell and Rushing to deal with the large Japanese fighter force. McCampbell now takes up the story.

"The five fighters that were with my wingman and I, they went down on the bombers, and almost immediately [the Japanese fighters] went into this Lufbery. They circled around there, I guess, maybe ten or twelve minutes. At least I had time to smoke a cigarette and sit up there and watch them. We made a couple of attacks and found it was very difficult... we made a couple of attacks, and I think we got two planes out of that. But I didn't like it, so we just pulled up above them about 3,000 feet [approx. 18,000 feet] and watched them until they came out of the circle."
After ten minutes or so, certainly enough time for McCampbell to finish his cigarette, the Japanese fighters broke their defensive circle and turned away from the task group back toward Manila. They carried an external load, which was either a fuel tank or a bomb; David McCampbell could not be certain. While it was probably a fuel tank, the uncertainty, coupled with a pronounced lack of aggression on the part of the Japanese pilots, led McCampbell to speculate that they were not a fighter unit at all. "to this day think... that those [the Japanese fighters] must have been kamikazes, because they gave us very little fight. Two or three of them tried to climb up to [our] altitude. Of course, we picked them off in a hurry. The rest of the time, they were just sitting there flying along, taking it, and we were knocking them off right and left. Since they were headed back to Manila and away from our task group, we were in a position freely to strike them from the rear. There was no great hurry to get the leader. And we never did get him, by the way. Now the real leader was a twin engined bomber which led them in, and he was down [below]. All the bombers were behind him; the fighters were above them. But it wasn't much of a fight for us?just a question of taking your time and make sure you get one. We didn't get one every time, but we pretty well took care of them. Made 20 co-ordinated runs, and my wingman went down with me every time...
"We had the altitude advantage in all the time we attacked the Japanese. We would zoom down, shoot at a plane or two. Roy and I each would take one, and I'd tell him which one I was going to take, whether it was to the right or to the left ... We'd make an attack, pull up, keep our altitude advantage, speed, and go down again... In the_jneantime, a third pilot joined up on us, and he made, he said, two attacks, getting a plane on each one."
As the score mounted, the confusion factor was running high. David McCampbell recalled: "After Roy and I had gotten about five, I took out my pencil... and I started marking them down." Finally the two USN pilots broke off the action through shortage of ammunition. By this time, the fight, if it can be called that, had moved about 100 miles away from the Essex. McCampbell had scored nine, and Rushing five in this single action against enormous odds. Their sole damage was dents in the wing leading edges sustained from the flying debris of an exploding victim.

So setup something like this in the game, with sprog pilots and it will get real easy - real fast.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/WaldoPepper/sig/p61rev.jpg

JG53Frankyboy
01-12-2007, 02:35 AM
the D3A's DM much to tough ????????????
come on, agaisnt normal rumors even this bird id not build of bambus and paper http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

enable the arcade mode, then shoot at a flight of them with a F4F-3 or Hurricane Mk.IIb as examples and watch, how fast and easy:
- the pilot kill message appears
- the RTB message appears
- fuel leake appears
- engine is smoking
- it burns and even explodes when you fire from a to close range !

and as i fly it often online, you are in 95% in all cases dead meat for an enemy fighter very fast !

Tater-SW-
01-12-2007, 07:36 AM
Want a ridiculous damage effect? I was flying a zero last night online (ZvW), and got a couple shots on an F4U and a F6F from low 6. I wasn't taking a twisting, turning shot, calm, slowly climbing, level. Could really watch. I have felt this in USN planes MANY times, but seeing it twice in a row from the zero was too much. What a joke...

What was it? I pinged the F4U with cannon, and he flipped on his back. This was not from him evading, the impact inverted his plane. It did the same to the F6F. Anyone who has flown USN planes has seen this, and it is patently absurd.

DKoor
01-12-2007, 08:14 AM
Do not test with 20mm
Do not test with 20mm
Do not test with 20mm

It's easier when you test with 12,7. Almost all airforces used it (all in game) at some point and it gives quite accurate picture of both structure and other damage.
Most of the aircraft just refuse to burn like they are supposed to or take heavier structure damage when struck with 12,7 like they are supposed to.

Beaufighter, Ki-27 and D3A are fine examples of this issue.
Fuel tanks? What fuel tanks? J.H. .. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif most of the aircraft in real life will burn very happily when continuously hit in fuel tank but not in this game. Sometimes you can hit fuel tank area for as long as you like and you wont set it ablaze - until he11 freezes over term comes to my mind. Aircraft will only get structural damage.
Somehow only engine tank area works very well in this regard. Wing fuel tanks... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Example is my Burma campaign... I could check how many Beaus I've shot down around 10-20 I don't know. And of that number only two were on fire all other went down from structural damage, in spite that I aimed only for outer wing area and engine. I've got them PKed more frequently... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/5638/g14hartmannlh1.jpg (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=search&sa=599) <pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">@ SoW: Battle of Britain coming November 2006 for PCs worldwide. Not!!!

tigertalon
01-12-2007, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Do not test with 20mm
Do not test with 20mm
Do not test with 20mm

It's easier when you test with 12,7. Almost all airforces used it (all in game) at some point and it gives quite accurate picture of both structure and other damage.
Most of the aircraft just refuse to burn like they are supposed to or take heavier structure damage when struck with 12,7 like they are supposed to.

Beaufighter, Ki-27 and D3A are fine examples of this issue.
Fuel tanks? What fuel tanks? J.H. .. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif most of the aircraft in real life will burn very happily when continuously hit in fuel tank but not in this game. Sometimes you can hit fuel tank area for as long as you like and you wont set it ablaze - until he11 freezes over term comes to my mind. Aircraft will only get structural damage.
Somehow only engine tank area works very well in this regard. Wing fuel tanks... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Example is my Burma campaign... I could check how many Beaus I've shot down around 10-20 I don't know. And of that number only two were on fire all other went down from structural damage, in spite that I aimed only for outer wing area and engine. I've got them PKed more frequently... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

Let's not forget that burning after being hit was the most frequent cause of plane going down (by far) in ww2. Structural damage (like loosing wing) was far less likely. Exactly vice versa of what we have in PF. Still, damage modelling has to do more with that than actual weapons modelling IMO.

To me it seems not all planes have their fuel tanks modelled where they should be.


Originally posted by rmorgansmith:
Is the Il-10 tougher that the Il-2. Still waiting for my 46 DVD to get here.


IL10 for me is harder to knock out than a B17. Online or offline that is.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK"><pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">?Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany.

ElAurens
01-12-2007, 10:51 AM
Odd, whenever I fly the Val just a few hits from an F4F sends the thing down, every time.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

rmorgansmith
01-12-2007, 11:56 AM
I am glad I started such an interesing topic, no one has answered my question about the ammo modelled on the U.S. .50 cal. Is it ball ammo, which is just lead slug with maybe some kind of ballistic cap? Read a very interesting passage in The Clash of Carriers about a Catalina pilot and crew I think it was that scrounged up some AP/Incendiary ammmo buy trading some booze and went hunting Japanese patrol planes and got a few with this ammo and were describing how effective it was as opposed to the regular ball round.

Nimits
01-12-2007, 06:36 PM
According to USN pilots at Coral Sea and Midway, Vals and Kates were in fact noticably tougher to take down than the Zeros.

Also keep in mind that pilots in every air force tended to overclaim. In alot of accounts of pilots shooting down 3, 4, 5 or more D3As or other IJN aircraft, several of the claimed kills in actuality either survived, or were downed later by AAA or other fighters.

Tater-SW-
01-12-2007, 10:39 PM
I'll have to check Lundstrom, but at Coaral Sea, the F4Fs were armed with just ball ammo, and possibly Midway as well.

JG53Frankyboy
01-13-2007, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by rmorgansmith:
I am glad I started such an interesing topic, no one has answered my question about the ammo modelled on the U.S. .50 cal. Is it ball ammo, which is just lead slug with maybe some kind of ballistic cap? Read a very interesting passage in The Clash of Carriers about a Catalina pilot and crew I think it was that scrounged up some AP/Incendiary ammmo buy trading some booze and went hunting Japanese patrol planes and got a few with this ammo and were describing how effective it was as opposed to the regular ball round.

old info from Oleg, but i doubt they changed anything:
Browning .50
// APIT - AP - HE - AP

APIT
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.002

AP
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0

HE
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.00148

tigertalon
01-13-2007, 03:44 AM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
old info from Oleg, but i doubt they changed anything:
Browning .50
// APIT - AP - HE - AP

APIT
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.002

AP
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0

HE
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.00148

Interesting. What does power actually mean? Looks like APIT has greater power than high explosive.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK"><pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">?In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility,

JG53Frankyboy
01-13-2007, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by tigertalon:

Interesting. What does power actually mean? Looks like APIT has greater power than high explosive.

"Here is the direct table of shells and bullets from source code of IL-2.
Comments:

power - here is the TNT, that also modelled (as well as pices of shells).

T - Tracer bullet
AP - Armor-Piercing bullet
APT - Armor-Piercing with Tracer
API - Armor-Piercing Incendary
APIT - Armor-Piercing Incendary Tracer
HE - High-Explosive shell
HEI - High-Explosive Incendary shell
HET - High-Explosive with Tracer
HEIT - High-Explosive Incendary Tracer
MG - M-Geschoss, thin-shell High Explosive "

Aaron_GT
01-13-2007, 08:12 AM
Do not test with 20mm

It's easier when you test with 12,7. Almost all airforces used it (all in game) at some point

Ditto 20mm cannons...

Tater-SW-
01-13-2007, 09:16 AM
Wonder why the IJN 20mm flips a huge plane like a F4U or F6F right over on its back faster than I can roll the plane intentionally...

I swear, something must be wrong with the concussion of those (or the associated concussion DM/FM with all USN planes---wouldn't be the first time tghe USN birds had something consistantly wrong with them, perhaps the guy in charge of navy planes had the effect off by an order of magnitude?)

DKoor
01-13-2007, 09:37 AM
Sometimes I can flip landed Spitfires on runway with 2x12,7 in Ki-43II. I was very surprised when I saw this... In fact most of the times when I struck it in the engine area it jumps and sometimes flips over... very funny effect. Of course 0% historical. http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/gm_shrug.gif

I even have a track... (http://rapidshare.com/files/11534848/DKoorKi43-targetdancing.ntrk.html)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<hr class="ev_code_hr" />http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/5638/g14hartmannlh1.jpg (http://airwarfare.com/mediawiki-1.4.5/index.php?title=Main_Page)<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">@ STURMOVIK?: 1946 - coming November 2006 in ETO and Australia

rmorgansmith
01-13-2007, 10:40 AM
Now I am more confused. Why would a .50 cal round be given any HE potential? Never heard of a .50 HE round. What does all the source code gibberish mean?

It kind of looks to me that several types of rounds are modelled,maybe incorrectly if some HE potential is given to a .50 cal round it never had. In real life sometimes I imagine the armourers had to load up with whatever they had on hand.

It would seem to me that for Japanese planes incendiary rounds would be most effective and for German aircraft you would want a good percentage of rounds to be AP. So two questions for clarification.

Is the game modelling several types of ammo for U.S. .50 cal?

How much thought and ammo mixing went on in real life?

JG53Frankyboy
01-13-2007, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by rmorgansmith:
.........
Is the game modelling several types of ammo for U.S. .50 cal?

....

no

JG53Frankyboy
01-13-2007, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Wonder why the IJN 20mm flips a huge plane like a F4U or F6F right over on its back faster than I can roll the plane intentionally...

..........

if you trust il2compare in that, the japanese navy canons of the Zeros are modelled like the german MG-FF........... means they have mineshells loaded !

MG/FF
// APIT - HE - HE - MG

APIT
mass = 0.115
speed = 580.0
power = 0.0036

HE
mass = 0.115
speed = 585.0
power = 0.0044

MG
mass = 0.092
speed = 690.0
power = 0.0186