2- Gun modeling.

2.5 uses a new gunnery model that allows much finer granularity in how we model rate of fire. This means you will be able to score more hits for a given duration of fire, but each hit will be proportionally less lethal. Not every burst will have a tracer drawn either. The tracer ratio in 2.5 is set to 1 tracer per every 4 to 5 real rounds.

Posted by: fd-ski S/L Squadron 303 (Polish) RAF

Message:

Ok, so the 2.5 is out and we're all trying to learn how to shoot one more time. And this time it seems to be much easier. Personally, after 3 days on 2.5 i'm somewhat disappointed. Let me do few disclaimers here...

I never claimed that WB shooting system was realistic...far from it. I think it was harder then real life should be, and MG's were little on the lite side.

With coming of 2.5, it's easier then ever to hit the target, spray and pray tactics work wonders in the same situations where it would be a waste of ammo in 2.1. Some of you will say that it's probably closer to reality, and that could be argueed, but the fact reamins that dweebs accross the world are singing in joy, for the one thing that held them from becoming aces, is gone now. It took me a great ammount of time and skill to learn how to shoot in 2.1. It was a skill aquired and even thou i rarely broke 20% i was prowd of my shooting. Now, just point and hose down. It's quite irrelevant to your skill.

Also, tracers look somewhat large. Diamiter is really big, hit bubbles appear to be much larger as well.

On the possitive note... MG's are much more effective, and for once flying a hurri or a spit 1 is not a silliness it used to be.

Imol, you guy did a great job on 2.5. Don't get me wrong. Above are only my oppinions and I could be wrong :)

fd-ski

S/L Squadron 303 (Polish) Kosciuszko RAF

Posted by: bubba Maj. Red Raiders

Message:

: after 3 days on 2.5 i'm somewhat disappointed.

I don't like the new gunnery system either, but perhaps it's something that can simply be tweaked. It's just way too easy. If I can get settled onto a guy's 6, he's dead.

And if I can do that, it's _way_ too easy.

Posted by: scotts Crazy 8's

Message: I like the new gunnery model. I find I now take more time to set up shots and fire at closer ranges with smaller bursts. I can judge deflection shots better also.

The tradeoff however is that I have to have better SA. 6 calls even more important now. It's making me a better pilot. Now if warps would settle down, I could do real well.

scotts

Posted by: Moose *Flying Pigs*

Message:

I've gone *down* from 20+% to only 11% since 2.5 came out. I'm missing in situations where I used to score easy hits. I honestly can't figure out why everybody thinks this new gunnery system is so easy because for me it's a damnsight harder than the old way. And BTW, this is with all sorts of planes--the only plane I've gotten good consistent high gunnery %'s with is the P-38F tonight. I used to be a good shot in planes armed with six .50s, now I can't hit the broad side of a barn.

Moose

Flying Pigs

Posted by: -fluf- 417 RCAF 'The Windsors'

Message:

I don't think the shooting is harder than real life at all...most pilots couldn't hit much in air-to-air from what I understand.

It is probably easier to hit targets - the stream of projectiles has fewer 'holes' in it because the bullets are no longer bunched into clumps the way they were in the older system. This is exactly what we could expect from a more realistic system! So naturally 'spray and pray' would result in more hits - but less effective ones don't forget.

I disagree that more dweebs will benefit from this - what about the 'snap-shot' dweebs (like me) or the 'head-on' dweebs - both groups of which benefited unnaturally from the older system? The new system levels them out.

>....... i was prowd of my shooting. Now,just point and hose down. > It's quite irrelevant to your skill.

Well, I don't follow your logic here. If you were a good shot before then you'll have an even bigger edge over 'dweebs' with the new system -IMO. I haven't noticed any big changes in my gunnery %. I do find that it is easier to concentrate fire on different parts of a target (when close nough of course), because I get more feed-back on my shooting due to the increased number of hit flashes.

I have heard concerns about long range fire and convergence oddities but I haven't experienced any of those phenomena myself yet.

The tracers are no bigger to my eyes - there are more of them though. I also am glad to be able to change the tracer colour to one which suits me better.

For me the new gunnery system is a huge step forward - it may need some tweeks - but I am very pleased. I believe that it takes a bit more skill to use it well, and that it rewards more realistic gun usage (long range stuff excepted - if reports are true).

I have a feeling that once things get a chance to shake out, most will grow to prefer the new system.

-fluf-

Posted by: -kosa- F/Lt RAF 303 (Polish) Sqn.

Message:

Well, it still takes only one bullet to smoke the engine... effectively ending the fight. Happened to me a lot last night... This is what often happens on HOs, even though I avoid them out of principle, quite often my opponent is able to get 1-2 pings in and smoke the eng... :(

Posted by: Rob Ryland ( lkjjj-)

Message:

I suspect that they have the exact same hit bubble that they did in 2.1. but we are firing alot more rounds now , so you get more hits. the thing is , now that we are modeling close to every round ( worst case is just under every other bullet i think ), we don't need any hit bubble. let it be the exact same size as the plane. basketball sized rounds are no longer necessary to acount for the spread of the bullets in a "WB burst".

I would like to see a few things though:

1) add just a little bi of noise (randomness) to each rounds initial tragectory. that would give a bit of spread even at convergence which would be historically accurate.

2) rounds should slow down during flight with the corresponding change in tragectory and damage when hitting ( and rounds with a higher relative velocity do to front quarter shots or straffing stationary targets would do more damage ).

3) track the rounds further than 1500 yds. you shouldn't be able to hit aircraft from that range, but straffing shots on ground targets can be reasonably taken from further, especially against AAA.

Now if they can just deal with all the new warping ( i still don't know if it is from downloads or the additional hit messages generated by the new gunnery model ).

lkjjj-

Posted by: -taur- 416 Sqn RCAF

Message: I havnt noticed any big diff in the shooting model. Mgs are more effective but I dont think there has been any change in the "hit bubble". Perhaps you are a better shot than you think :). I doubt most newbies can hit a 109 at d4 pulling a 5g turn by just "spraying". At close range anybody can hit, but not past d3. Unless the dope is flying straight and level or they get lucky with a burst from a heavy battery of cannon ie. Fw 190 ect. IMHO deflection shooting skill in WB is still an art that takes time to learn. We may view it as easier because we have been flying in it for so long. My 2 cents.

Posted by: -kosa- F/Lt RAF 303 Sqn (Polish)

Message:

A few comments, in support of my C/O. :)

In general, I like the idea of having every shell modelled independently (instead of "WB bursts"), and that surely is a change for the better.

BUT:

It is too easy to make these long distance shots... a case in the point: was chasing a 109 today (in Spit IX) which stayed at constant d8 distance... I fired really short bursts with my mgs time after time, and noticed about 20 pings till I run out of ammo...1-2 pings on *every* burst. Then I switched to cannon, and imagine my surprise when in 2 initial bursts i got 3 or 4 pings and he exploded.

He wasn't flying in a perfectly stright line btw.

Now d8 is supposed to be 800 yards, and the 109 is a pretty small target, I doubt it would be possible to score these pings as regularly and easily in real life. The culprit, is most likely the "hit bubble". It is probably only roughly deifned around the planes main elements, and clearly, it is too big. I have often wondered about those HO shots that blow the opponents wings off... in RL these would be almost impossible, considering how thin the wings are and the combined speed of both planes.

Also.. could be wrong here, but I would think that to compensate for gravity and drag, I should have been aiming at that 109 more than *slightly* above the enemy plane... I did, but the margin was maybe 1 or 2 pixels in 1024.

Could it be that drag is not modelled in the gunnery model?

I am sure these things have been discussed here before, so sorry if what I said is not very novel ;).

-kosa-