Battle of Britain Campaign Feedback

[Bandy 3]

If it is OK to say, and not being negatively critical of any FM's out there just purely constructive, BUT I heartily recommend anybody to go over the FM's for themselves. In my wanderings I've noticed some possible typos (missing armour on some wing tank surfaces that is present on the other wing tanks, etc.). I also found that the Bf 109E has code for a nose cannon, which it didn't have in BoB, though that just may have inadvertently been left over from another later version of the FM for the 109 F or G. I just put //'s in front of those lines just in case...

 

Something also struck me late last night as I was watching the hit pattern light up the wings of an He111; the 8 guns of the Brit fighters were set to converge at a certain distance (200 to 300 yards I think), focusing all that firepower to a small area. See Anthony Williams' excellent online analysis, he says that Hurricane and Spitfire unleashed 4 lbs of bullets a second!!! However, I think the Hurricane and Spitfire guns are set to fire parallel in the FM (unless I'm misunderstanding a variable in there). Pilot accounts say that 8 properly set up .303's were devastating... They also mixed AP with incendiary. Does SF support incendiary rounds? I haven't seen any discussion of it.

 

So, I'm going to try to see if I can converge the fire of the .303's by slightly altering the rotational alignment, and will report... If somebody beats me to it, hey, all the better...

Edited June 23, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[+Tailspin 3]

We're on the same page B. I've been tinkering around with gun convergence and it seems to work visually. The aim offset seems to be in degrees so you can either guesstimate the angles or you can actually do the math given the muzzle postitions from the centerline and the convergence distance as two sides of the right triangle. I gotta do some work today so I'll have to post more later this evening. Interested to see what you come up with and whether you think the sim actually calculates the effect of convergence.

[Bandy 3]

The aim offset seems to be in degrees...

 

FYI: from another thread on AimAngles:

the middle number is up/down, the 1st or 3rd should be the left/right adjustment

the 'measurment' is meters. minus numbers ie: 0.0,-1.0,0.0 would be 1 meter down from center. Plus signs are not needed.

BTW, minus numbers are left of center

 

This helps, but is still a bit confusing, so let me see if I read that correctly before I go spending hours tweaking these AimAngles

If the 1st number in the AimAngle is "Left Adjustment" and is something other than zero (say 1), then the 3rd number "Right Adjst" MUST BE zero, and vice versa. Right?

 

I've seen other threads where people think the 3 numbers in AimAngle are X,Y,Z adjustment, and while initially this seems logical, on reflection it makes absolutely no sense since movement in the 3rd axis would have no effect on where the bullets fly given that the desired "target" pattern is 2 dimensional (only up/down and left/right to a bullseye, NO depth...).

 

ALSO, unlike gunners machine guns in the data ini, where tracer can be easily changed (stock is a tracer round every 5 bullets), I cannot find where to change tracer loading to 1 for wing guns to better facilitate seeing the results of these tweaks.

Me thinks the gun editor might need to be invoked here... ugh! Oops, did I say that out loud???

Edited June 23, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[Guest capun]

As per TK, gun tracer amount can only be changed for AI gunners, fixed guns are hard coded to every 5 rounds (I may be wrong on the actual number).

 

It's too early and no coffee so I can't remember about the gun aim angles, I'll see if I can search my notes about it.

 

Edit. I found my notes.

 

The Gun Aim Angles are done a bit different, not in the normal X,Y,Z. They are done in Yaw (Z-axis), Pitch (X-axis), Roll (Y-Axis) and they are in degrees.

[+Baltika 84]

Absolutely fascinating stuff chaps

 

My preliminary experiments in setting up gun convergence have visibly shown that it does work, and is relatively straightforward - thanks to Bandy and Tailspin for raising it and to capun for explaining the settings. I am just now scratching my head trying to remember how to find out the angle at the base of an isosceles triangle when you know the length of the baseline and the length of the median to the far point (or something like that - maths was never my strongppoint )

 

Anyway, as capun defines the x,y and z, the only one you have to fiddle with is the x co-ordinate. The gun mounted at the extreme left of the plane requires the greatest positive angle, reducing for each gun as you get closer to the centreline of the plane. The gun at the extreme right has the greatest negative angle, again reducing as you get closer to the centreline of the plane.

 

You can tell which gun is which by the x co-ordinate of the muzzle position. On the Spit 1A they are set up like this (looking down from above with the nose of the plane to the top of the page):-

 

GunL01 GunL02 GunL03 GunL04 GunR04 GunR03 GunR02 GunR01

 

My initial experiment used the following AimAngle for each gun, following the above scheme:-

 

4,0,0 3,0,0 2,0,0 1,0,0 -1,0,0 -2,0,0 -3,0,0 -4,0,0

 

That resulted in tracers converging (and crossing over before zooming off into the distance fanning out again) about two plane lengths in front of my machine. Woo-hoo

 

Now I just have to fiddle with the fractions of an angle to get convergence at, say, 300 yards, and go blast some bombers. Oh yes

 

 

BTW, I have aslo followed capun's suggestions at post #6 re altering the bomber gunner behaviour. I reduced the gun range to 1000 (from 2000), reduced the burst amount from 50 to 10, and reduced the Pitch and Yaw AngleRates to 30. I have not touched the Gunner Fire chance and fire time in the AIDATA section (which I have, however, added to the data ini of each bomber) as that seemed to open up a can of worms.

 

I can report that the gunner fire is reduced, but still poses a challenge, especially if you are leading the attack. May be worth thinking about trying, though, if you haven't already.

 

I will let you know how my further gun convergence work goes.

 

Cheers,

 

baltika

[+Baltika 84]

Alright,

 

I suggest reducing my initial figures by a factor of 10 for something useful. Following the same scheme, set them like this:-

 

0.4,0,0 0.3,0,0 0.2,0,0 0.1,0,0 -0.1,0,0 -0.2,0,0 -0.3,0,0 -0.4,0,0

 

When I get the chance I will work out distances - I think that is rather closer than 300 yards, at least visually, but I tend to get in close anyway before opening up.

 

You will see your fire being concentrated on a particular spot.

 

Excellent

[+Baltika 84]

For the Hurri, I suggest setting guns on the right wing ALL to -0.2,0,1.5 and the guns on the left wing ALL to 0.2,0,1.5

 

This is simply because the guns on the Hurri are much more closely grouped together on each wing - 4 guns on each wing, each gun 15cm from the next one, if I am correct in reading the scale as metres.

 

The y value I am leaving as 1.5 as that is what the stock Hurri Mk1 has - what difference this makes over the Spit, which has a stock y value of 0, I have no idea. "Roll" implies some sort of spin on the bullet, perhaps to simulate rifling on the weapon barrel, which ought to increase accuracy, but really I am just guessing.

 

As to results in the field - I was working through a Hurri campaign with the above convergence settings, and although I had yet to encounter a Ju-88 flight, I sent a 110 down in flames in fairly short order, and I have previously found them tough birds to crack. A flight of Do-17Z was cut to pieces by my Hurri flight, and I could clearly see concentrations of fire on the targets I hit. Then, of course, I got target fixated on straggler whose engines were out, and I got blown to pieces by a 109 escort who arrived belatedly on the scene.

 

Ouch!

 

But the convergence settings seem to be making a difference.

 

Tally-ho once more

 

baltika

[Guest capun]

The last value is probably a typo in the Hurricane, or it was originally thought that was the Z-axis, which changes the convergence. It should not make a difference since you basically are rotating the barrel along the firing axis (the Y-axis)

[+Baltika 84]

The last value is probably a typo in the Hurricane, or it was originally thought that was the Z-axis, which changes the convergence. It should not make a difference since you basically are rotating the barrel along the firing axis (the Y-axis)

 

Hi,

 

Certainly it doesn't seem to be causing a problem. Kill rates are up

[+Tailspin 3]

http://www.ajdesigner.com/phptriangle/law_...ion_angle_a.php

 

 

 

There is another formula for figuring the length of the other side of the triangle (a^2 + b^2 = c^2) at the site too.

 

Using the formulae I get a value of 1.19 for the outer guns on the Spit @ 200 meters. I haven't got the chance to see if the guns converge at 200m in the sim though. Seems like they converge pretty quickly at this angle but its hard to tell how far it is in the virtual world.

 

BTW...AFAIK the first number is all you need to set convergence. A postive number angles to the right and a negative number angles to the left.

 

As to the question of somehow incorporating an API or incendiary rounds, if you extract the AIRCRAFTOBJECT.INI you will see a section titled ObjectFire. In that there is an entry for APRoundFireChance=1. Try increasing that to a higher number. I have mine set to 3 at the moment.

 

FYI, I am trying these things out for the first time myself. I don't know what effect they will have and I haven't had time to fully test anything. I hope you all will try them too and we can compare notes.

[+Baltika 84]

Cheers Tailspin,

 

Having calculated the angles (OK, the website did it for me ) I have come up with this for the Spit 1A, for convergence at 200m:-

 

[GunL01]

AimAngles=1.096,0.0,0.0

 

[GunR01]

AimAngles=-1.096,0.0,0.0

 

[GunL02]

AimAngles=0.865,0.0,0.0

 

[GunR02]

AimAngles=-0.865,0.0,0.0

 

[GunL03]

AimAngles=0.772,0.0,0.0

 

[GunR03]

AimAngles=-0.772,0.0,0.0

 

[GunL04]

AimAngles=0.593,0.0,0.0

 

[GunR04]

AimAngles=-0.593,0.0,0.0

 

 

I'm not sure how to confirm the actual in-game distance by any means other than Mk 1 eyeball, but I will try it out and see how I get on.

 

baltika

[+Baltika 84]

OK, 200m seems a little close. Here are my figures for the Hurri Mk1, convergance at 250m:-

 

[GunL01]

AimAngles=0.504,0.0,1.5

 

[GunR01]

AimAngles=-0.504,0.0,1.5

 

[GunL02]

AimAngles=0.47,0.0,1.5

 

[GunR02]

AimAngles=-0.47,0.0,1.5

 

[GunL03]

AimAngles=0.435,0.0,1.5

 

[GunR03]

AimAngles=-0.435,0.0,1.5

 

[GunL04]

AimAngles=0.401,0.0,1.5

 

[GunR04]

AimAngles=-0.401,0.0,1.5

 

 

I am definitely seeing concentration of fire on targets, with good results.

 

Cheers,

 

baltika

[Bandy 3]

Tarnation, you guys are fast on a good idea!!!

 

Here I slavishly "worked" at this all night, and didn't get around to seeing this thread at all... Even prepared some pics to show effects to those not convinced! Well, I'm posting my results anyways!!!

The values below will put the bullet convergence (4 lbs of lead per second!!!) right on the pip when the wingtips of a Bf 109 touch the margins of the ring sight.

 

STOCK AIM ANGLES for Spit:

 

My CONVERGENCE ANGLES:

 

AND CONVERGENCE AGAIN at Work:

 

AIM ANGLES I DECIDED UPON (No math, just trial and error, which appear damn close to the math!) I found the pitch convergence needed 0.5 (the middle number) and it landed right on the pip, maybe a wee bit high, which is fine for me since I go for lead pursuit everytime I can I changed the last variable by up to 10 and saw no result in the path, and as I mentioned earlier, logically figured this was the case that it rotated the gun in the axis of fire. Not sure why TK kept that space there...

 

// Internal Guns------------------

 

[GunL01]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=-3.826,1.917,-0.315

LightPosition=-3.826,1.917,-0.315

AimAngles=1.0,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=-3.8260,1.02,-0.30

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunR01]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=3.826,1.917,-0.315

LightPosition=3.826,1.917,-0.315

AimAngles=-1.0,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=3.826,1.02,-0.301

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunL02]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=-3.02,2.01,-0.378

LightPosition=-3.02,2.01,-0.378

AimAngles=0.8,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=-3.02,1.10,-0.350

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunR02]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=3.02,2.01,-0.378

LightPosition=3.02,2.01,-0.378

AimAngles=-0.8,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=3.02,1.10,-0.350

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunL03]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=-2.695,2.01,-0.390

LightPosition=-2.695,2.01,-0.390

AimAngles=0.6,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=-2.695,1.10,-0.375

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunR03]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=2.695,2.01,-0.390

LightPosition=2.695,2.01,-0.3590

AimAngles=-0.6,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=2.695,1.10,-0.375

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunL04]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=-2.07,2.01,-0.450

LightPosition=-2.07,2.01,-0.450

AimAngles=0.5,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=-2.07,1.20,-0.435

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

 

[GunR04]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_Browning

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

MuzzlePosition=2.07,2.01,-0.450

LightPosition=2.07,2.01,-0.450

AimAngles=-0.5,0.5,0.0

MaxAmmo=350

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=2.07,1.20,-0.435

EjectVelocity= 0.0,0.0,-2.0

Edited June 24, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[Bandy 3]

And oh, yes, I forgot to report that excellent results are to be had, and so do the AI, yeah!!!

First mission out with converged guns and the AI got as many NME as I did, and they had higher %hits than I did as well!!!

 

However, I've found that the mods I've done to aircraft recently (I've taken self-sealing tanks out of the Bf109 and 110 since the few references I've found says they didn't have them till 1942, and made FALSE all fire suppression system for engines and fuel tanks...) have made them Roman candles waiting for a match, and converged fire is devastating, as historical accounts have professed. Will have to put some armor there for game balance, which likely was the case anyways. Supposidely the German bombers had bullet-proof gas tanks. I've also read that the early Stukas had no cockpit armour, but was hastily modified post-BoB for the Eastern front... Anyone have confirmation on that?

 

Need to test with bomber intercepts now...

 

Will try that mod with the ammo Tailspin, sounds like the trick...

 

Perhaps an AimAngles thread in the Knowledge Base is in order, since all the threads I looked through there was much mis-information... ESPECIALLY about that third variable !!!

Edited June 24, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[Bandy 3]

As to the question of somehow incorporating an API or incendiary rounds, if you extract the AIRCRAFTOBJECT.INI you will see a section titled ObjectFire. In that there is an entry for APRoundFireChance=1. Try increasing that to a higher number. I have mine set to 3 at the moment.

 

TS, did you use the GunEditor to save these changes to the APRoundChance?

I seem to vaguely remember that that is/was a necessary step in the procedure in order to make Cat file changes to guns, otherwise you might be shooting blanks [sorry, had to say it...]

[Nicholas Bell 117]

and made FALSE all fire suppression system for engines and fuel tanks...) have made them Roman candles waiting for a match

 

Fire Suppression stops any chance of the plane flaming. Self-healing nearly does too. Been doing a lot of testing on the damage models lately. The only way to get a balance between flaming with 1 bullet and never flaming at all is to keep self-healing and fire suppression false and armor the tanks with steel. 20-30 mm seems to work as a reasonable balance considering machine guns and cannon are such radically different animals when it comes to damage modeling. Increasing structural integrity of the tanks or the assembly they are in (fuselage, wing) doesn't impact the chance of a tank flaming. Apparently there are critical hits modeled unaffected by this.

 

If you want to tweak the DM yourself I recommend setting up an "all friendly" mission and have at your buddies rather than attempting to see minor differences while actually dogfighting the enemy.

 

Thanks for the convergence tweaks!

[+Tailspin 3]

TS, did you use the GunEditor to save these changes to the APRoundChance?

I seem to vaguely remember that that is/was a necessary step in the procedure in order to make Cat file changes to guns, otherwise you might be shooting blanks [sorry, had to say it...]

 

No, I didn't. Since it was a tweak that didn't involve any of the weapons or gun files I didn't think it necessary. I just assumed this applied to objects and how they reacted to impacts from bullet types. However this tweak may not be necessary if we can get the planes to catch fire as they should without it. Still, I think its worth a little experimenting.

 

BTW....good job on the convergences. I didn't find the geometry site until after I'd done a bunch of trial and error stuff myself. Not sure the trial and error wasn't the better way to do it.

[Bandy 3]

Not sure the trial and error wasn't the better way to do it.

 

Oh yeah, I had a blast!!! For me, it was a much more organic process.

Told my wife I had a project I needed to work on...

 

Mr.Bell, that is exactly what I decided on as well; I dropped the self-healing and sealing, but armoured the tanks up with 10mm and improved the cockpit where I found mention of further supplemental armour in some historic sources... It worked very well initially, but now with convergence, its back to square one!

 

The Anthony Williams' analysis link I posted on page 2 mentions historical accounts of RAF testing programs involving self-sealing tanks sometimes working even with 20mm cannon hits, but this was the exception. Thus the Brits decided to also put angled armour on the back side of their tanks during BoB, and put massively thick (up to 90mm) bullet-proof wind screens on the Spit and Hurricane. The 109 also had good pilot armour, but no self-sealing tank(s) [likely trying to keep the operational range up]. And again, from one account, the Stuka had NO cockpit armour! Unbelievable!!! Talk about over confidence!!!

 

All this makes for some interesting tweaking... This must be a labour of love... Couldn't imagine what a flight model from scratch must be like, all that tweaking just to get it to a point where one last tweak causes the whole thing to start over...

Edited June 24, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[keith 0]

Baltika,

 

1) I have noticed in some of the briefing messages for Luftwaffe strike missions that the objective is to protect bombers from enemy MiGs - where is this data held?

 

2) When on escort missions, I never seem to meet up with the bombers I am meant to be escorting...

 

Keith

[+Baltika 84]

Hi Keith

 

1) I have noticed in some of the briefing messages for Luftwaffe strike missions that the objective is to protect bombers from enemy MiGs - where is this data held?

 

I'm having trouble recreating this one - which unit are you flying, what type of mission, and what screen are you on when you see it?

 

The data for briefings is held in .../Terrain/Battle of Britain/Battle of Britain_Briefing.ini which Gepard has edited in keeping with the terrain, and certainly no reference to Migs there. There may be other text elsewhere which I haven't been able to track down - certainly on escort missions (I think that's what you're talking about) I see references to "preventing enemy interceptors" from attacking the strike force, but again, no reference to Migs.

 

 

 

2) When on escort missions, I never seem to meet up with the bombers I am meant to be escorting...

 

Yes, this can be a problem. Use Red Crown to give you a bearing to your "Primary Target" as early as possible and vector to intercept them. Once they hove into view it's a matter of keeping your eyes peeled to keep track of where they get to!

 

 

Cheers,

 

baltika

[+Baltika 84]

Just read this on Mike Kelsey's 151 Sqdn site http://www.151squadron.org.uk/

 

"Of being shot down on June 30, S/Ldr Donaldson wrote in the Daily Telegraph as follows:-.

 

'Air Vice Marshall Keith Park, Air Officer Commanding No 11 Group, which directly faced the Luftwaffe across the Channel was utterly dedicated to the winning of the Battle and was not an entirely Defensive man. On certain days he sent Squadrons over France to fight Germans over their own bases. I think this gave the Germans the impression that the R.A.F. was much stronger than it was.

On one of Park's trips over France on June 30, my Squadron was ordered to escort Basil Embrey to destroy a large enemy fuel dump in France. We did not particularly like this assignment because Basil, absolutely fearless himself, took so long with positive identification of the target dump, for the Germans had so many dummies.

Basil was not about to waste bombs On dummies so round and round he went with his Blenheim bombers being shot at from the ground while we were continuously attacked by Messerschmitts from above. But we did not leave him and this kept the Messerschmitts from attacking the bombers.

Eventually, flying home from this, Basil's Squadron was jumped by Messerschmitts low over the sea and a terrific battle started. It was then that a particularly threatening Messerschmitt arrived and went straight for me. We fought for fifteen minutes ending up with head-on attacks on each other. Usually, Messerschmitts did not like this, for a Hurricane could turn more sharply, so it usually made off, which it could do so at 60 mph faster than the Hurricane.

In this case, On about the fourth head-on attack, shells and bullets started to strike my poor aircraft. The first shell knocked my poor oil tank clean out of the leading edge of the wing, so I knew the engine could not run much longer.

Then the petrol tank blew up and my clothes caught fire and I became hot but still the b-----d continued to shoot. My gloves were burning and my goggles frizzled up but I took neither off - luckily!.

I undid my straps and climbed on the wing, for the Hurricane was flying very slowly and I could actually see the burning wing bending upwards. Then I realised with alarm that I was only 800 ft off the sea. I thought this too low for a safe bail out but at this time I fell off and it took me seconds to locate the pull ring, which I must have pulled, for, as I was about to hit the water, my parachute opened. I disappeared to the full extent of the cords and the wind got under the parachute and lifted me like a missile to the surface and started pulling me at about 5 Km/hr towards the French Coast. Boulogne was two miles away, so I got rid of it at once, but then again shells started coming over, even when my head was under water. It certainly hurt my ears.

The Germans had been shooting at pilots In the sea at that time but my Squadron flew over me as long as their fuel lasted. They were not going to let the Germans near me.

Later the Y Service which listened to all R/T prattle told me it was General Galland who had shot me down.

I met him in London recently and I still don't think much of his conduct that day, for he must have known that my Hurricane was dead as far as fighting again, but he never stopped shooting.

After this encounter neither did I.'

Basil Embry was later shot down, taken prisoner, but escaped from Imprisonment with a price on his head. He was later to become Station Commander at Wittering as Group Captain when 151 Squadron was stationed there in 1942/1943, thus furthering his association with 151 Squadron. After the War Basil Embrey was a Senior Commander in the R.A.F. before retiring back to his native New Zealand.'

 

 

My question is this:-

 

Given the above, how about I add a couple of squadrons of Blenheims for the odd bombing run over Luftwaffe bases in France, and add a few escort missions for fighter squadrons?

 

Cheers,

 

baltika

Edited June 25, 2007 by Baltika

[+Tailspin 3]

Excellent idea. Something different to try amongst all the intercepts.

 

BTW....is anybody getting any engine fires or smoking from the bombers? All I can seem to get to burn are the fuel tanks. I noticed the Engine nacelles have no hit boxes (Min./Max. extent in the data.ini...although the engines themselves do). Wonder if this could be the culprit? Like Nicholas Bell suggests (Thanks NB) right now I've got the fuel tanks without fire supression or self sealing and with armor values of 25mm. Its still fairly easy to get a good fire going for me. I had the armor set to 30mm which was a little harder but the AI seemed to have trouble getting bomber kills. This is with all the defensive guns of the bombers shut down and me taking deliberate, well aimed shots directly at the fuselage/wing root so it might be OK when I turn the gunners back on. The only thing I don't like about it now is there seems to be no damaged but still flying bombers. Its either burning and going down or not. I can turn the Fire Supression back on and get more "smokers" that stay in formation longer but then I almost never get one to burn real good. Can't seem to find a happy medium. Any ideas?

 

Sorry to change the subject, Baltika. I think the idea of attacing the German airfields is great!

[+Baltika 84]

Tailspin-

 

No worries mate, my bad for introducing a new theme. Thanks for the vote of confidence, the sadly often forgotten (and highly dangerous) daylight efforts of Bomber Command over Luftwaffe bases in France in the early stages of BoB will gain due recognition in the next campaign update

 

As to getting those bombers to burn, but not too much, I have been following the discussion with keen interest. I have currently set up my Luftwaffe bombers to have FireSuppression and SelfHealing set to TRUE for fuel tanks (otherwise I get the Roman Candle effect Bandy describes, especially with new improved gun convergence) but I have set FireSuppression for engines to FALSE. The idea being, hopefully by targetting an engine you can get a flamer, but not a massive explosion every time you hit a bomber. Your comments re hitboxes are interesting. I've not done enough testing yet for any clear results, but the night is young

 

In the back of my mind I have those reports of bombers making it to homebase with 2 or 3 hundred .303 bullet holes in them. Sometimes hard is just hard

 

Oh, and BTW, my completely soulless but very precise mathematically calculated gun harmonisation works just fine, thank you

 

Although I must admit, Bandy's trial and error is surprisingly accurate - running his figures through the machine gives the outer guns converging at a shade over 219metres, or 197 yards. Battle experience led the RAF to reduce their convergence from 450 yards to 200 yards. Go get 'em Bandy

 

Well, so much to do, so little time.

 

Cheers,

 

baltika

 

 

PS I see armour values of 2 or 5 or whatever in the _data.ini, but what is the unit? For, say, 30mm, what do I set it to?

Edited June 25, 2007 by Baltika

[+Tailspin 3]

The armor values are in mm. Don't worry about using the calculator, I finally did the calcs. and used them anyway.

[+Baltika 84]

The armor values are in mm.

 

Thanks for that - further testing required.

 

Cheers,

 

baltika