Rocket inconsistencies.

chuckfourth · #1 February 15th, 2007, 07:37 AM

Hi Don
Yes you are very correct the range doesnt seem to have much bearing on anything, though various people have mentioned that it does in the DOS forum. So they put me on a red herring.
However, during my testing I noticed something I think is a bit odd. In 3 sets of 24 typhoons shooting at the fronts of 3 sets of 24 spotted pz 4 g's in March 44 with visibility set to 50. I got 15 16 and 15 tanks hit, with some of the tanks hit multiple times. This is without having a second run to use up the remaining couple of rockets most typhoons still had. For the typhoons (unit 095) I removed the ammunition from the hispano cannons so only rockets were fired. The tanks were spread out so no "shrapnel" hits.
My point would be that the hit rate mentioned above of 4% for typhoon rockets and the information that these 60 pounders were very inaccurate doesnt seem to be modeled very well in the game. Rather than a 4% hit rate the game has about a 65% hit rate for these rockets (per strike).
Now Ill add a bit more on the assumption that FireControl (FC) affects all four weapon slots.
I realise that these Rockets already have the lowest accuracy of 1 and that the planes very high (FC) of 15 (for the hispano cannons) may eclipse the weapon accuracy values. The only way I can think of to model the accuracy of the cannon and the (in)accuracy of the rockets when fired from the single (high FC) plane is to drop the FC values and raise aircraft weapon accuracy values. Perhaps this can be done so that overall the accuracy/fire control value remains similar but the weapons can then be differentiated. Maybe the rocket salvo could be modeled as a single blast rather than eight seperate rockets giving a lower hit rate. Similar concept to having the KWK 38 firing bursts. You of course may see other ways this could be solved.
Problem being of course that maybe all plane fired rockets are way too accurate making the rocket armed planes much better tank kilers/disablers than they really were.
If all weapon slots share the same FC value then bombs are also way too accurate (except dive bombers bombs).
Also I have always been puzzled that purpose designed ground attack aircraft and fighter bombers have the same FC values. I would have though a ground attack aircraft would have a better FC than a dive bomber. And that fighters (fighter bombers) travelling much faster, designed to be twitchy rather than stable and without proper sights would have a way lower FC than a ground attack aircraft.
Please feel free to move this thread to the WW2 General Discussion forum if you think it is about the game system.
Best Regards Chuck.

DRG · #2 February 15th, 2007, 10:56 AM

We made alterations to the code of both games weeks ago regarding secondary blast effects of those type of rockets so they are less deadly overall than before.

If you search through the threads I know you'll find other people complaining at one time or another that aircraft are useless at hitting anything which balances out your assertion that they are too deadly.

The Germans knew in 1944 that if you put a tank in the open ( "spotted" "with visibility set to 50" )when there were Jabos in the sky that tank was dead meat. You've rediscovered a historical truth .

We have no plans to further "de-tune" the aircraft .

Don

chuckfourth · #3 February 15th, 2007, 08:21 PM

Hi Don
OK I see you are one step ahead of me. I dont know if you have already done so but as well as rockets, bombs would also benefit from having there "secondary blast effects" adjusted. Bombs are of course even less/much less accurate than rockets... when delivered by fighter bombers.
British unit 731, a typhoon has 16 60 pounders attached to it I find this hard to believe. Unit 730 a typhoon and 492 a tempest have a more believable 12. But... I have been unable to find any references anywhere for either of these planes ever carrying any more than 8 rockets.
And lastly do you think that the ground attack aircraft should be more accurate (have a higher FC) than the 'ad hoc' fighter bombers?

DRG · #4 February 15th, 2007, 10:06 PM

Rockets are the same weapon class as bombs, the difference is they have a range >1 which makes them "rockets" so lowering the secondary effects of that class affects bombs AND rockets.... yes?

Re Typhoons. There are twelve Typhoons in the game. 8 of which have the correct weapon loadout. You managed to find two of the four that didn't. They have been corrected

All Typhoons have 15 FC.( Shturmovik and HS129's are 15 as well ) There are 656 attack aircraft in the game with FC of 2 or more ( no.. the number is not made up )and 378 with 10 FC or more there are over 40 aircraft with higher FC than Typhoons. That's the way the game works and has worked for years and it's not going to be changed

OK?

Don

chuckfourth · #5 February 15th, 2007, 10:49 PM

Ok, pending new info of course.
Best Chuck

DRG · #6 February 16th, 2007, 12:13 PM

Don't bother looking for "new Info" to "prove" whatever point you are trying to make. We are NOT ( repeat.... N O T ) changing the way ground attack aircraft are set up

Don

chuckfourth · #7 February 16th, 2007, 06:10 PM

Hi Don
OK, but what about old points? In my thread "ME262 wrong guns?" if you read my last two posts you will see that I tested and proved that it is possible to give the ground attack aircraft guns their correct armour penetration characteristics by removing the HEK value and substituting a sabot value. With the current set up using a HEK instead of a sabot value they may as well be firing plasticine not tungsten shot.
Thanks for your time, Chuck

PanzerBob · #8 February 3rd, 2009, 03:22 AM

Good day all,

Test vs. Combat conditions for WWII Rockets. IIRC rockets seemed to be a good bet during their trials, but when put into use the results were rather poor in so far as actual armour killed. With that being said, if I understand correctly, their main effect (outside of scoring direct hits on armour and soft skin vehicles) was scaring the bejesus of those on the receiving end of a rocket attack. IIRC the warheads tended to be equal to roughly 5inch naval shells or worse in effect. At times this caused troops to abandon equipment even if not destroyed.

As far as game play goes, I find roughly the same effect tends to happen. As a result I tend to target embarked or massed troops with rockets, saving cannons for actual anti-armour work. As the Germans I tend to fear cannon armed CAS aircraft more than rocket armed in regards to losing Panzers. The Hurricane with the 40mm Cannons, Typhoons and Stumoviks have had great effects on my units at times. Even when launching my own airstrikes kills are a bonus but breaking the enemy is always more my aim.

Bob out