Charles2222
Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline
|
AmmoSgt: We're having to hypothesize with some loose data here. First off the 40% figure was based on 500 kills off the 2530 figure. Understand that it was actually 2130 and that the other report showed the kills to be 519, and that's not even including the over 1,000 other vehicles, which I take were more than likely even more difficult to hit than tanks. That's getting fairly close to a vehicle of some sort per mission. Needless to say the data points out that there were missions where he either didn't have vehicles or tanks to target and that he concentrated on flak etc. Even so, he came close to tallying a "vehicle" kill per sortie. And, no, not all these sorties were in the tank-buster model either.
Of course Rudel doesn't fly every Stuka, but then I have no data to suggest tanks were all so difficult to destroy via the tank-buster, or the thinner tanks before the tank-buster, only that you think so based on ship attacks from what may be the somewhat isolated incident based on a broadcast Channel skirmish (BTW, in that engagement, a "Messershmidt" as it was called (a 109?) was shot down by a British fighter, so perhaps while the Stukas may had sounded unmolested, it's evident that there were at least aerial opposition possible, and as I say, tanks probably don't see it coming, while ships do.
quote:
That sounds like about what most folks who are complaining say they are getting with average pilots in non AT versions of Stukas .. So maybe we ought to further cut back on Stuka accuracy and effectiveness , so that in the game not every early version , non AT Stuka flown by Very Good but not quite Rudel pilots are matching Rudels Record.. say they do half as good .. that would mean half of all Stukas bought would do no damage and only 1 in 5 Stukas bought would actually be expected to knock out a Tank ?
You haven't tried using these Stukas have you????? Let's use my revised Rudel figures, let's say 519 out of 2130. Understand that I'm guessing at least half those missions weren't gearing for tanks, or that there just weren't any present. So now we have 519 out of 1065, close to a 50% ratio. IF we can assume that Rudel had TWICE the skill of the average Stuka pilot, then Stuka pilots should achieve at least a 25% tank kill ratio, yes? I haven't tried any tank-busters in 7.1, but in earlier versions you were lucky if you achieved a 10% ratio with the ordinary Stuka. Yes, the tank-buster should be more effective, but the ordinary model was going up against generally thinner-skinned tanks. Anybody that would expect a kill on a T34 or KV1 with the all but a top hit on those tanks is daydreaming, but even so I think the top hits weren't either being registered or they just didn't kill them with that 500lb. bomb. And whether the program considers bomb drop angle to slope I don't know, for a T34s RH slope would be practically meaningless from above.
Something else to keep in mind when you think along the lines, even if you accept these adjusted figures of getting close to Rudel taking out a vehicle per sortie, and that is that this says nothing about accuracy of the bomb or the cannons. While you need accuracy to get the kill, the point I was making earlier with the isolated Rudel incident was that he had only 12 rounds but got 4 kills. He could've fired 4 rounds and got 4 kills, or he could've fired all 12 and got 4 kills. In any case it shows the 'kill ratio' not the 'accuracy ratio'. It just shows to me that the tanks weren't that difficult to hit with a Stuka, or at least I don't consider between 33% and 100% (as those figures are between that somewhere) as really that difficult. If we take the median position, he was hitting with 66% of his 37mm, that surely isn't a difficult shot to make. So maybe the average tank-buster pilot only hit 33% of the time, but these cannons weren't like rockets, they were direct-fire and didn't go scooting off on with something of a life of their own. Even if the accuracy figure was as low as 20%, that in game terms, should the pilot expend 10 or more of the 12 rounds, call for 2 hits, and in the game they were "maybe" hitting once and then of course they weren't causing damage either. Have you ever played anybody who used a Stuka, and you in game terms feared it? If I see anything heading for my tanks, I expect about 50% of the time, or better, if the tank is hit I've lost it, and yet "maybe" 10% of the time, if that, the Stukas achieved success.
Basically, be the Stuka bomb-laden or not, the people can't believe that something that enjoyed such a fame for tank-busting could do so awfully. I understand that the bomb-laden version would be more effective against the Poles and Brits, than against T34s, and hopefully people consider that, but anytime I used them against the most ordinary thin-skinned tank, top hit or not, they were just useless. The ME110 was more effective.
|
Printable Version
Historical versus game - 
- 
- 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread