Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Corsair performance?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> RE: Corsair performance? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 4:18:13 AM   
Stele


Posts: 85
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline 		Ike,

I fly only with the cockpit on, and no icons as well. Anything else would be like putting quarters in my computer.

Ki-43 is a lot of fun in the sim. The Zero is a lot of fun to fly in the sim. Although I've never flown any real WW2 plane, a lot of people have respect for IL2's flight model characteristics. All flight models seem to be pretty accurate from what I've read about the planes, although there are a few small issues.

I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes. I can't say that would happen in "IL2" unless circumstances favored the Corsair with almost an infinite number of factors. Then again I can't compare apples and oranges (IL2 and UV).

While flying in the server "Zekes vs Wildcat," which tries to be pretty accurate with their plane sets, the Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.

A patient and skilled Corsair pilot should come out of a fight even if outnumbered due to his speed, but I can't really see a few Corsairs downing over 100 Zekes. Your boom and zoom energy tactics will go on for so long and you'll be forced to extend away.

I can see kills that high if it was the Marianas Turkey Shoot, but that AAR seems to be the story of the 3 Musketeers and Team on steroids.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 31
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 5:58:06 AM   
Hornblower


Posts: 1361
Joined: 9/10/2003
From: New York'er relocated to Chicago
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tocaff

The Corsair was a deadly beast in the right hands and the Hellcats downed more Japanese planes than any other US fighter.  The Japanese designs were made obsolete by new US designs and their pilot training (poor) sent green replacements to the front as canon fodder.


They are the most effective fighter bar none...

(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 32
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 12:31:13 PM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: borner

Saldy, there is no way I know of to adjust the values of the planes. I think most poeple that are not "history" people, and are instead game designers, look at the wrong things when putting these games together. Example: the F4U had a great kill ratio, so it must be a better plane hands down. A large part of that was due to poor jap pilots more than anything else, by that state of the war.



Is it a better plane, yes. WAs the Hellcat, yes. Were they 11-19x better than the Japanese planes? No.

As you point out the declining quality of the pilots likely made up at least half of that kill ratio. The problem, or upside if you are the USA, is that UCV seems to take the total kill ratio including 44-45 into account so the planes mean that literally overnight the USA rules the skies.

(in reply to borner)
Post #: 33
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 4:09:41 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline 		The way I see it is Kido Butai and Corsairs are modeled too strong and F4Fs, P-40s too weak. If one plane is adjusted to a better level all should be adjusted.

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 34
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/2/2008 7:43:55 PM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		I don't know if it's so much a matter of how the individual aircraft are represented as it is the dynamics that allow so many of the friggin' things to be up flying around and engaging in combat.

I remember a lot of discussion on these forums back in the early post-release days about how the game system didn't handle air combat between large forces - and large forces against small ones - at all well. We may be remarking some of that residue, as I don't believe that aspect was addressed to any great degree in the patches.

I do agree with most of what has been said here about the over- and under-valuing of various airframes (Corsairs in particular seem egregious, but P-40s, P-38s, and F4Fs are mighty weak, although pilot experience and lousy leadership explain this to some degree, I think. I have fiddled with this in the editor, and it does show up on testing). I feel that there's more to the solution than just changing airplane performance values.

I hope that CF and AE do a better job. Remember how the "uber LBA" problem was "fixed?" If you check the values in the editor, you find that B-17s lost 1/3 of their bomb load, and B-24s lost 2/5. This is not the solution I wanted to see (and, by the way, you can't change that in the editor. You think you've saved such changes, but you don't. The database defaults back to the hard-coded values). The real problem, as I see it, is the ability to mass so many bombers for strikes (penalizing B-17s and B-24s by imposing additional fatigue and ops damage and loss penalties - as well as making them take forever to be repaired - is more maddening than satisfying, particularly when you see that no other aircraft types are made to suffer from these problems).

Again, it's a matter of having too much and being able to do too much with it. Kido Butai isn't invincible. It just lumps together in one hex and flies a couple hundred Zeroes overhead (with 90-experience pilots led by men who have better leadership ratings than god).

In passing, something I've noted along the way is that your best planes seem to be more susceptible to ops loss. When I hit the summary screen for the start of the next turn, I always mutter under my breath, when I see that I've lost some aircraft to operations, "Well, what is it this time? Some of my P-38s I waited so long to finally get? B-17s? Corsairs? (when I play as the Japanese, it's always Zeroes and Bettys)." I never seem to lose any Wirraways or Petes.

Well, 'nuff said. I used to run these ideas past y'all way back then and got called a horse's patoot (and worse) for my efforts. I hope that maybe some can see now that I wasn't completely full of sh1t - my glass is only half full, you see...


_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 35
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 1:40:08 AM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

The way I see it is Kido Butai and Corsairs are modeled too strong and F4Fs, P-40s too weak. If one plane is adjusted to a better level all should be adjusted.



Agreed, the F4F had a kill ratio of 4:1 by the end of the war but in UCV it is basically chopped liver before the Zeros. All the planes need to tend back towards the middle a bit more. The Zero is better than the F4F but not as much as the game says and the F4U and F6F aren't as superior to the Zero as they get credit for.

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 36
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 1:42:51 AM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski


I remember a lot of discussion on these forums back in the early post-release days about how the game system didn't handle air combat between large forces - and large forces against small ones - at all well. We may be remarking some of that residue, as I don't believe that aspect was addressed to any great degree in the patches.

Again, it's a matter of having too much and being able to do too much with it. Kido Butai isn't invincible. It just lumps together in one hex and flies a couple hundred Zeroes overhead (with 90-experience pilots led by men who have better leadership ratings than god).



The game does have issues with scaling engagements but I've lived with the 20 planes fight 200 and lose 1 with the "they just ran away" logic. ;)

The thing with the KB is that it isn't the Zero or the pilots but the sheer overhwleming mass of Zeros it puts in the air since the group doesn't operate separately and since the F4F's are undervalued they can blow through any CAP. Still, even with that the carrier on carrier fight always tend to be indecisive since both side are basically gonna burn badly in the exchange.

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 37
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 1:59:02 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes.


Ahh, I haven´t read those reports. But even how great the Corsair is, ammunition would still be a limiting factor on shoot down number for number of planes engaged.

quote:

Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.


It´s a monster for the Zero. It´s faster, climbs better and dives better. Has everything but turning in dominating fasion. The Zero can be ¨boomed and zoomed¨ at will by it. The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision.

Yes, it´s extremely hard to bring down as well for me too. Even with the 20mm cannon you need about every round in close or you may as well forget it. I shoot for the wing roots in 6 oclock. Unless somehow I can get a decent deflection shot and hit the engine with a burst of 20mm cannon.

The Hellcat, hmmm, great Zero pilot could give the Hellcat some trouble I think.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 7/3/2008 2:15:50 AM >

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 38
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 3:37:42 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ILCK
The game does have issues with scaling engagements but I've lived with the 20 planes fight 200 and lose 1 with the "they just ran away" logic. ;)

Me, too, but what about when they shoot down 40 or so before Sir Robinning?

quote:

The thing with the KB is that it isn't the Zero or the pilots but the sheer overhwleming mass of Zeros it puts in the air since the group doesn't operate separately and since the F4F's are undervalued they can blow through any CAP. Still, even with that the carrier on carrier fight always tend to be indecisive since both side are basically gonna burn badly in the exchange.


Concur.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to ILCK)
Post #: 39
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 2:08:11 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99

quote:

I've seen the after action reports here on the forum and some seem to be extreme for just a handful of Corsairs and 38s up against over 100 Zekes.


Ahh, I haven´t read those reports. But even how great the Corsair is, ammunition would still be a limiting factor on shoot down number for number of planes engaged.

quote:

Corsair is a beast to go up against when flying the Zero. If I fly the Zero the only way I'll ever get a kill on a Corsair is if he starts turning with me, I dive on him, or I creep up on his six low. Even if I do get hits on him the Corsair will come out with scrapes and bruises.


It´s a monster for the Zero. It´s faster, climbs better and dives better. Has everything but turning in dominating fasion. The Zero can be ¨boomed and zoomed¨ at will by it. The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision.

Yes, it´s extremely hard to bring down as well for me too. Even with the 20mm cannon you need about every round in close or you may as well forget it. I shoot for the wing roots in 6 oclock. Unless somehow I can get a decent deflection shot and hit the engine with a burst of 20mm cannon.

The Hellcat, hmmm, great Zero pilot could give the Hellcat some trouble I think.



thats very true. there are more then one reports of japanese aces bringing down several hellcats but i know no reports of the same success of japanese pilots against corsairs.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 40
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/3/2008 2:17:57 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99
The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision.



...And your reasoning is?

< Message edited by SuluSea -- 7/3/2008 2:32:33 PM >

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 41
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/4/2008 5:13:07 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

...And your reasoning is?


Really hard to describe events with words for dogfights. That´s why you always see pilots, no matter where they´re from talking with their hands simulating the planes, but I´ll try.

The Corsair is faster, climbs better and dives better than the Zero.

Now as in a real fight the one person on top of another has an advantage over the other because of gravity. In air combat case...

A good Corsair pilot would, starting equal altitude, use his superior speed and climb rate to first climb to gain an altitude advantage over the Zero pilot. Then he would close to attack.

His extra altitude over the Zero would give him more energy to spend when he closes to start the actual dogfight.

He gets a good altitude advantage over the Zero, dives down to attack on the Zero, preferably from an angle making the Zero use up as much of his energy early as possible. The Zero must turn up, to meet the attack head on, or perform a defensive move to avoid the attack.

If the Zero pilot turns up into the diving Corsair, the Corsair has the huge advantage of plane durability. Even if both the Zero and Corsair hit each other with guns, the Zero will probably be a flaming wreck and the Corsair still flying.

If they miss each other with guns, after his dive the Corsair pilot keeps his speed up and goes into a climbing turn to repeat the same attack down onto the Zero.

¨Boom and Zoom¨

The Zero is forced to turn up and around to prepare for the Corsairs next attack but this pilot is losing more energy, getting slower and slower, easier and easier to kill because it is a less performance plane to start with and started the fight at altitude (energy) disadvantage. Less reserve energy.



Until finally, the Zero pilot is all out of energy and stalls, then gets killed or, chooses not to stall his plane but also not get the nose of his Zero around to meet the next attack and gets killed by diving deflection shot.

If the Zero chooses not to go head to head against the Corsair, to perform a defensive move and avoid the diving Corsairs guns the Corsair follows through on his dive and repeats the above mentioned attack again and again. The Zero will eventually run out of altitude, when he is out of altitude he will be out of the reserve energy needed to perform the defensive move to avoid the diving Corsairs guns.

So he stalls, crashes into ocean or land, or gets killed by diving deflection shot as mentioned above.

None of that probably made much sense but as mentioned before, it´s almost impossible to describe with words alone.

< Message edited by Ike99 -- 7/4/2008 5:16:23 AM >

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 42
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/4/2008 3:45:18 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline 		Thanks, given your basis of reasoning you just stated the Zero I highly doubt would win 50% much less than the 99%. You can bet all known tactics were used by Japanese Air and given the success rate of Corsair pilots very few were successful. Given the Zeros fragile airframe in comparison to Corsairs and other U.S. aircraft a head on attack would have more than likely ended with the same 11-1 ratio if not worse.

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 43
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/4/2008 6:35:01 PM   
Stele


Posts: 85
Joined: 7/21/2007
Status: offline 		I think one factor not discussed is communication between the pilots. The Japanese doctrine required their fighters to attack, attack, attack. Fly the plane from point A (start), to point B (bandit). The Zeros did not have radio, except for maybe one or two designated planes, but they weren't used for communication between the pilots. At best, the Japanese pilots communicated through hand signals, but even then that was limited in combat.

The American pilots relied on radio communication extensively, and it was essential that it be used in combat to coordinate some strategies like the "sandwich." This was a huge asset in overwhelming even the best Japanese pilot's situational awareness. If you can't beat him with one on one tactics, then you use 2 on 1 or 10 on 1.

To look at just the plane alone in comparison against another isn't enough to say "that's why it won every time." Numerous factors come in to play. By the end of the war the Japanese had formidable fighters like the Ki-84 and J2M3, but it was almost pointless to launch them in the air when those particular planes required a lot of piloting experience and when the enemy is launching armadas of wings after you.

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 44
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/5/2008 3:44:29 AM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

To look at just the plane alone in comparison against another isn't enough to say "that's why it won every time." Numerous factors come in to play. By the end of the war the Japanese had formidable fighters like the Ki-84 and J2M3, but it was almost pointless to launch them in the air when those particular planes required a lot of piloting experience and when the enemy is launching armadas of wings after you.


Japanese had some very good late war fighters able to stand up to Corsair but they were too few, too late, to make much difference.

KI-84, great plane.

quote:

Thanks, given your basis of reasoning you just stated the Zero I highly doubt would win 50% much less than the 99%.


I either wrote that wrong or you misunderstood me. In a head to head pass the Corsair will win 99% of the time. Perhaps that´s an exagerration but the odds are extremely low.

quote:

Ike99-The best I would think one could do in a Zero against a Corsair, smart human vs smart human is get a head to head attack. You know who will win that exchange 99% of the time minus a collision...Even if both the Zero and Corsair hit each other with guns, the Zero will probably be a flaming wreck and the Corsair still flying.


< Message edited by Ike99 -- 7/5/2008 4:41:52 AM >

(in reply to Stele)
Post #: 45
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/5/2008 5:30:30 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99
I either wrote that wrong or you misunderstood me. In a head to head pass the Corsair will win 99% of the time. Perhaps that´s an exagerration but the odds are extremely low.

I understood your point, Ike. Simple misunderstanding, I think.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 46
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/7/2008 6:08:16 PM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		I'll shock people and say something nice about the Zero. It had excellent stall properties. In the hands of an extremely experience pilot, with enough fuel, a Zero might survive an encounter with a bunch of corsairs. Something like that was documented, anecdotally, for a Ki-43 dueling with a bunch of P-38s over New Guinea in Bergerud's FitS. The Ki-43 hadn't a prayer of nailing one of the lightnings as they were doing all high energy attacks, but the Ki-43 spoiled multiple attack runs by multiple lightning drivers until the latter just shrugged and left the Japanese pilot alone.

The problem for post-1942 Zeke drivers was that survival wasn't their mission. Downing enemy a.c. was, and that demanded that they stay in the fight and try to win, rather than merely fly to survive. And unless most of them were as good as that Ki-43 driver, the performance differences between their planes and the F4U pretty much made their situation hopeless.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 47
RE: Corsair performance? - 7/8/2008 1:01:15 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ike99





quote:

Thanks, given your basis of reasoning you just stated the Zero I highly doubt would win 50% much less than the 99%.


I either wrote that wrong or you misunderstood me. In a head to head pass the Corsair will win 99% of the time. Perhaps that´s an exagerration but the odds are extremely low.




I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, Ike and the rest of the members of this forum.


_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 48
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> RE: Corsair performance? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.844