1.33.0.11 Readme - Aircraft Convergence unacceptable

[barkas]

Aircraft Gun Convergence:

- audited all minimum convergence to be 100m (was up to 250m)

- convergemnce ranges standardized 100m to 800m

If that is the case, we need the possibility to use conv below 100m.

I want my 50m back.

[madrebel]

you do realize 100m is probably still lower than what was possible IRL right?

spitfires as an example couldnt be harmonized below iirc 220m. i highly doubt 109s could be harmonized down to 100m. 150 maybe.

[eigenman]

If that is the case, we need the possibility to use conv below 100m.

I want my 50m back.

You never had 50M you just thought you had it. It never really went below 100M

[DOC]

This is true, you never had 50m to begin with.

There is a code clamp that fixes the minimum and no plane was able to go to 50m previously even though you could "set" it, you were still getting 100m, you just didn't know that's what was happening.

We tested 50 meters and it is almost stupidly short, at 75m no rounds would hit the target, so we left it at the previous 100m and just made sure the planes that were articiflayy limited to 150m and 200m were able to use 100m too.

That's all we did. No plane lost anything from before and a few gained something they didn't have before, ie: guns that will actually converge together where they didn't previously, unless you used a .conv at or OVER 200m

Most do not understand what we did because what they thought the system was doing something that it was not.

You can't have your 50m back because it was really 100m, and we didn't take that away with this improvement to the data structure.

[dabar0n]

This is true, you never had 50m to begin with.

There is a code clamp that fixes the minimum and no plane was able to go to 50m previously even though you could "set" it, you were still getting 100m, you just didn't know that's what was happening.

We tested 50 meters and it is almost stupidly short, at 75m no rounds would hit the target, so we left it at the previous 100m and just made sure the planes that were articiflayy limited to 150m and 200m were able to use 100m too.

That's all we did. No plane lost anything from before and a few gained something they didn't have before, ie: gins that will actually converge together where they didn't previously, unless you used a .conv at or OVER 200m

Most do not understand what we did because what they thought the system was doing something that it was not.

You can't have your 50m back because it was really 100m, and we didn't take that away with this improvement to the data structure.

Thank you DOC. I appreciate the explaination. Sorry for the firestorm I started by posting this in the hangar.

[DOC]

Follow up in greater detail:

The code covers a convergence range of 0 - 800m (that's the entire range available)

Because setting 0 causes weird bugs to occur, the bottom end of that range (user selectable) has to be a positive interger (for evidence look at a destroyers guns when range is set to 0)

Additionally, because less than 50m is ridiculous (we have tested it and even when set *AT* 50m the guns are only useful at 50m, with the target as little as 10 or 15 meters beyond that; the cross over post convergence point defeats you getting almost any hits on the target) ... so anyway the original coders that made all this, they chose 50m as the actual bottom end or minimum (it trumps the 0->49m the base code would allow in the 0->800 full range of the base engine code) ...

BUT

There is a data line in every aircraft's data component file which clamps the bottom or minimum convergance you can use. While some were set to 150m, and a couple of others at 200m (why was never documented but I have a theory that isn't important to our decision) ... this minconvergence over rules any other minimum that the code otherwise allows.

The lowest in any aircraft data file was 100m. None were lower than that and ALL have this line in them. So while you were for years routinely setting .conv 75 you were getting 100m. In the case of those with 150m or 200m then THAT was as low as they would be able to be set to.

In the case of those that had 3 different settings (The Bell Mle.14a for example had 3 different mimimums) unless you set the convergence at the high number (200m) you were prevented from getting all the guns to converge no matter what you chose.

This is clearly not very good. It means you cannot get a good concentration of gunfire although it does give a better shotgun effect at the cost of less bullets hitting the target.

So anyway, we decided to standardize them to give all pilots feeback that is consistant in all planes and that makes sense or follows a logical method, as well as better convergence fucntionality. We chose 100m because obviously, that was the lowest you had available for all these years. We're not making this up.

The Bf109E-1 is a good example. Because the weight of fire (only 4 x 7.9mm RCMGs) being light, players naturally set them short for the best firepower (as long as they weren't shooting at long ranges, which increases misses anyway) ... however the lowest you can set those (if I am to believe the code) is 150m, as this is the data minimum entered in it's component file.

The Bell Mle.14a had 1 setting for the RCMGs (100m) a different one for the .50's (150m) and another different one for the Hispano 20mm (200m) ... not good unless you want one gun to hit and all the others to converge at a different range.

So now you can set any planes guns to all converge at anything from 100m to 800m. some planes already followed this principle, eg: the Spitfire Mk.Ia had all guns minimums set at 100m

Oh, final note: the "200m default" is just so that ... if you don't set a convergance yourself, this is what you will get (in all planes) and it actually represents not just the best average of short and long convergences ... but the average of the ranges used by actual operational squadrons in WWII.

(the RAF favoured 225 yards in fact)

Late in the war the USAAF increased their convergence ranges because they had the K-14 lead computing gunsight and pilots at this time were being trained in gunnery that used 300 yards as their "best" range and 600 yards as their maximum effective range (with .50cal HMGs)

We obviously expect some to struggle at first because they have both years of ingrained habits related to "how I get hits when I shoot" (deflection, both vertical and horizontal) and because they will see what it is they believe, whether or not it is true.

Those that take a little time to understand what we have explained with this change, and spend even a little bit of time adapting to it (if needed, some won't need to adapt at all and these are the real sharpshooters already) .... I suspect the end result will be more kills and less damages. Expecting that improvement immediately might be a tad too much although I have no doubt some will achieve it.

Remember that in air combat, range from the target is always in flux, it is never constant. Picking a convergence that meets the most common "shooting distance" depends on the pilots style of flying and fighting (and shooting) ... and the shorter the range you pick the narrower is your range of variation from the target.

The reason why 200m is most often given as the best average is that it works from 50m to 350m, or even 400m if you're good and steady and your target is steady as well.

What you gain doing ->this<- you probably lose when the target does <-that-> ... it's an eternal compromise.

Work with it, find the compromise that suits you best.

[Ogg]

DOC I am curious about one thing.....

Can you set the slider for individual types of aircraft (as in the keymapper individual aircraft) or are the convergence setting going to be for all aircraft you fly?

[DOC]

feature not created yet, so unknown at this stage <- actual answer

I expect like other settings info, it will be saved per aircraft not global, unless you want it to be global <- what you could assume but subject to change answer

note: but why should I say this when if for any reason it cannot be done that way, I will have broken a promise I never made ? <- oh well such is life answer

A lot of times, this is why we say nothing until we are ready to say something.

[Ogg]

Soon DOC, very...... very SOON. thanks