65 replies to this topic

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

I'll be using this thread to display and discuss my findings of aircraft's performance and how they affect the meta.

My first analysis is the comparison of the stats given off of the comparison part of the web site, 

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 24 November 2017 - 02:38 PM.

[SpiritFoxMY]

Ooooh. Thanks! This'll be great :p

[SpiritFoxMY]

Are there any soft/hidden stats to these planes?

[gmann14]

Super helpful and Thank you

Are you planning on adding other tiers as well?

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

SpiritFoxMY, on 24 November 2017 - 03:26 AM, said:

Are there any soft/hidden stats to these planes?

 

Yes, for example, your maximum damage output depends on your range (i.e the closer you are the more the bullets hit and the higher muzzle velocity they have).

Another one is turn time, this has to be found empirically but your turn time depends on your speed and altitude. The graph of turn time looks a bit like a bell curve. The radius of the turn should also be able to be found from this.

Climb rate depends on your speed and angle.

Acceleration with and without boost also has to be found empirically.

It will take a long time to compile but it'll certainly be useful stuff. 

 

Yes I'll be adding more tiers, it will just take a while to get through one.

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 24 November 2017 - 01:12 PM.

[J311yfish]

Neat

[Mercsn]

SpiritFoxMY, on 23 November 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

Are there any soft/hidden stats to these planes?

 

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 24 November 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

 

Yes, for example, your maximum damage output depends on your range (i.e the closer you are the more the bullets hit and the higher muzzle velocity they have).

Another one is turn time, this has to be found empirically but your turn time depends on your speed and altitude. The graph of turn time looks a bit like a bell curve. The radius of the turn should also be able to be found from this.

Climb rate depends on your speed and angle.

Acceleration with and without boost also has to be found empirically.

It will take a long time to compile but it'll certainly be useful stuff.

 

Yes I'll be adding more tiers, it will just take a while to get through one.

 

We learned in Beta that auto-aim coefficient was a soft stat and could differ for each class, caliber, and aircraft.

 

 

With the way the new marksman perks are worded and the fact that somebody recently reminded me of a website that had pulled out this data from the game files, I would imagine auto-aim is still a soft stat that (as another player suggested) is boosted by the perks.   So, a GA with auto-aim coefficient of zero would benefit very little from having marksmen perks (simply a reduction of dispersion), while a craft/weapon combo that high auto-aim coefficient would have a much greater benefit from marksmen perk, for example.

 

This is definitely a hidden stat, that if actually still present in the game, should definitely be included.

 

 

[trikke]

beautiful job, FW!

 

I would love to help in some way, just PM me and we'll jump on curse, discord or TS and just tell me what i can do to help!

 

i'm available to help US EST 9am to 3pm

Edited by trikke, 01 December 2017 - 03:09 PM.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

I'm not too confident about these results.

Blue is Spit I, orange is Spit V.

What I did was pull the stick all the way back and adjust the throttle to get the desired speed. Speed varied by about plus or minus 7 km/h. Time was rounded to 1 digit and was me letting go of the stick with one hand to start a timer on my phone.

The turn circle was determined by eyeballing when the plane course projector on the radar passed one of the compass points.

 

What I think we're seeing has to do with the optimum speed differences between the planes. The Sipt V's is higher so it will less gradually have a slower turn.

Ways to improve the test:

record the training room and determine variances in speed, beginning/end of turn, and time by the frame.

[trikke]

crap, i'm not so good at reading graphs...   is each dot a complete tight circle at the dif airspeeds?

 

if so, the V consistently turns 8 second circles from 180 until 300 km/h IAS, and still-phenomenal nine seconds at 340?

 

while the spit 1 tight turn drops off dramatically at around 300?      (note to metric-impaired fellow muricans...  180 km/h = 112 mph, 300 = 186 mph)

 

 

i never think to check my IAS while in a DF... until it's too late

 

dammit, yet another post-it note goes up on the monitor bezel, just to be ignored             maybe a red one, and use a sharpie this time?

 

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

Each dot is a full circle. Yes. I'm not to confident with my results for the Spitfire 1. I may have been looping up and down more than turning level. I'm going to try again more accurately.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

Here's a better graph for the Spitfire 1.

As I get more data I'll update the graph.

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 17 December 2017 - 09:38 PM.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

Allow me to explain the meaning of the graph.

On the ingame UI:

Stall speed for the Spit I is at 120 km/h.

Yellow speed is from 130km/h to 170 km/h.

White speed is from 170km/h to 400km/h.

Speed then goes to yellow again from 400km/h to 600km/h.

Red again from 600km/h to 680km/h.

What the graph shows is the time it takes to complete a full level 360 degree turn at a specific speed.

And what you get is something quite different from how it used to be.

Here's an outdated graph showing the same variables.

http://forum.worldofwarplanes.eu/index.php?/topic/18947-thrust-and-extended-flaps/

As you can see, turning time got significantly worse the slower you go. Which, makes sense. You're going slower which means you will take more time to complete the turn.

However, take a look at this turn radius graph.

Turning radius stays consistent below 300km/h because the longer turning time, and the smaller circumference of the turn you should get from going slower cancel out.

Have a look at a turn radius graph for 2.0

Your best turn is literally at 170km/h. Because the turn time stays the same, and therefore your circumference becomes smaller.

If this isn't different flight physics than I don't know what is.  

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 19 December 2017 - 03:45 AM.

[Mercsn]

As I noted in another recent thread where someone mentioned that Priola said the FM didn't change, just characteristics, I said that she may not have been entirely forthcoming and that in the past, besides their secrecy in development issues, WG has been blatantly dishonest.  Get someone to post this on the EU or RU forums and WG will say this is some bug they are addressing.  Just like when I first caught them in pictures, lying about the inclusion of aim-assist.

[ARCNA442]

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 19 December 2017 - 03:43 AM, said:

Your best turn is literally at 170km/h. Because the turn time stays the same, and therefore your circumference becomes smaller.

If this isn't different flight physics than I don't know what is.  

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The numbers are different but your graphs look to me like they are showing the same general behavior in both versions of the game.

[comtedumas]

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 23 November 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

I'll be using this thread to display and discuss my findings of aircraft's performance and how they affect the meta.

My first analysis is the comparison of the stats given off of the comparison part of the web site, 

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

 

on one side you have metric numbers, could you put imperial on the other?  

[trikke]

mnbv_fockewulfe, on 18 December 2017 - 10:43 PM, said:

Your best turn is literally at 170km/h. Because the turn time stays the same, and therefore your circumference becomes smaller.

If this isn't different flight physics than I don't know what is.  

 

170 km/h is about 100 mph, which is not far from stall speed

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

ARCNA442, on 19 December 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The numbers are different but your graphs look to me like they are showing the same general behavior in both versions of the game.

 

What the graph for 2.0 turn radius of the spitfire shows is that lift increases as you get slower until it doesn't. That isn't anywhere close to how it works IRL and the game before 2.0

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

comtedumas, on 19 December 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

 

on one side you have metric numbers, could you put imperial on the other?

 

I'll reformat the OP to better display the information I collect. And yes, I can put it in imperial.

Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 20 December 2017 - 02:19 AM.

[mnbv_fockewulfe]

I've got a hunch why BnZ is less effective in 2.0.

Climb rates were increased by more than 100%. Before when the highest climb rate for a fighter in T6 was around 24m/s, planes in the same tier now climb at around 50m/s. Altitude compression wasn't changed as far as I know, which means that before if you how 1,000m above your opponent, you actually had 3,000m of potential energy over him. Now its easier for planes to climb that 1,000m, but the dive rate for planes wasn't changed (speculation in need of testing). This means that you get the same amount of kinetic energy as you would before, and those rates are balanced for having half the climb rate as we have now. This means when you dive 1,000m you don't get more kinetic energy than the opponent below you. So when you climb away, he matches you in kinetic energy and has a similar climb rate meaning you can't escape by climbing.