Air Superiority Competition Unlimited Re-Continued - Now in KSP 1.4 and BDA 1.2!

[Box of Stardust]

7 hours ago, goduranus said:

Normally, to add 100kN you'd have to add 1.5 tons, not just weight of the extra engines, but also counterweight elsewhere to maintain balance, extra fuel to push the extra weight and maintain the same endurance, as well as weight of extra wings to lift the added weight. Allowing text editing engines would increase of planes' maneuverability far more than one might expect. There's really no downside to compensate for this advantage that text editing brings.

You could still argue heat signature though.

[Box of Stardust]

Continuing going through the remaining 1.3.1 queue.

@dundun92's Du-6S 'Diode' vs Gunbrick.

Let me get this out of the way: Du-6S wins the prize for being the most impressively non-compliant to fly in a formation. It turns out there's an important reason for this, but I'll get to that in the analysis. For now though, that's the explanation as to why formations are so wonky in this one- because I had to do screwy things to get them to fly as close as they do when I started the battle.

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

The Du-6S has absolutely awful roll control.

Diode is cool, it's stylish, and it doesn't want to roll at all.

This prevents it from flying in formation, because the BD AI will always roll the aircraft to turn into the direction of combat. Because it has terrible roll control, all the aircraft would be too desynchronized to fly, then they'd go in all directions.

For actual combat, roll control is also important, but that's not the only contributor to its loss.

Oh, and another thing- Diode also has no vertical control surfaces, meaning it has no significant yaw control other than the reaction wheels either.

Again, Diode has MLRS- two, actually, which could be a feasible idea separately- to break merges, but then, it's programmed to fight as a merge aircraft with its slow speed of 225m/s. Two opposing strategies on the same aircraft will not work against the pure merge aircraft, Gunbrick.

Gunbrick is given enough time to recover and turn back to re-initiate merging, at which point it wins, likely due to better stability and ability to do minute flight adjustments with a proper control surface layout.

 

[Box of Stardust]

Next up is @dundun93's A26, an actual, properly designed aircraft this time. It's got an MLRS and a Big-S Strake-based design like the Squirrels and my various ASPEN aircraft.

Perhaps this has a good shot at beating Gunbrick?

 

 

Bonus battles considered 'invalidated' due to... things happening.

Spoiler

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

A26 seems good enough, but it doesn't actually have enough tools to beat Gunbrick. It's fast, which works to rush in while the Gunbricks are routed, but that's not enough. It's also decently maneuverable, but as Gunbrick and TFD 2.1 proved, excessive firepower is a far more valid solution in specific situations.

Though this specific information may be outdated once we move into BDA 1.2, let's talk about having 'tools'.

The MLRS pre-routing device is a tool that breaks merges. That's it, that's all it does.

After launching the PRD, A26 is just a gunfighter. That is, unfortunately, not enough to beat the ultimate gunfighter (well, other than TFD 2.1), especially once you're playing its game.

It does not have the excessiveness of TFD 2.1 to get gun kills easily, and it ends up missing the first gun pass against the routed Gunbricks.

It has no missiles to back its guns up, which also, very importantly, serve as suppression tools to keep the Gunbricks routed and also herd them away to further take advantage of the PRD merge-breaking, and eventually allow the attacking aircraft to come in and catch the Gunbricks in much worse positions. As it is, the Gunbricks are only routed once, then continue to evade towards the A26's initial direction, which makes the match transition into the dogfight stage. In the dogfight stage, no missiles means no breaking head-on jousts, or routing the enemy again.

And again, A26 as a pure gunfighter is not enough to kill the ultimate gunfighter.

Not just that, but A26 lacks sufficient yaw control and some stability in general, due to having fixed vertical tail surfaces, which may have contributed to the inability to get passing kills, relying on head-on or from-the-rear gun kills. It also showed an alarming tendency to flat spin out, though recovery is not too difficult either.

In the bonus battles, one A26 manages to off itself launching the MLRS somehow, and in another, the AI glitches out and tries to actually play Kerbal Space Program. A dead Gunbrick also manages to damage an A26 in its post-death turret mode, which is the first time it's actually managed such a thing.

 

 

Lastly, I realized I (partially) screwed up following the new leaderboard rules, so @dundun92's Du-5Rs and Du-6S (ugh; I'm just gonna let this thing fly in a messed up formation), as well as the A26 will be tested against the Tier 2 board according to the new leaderboard rules.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Box of Stardust said:

Next up is @dundun93's A26, an actual, properly designed aircraft this time. It's got an MLRS and a Big-S Strake-based design like the Squirrels and my various ASPEN aircraft.

Perhaps this has a good shot at beating Gunbrick?

 

 

Bonus battles considered 'invalidated' due to... things happening.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Battle Report:

Analysis:

A26 seems good enough, but it doesn't actually have enough tools to beat Gunbrick. It's fast, which works to rush in while the Gunbricks are routed, but that's not enough. It's also decently maneuverable, but as Gunbrick and TFD 2.1 proved, excessive firepower is a far more valid solution in specific situations.

Though this specific information may be outdated once we move into BDA 1.2, let's talk about having 'tools'.

The MLRS pre-routing device is a tool that breaks merges. That's it, that's all it does.

After launching the PRD, A26 is just a gunfighter. That is, unfortunately, not enough to beat the ultimate gunfighter (well, other than TFD 2.1), especially once you're playing its game.

It does not have the excessiveness of TFD 2.1 to get gun kills easily, and it ends up missing the first gun pass against the routed Gunbricks.

It has no missiles to back its guns up, which also, very importantly, serve as suppression tools to keep the Gunbricks routed and also herd them away to further take advantage of the PRD merge-breaking, and eventually allow the attacking aircraft to come in and catch the Gunbricks in much worse positions. As it is, the Gunbricks are only routed once, then continue to evade towards the A26's initial direction, which makes the match transition into the dogfight stage. In the dogfight stage, no missiles means no breaking head-on jousts, or routing the enemy again.

And again, A26 as a pure gunfighter is not enough to kill the ultimate gunfighter.

Not just that, but A26 lacks sufficient yaw control and some stability in general, due to having fixed vertical tail surfaces, which may have contributed to the inability to get passing kills, relying on head-on or from-the-rear gun kills. It also showed an alarming tendency to flat spin out, though recovery is not too difficult either.

In the bonus battles, one A26 manages to off itself launching the MLRS somehow, and in another, the AI glitches out and tries to actually play Kerbal Space Program. A dead Gunbrick also manages to damage an A26 in its post-death turret mode, which is the first time it's actually managed such a thing.

 

 

Lastly, I realized I (partially) screwed up following the new leaderboard rules, so @dundun92's Du-5Rs and Du-6S (ugh; I'm just gonna let this thing fly in a messed up formation), as well as the A26 will be tested against the Tier 2 board according to the new leaderboard rules.

I've been in 3rd place twice actually.(Du-3, Du-1b), and the TFD was in first once. So we classify as veterans, right?

[Box of Stardust]

Last one for the night.

@dundun92's Du-5Rs goes on the offense against #6 spot, @ZLM-Master's V-TEK.

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

So I figured out why Du-5Rs was still exploding. Its wingspan is wide enough to tip missiles if it doesn't clear the MLRS launch fast enough. It can be partially mitigated by spacing out the formation a bit, since the Du-5Rs is quite a compliant formation-flier (unlike the Du-6S).

As for the battle, we get to see a bit more of the Du-5Rs's actual capabilities in this one. Unfortunately, it still runs too hot to be a truly effective merge killer; Panthers just run too hot, even in dry mode, meaning the V-TEKs could lock Sidewinders onto them.

That's not to say Du-5Rs's merge strategy was totally ineffective. It did work on a few occasions. As well, the slow speed helped it make tight turns, making it an okay dogfighter.

However, V-TEK was significantly faster than Du-5Rs, fast enough to outrun the Du-5Rs to fly to safety and line up for another pass. Its missiles also, again, warded off attempted jousting by the Du-5Rs.

V-TEK also has its interesting construction quality that allows it to survive gunfire, even if not completely, which then instead has the possibility to turn a damaged V-TEK into very good bait.

Du-5Rs will continue downwards to face the Dart II next.

 

10 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

I've been in 3rd place twice actually.(Du-3, Du-1b), and the TFD was in first once. So we classify as veterans, right?

Yup. But you're only barred from Tier 2 if you already have 2+ aircraft currently in Tier 1. Which kind of only really applies to me right now.

Edited May 9, 2018 by Box of Stardust

[53miner53]

On 5/7/2018 at 10:09 PM, goduranus said:

Normally, to add 100kN you'd have to add 1.5 tons, not just weight of the extra engines, but also counterweight elsewhere to maintain balance, extra fuel to push the extra weight and maintain the same endurance, as well as weight of extra wings to lift the added weight. Allowing text editing engines would increase of planes' maneuverability far more than one might expect. There's really no downside to compensate for this advantage that text editing brings.

Not always, with F3Mk2 and P-5a(release pending additional improvements), F3Mk2 I just needed to remove a pair of canards to bring CoL back to CoM, and P-5 I doubled the engine count without needing to change wings to compensate. Text editing would allow for lower mass and less parts, but would make sidewinder lock easier, so if you’re trying to go full stealth, like I am with P-5, then you probably would go with the extra engines instead.

[Dimas152]

oh man i think all of my manned fighter will lose against them
DAT HYPER-MANEUVERABILITY 
DAT MISSILE AND GUN SPAM
kek

[goduranus]

3 hours ago, 53miner53 said:

Not always, with F3Mk2 and P-5a(release pending additional improvements), F3Mk2 I just needed to remove a pair of canards to bring CoL back to CoM, and P-5 I doubled the engine count without needing to change wings to compensate. Text editing would allow for lower mass and less parts, but would make sidewinder lock easier, so if you’re trying to go full stealth, like I am with P-5, then you probably would go with the extra engines instead.

Can you check if you cover up the engine with wings or structural fuselage it will make IR missiles harder to get a lock? I remember the BDArmory wiki saying you can get around engine heat by keeping it out of IR missile's line of sight, but I have never tested this mechanic conclusively. 

If this were true, then you can edit the engine to go as hot as you want and the opponent won't see anything hotter than ambient temperature.

[53miner53]

11 minutes ago, goduranus said:

Can you check if you cover up the engine with wings or structural fuselage it will make IR missiles harder to get a lock? I remember the BDArmory wiki saying you can get around engine heat by keeping it out of IR missile's line of sight, but I have never tested this mechanic conclusively. 

If this were true, then you can edit the engine to go as hot as you want and the opponent won't see anything hotter than ambient temperature.

TBH, I don’t know how to get to BDA’s debug menu to find the values. I could test by shooting planes with sidewinders though... 

[ZLM-Master]

@53miner53 In Game , Press ( ALT+B ) & Check BDA Debug ( Tick it ) You'll see additionnal BDA HuD .

[Box of Stardust]

1 hour ago, 53miner53 said:

TBH, I don’t know how to get to BDA’s debug menu to find the values. I could test by shooting planes with sidewinders though... 

When you open the BDA menu to run competitions, there's a box you can tick 'Debug Labels'.

Heat rating sort of corresponds with the hottest part on a craft (so, the engines), but seems to be a little more nuanced than that.

1 hour ago, goduranus said:

Can you check if you cover up the engine with wings or structural fuselage it will make IR missiles harder to get a lock? I remember the BDArmory wiki saying you can get around engine heat by keeping it out of IR missile's line of sight, but I have never tested this mechanic conclusively. 

If this were true, then you can edit the engine to go as hot as you want and the opponent won't see anything hotter than ambient temperature.

I asked on the BDA thread how heat seeking works, and it simply seeks out the hottest part on a craft; it is in no way occluded by parts in line of sight.

[Box of Stardust]

Continuing on, @dundun92's Du-5Rs vs @GillyMonster's Dart II.

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

With ECM and chaff, Du-5Rs was immune to Dart II's AMRAAMs, and Dart II was not programmed well enough to switch to Sidewinders (though if it had been, it probably would not have been able to beat the P-5 Flash). Du-5Rs is able to execute its air jousting strategy, one which Dart II was unprepared for.

Du-5Rs should still be noted that its wide wingspan still leads to frequent suicide by pre-routing device.

Du-5Rs settles in the #7 spot.

 

[goduranus]

9 hours ago, 53miner53 said:

TBH, I don’t know how to get to BDA’s debug menu to find the values. I could test by shooting planes with sidewinders though... 

Dang, never noticed heat values was in the debug menu I'm gonna check it out

[Box of Stardust]

Getting back to the Tier 2 runs for the ones I missed.

@dundun92's Du-6S Diode poor-formation-flier vs @ZLM-Master's V-TEK.

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

Again, done in by poor directional control. Diode has good pitch control, but that's not enough once the dogfight section gets going, so it can't point itself towards the targets to get those 10 Vulcans going.

V-TEK has Sidewinders to ward off the head-on passes in most cases, and it's a far more maneuverable craft.

Du-6S will continue its downward descent.

V-TEK has completed 6 defenses, and gets to go on re-advancement, luckily this time, against Gunbrick, the craft its generation of fighter is designed to beat. But can it win in the Re-Advancement 5v5? Let's find out...

 

[Box of Stardust]

@ZLM-Master's V-TEK goes on its Re-Advancement 5v5 vs Gunbrick.

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

It's over in two battles, with the V-TEKs unable to get enough kills or win a match to keep the 3-plane minimum needed to sortie out in the 5v5.

Excessiveness is a virtue, and I guess the 5v5 format plays into that to give Gunbrick the advantage. At this point though, I do wonder if 10 Vulcans is really 'excessive' compared to 16. Maybe it's the sweet spot of 'excessive enough, and not too much'.

Despite having Sidewinders, I guess all the Gunbricks were still too much. Even an early Sidewinder sinking a Gunbrick in Sortie #1 wasn't enough of an advantage. In general, it seemed like Sidewinder usage was lacking; I didn't notice too many Sidewinders firing as the battles developed.

I noticed that V-TEK was missing/taking too long on some of the gun kills in Sortie #1. I'm not really sure why, but maybe for some of them, it was because it was chasing a Gunbrick on the tail of another V-TEK, which was a threat of friendly fire.

Seemed to be a battle mostly of positioning, and the V-TEKs just couldn't get into the right positions with so many aircraft on the field. Possibly also too tight of a dogfight; V-TEKs couldn't get out to the ranges where they could switch back to Sidewinders.

But that's the 5v5 format for rematches, I guess. It's the replacement for exbyde's massive one-match 8v8s, which were also rare, but served less of a purpose in the overall leaderboard.

V-TEK remains in the #6 spot.

 

[Box of Stardust]

Last one for the night because my allergies are killing me.

@dundun92 faces off against himself, with Du-6S going up against Du-5Rs. Two pretty opposite aircraft- one that doesn't like to fly in formations at all, and one that flies in formation probably a little too well.

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Results:

Analysis:

The value in being able to turn.

Du-6S misses a lot of its gun passes just because it doesn't have enough control over its direction.

Meanwhile, Du-5Rs does just fine it pointing itself where it needs to be. Especially in the bonus battle... where it pretty much wins a 1v3.

Du-6S will continue downwards against Dart II... but I think we should all be sensing a common theme here.

 

Edited May 10, 2018 by Box of Stardust

[Box of Stardust]

@dundun92's Du-6S vs the remainder of the board:

 

vs @GillyMonster's Dart II

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

Again, being able to turn. And while Dart II is not optimized, it is still able to occasionally fire off its AMRAAMs, which aid it in getting better positions against the Du-6Ss.

 

 

vs @53miner53's P-5 Flash

Spoiler

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

Common theme.

P-5 has Sidewinders to help it gain better positioning. As well, its small size helps it evade when turning.

 

vs @Earthlinger's Berzerker 2.1

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

Berzerker doesn't use its Sidewinders too well, but it does occasionally. It gets into head-on jousts the most frequently of Du-6S's opponents I think, which is what catches it a few times. Still, it's able to turn and engage faster than Du-6S can, as long as it's not in those head-on jousts.

 

Ultimately, Du-6S does not place on the board.

 

[Box of Stardust]

@dundun93's A26 vs #6 spot, @ZLM-Master's V-TEK:

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

While A26 seems to have the speed and enough maneuverability, it doesn't have the stability to compete enough with V-TEK. It can point itself in the direction it needs to go, but once there, struggles to be accurate using its guns.

It also can't turn too hard, or else it risks going into a spin. Still, with good speed and maneuverability, it can at least get itself into decent positions to get the kills that it got.

By contrast, V-TEK is able to do accurate adjustments to its flight path very quickly, as demonstrated at the end of Sortie #2. I didn't notice a lot of significant Sidewinder usage in this battle, but it still came into play a few times.

 

[Box of Stardust]

Continuing the rush to get the 1.3.1 queue over with.

Two gunslingers face off in the next match. @dundun93's A26 vs @dundun92's Du-5Rs.

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

First, let me rant about these two planes.

Du-5Rs: has a tendency to kill itself if it turns too early after releasing its routing device.

A26: has an unstable landing gear configuration that can cause it to bobble left and right, has a strange tendency to not take off in a straight line, but rather turns slightly (usually to the left) from its initial starting direction, has a chance of killing itself if the routing device is released at the wrong time (sometimes induced because the opponent fired a routing device, but not always), and has a weird AI glitch/tendency to continue gaining altitude (not sure why, but the only other plane I know that did this was my PFC-spec Viper MkIV).

Okay!

Actual analysis.

Well, the A26 flight glitch certainly didn't help it in this match. But the Du-5Rs is a much larger target with easier to hit critical components than the V-TEK. It gets kills against Du-5Rs with relative ease, especially while flying in a straight line.

Unfortunately, it has its tendency to spin out, which costs it some maneuvering. Also, again, the glitch which makes it run away for the most part. Can't wait to get into BDA 1.2, where the AI is much, much smarter.

Du-5Rs is able to air joust at times with mixed results against another air jousting gunfighter. It's more stable and cooperative while maneuvering though, which is its most defining attribute in this battle.

The best example of a clean fight between the two was Sortie #3, where A26 was unable to get any kills in the first passes, and the Du-5Rss were able to turn around and get on their tails.

 

[Box of Stardust]

Last one for now.

@dundun93's A26 vs @GillyMonster's Dart II.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

Battle Report:

Analysis:

Sortie #1 was ended due to the last A26 running away so far that the Darts actually disengaged. I guess that's the first instance of this new thread of a battle ending without a full wipe of one side.

A26 can't use its full maneuvering capability due to its inherent instability, which really hinders it in combat. Center of lift appears to be on or ahead of center of mass, which is the cause of its frequent spinning out. But when it had the right positions, A26 was a decent enough gunfighter.

Funny enough, Dart II's trouble with the A26 is that its guns are mounted too wide, so when lined up behind the A26, the Dart can't hit it with its guns. Which, combined with A26's tendency to run away, prolonged these matches.

Still, being able to maintain stable flight and perform controlled maneuvering gives Dart II the edge it needed to win this battle, with A26 unable to maintain the reserve count it needed for one final sortie.

 

[GillyMonster]

@Box of Stardust thanks for the tests and analysis!  Thought this competition was dead.  Does anyone know if BDA has issues running multiple radar on one aircraft?

[Box of Stardust]

35 minutes ago, GillyMonster said:

@Box of Stardust thanks for the tests and analysis!  Thought this competition was dead.  Does anyone know if BDA has issues running multiple radar on one aircraft?

You can put multiple radars on aircraft, but I don't think it gets any utility out of them. I've tried it, to an extent, with forward and rear facing radars. The thing I haven't tried was mounting missiles facing backwards with it. 

The tricky thing, too, is getting BDA to actually use rear facing weapons, since it may require mixing weapon ranges to get utility out of them, and not even BDA 1.2 is smart enough for this, awesome as the AI is in the update. And next, firing the right weapon, which I have not seen it do; it was able to select a rear-facing Sidewinder against a chasing craft in my testing, but it wouldn't fire. 

Edited May 11, 2018 by Box of Stardust

[ZLM-Master]

Using Link data transmiter seem better than mutiple radar . 1st for your mass craft , plus you don't have to face ennemy if one other of your craft still pointing him . But with multiple radar you sure to cover 360° view , not sure with Data link ^^

[ZLM-Master]

@Box of Stardust The only test i've made is with reversed vulcan canon , & AI is able to fire with it ( the front canon not firering , only the rear one ) But it's always a few among of bullet in a very short wave ! ( 3 to 5 bullet rarely more ) May work better with some craft when they try to touch the sky ^^

For missile it's pretty hard because you general facing the tiny radar signature ( the front one )

[GillyMonster]

Thanks for the quick reply everyone.  I was just thinking if ECM compounds than maybe radar would too.