Remember, there are different types of deflection shots. A deflection shot at a target 100 m away from its 5 or 7 o'clock (i.e., 30 degrees or less deflection) where your speed is almost the same as the target's is very different from a "crossing shot" at a target 300 meters away, going 500 kph, from its 3 or 9 o'clock (90 degrees of deflection).

While we're mostly in agreement, consider the alternate scheme

Untrained - Doesn't do deflection shooting. Aims guns right where the target is, ignoring things like deflection, target speed and bullet drop. Starts shooting from well outside of effective range of guns. Shoots long continuous bursts of fire that that jam guns.

Rookie - Doesn't take deflection shots from more than 45 degrees "angle off", has trouble with calculating target range and speed, leading them to vastly underestimate lead required for shots with more than 10 degrees of deflection. Might start shooting well outside effective range of guns, especially against large targets. Likely to use long continuous bursts of fire that jam guns.

Average - Doesn't take deflection shots from more than 60 degrees "angle off," has some trouble calculating target range and lead for shots with more than 20 degrees deflection. Occasionally shoots outside of effective range of guns. Sometimes takes long bursts that jam guns.

Veteran - Doesn't take deflection shots from more than 75 degrees "angle off" has some trouble calculating target range and lead for shots with more than 30 degrees deflection. Uses short "ranging bursts" to judge if fire hits, then attacks using repeated bursts of 1-2 seconds. Gun jam unlikely.

Ace - Doesn't take deflection shots from more than 90 degrees "angle off" (i.e., will shoot at target from any angle). Has some trouble calculating range and lead for shots with more than 45 degrees deflection. Uses short "ranging bursts" to judge if fire hits, then attacks using repeated bursts of 1-2 seconds. Gun jam unlikely.

Also, a possibility is that a pilot's chance to hit with a deflection shot might be something like SQRT ((100 - degrees of deflection) * modifier for pilot skill / modifier for range to target / modifier for size of target / modifier for target speed relative to attacker) = % chance of hitting. That is, even a rookie ought to be able to get a fair percentage of hits with a low deflection shot, but even an ace ought to have trouble hitting with a high deflection shot against a fast-moving target.

Additionally, all but Ace pilots should be much more timid about getting close to their enemies. Rookie to Veteran should try to shoot from the default convergence ranges for their guns - typically 300 m.

And, now that I think of it, only having fighters attack from the convergence range of their guns is a great way to make IL2 AI combat less lethal. For example, British doctrine in 1939 was to have their guns converge at 450 yards! In mid 1940 this was amended to 250 feet. This despite the fact that your typical rifle caliber MG isn't that effective against against aircraft beyond 100-200 m. By contrast, most aces preferred to have their guns harmonized to converge at 50 (Erich Hartmann) to 150 m (James Lacey and a number of USAAF aces).

Given that just about every list of advice for novice fighter pilots from Boelke's Dicta on emphasizes the need to get close before shooting, that implies that most pilots WEREN'T getting close. Making a Rookie to Average pilot start shooting at 500 m and stay outside of the gun convergence point (e.g., at 300-400 m) would make "Average vs. Average" combats much less lethal, even without fixing deflection shooting.

I'm hoping that folks from TD will read this, pick up on the data and ideas we've presented and make them their own.

In fairness to TD, I think that the work they've done on AI in 4.12 and 4.13 is magnificent. Due to their hard work, it's now actually challenging to fly against Average or better AI.

Even better, at least in 1 vs. 1 combat, planes actually behave like they were reported to do so historically. For example, fly a single Average AI Spitfire Mk IX vs. a single Ace AI P-47D-10 and you'll usually get the same results that Robert Johnson described flying a mock dogfight against a Spitfire pilot.

My only complaints are that AI still has some trouble with squadron level tactics, AI at all levels is more aggressive than they were historically - at least in QMB missions, and badly damaged planes still make stupid decisions (e.g., not immediately trying to run for friendly territory when badly damaged, not having the crew bail out until it's too late when flying over wooded or hilly territory).

So, while I might seem like I'm complaining, I'm actually trying to further "polish the gem."

Well, I was actually the one who started this conversation and I couldn't agree more those things that has been said untill now. And Pursuivant just was quick enough to tell my thoughts about polishing this great sim.

no update this Friday...

:(

:(

What about night fighter and radar :))))))))) ?

Update is ready, but we experience small technical problems with uploading it. It will be up, as soon, as the problem resolved.

Thanks for the heads up

We would like to post an update but the thread is locked.

While waiting it to be opened, we would like to post this as an update:
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/bombardier.jpg

Thanks to major.kudo :D