I appreciate you to keep our promise first. watched all of video and thought you seem to find the effectiveness of this build. The fundamental of Nosferatu is making optimal skill-set based on speed-oriented equipment-set. Even though there are some skill-sets I recommend, another having a little difference can also exist. Nosferatu was made to intend to make F7U optimized. However this build (both original and branch) can be applied other aircrafts having similarly characteristic and I also applied to Me 262 and Me 109 TL and now I am trying to apply to others. Getting experience to play many aircrafts with this build will help you to play F7U well.
I plan to keep working my skills with this setup. F7U was my first tier x so it is close to my heart and I want to get better with it. I'm sure I will eventually have the skills to post gameplay that properly showcases the build. Thank you again for sharing your build and skills plan.
I think your understanding of dispersion vs accuracy in the game engine is off a little, though. Pre-2.0, it was more visible to players, but I have pierced together from a few developer comments a few details: 1) Developers commented on WoT that letting all tanks use their hull MGs would cause too much server lag, yet, in WoWP, the average plane is during way more individual guns, thus, I do not believe every individual bullet is modeled. Rather, a DoT calculation is performed independent of the client-side animation of your bullets. 2) In v1, each aircraft had a predictive autoaim circles in front of it. One for each of your weapon types. Placing your crosshairs within this circle resulted in autoaim hits. GA aircraft did not have autoaim at all. 3) Centered around your crosshairs are the dispersion rings for each of your weapon types. It is distinctly possible the autoaim ring is around the crosshairs and the dispersion ring is the leading indicator. The result is the same either way. 4) When you fire a given weapon, a calculation is performed and the DoT applied to the target is determined by multiplying your weapon DPS by the fraction of autoaim to dispersion ring volumetric overlap, (possibly with a bell curve gradient applied), and the ratio of target hitbox area to dispersion ring area at the target's range. Taken together, this means that raising accuracy not only increases your chances of hitting, but also makes it easier to fit your entire dispersion ring inside the autoaim ring for maximum DoT. Reducing dispersion increases damage applied to small and distant targets as they will fill more of the dispersion ring, but may make the edge of the autoaim circle less forgiving, depending on whether they calculate overlap or give 100% credit any time you have the crosshairs in the autoaim circle. For GA planes, assuming the original rules are still in use, your autoaim circle is essentially a dot: of the dot is inside your dispersion ring, you will apply DoT based on the target cross section vs dispersion ring ratio. If not, you miss. This does a good job of creating the illusion of individual bullet modeling, but the flaws show in a few select situations: for example, my P39N-1 has three different gun types with very different characteristics. In stock configuration, I cannot effectively put all three on target except at very close range. Throw my hotshot pilot with both marksman skills in there and throw on ultimate level everything for accuracy/dispersion reduction, and now even at high angles of attack I can often hit with all three types at range. This should not be physically possible, but through the magic of now overlapping autoaim circles, I can get the dispersion rings of all three guns into the tiny space of overlap and obliterate my target. All invisible to you, the player, of course, and handled server-side just like in WoT and WoWS to prevent the autoaim circles being made visible by a player again. Again, I could have which kind of ring is around your crosshairs vs which travels predictively in front of other aircraft swapped. The math is the same regardless.
I had to stop watching early as work calls, but yes, this is why I love this plane: even with a specialist speed build without prototype equipment onboard, this thing just screams from place to place. Seriously considering moving Mary into it and moving my top hotshot pilot to the F-84 now.
Good to have you back Vee! I do love this kind of theory-crafting for the game. And this does beg the question: why not run every plane with a speed build?
Another great video. 2 things that stand out for me. 1 is that this is a casual flyer shooter and players like Kaim Invictus are way overboard on maximizing everything. 2 is that players like Kaim Invictus are always players I want to avoid seeing in any battle. Losing is not fun so I want to avoid the top players like the plague. Top players can always milk any game to the max and I find them way too fanatic and aggressive to ever want to be in a battle against them. I do my best to try to win in this game in spite of being shafted by the extreme rng (non-level battlefield conditions) and when I get the bad bots I don't need to see top players on the red team to add insult to injury. The worst that this game has is the 3 op planes that players fly to "cheese" wins. That just destroys any desire to play this game. Wg should be ashamed for allowing these planes to stay so op, but they don't care to balance this game.
That's why I chose to highlight the F7U build, as it isn't considered an OP plane. Honestly I'm more disappointed when I see flights with a bomber an escort at top tier stat padding their precious win rates and standing on the leader board. But to keep the game enjoyable I find I just play against myself in those instances. I could get mad, but life is too short to waste it on negative emotions in a video game. When I see those folks with 90% of their battles in the b29c, ef 131, xf90... etc, I just feel sorry for them and focus on my individual game. Last night I had a great game in my F7U against that escort combo, and despite the loss I had 9 zone captures and 700 capture points. For me that was a personal win. But that is the nature of online gaming, there will always be folks exploiting game mechanics. As for Kaim, he is just a good player and I will not fault him for doing what he finds enjoyable I'm the game, and I think I'm at the point were I can learn from him rather than just assuming a loss and getting upset. I hope folks can see those "no win" situations and still find the will to challenge themselves and find some internal motivation opposed to focusing on the extrinsic motivation of seeing "victory" to find some enjoyment in the game. What gets me more upset is when folks quit those battles and leave me to face the challenge alone, they are worse than the stat padders in my opinion.
You learn the game by playing with and against the best. But thats your problem you dont want to learn, you just like to cry about it, like in the forums. 1000 posts about the same. Better players kill me i cant win, bots are against me i cant win bla bla bla
Given the new build, could you do a video directly comparing the F7U with the Hunter? I have been grinding the British multiroles to get the Hunter, but I could unlock the F7U sooner. Would love to get both, but credits and time.
Hunter all around better. You will like it more I think. The F7U has been a passion project to make it feel good, but Mary is almost a must for this build.
@@Veebat Didn't get to respond when I read this, but thanks so much for the quick response. I'm continuing on to the Hunter then. Up next is the Sea Hawk. Most of these have been good, so not a pain to grind. Thanks!
This is the one aircraft in my hangar in which I frequently find myself floating up in the 1X,000 ft ranges because I overshot a bomber high. I'm pretty sure I spend every screaming pass above the deck at 700+ mph with a goofy grin on my face. If you want to see (remember) how well it lives up to the historical aircraft "performance", take it back to a non-specialized build. Specializing changes this aircraft in a huge way. So much so, that when I see a non-spec F7U on the other side while flying my spec'd F7U, I often leave the poor player alone out of respect for what they are dealing with. Oh, Slava is Russian and Ukrainian for "Victory".
I appreciate you to keep our promise first.
watched all of video and thought you seem to find the effectiveness of this build. The fundamental of Nosferatu is making optimal skill-set based on speed-oriented equipment-set. Even though there are some skill-sets I recommend, another having a little difference can also exist.
Nosferatu was made to intend to make F7U optimized. However this build (both original and branch) can be applied other aircrafts having similarly characteristic and I also applied to Me 262 and Me 109 TL and now I am trying to apply to others.
Getting experience to play many aircrafts with this build will help you to play F7U well.
Thanks for sharing, and for your inspiring videos!
I plan to keep working my skills with this setup. F7U was my first tier x so it is close to my heart and I want to get better with it. I'm sure I will eventually have the skills to post gameplay that properly showcases the build. Thank you again for sharing your build and skills plan.
Another great and very informative video, Vee. And a big thank you to Kaim for letting us peer "under the hood". Fantastic stuff!
Very nice and informative video, thanks! If possible, please do one just like this with Kaim's input on the 109 TL :)
Kaim replied stating he uses this setup for his 109TL as well, check out his comment
Watch Kiam myself, he is very good, one of the best, knows the game as well as anyone
I think your understanding of dispersion vs accuracy in the game engine is off a little, though. Pre-2.0, it was more visible to players, but I have pierced together from a few developer comments a few details: 1) Developers commented on WoT that letting all tanks use their hull MGs would cause too much server lag, yet, in WoWP, the average plane is during way more individual guns, thus, I do not believe every individual bullet is modeled. Rather, a DoT calculation is performed independent of the client-side animation of your bullets.
2) In v1, each aircraft had a predictive autoaim circles in front of it. One for each of your weapon types. Placing your crosshairs within this circle resulted in autoaim hits. GA aircraft did not have autoaim at all.
3) Centered around your crosshairs are the dispersion rings for each of your weapon types. It is distinctly possible the autoaim ring is around the crosshairs and the dispersion ring is the leading indicator. The result is the same either way.
4) When you fire a given weapon, a calculation is performed and the DoT applied to the target is determined by multiplying your weapon DPS by the fraction of autoaim to dispersion ring volumetric overlap, (possibly with a bell curve gradient applied), and the ratio of target hitbox area to dispersion ring area at the target's range.
Taken together, this means that raising accuracy not only increases your chances of hitting, but also makes it easier to fit your entire dispersion ring inside the autoaim ring for maximum DoT. Reducing dispersion increases damage applied to small and distant targets as they will fill more of the dispersion ring, but may make the edge of the autoaim circle less forgiving, depending on whether they calculate overlap or give 100% credit any time you have the crosshairs in the autoaim circle. For GA planes, assuming the original rules are still in use, your autoaim circle is essentially a dot: of the dot is inside your dispersion ring, you will apply DoT based on the target cross section vs dispersion ring ratio. If not, you miss.
This does a good job of creating the illusion of individual bullet modeling, but the flaws show in a few select situations: for example, my P39N-1 has three different gun types with very different characteristics. In stock configuration, I cannot effectively put all three on target except at very close range. Throw my hotshot pilot with both marksman skills in there and throw on ultimate level everything for accuracy/dispersion reduction, and now even at high angles of attack I can often hit with all three types at range. This should not be physically possible, but through the magic of now overlapping autoaim circles, I can get the dispersion rings of all three guns into the tiny space of overlap and obliterate my target. All invisible to you, the player, of course, and handled server-side just like in WoT and WoWS to prevent the autoaim circles being made visible by a player again. Again, I could have which kind of ring is around your crosshairs vs which travels predictively in front of other aircraft swapped. The math is the same regardless.
Sorry, that was meant to be mild constructive criticism and turned into a thesis on a theory of mine.
Great showcase Vee!
I had to stop watching early as work calls, but yes, this is why I love this plane: even with a specialist speed build without prototype equipment onboard, this thing just screams from place to place. Seriously considering moving Mary into it and moving my top hotshot pilot to the F-84 now.
Thanks for introducing me to Invictus. Great video. Picked up this plane
XF-90 I forgot who had this, but I have seen people at boost speed over 1k for the 90
Good to have you back Vee! I do love this kind of theory-crafting for the game. And this does beg the question: why not run every plane with a speed build?
F7nny you mention that because I have been trying a tank build on f84f to great affect.
@@Veebat Yes! I've noticed that's what Kaim runs as well, and I'm curious as to the "why" of it!
Another great video.
2 things that stand out for me. 1 is that this is a casual flyer shooter and players like Kaim Invictus are way overboard on maximizing everything. 2 is that players like Kaim Invictus are always players I want to avoid seeing in any battle. Losing is not fun so I want to avoid the top players like the plague. Top players can always milk any game to the max and I find them way too fanatic and aggressive to ever want to be in a battle against them.
I do my best to try to win in this game in spite of being shafted by the extreme rng (non-level battlefield conditions) and when I get the bad bots I don't need to see top players on the red team to add insult to injury. The worst that this game has is the 3 op planes that players fly to "cheese" wins. That just destroys any desire to play this game. Wg should be ashamed for allowing these planes to stay so op, but they don't care to balance this game.
That's why I chose to highlight the F7U build, as it isn't considered an OP plane. Honestly I'm more disappointed when I see flights with a bomber an escort at top tier stat padding their precious win rates and standing on the leader board. But to keep the game enjoyable I find I just play against myself in those instances. I could get mad, but life is too short to waste it on negative emotions in a video game. When I see those folks with 90% of their battles in the b29c, ef 131, xf90... etc, I just feel sorry for them and focus on my individual game. Last night I had a great game in my F7U against that escort combo, and despite the loss I had 9 zone captures and 700 capture points. For me that was a personal win. But that is the nature of online gaming, there will always be folks exploiting game mechanics. As for Kaim, he is just a good player and I will not fault him for doing what he finds enjoyable I'm the game, and I think I'm at the point were I can learn from him rather than just assuming a loss and getting upset. I hope folks can see those "no win" situations and still find the will to challenge themselves and find some internal motivation opposed to focusing on the extrinsic motivation of seeing "victory" to find some enjoyment in the game. What gets me more upset is when folks quit those battles and leave me to face the challenge alone, they are worse than the stat padders in my opinion.
You learn the game by playing with and against the best. But thats your problem you dont want to learn, you just like to cry about it, like in the forums. 1000 posts about the same. Better players kill me i cant win, bots are against me i cant win bla bla bla
(IKaros_GR) i think you did the best review ever... based on building... skills... consumables... equipment.... PERFECT !!!
I'm jealous that you have the special nation project equipment. So far I've only got the UK period 2 gunsights
Given the new build, could you do a video directly comparing the F7U with the Hunter? I have been grinding the British multiroles to get the Hunter, but I could unlock the F7U sooner. Would love to get both, but credits and time.
Hunter all around better. You will like it more I think. The F7U has been a passion project to make it feel good, but Mary is almost a must for this build.
@@Veebat Thanks so much. I suspected that might be the case from your videos, but I wasn’t sure if the new build changed things. Thanks!
@@Veebat Didn't get to respond when I read this, but thanks so much for the quick response. I'm continuing on to the Hunter then. Up next is the Sea Hawk. Most of these have been good, so not a pain to grind. Thanks!
@@logosprime9161 be forewarned, the seahawk is not everyone's favorite, but the hunter is the prize for your hard work.
You were correct about the Sea Hawk, but it wasn’t really bad and was so worth the Hunter.
This is the one aircraft in my hangar in which I frequently find myself floating up in the 1X,000 ft ranges because I overshot a bomber high. I'm pretty sure I spend every screaming pass above the deck at 700+ mph with a goofy grin on my face.
If you want to see (remember) how well it lives up to the historical aircraft "performance", take it back to a non-specialized build. Specializing changes this aircraft in a huge way. So much so, that when I see a non-spec F7U on the other side while flying my spec'd F7U, I often leave the poor player alone out of respect for what they are dealing with.
Oh, Slava is Russian and Ukrainian for "Victory".