Buffs dont need external views

[DktrEvil]

External views are ALWAYS available ............................. ........................in th MA.

We need to have alternative settings in other arenas, otherwise they are just slightly modified MA's. At present, the main differences between the MA and CT are an expanded planeset and maps.

Thusly, any flyboy from the MA can easily transfer to the CT without any special skill adjustments other than reading how many troops can take a base or other minor changes in the weeks setup.

I am one who believes we need a Historical Arena or some other arena where the Radar/Views and such are set to at least semi-realistic levels.  This would require each pilot adjust his habits to the new settings in order to survive, especially if they happened to "drop" in from MA.

My past experience with the "other" flight sim shows that the Arena with the more realistic settings attracted more veteran pilots and those looking to improve their piloting skills by flying in more realistic conditions.

Granted the numbers of players were smaller (but they are that way now in the CT) but the quality of play was better. More emphasis on teamwork, pilot skill, strategy and tactics. It wasn't as simple as learning to fly a different airplane or learn a new map.  You had to have good piloting and SA skills to stay alive.  There was a lot more "bouncing" going on and you either learned quick or died.

For those that want external views you have the MA, for the rest we have nowhere to go.

Regards

[DktrEvil]

Oh by the way, if you still want to come to the CT and bomb but feel disadvantaged without the external view, then make sure you are bombing from altitiudes over 10,000 feet and you should be fine.

However, this won't work if your secondary motive is to go "fighter trolling" in your 'ack wagons'.

Regards

[PropNut]

It occured to me last night while cruising around in a  B17 that "gun view only settings " could be more immersive in the right situation and I have no problem with no F3 view... It also occured to me that all that is really needed (since this is all being done in the name of realisim)  is to have automated 6 calls for all bombers and the C47.  As in real life ....using the B17 as an example, you had 10 guys panning the sky from their positions, it was rare a con could just sneak-up on a loaded B17.  We need auto callouts like  "con high 6"  or    "Ball gunner.... low con 2 oclock"    these calls should come at at least 3.0 out (even though in reality  they were spotted much further out) they should also only make the calls if the cons a visable through the normal windows,turrets etc.    this is the only way we can even get close to realisim in AH without the F3 view. The only people that would think otherwise just want "blind buffs" in the CT   I think that  When something like this becomes available I would be the first to say retire the old F3 view. But untill then let F3 do the job it was intended for "to allow the pilot to view the airspace around the Buff"

[storch]

Originally posted by PropNut
It occured to me last night while cruising around in a  B17 that "gun view only settings " could be more immersive in the right situation and I have no problem with no F3 view... It also occured to me that all that is really needed (since this is all being done in the name of realisim)  is to have automated 6 calls for all bombers and the C47.  As in real life ....using the B17 as an example, you had 10 guys panning the sky from their positions, it was rare a con could just sneak-up on a loaded B17.  We need auto callouts like  "con high 6"  or    "Ball gunner.... low con 2 oclock"    these calls should come at at least 3.0 out (even though in reality  they were spotted much further out) they should also only make the calls if the cons a visable through the normal windows,turrets etc.    this is the only way we can even get close to realisim in AH without the F3 view. The only people that would think otherwise just want "blind buffs" in the CT   I think that  When something like this becomes available I would be the first to say retire the old F3 view. But untill then let F3 do the job it was intended for "to allow the pilot to view the airspace around the Buff"

Then all you would need is to have all your guns rattle and vibrate and realistic bullet drop on those .50s

[Slash27]

And a cappacino machine.

[Grits]

Originally posted by Slash27
And a cappacino machine.

Buffs already have cappacino machines, but they are not slaved to Otto-Majik, each one must actually be manned by a player.  After all, they didnt have Mr Coffee in RL did they? I guess you could add that as a post WWII "What if".

[PropNut]

And a cappacino machine

 Not a bad Idea  but then we need "otto" to gun while we sip our cappacino              

Then all you would need is to have all your guns rattle and vibrate and realistic bullet drop on those .50s

 now thats something ive heard alot but have never seen any proof.  Storch are you telling me that in fact the drop on the buff guns are not realistic?  I know I always have to compensate for drop ...please tell us where we can find all the data that supports this claim. If its wrong I say fix it. I would say the drop in the 50 cals look like maybe 10 feet at 1.2 (not measured just a guess)... Ive asked this before but no one ever has a real answer. Maybe if Hitech or Pyro ever scan this message one will answer. It wont matter to me I'll just aim a tad higher:D

[storch]

1.2k= 4700 ft. +- (is my math right?)  what possible damage could 750gr do at that distance?  Could you possibly be able to aim a weapon to hit enough times at those ranges given the conditions in which those men had to fight?

It's a game and it's all good but honestly if the case where as it is represented in this game there would never have been the need to develope the P51.

That's all I'm saying.  No need to get defensive, hell it's always a pleasure to be shot down by you at 1500 yards.

[PropNut]

Defensive??? who's defensive not me thats for sure its a game and hardly worth any rise in blood pressure ...here have a cup of cappacino bro   I did a quick search around  and got a range of  info on the 50 cal ammo that was typically used in the guns on most aircraft .. It seems that 50 cal ammo typically can deliver between 2500 and 4000 ft lbs of energy at 1000 yards 3,000 feet and would have a drop at 3000 feet averaging 120-140 inches... so it would seem that the drop is about right (with just using averaging) I dont think its off alot though. as far as killing you at 1500 yards  Ive never done that.   I usually am aligned and ready to fire at 1.2 but with the close rate of 50 - 100 yards per second I usually dont fire untill 1K thats the start within 2 seconds the plane flying up my 6 is at about 800 and has soaked-up  2 sec worth of 50 cal ammo from 12 guns that should blow the wing off of just about anything. Another thing to consider is that the Buffs tail gun is firing into a negitive wind of about 300 mph while a diving fighter would be firing into a 500+ headwind (now im not sure  how this is actually modeled in AH) this should increase the range of the rear firing guns considerably and also spread out the drop over a longer distance. And sometthing that hasnt been modeled in AH is the typical Buffeting and turbulence
that was present in real life. But on the same subject the fighter approaching  the 6 of a bomber isnt having to fight the wake of a bomber or group . So untill we all get less than stable platforms to shoot from i guess this is it.

[DktrEvil]

Don't forget  the wind resistance on the side guns.  This was in place in the "other" sim I used to fly.

Regards

[storch]

Well it's a pleasure to be shot down by you at any range