ACMs or Gunnery

[DoKGonZo]

Originally posted by Redd
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill"  , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.


Who would want the MA to become like that ?

Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?

I hope so, otherwise I must surmise Redd has absolutely no clue wtf he's talking about...again...

Zazen

[Redd]

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?

Yes

[Redd]

Originally posted by Zazen13
I hope so, otherwise I must surmise Redd has absolutely no clue wtf he's talking about...again...

Zazen

thought you migh be able to spot irony , I''ll keep things simple from  now on.


The arena is full of HO weenies, who have no understanding of ACM  - how's that  

[Redd]

Originally posted by Zazen13
Where have you been flying?!? That's pretty much the MA in a nutshell... It's rare to find someone NOT willing to accept a HO opportunity in ANY plane. Just ask Shane, he's as good a flyer as anyone but will push for a HO if given the faintest glimmer of an opportunity. .

Zazen

And good to see you back Zaz  , we've missed you  

[Grits]

Originally posted by Redd
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill" , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.

ROFLMAO Redd! I fell out of my chair when I read that.

[Murdr]

My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's.  In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???
Gunnery school.  His method had been to get close enough so he couldnt miss.  He didnt get to where he was at that time by relying on superior gunnery skills.

I also agree with Dok's points.  If you drop and old flight sim vet, and someone with that innate gunnery ability both as newbies into AH, the vet has a vastly larger repituire to work with.

Tour 54 was the first full AH2 Tour.  My stats:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.92883
Kills / Sorties = 2.45333
Hit percentage = 5.711 %

Tour 58 was the last Ive flown over 20 hours:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.72619
Kills / Sorties = 2.40769
Hit percentage = 8.376 %

In that case I can see where my gunnery adjustment period hurt performance.  Or, where ample time with the gunnery model particulary helped overall performance.

[Zaphod]

murdr wrote:

My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's. In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???

Again I really think that "getting close enough so you can't miss" is misleading.  I can't get that close.  I really think that the folks who have great gunnery don't really understand not having great gunnery.

As far as an old flight sim with poor gunnery vet vs a newby with innate gunnery skills I agree if this is a one vs one engagement.  I was referring to the MA in general.  I really think that gunnery is more important in there.

I think that given a very good ACM skill combined with a poor gunnery skill vs a very good gunnery skill comined with a poor ACM skill, the good gunner has a better chance.  Only because the very good gunner is likely to put some rounds into your plane before you can put your superior ACM to work.  It only takes one pass for the good gunner to kill or cripple.  It's very difficult not to give that one good pass, even if it's a HO shot.

This isn't always going to happen obviously, but the great gunner has a leg up in the first few seconds in my opinion.

I think the best have both, might be that some are better gunners than fliers or visa versa but the really good guys have both (that includes you Shane).

Zaphod

[Murdr]

Originally posted by Zaphod
I think that given a very good ACM skill combined with a poor gunnery skill vs a very good gunnery skill comined with a poor ACM skill, the good gunner has a better chance.  Only because the very good gunner is likely to put some rounds into your plane before you can put your superior ACM to work.  It only takes one pass for the good gunner to kill or cripple.  It's very difficult not to give that one good pass, even if it's a HO shot.
[/B]

I understand what you're getting at, but under the above parameters in my mind we are now talking about a very small number of players.  Giving your opponent the most akward shot opportunity in virtually any situation is an artform in an of itself.  There are very few people I encounter that can connect that passing shot, and fewer still that can do it consistantly.

Also this brings a previous gunnery discussion to mind where I asserted that good gunnery is all about the "site picture".  Some people do in fact easily identify hit yeilding site pictures, and have the reaction time and smooth physical dexterity to connect those shots.  Knowing, and getting the site picture are two different things.  As mane eluded to earlier, a good part of gunnery is positioning yourself to have the optimum site picture.  Stumbling around and squeezing the trigger when the site picture presents itself isnt all that handy when dealing with those who know how to deny you that site picture.

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by Redd
And good to see you back Zaz  , we've missed you  

Hehe, ty, good to be back. I've been reading the boards while I was away but there really wasn't any posts I felt passionately about until this one came along....

Zazen

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by Murdr
My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's.  In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???
Gunnery school.  His method had been to get close enough so he couldnt miss.  He didnt get to where he was at that time by relying on superior gunnery skills.

I also agree with Dok's points.  If you drop and old flight sim vet, and someone with that innate gunnery ability both as newbies into AH, the vet has a vastly larger repituire to work with.

Tour 54 was the first full AH2 Tour.  My stats:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.92883
Kills / Sorties = 2.45333
Hit percentage = 5.711 %

Tour 58 was the last Ive flown over 20 hours:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.72619
Kills / Sorties = 2.40769
Hit percentage = 8.376 %

In that case I can see where my gunnery adjustment period hurt performance.  Or, where ample time with the gunnery model particulary helped overall performance.

Be carefull when using in-game hit % data to measure your raw gunnery skill. That data is more influenced by how many bombers you attack, your weapon system choice and how much you tend to vulch in a given camp than any other factor. My fighter hit% fluctuates by as much as 5% either way entirely based upon whether I choose to hunt bombers or not.

When measuring your gunnery effectiveness rely more on objectively and honestly evaluating your gunnery passes on fighters, how many one pass kills do you get on an evading foe per attempt? How many one pass kills on an evading foe when using a weaker gun package (ie: 6 X 50cals)? How many times does your pass only result in a glancing blow, producing no damage? How many times do you miss your foe entirely when he is aware of you and evading? That kind of evaluation is what indicates how effective a marksman you are...Using myself as an example, if I hunt bombers as well as fighters I may approach 18% hit % a camp, if I conscientiously avoid bombers 12-13% hit % is about the best I can do. .

Also, bear in mind the weapon package of your chosen ride(s) greatly influence your hit %. It is much easier to attain a higher hit % with nose/cowl mounted weaponry than with wing mounted weaponry for example as convergence issues are not a factor. The same holds true for weapon packages with varying ballistics performance, especially attributes such as rate of fire and drop-off/muzzle velocity/dispersion. It stands to reason and you can experiment with this to prove it to yourself, that the rate of fire of slower/older cannons (ie: Ho5's, MG FF 20mm) provide lower hit % than 50 caliber MG's for example, all other factors being equal.


I like this topic because when I started AW some 13 years ago it was the first flight sim I had ever played, so in this respect I am a fairly pristine base-line example. Immediately I found I was a very good shot relative to the average player. I was a good shot and could kill much more experienced and talented flyers with relative ease by virtue of this fact alone, while having no clue how to fly myself, basically. I gradually developed some flying skill to go along with the marksmanship and attained a level of play I am happy with, but from 13 years ago until now, I am just as good a shot as I was then, probably only fractionally better and only as a result of those many years of experience. In that time I have read countless books and have endeavoured to improve my ACM as much as possible in every way possible to very reasonable effect. I am a far, far superior flyer now than I was 10 years ago, 5 years ago, or even 1 year ago and I continue to develop, as does everyone else who puts forth a comparable effort.

In my years at this I have come to know many, many people and their styles of play, strengths and weaknesses. I cannot think of a single exception to my rule. Everyone I knew from 10 years ago with a minumum of one year's experience who had weak gunnery then still has weak gunnery even after all of that time and experience playing. However, all of those folks with weak flying skills 10 years ago, have since improved dramatically in that same time frame, myself included.



Zazen

[Zaphod]

Murdr wrote:

I understand what you're getting at, but under the above parameters in my mind we are now talking about a very small number of players. Giving your opponent the most akward shot opportunity in virtually any situation is an artform in an of itself. There are very few people I encounter that can connect that passing shot, and fewer still that can do it consistantly.

Agreed, there are very few who can do this consistently.  In fact only a couple or maybe three come to mind right off the top of my head.  You know, the ones who if given the slightest opening for a shot kill or cripple you.  However there are a few others who while not quite this good are still pretty stellar in their ability to shoot.  Too me this is still more important than ACM.

Also this brings a previous gunnery discussion to mind where I asserted that good gunnery is all about the "site picture". Some people do in fact easily identify hit yeilding site pictures, and have the reaction time and smooth physical dexterity to connect those shots. Knowing, and getting the site picture are two different things. As mane eluded to earlier, a good part of gunnery is positioning yourself to have the optimum site picture. Stumbling around and squeezing the trigger when the site picture presents itself isnt all that handy when dealing with those who know how to deny you that site picture.

I was actually considering this as being part of the gunnery skill.  I suppose this would also fall into the ACM skill in terms of what you expect the relative positions of your plane and the other persons plane to be based on experience and knowledge.  

As you said knowing and getting to the sight picture are two different things.  However this is very dependant on gunnery ability too.  I say this because it has to do with the kind of shot a particular individual is capable of making.  In other words the sight picture that I have to get to is either easier or harder to achieve based my gunnery skill compared to the other pilot.

Urchin had posted a couple films that I watched that made this painfully obvious to me.  I knew when he was going to get a shot as I watched the film.  I also knew that it was a low percentage shot for me...like not likely to happen.  However he did this several times consistently.  In other words the sight picture he flew to was not one that would work for me because I am not that good of a shot.

For example I am in a scissors with an enemy plane.  My gunnery is poor relative to his.  I can make the tracking shot work pretty easy but to get to my sight picture I have to fly my plane onto his six.  The other pilot has better gunnery and is capable of making effective snap shots.  The other pilot can fly to his sight picture much easier and quicker than I would be able to.

I guess this is what I was considering when making my arguement more than anything else.  Obviously if you are bad enough in your ACM skill then your likely going to fail to get your sight picture at all, no matter how well you shoot.  In other words I really don't think that good gunnery trumps the best ACM skill set.  However the best ACM skill won't make up for a really poor marksman either.  I just think that in the MA good gunnery gives more of an advantage than good ACM.

Zaphod

[TequilaChaser]

Very interesting thread.thanks everyone for the input

I myself  will always put SA first, even though as Zazen mentioned it was not part of the original posters question.

I put them in this order:
#1- SA
#2- BFM/ACM
#3- Gunnery

my reason being is without SA, you would not even know what or where to look for an encounter or have no idea where your attacker is coming from or how fast he might be , his/her alt....etc.......

then jumping to BFM/ACM, without using this how would you know how to go about lining up for even a quick HO shot, snapshot, crossing shot, deflection shot.....you will have to maneuver in some way to get into a firing position even if it is a Head On shot.........

then I would finish up with gunnery, for without good gunnery you would never get a hit or a kill.........

anyhow, that is my theory but I do agree with a lot of what has been posted here, just in a different order of events is all, all this pertaining to AH2 arenas and not to actual WW2 air combat...

Zazen mentioned something interesting about having a better hit percentage with nose/cowl mounted gun platform vs  wing mounted guns. I find the opposite to be true, I get far better hits, especially deflection shots with wing mounted guns over nose/cowl mounted.  I get better dead "6" hits with nose mounted verses wing mounted guns..........

again great thread.......some good comments/thoughts  here..........  

[DoKGonZo]

Originally posted by TequilaChaser
...

Zazen mentioned something interesting about having a better hit percentage with nose/cowl mounted gun platform vs  wing mounted guns. I find the opposite to be true, I get far better hits, especially deflection shots with wing mounted guns over nose/cowl mounted.  I get better dead "6" hits with nose mounted verses wing mounted guns..........

I'm with you on this, TC. I find I get much better hit percentages with the P51 over like a P38. Maybe those hits are less damaging (i.e. not as concentrated a volley as a P38 would deliver), but at least I score the hits.


Someone also mentioned how after a year your gunnery is as good as it will get. I disagree. For the first 3 or 4 months I returned to AH, my gunnery was more or less guesswork - didn't think it would ever improve. Then around November sometime firing .50 cal's finally "clicked" for me. I was getting 1-pass kills on everything from P38's to Fw190's with the P-51, and scoring some wild deflection shots too. I still can't do squat with German or Russian 20mm's ... but the .50 and Hispano now "work" for me where they didn't for the months before.

Some small percentage of people will always have an uncanny knack for shooting. That's just natural. But gunnery is something you can practice offline and consistantly get better at.

[bustr]

If I force myself to practice every day in off line mode using the lead computing gun sight and attacking from every angle possible, after a week or two my hit percentage increases. But that also goes hand in hand with doing it as a warmup before going online for at least 2 hours. If I stop doing it and dont go online more than 2 days a week I have to start over.

Another thought, now that I'm with the 56th, I'm more concerned about covering my wing leader than if I'm killing anything. My ACM and SA is all about covering his tail, or running interference against multiple cons to let him escape with his smoking wreck.

It's hard with these experiences to not beleive if my gunnery were better, I would be surviving 2 or 3 cons. Or am I imagining the snap shots on each and every one of the cons as we dance around? I often die with over 1000 rounds per wing. I know spraying on a snap shot is useless. What counts is exactly the place your pipper is targeting leading the con and the timing of pulling the trigger to your combined velocities.