ACMs or Gunnery

[SlapShot]

All of the people emphasizing ACM over gunnery, from the start of the thread to now, essentially assumes an air-combat as a 1vs1 duel. This is a fundamental flaw in reasoning.

As much foolish it is to imagine that Aces High would be the same as WW2, it is near-sighted to assume that the only combatants in the air worthwhile considering would be you and the enemy at hand. There is no such thing as a "nice, steady 'saddle' " when there is more than one enemy plane nearby.

Ironically(indeed VERY ironically), as much as the people emphasizing ACM abhorr 'horde', in reality the only time one can really saddle up onto someone comfortably and start maneuvering, is when they have secured a local numbers advantage.

Kwe ... everything you said in the above is pure conjecture and it is you that is doing all the assuming, on behalf of those who emphasize ACM.

Those that happen to think that ACM is the key, don't by default, think that good gunnery is not needed too ... at least I don't ... I would not want to assume for all of them tho.

[Kweassa]

Uh. I assume quite the opposite, actually. ACM isn't just about close-in manouevering. All those moves are tools used to position you for attack or defense in a multi-plane environment.

 Sorry for the overlook.

 But quite frankly, the scope of "ACM" people talk about in this thread is sometimes wildly different. Some people specifically point out ACM as close-in maneuvering, a means to continue pursuit without breaking away or coming in for 2nd, 3rd passes. On the other hand, the ACM you're talking about is a very wide concept, which I think it cannot be described as just "ACM".

 

There is one big drawback to relying on gunnery alone which is unique to AH (and games of the genre): you're relying on steady connections for you and the target. Rule #4 sayeth: "Warps: The Great Equalizer." I can't tell you the number of times people I fly with - who land 5+ kill missions routinely - end up dead because some bogey just couldn't be hit due to some blip in the Internet.

 That's a no-go Dok Warps and conn. issues effect everything in the game, not just gunnery. Close and maneuver all you want and sometimes the plane would warp away, and you'd have to start maneuvering all over again.

Again ... IMNSHO you need a combination of SA, ACM, and gunnery to be a complete A2A pilot in this game. Whichever one you excel at will govern to some degree your most successful style of play. Whichever one you suck at most will govern to some degree the reasons you get shot down most often. No one is more important than the others in the big picture.

 Agreed.

 But the Earth still rotates and gunnery is still much more important than ACM.

 Let's try fantasizing a duel between a pilot who can get 99% of shots in but sucks in maneuvering, and a pilot who will outmaneuver 99% of people in the world, but has bad gunnery. Who'll win?

 As funny as it seems, these things happen a lot in H2H rooms Try the H2H games some times - lot of fun options. Turn the lead-computing gunsight on and you'll notice there is basically no such thing as "ACM" in the rooms. Every first pass is a death pass. On the other hand, in a room full of newbies, I'm the superace when I take the Zeke up. These newbie guys will always turn.

 So, in a H2H room full of newbies with lead-computing sight on, I can beat those guys all day long without using the LCS, until one actually discovers that they can use the LCS. So what happens if a total newbie with a LCS engages me not using LCS?

 If he is higher than me I'm dead. If we both approach in a HO merge I'm dead.  If I bounced him unnoticed, I win. If he sees me bouncing and comes to HO me, I'm dead. If I have an alt advantage and rope him with at least a distance of 1.5k plus max closure, then I might win. Basically, if he has his gun pointed at me inside 1k range, and knows how to control the joystick, whatever angle, whatever situation, I'm dead.

 A person with perfect ACM still needs some gunnery. A person with perfect gunnery doesn't need ACM at all.

 ACM helps the kill. Gunnery, just kills.

[DoKGonZo]

In 17+ years I've never once issued or accepted a challenge to a duel. Not my style. So whatever rules apply to that corner of nirvana I can't comment on.

But in a mega-player environent, you still need the combination of skills to succeed. Good flying and SA will compensate for less than stellar gunnery. Look around the BBS at all the posts by high scorers discussing planes, tactics, and films where they admit they're crappy shots.

And, of course, "success" is subjective too. If a player wants to have 5-kill Spit V missions, he damn well better shoot good. If you want to win 1-1's to "succeed", yeah, you have to shoot well - you'll only get a few chances to fire and they have to count. But plowing your formation of 4 into their formation of 6 and having all the friendlies come out alive and no one else - gunnery alone won't get you that.

[WMLute]

Originally posted by Kweassa
So, in a H2H room full of newbies with lead-computing sight on

THAT explains it.  Not to hijack, but....  Was flying H2H just to check it out, and was geting tagged ALOT on the initial merge, using moves that, in the MA, would never get me hit.  Was starting to irk me.  Was wondering if it was connection, or what.  Never even considered it was the lead-computing sight thingy.  

After the 1st pass, I would saddle 'em and kill them every time.  Never lost one fight, but was "hit" and dmg'd on that 1st pass MOST of the fights.

ALSO I agree that you must have the "total" package to be successful.  The really "good" guys are fairly well balanced in ACM, SA, and Gunnery.

[Zazen13]

To avoid confusion I am going to re-state, in summary, what I am asserting...

If you have excellent flying skills but mediocre gunnery, you simply must consistantly outfly your opponents to have any reliable success, that is assuming you have the necessary time to safely do so which is by no means a guarentee. If you are up against someone with equal or even inferior flying skill but superior gunnery to yours, you can very easily lose even if you are not outflown. This same fact holds true if engaged by someone with inherently equal or weaker flying skill but in a plane that has a performance advantage in key area(s) and/or superior gunnery to yours.

Conversely, if you have excellent marksmanship but mediocre flying skill you can have great success even if you cannot outfly your opponents consistantly or even if you are outflown. You will have even greater relative success in those situations where you manage to outfly your opponent as well as out-shoot him. These successes require very little time, therefore subject you to relatively little risk, especially if you fly one of the faster planes that can disengage/re-engage at will.

The evolution of modern fighters, tactics and computer aided deflection aiming sight reticules lend credence to my assertion that flying skill is taught and learned, but deflection gunnery skill is largely an innate talent. Lead computing sights were designed specifically to compensate for the very common fallibility of the average highly trained pilot's aim and inherent weakness for independent and reliable computation of proper lead for deflection. There is, however, no such technical innovation for computer assisted devices that tell the highly trained combat aviator when and how to perform particular manuevers in combat. It is not necessary, he is trained to do this and if competantly trained knows exactly when and how without any 'artificial' assistance.

It is becuase of all of this that I must concur with the majority of actual WWII pilots that in multi-plane engagements, especially those involving plane types with very disparate performance characteristics, without the aid of lead computing sights of any kind,  gunnery skill is of paramount importance.

Zazen

[jaxxo]

gunnery..mine sux..i can fly against two or 3 in a zeke if i dont bother trying to get a shot off lol. My big problem is  killing the guy when i have the shot..and then manuevering against his wingman. takes me entirely to long to dispatch the enemy.

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by Kweassa

 A person with perfect ACM still needs some gunnery. A person with perfect gunnery doesn't need ACM at all.

 ACM helps the kill. Gunnery, just kills.

Precisely...

Zazen

[-MZ-]

"The better I shoot, the less I have to manuver" - GE

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by -MZ-
"The better I shoot, the less I have to manuver" - GE

Again...precisely...

Zazen

[Shane]

i prefer the corollary "the better I manuever, the less I have to shoot."

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by Shane
i prefer the corollary "the better I manuever, the less I have to shoot."

With your LA7's short clip and poor ballistics properties that is probably true for you to some extent...

Zazen

[DoKGonZo]

I guess I see this different due to experience. A lot of us old pukes came back to AH when 2.0 was released. Most of us had the same basic experience - our gunnery was sucky, but everything else was almost as sharp as the day we unplugged our joysticks how ever many years ago. ACM, instincts, SA, comm's, etc. - all came back within hours. As such, within days we were again landing multiple kills, being effective, and *not* being killed by the people who fly 25 hours a day.

In other words, we were "good" again even though our gunnery was pathetic.

I think there may be some under-appreciation for just how much skill and experience it takes to operate in a combat environment in the MA effectively. To engage in a fight while tracking all the enemas in vis range while handling comm's on multiple text and voice channels while performing complex ACM and knowing at all times where your plane is and what it's capable of doing at that moment from that angle and at that speed ... for as many different kinds of planes as you like to fly ... plus knowing what the opposing plane(s) is(are) capable of from it's angle and speed at that moment. That's SA+ACM ... all that combined dwarfs gunnery in terms of a learning challenge.

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
That's SA+ACM ... all that combined dwarfs gunnery in terms of a learning challenge.

In fact, you are correct, but only because good gunnery cannot be learned. All of that other stuff can be. In terms of the game, after a year or so of experience whereby you have had the opportunity to take and make or miss about every possible shot imaginable you are as good at gunnery as you will ever be. That is to say your innate talent for deflection shooting + exposure to a wide variety of shooting opportunities and experience = your maximum marksmanship potential actualized.

Insofar as I know, SA and flying skill, defined as ACM knowledge applied in an engagement, knows no bounds. There is always more to learn about these things. No one has 'arrived' in terms of the accumulation and application of this knowledge compounded by experience in and vs. various aircraft. It is because of this fact I recommend those with particularly poor gunnery deeply explore advanced ACM's and endeavor to perfect them as much as humanly possible in at least one aircraft with above average manuevering performance. Those with excellent gunnery can also do this, but their success does not entirely depend upon it.

I'm intentionally avoiding the SA discussion as this is not within the scope of the original poster's question.

Zazen

[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 ?

[Zazen13]

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 ?

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