Lazer Buff guns

[soupcan]

yes it was lancs that got the tirpitz


12 November 1944     R.A.F.     32 Lancasters     Tromsø     3 hits and 2 near misses
Tirpitz sunk

[Bruno]

How many others tried the 6 attack against live gunners and never lived? Since the data set is skewed, its results will be biased.

Almost all Sturmgruppen attacked dead 6 in a wedge or line abreast formation. The tail gun on B17 had a dispersion of 45 feet on the ground at 600 yards. In flight this would have been much larger.

...like the armored knights in the Middle Ages, we were well protected. A Staffel might lose one or two aircraft during the advance, but the rest continued relentlessly on. Positioned now about 100m behind the bombers the Staffel leader barked out the order to open fire:

Pauke! Pauke!...

From such a range the Staffel could hardly miss, and the 3cm explosive rounds struck home. Just 2 rounds could take the tail off a B-17. A B-24's fuselage structure was not as sturdy. The enemy bombers literally fell apart in front of the Sturmgruppe.

The whole 12 o'clock high or head-on attacks were mostly ineffective as only the most skilled pilots could hope to score hits on the first pass. When they missed where did the end up? In 6 o'clock chase. By the time they turned around the escorts would have been called in. As such themost effective tactic was to attack the bombers from the rear with a moderate closure rate in formation and shoot them down.

As for the gun cams the bomber guns, one in every 5 rounds wasn't a tracer like in AH so you wouldn't see most of the rounds fired. The reason why it was easy to kill the gunners is because the LW could easily get into close range. Not just the gunner would be killed by the hydraulics knocked out disabling the turrets (top / bottom)

What happened to the Sturmgruppen was they were ordered not to engage fighters but to stay in formation and push through to the bombers. When escorts were around they easily set up to break up the formation and shoot down many of the attackers.

In AH the Bomber gunners are made to be more accurate / lethal then real life as a game play decision. No attempt to rationalize how 'real' they are holds water. We had a guy in our squad whose grandfather was a B-24 tail gunner, when asked specifically whether the gun on the bombers were an effective defense he said 'no, it was a miracle to score even one hit let alone shoot down an attacker'. Of course some LW were shot down by the bombers guns but they were no where near as effective as in AH.

If bomber guns were made real, then no one would fly bombers. The only reason many fly them now is because they can tool about 1000 ft playing ack star. Since HTC sees no need to make any adjustment the best thing to do is just ignore them. They will get bored and find something else to do.

[SuperDud]

Originally posted by soupcan
yes it was lancs that got the tirpitz


12 November 1944     R.A.F.     32 Lancasters     Tromsø     3 hits and 2 near misses
Tirpitz sunk

It was docked though, not manuevering at sea.

I will also add that attacking from the front is just like HOing up to a 18 .50cal MGed plane. Just like attacking the rear but with a shorter firing time.

[KD303]

Originally posted by jaxxo
ive seen one newb launch over 10 sorties in less than 5 minutes..thats 30 planes he augered trying to take off into a mountain

Jeez he must've been a real knob brain noob to think you're supposed to take off into a mountain rather than the sky...

[Pooh21]

in Gerald Astors "The Mighty Eighth" there was a tail gunner quoted as saying.

"They lined up about 1000 ft behind us and high, and sprayed with their 20mm. They could hit us from there, but we only had an effective range of about 600ft and couldnt hit them."

[Saxman]

SD beat me to the Tirpitz being docked.

The B-17 was designed with the purpose of coastal defense in mind. This role was abandoned the moment it became clear high-alt horizontal bombers couldn't hit the broad side of a battleship with the broadside of a battleship at altitude while at sea.

I've seen a GREAT picture taken at Midway from one of the B-17s sent up to attack the Japanese fleet. I think it's of the Akagi doing donuts with the eggs from the Forts splashing down harmlessly in the middle of the circle.

Not surprisingly, if you have the CVs doing that when a buff formation rolls through in the MA, most of the time I've noticed the carrier escapes severe, if any, damage.

Also, as a point of order, Prince of Wales and Repulse were, IIRC, sunk by Japanese dive bombers, torpedo planes, and low altitude level bombing in what was sort of a "trial run" of the Pearl Harbor raid, NOT by high-altitude level bombers (also, IIRC, they were ALSO in port at the time).

[gatt]

Originally posted by ghi
WHy not?
Gun cameras movies here

and   ->  here

Look, I'm a dedicated buff hunter (check my stats to be sure) and I dont like how bomber gunners are actually modeled in AH2. That said, honestly speaking, I cant say that real gun cameras are the *main* proofs of this game concession. For the reasons already explained: scattered formations, stragglers, gun cameras are from fighters who actually survived. Its difficult to get a gun camera from a 190/109/110 shot down by bomber gunners, isnt it

But again, IMO the whole thing as Bruno and others said is a game concession to let buffs play, survive and enjoy the game. On one thing I dont agree, I'll not ignore them, I'll chase them all over Knight's sky

[bozon]

all manned guns in AH have the same problem - no recoil.
From B17 gunners through Ostwind to field acks, there's no shaking and you can fine-point the gun, shoot and correct while shooting. It should be more like the Tanks cannons that kick you a little off your mark when fired. It will make long spraying bursts hard to aim and spread more than short interval bursts.

I think there are two related problems too:
1. buffs are very easy to shoot down. They break too easily and should be more durable.
2. gunners are not killed often enough.

Bozon

[MrRiplEy[H]]

People seem to disregard the fact that bomber gunners were systematically let to overclaim victories to boost morale in midst of heavy losses.

Some estimates say that only 10% of the kills were actually done from the whole claims.

[Waffle]

Of all the guncam footage that shows the jerries on the tail of a bomber hanging there it's 6...

How much footage wound up buried in the dirt underneath a burning hulk of a luftwaffe plane?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

From all the accounts I've read attacking bombers seemed to be a turkey shoot.

I vividly remember how the pilot described that he moved so close he could see the eyewhites of the gunner before he killed him with a short spray of mgs.

After the gunner was out of the way, he parked 20m away from the steady and straight flying formations furthest plane and set its engine on fire. Then proceed to next, rinse and repeat.

During WW2 a single 109 shot down 6 russian medium bombers in about 10 minutes time on top of my home city. He rtb'd without a scratch - empty of ammo.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by soupcan
lazs2
u are in error sir regarding to use of 4 engine bombers
against capital ships.
the sister ship of the bizmark the turpitz (might have spelled it wrong)
was actively hunted by a group of British Lancs who eventually caught up
to it and sunk it in a fiord of Norway.

Parked

as a final note to all the anti-buff crowd.....
dont forget the DA is open 24 hours for endless furballing enjoyment

It is also open for endless killing of HQ and other very important enemy assets

pretty rare to find a "no skill toolsheding buff dweeb" dropping hangers
in there.

You would be surprised

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Urchin
Simaril.... take the kills of and deaths by GVs out of the mix, the K/D will probably drop even lower.  

Dedalos, the gun camera clips that you've seen have one thing in common.  In all of them, the tail gunner is dead or otherwise incapacitated.  The .303s maximum range is shorter than 1.5k, as well, unless somethings been changed in the couple years since I tested it.  IIRC, the .50 went out to ~1400 yards before disappearing, the .303 was considerably shorter.

Dont forget to take out the kills from those uber FHs comming up and hitting the buffs HO.

Exactly, if a gunner takes a mouthfull of 50s, 20s, or even 303s, chances are he will stop shooting very fast due to death or gun troble.  I know I would.   In any case, how do you know that the gunner was dead in every single film I have seen?

As far as the 1.5K, well thats what the screen said.  I appologise if it was really only 1.4K:D.

[Urchin]

Because if the clips are anything like the ones I've seen, if the gunner wasn't dead, there wouldn't be a clip.

Bozon had it right IMO, in the game buffs seem to fragile, but gunners seem to tough.  I'm pretty sure I've seen a 20mm shell compared to a grenade (in terms of explosive power).  If a grenade landed on the tail gunners spot of a B-17, I'd imagine that the gun would be out of action even if the gunner wasn't killed outright.

[lazs2]

soupcan....  I am in error?  Please, list the CV's that were knocked out by 4 engine bombers... hell... I will settle for capital ships sunk that weren't sitting still in port.

As for going to the DA because there are no mouse weilding enemies of fun there.....

Well... Of course there aren't.... they get no attention ruining peoples fun in the DA.

Lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's