Author Topic: HO clarification (Read 3997 times)

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #60 on:** January 24, 2006, 01:53:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
I think given a high speed rate of closure at 180 degree merge then if you must chance it then its best to start firing at 1K........so when you take your finger off it will be 600 and the time to target will be a quarter of that found off an opponents 6.

...

I'm talking real life here, Tilt.

Just consider how hard it would be to pick up a target that small at that rate of closure, then line up a shot with no rangefinder, then guess right on when to fire for the second or two of reasonable firing window you could expect.

No way in hell you shoot at 1000 yards out - the other fighter is a speck at that range. And you're bouncing around your own cockpit, looking through a smudged windscreen, looking through the prop. Just no way. Maybe at a bomber formation where it's huge, slow moving, and you can set up the run.

The experiment I'd love to try to cure HO'ing would be to remove the target ranging completely. Keep the neon for the plane type and country so you can find a fight - but no convenient ranging info to use to time that long range HO shot. Don't know if it'd work, but it would probably bring the range of all fights closer in to where they should be.

SKJohn · « **Reply #61 on:** January 24, 2006, 01:54:41 PM »

Like I said before, the only reason people complain about it is because they got used to the "Easy" button mode in Air Warrior where it was one less aspect of SA that they didn't have to worry about. If it hadn't been like that in AW, it wouldn't be an issue in Aces High.
It seems like anytime I read a biography about a WWII fighter pilot, it mentions both Ho'ing and being Ho'ed. Example - yesterday reading in "A Flying Tiger's Diary" by Bond, pp. 87, 103, etc. were a few places where he mentioned using the head on shot against the Japanese.

So, stop whining about a tactic that is very "realistic", was used quite often by WWII fighter pilots, and is able to be used in AH. If you don't like the head on, turn before you get shot!

HiTech summed it up pretty good:

>>Who ever said that manouevering for a rear quarter shot is playing the game properly or realisitcly. Rear quarter shots are just another tradeoff in the all the tatics availible in dog fights. If you belive that the rear quarter is the best tatic for you to use so be it. But if some one else chooses not to go for the rear quater, so be it, if your tatics are better you should win. But to say that someone else can not use a perfectly valid tatic, I.E. HO , as they choose to use it, is just "Plane" silly.<<

hitech · « **Reply #62 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:00:52 PM »

DoKGonZo: You assume AH was ment to simulate WWII, it has never attempeted to do so in the main. Nore has it ever been the goal to do so.

There is a drastic diffence between simlating WWII Aircraft and a simulation of WWII.

I also do not buy into head on shots in real aircraft are harder than rear shots.

HiTech

Tilt · « **Reply #63 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:03:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
The experiment I'd love to try to cure HO'ing would be to remove the target ranging completely. Keep the neon for the plane type and country so you can find a fight - but no convenient ranging info to use to time that long range HO shot. Don't know if it'd work, but it would probably bring the range of all fights closer in to where they should be.

I dont deny it would be interesting................

I would not be so confident of the out come re the HO as you seem to be..................interesti ng all the same.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #64 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:06:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
DoKGonZo: You assume AH was ment to simulate WWII, it has never attempeted to do so in the main. Nore has it ever been the goal to do so.

...

Weel, taht preddy muhc seddels teh dbate.

Tilt · « **Reply #65 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:13:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
DoKGonZo: You assume AH was ment to simulate WWII, it has never attempeted to do so in the main. Nore has it ever been the goal to do so.

There is a drastic diffence between simlating WWII Aircraft and a simulation of WWII.

HiTech

did you really mean that?

AutoPilot · « **Reply #66 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:37:16 PM »

You got SERVED on that 1 Hi-teek.

Guess you can have your cake and eat it too.Yea and let's advertise for this "GAME" on the military and history channel..............

hitech · « **Reply #67 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:37:21 PM »

Yes I did tilt, it has always been as I have said.

We make a game around WWII planes and vehicles. We do not try to simulate WWII. Simulation of WWII is one of CT's goal's. Then things like ho's start to be used much more like they were in the war. Once there is a substatial penalty on death. And you can win with out shooting down the other guy. Then the choice of to HO or not becomes a very diffferent equation.

But if you try taylor things in the main to be a recreation of WWII tatics, you start to run into major fun limiting restrictions.

AutoPilot: Where does our banner in anyway contradict what I have said. In fact we choose those words very precisly to not give the impression we were a simulation of WWII.

Other wise instead of saying the Preimer WWII combat experiance, we would have said the Preiemer WWII simlation.

HiTech

icemaw · « **Reply #68 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:40:24 PM »

If your plane has made the mistake of giving me a firing solution YOUR GONNA GET SHOT!! period end of story. If its a head shot and it makes you mad poor widdle girly man ALL THE BETTER!:rofl

Every thing else is just BLAH BU BLAH BU BLAH BU BLAH!

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #69 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:41:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
...

But if you try taylor things in the main to be a recreation of WWII tatics, you start to run into major fun limiting restrictions .

That's a highly context-sensitive phrase.

hitech · « **Reply #70 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:57:23 PM »

Yes it is DokGonZO: And the context is the Main arena. Whos basic criterea.

1. Jump in any time.
2. Fly a sortie as a lone plane or with others in a cordinated effort.

Those 2 items alone throw out the the basics of WWII simulation.

HiTech

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #71 on:** January 24, 2006, 03:02:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Yes it is DokGonZO: And the context is the Main arena. Whos basic criterea.

1. Jump in any time.
2. Fly a sortie as a lone plane or with others in a cordinated effort.

Those 2 items alone throw out the the basics of WWII simulation.

Fair enough, and it does settle the issue in terms of intent.

Just remember that HO's are somewhat "fun limiting" to the veteran players.

AutoPilot · « **Reply #72 on:** January 24, 2006, 03:03:11 PM »

Quote

If your plane has made the mistake of giving me a firing solution YOUR GONNA GET SHOT!! period end of story

That's exactly what dweeb's with no ACM skills always say.......

icemaw · « **Reply #73 on:** January 24, 2006, 03:24:29 PM »

Well maybe they are right and you should listen then. Since I am most certainly a dweeb and have none of the UBER acm skills that the rest of you debating this done to death topic have.

daddog · « **Reply #74 on:** January 24, 2006, 03:25:01 PM »

Quote

Just remember that HO's are somewhat "fun limiting" to the veteran players.

Only to those that let it.