FYI This is not a "HO":)

[Slash27]

Originally posted by KONG1
This IS a HO

mom?

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by Slash27
mom?

[nickf620]

where is this film everyone is talking about?

[SteveBailey]

agree with kermit. the typical AH dream of being a good stick has died. i've been playing a year

Hehehehe.. the season had long passed before you ever took flight in this game, young padawan.  A year........ still in swaddling clothes you are.  No offense intended.

Good shot Humble.  This is a long way from a HO. The accepted definition of a HO is a merge where both pilots have a gun solution, at least an opportunity to fire on the opponent.  This doens't occur, hence this is a high deflection shot and not an HO.

Considering this is the MA and one needs to kill the bad guys expeditiously in order to prepare for/fight others,  the person talking about "earning a six shot" lives in an idealistic, fantasy world and must find the chaos of the MA, with it's muiltiple bogie fights, to be most unsatisfying.

[kbman]

Geez...this like a time warp or something...

I haven't logged in here in ages and the same people are STILL arguing about HO's!

It's amazing...or terrifying...or just plain silly.

Anyways, nice to see things haven't changed much I suppose.

Happy new year all!

kb

[TexInVa]

Originally posted by Widewing
Ok guys, pay attention....

This is not an HO, but what happens when you try to avoid the HO:

My apologies to Widewing for altering his post.

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
If you can get your plane to turn tighter to take advantage of your better turning radius as opposed to the better turn rate of the other plane which will force the other plane to cross your nose in a turn is not a HO shot but a perfect deflection angle shot.   You can argue all you want that it's a HO shot but the facts will prove you wrong.


ack-ack

Look at it like this... at some point in that turning whateveryoucallit... it becomes less HOish.  But, in the end, it's still just so much HO style firing.  Here's another angle... would those shots have registered in AW?  No, most wouldn't.  Why?  Because HO's were/are/will be a pain in the oscar that most would rather do without.  I'm not saying in any way these are shots that should not be taken... I would.  But this is just a part of the reason I no longer engage in the tight turning stall fight.  9 times out of 10 you end up in a joust, if and ONLY if someone else doesn't jump in cherry one of ya.

[Suave]

Originally posted by Widewing
I understand your point, but I honestly don't care what the Navy calls it... This isn't the Navy. We set our own definitions. As long as I've been here, what classifies an HO is when both parties can get a guns solution.

My regards,

Widewing

I think the definition of the HO started to be confused about 7 years ago when the phrase face shooter fell out of favor. From then grew the "it takes two to HO" fallacy.

[Suave]

Originally posted by Murdr
I hate to break my record of never ever being skuzzyfied, but I can't seem to come up with a better way to put it.....You're an idiot.

Ad hominem is what people do when they know they're wrong but they still want to say something anyway.

[Suave]

I've been a member for years longer than that. And I do know what a HO is in real world and in dweeb nomenclature.

Mainly it's former AW players that are bitting thier pillows about what is or isn't a HO. Because AW was such a crappy game, HO shots almost never ever landed, they were basically disabled. When AW finally died the AW players came over to AH and pissed their pants when confronted with the frontal aspect shooters

This is turning into an entertaining HO whiner thread.

[thndregg]

Originally posted by Widewing
As long as I've been here, what classifies an HO is when both parties can get a guns solution.

My regards,

Widewing

Can't argue with that.

[herrhav0k]

I understand that in technical terms a HO is a head-on merge where both parties have a gun solution. But I think you only hear things on 200 like "nice HO dweeb" when one plane does not fire on the first merge in an attempt to set up a decent fight, and the other plane does.

Sure, they both could come out guns blazing, but one of them may think it's cheap and unfair, and that clash of opinions is when people start crying on 200.

[Speed55]

After watching the film.

#1 that was not a HO.

#2 If the LA or anyone else in the MA had that shot they would and should  take it.  

#3 When a shot like that used to present itself, i would start getting that dopey gallantry feeling, and hold fire thinking to myself i don't want to be accused of a HO shooter on 200.  Sometimes i would be able to saddle up on their 6 and make the kill like a "good guy" would. But sometimes after another merge or two, the enemy would have the same shot on me, take it, and shoot me down.  I would then think to myself, who's the good guy now dik.

 

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Bronk
Link or some other evidence like scanned USN data sheet  stating same.


Bronk

Again still waiting Suave.


Bronk

[humble]

Originally posted by Tumor
Look at it like this... at some point in that turning whateveryoucallit... it becomes less HOish.  But, in the end, it's still just so much HO style firing.  Here's another angle... would those shots have registered in AW?  No, most wouldn't.  Why?  Because HO's were/are/will be a pain in the oscar that most would rather do without.  I'm not saying in any way these are shots that should not be taken... I would.  But this is just a part of the reason I no longer engage in the tight turning stall fight.  9 times out of 10 you end up in a joust, if and ONLY if someone else doesn't jump in cherry one of ya.

1st,

That shot would have registered in AW (IMO){maybe HT/Pyro could clarify how that aspect of the "hit bubble" worked}. The shots strike the plane from cockpit to tail from an angle...not thru the frontal aspect of the plane.

2nd,

That was not anywhere near a stall fight. Just basic ACM with neither plane anywhere near stall. This was a simply a bounce that got converted to an E fight then a "once circle" fight and finally a 'two circle" fight. On the 1st 2 circle merge I was totally defensive. the bandits shot selection on the initial 2 circle merge created an opening which I went out of plane to exploit. His continuation of the 2 circle created both a shot opportunity and a potential risk in "evading". If you look at the clip the shot is actually nothing more then a lead turn that creates a small window (which I use) and places me roughly 800 behind (a gap I wouldnt have closed).

Basically what I'm getting out of this is that a pretty large subset of the population doesnt really understand ACM. The "two circle" fight is a very valid tactic. It's most commonly seen in the MA used by both Hurricanes and IL-2's as a vertical "two circle fight" where they loop up into the higher con meeting each "attack". you will also see alot of low spit drivers use the same tactic. I'm always amazed at the "HO" whines this generates. The higher faster con controls the fight but "complains" when his lack of fundemental ACM leads to a "HO". Its also seen used by tiffie drivers like coach who often create a front aspect shot by converting your defensive move into a two circle fight and getting around quicker. You also see it with 109's and C hog's......

If your in a one circle fight you cant win, try the two circle fight