Originally posted by mtnman
No problem Sloehand, it was a good idea!
For one, we play this game for entertainment. We visit the boards for information to help us be entertained, and for entertainment itself. As long as we keep coming back something must be working out correctly, right?
I guess I would have to go with the general consensus that there are really only two definite "types" of fighting, and that the best pilots don't use a third style, rather but freely move between the two as situations allow or dictate.
I even had trouble defining the third style myself because it is so fluid and vague, mainly because it isn't it's own style at all.
Maybe there really is only one way to fight, as blukitty alludes to (and 2Bighorn). Not BnZ or TnB. Energy fighting only works if you can use your energy to get the angle, and angle fighting only works if you have the energy to get the shot.
Maybe TnB and BnZ aren't "types" or "styles" at all, but rather traps that new pilots fall into on the road to the "real" method of fighting? Or are they valid decriptions of two different strategies used as part of the whole?
MtnMan
As someone else mentioned, the distinction between BnZ and TnB is predicated to a great degree by individual aircraft capabilities, which can determine what types of manuveurs offer the greatest potential for the pilot to engage, get a kill, and then survive. As such, these factors do form naturally into two styles of combat and training.
But as you point out, a really good pilot can do both or either as the situation arises. In fact, to be able to effectively engage a pilot flying in one style with someone flying in the other, it is almost imperative that the pilot knows well the other style.
Much of success in air combat is due less to fancy flying or swift reflexes than it is to anticipating what your opponent will do in a given situation almost before he does, due to recognizing the finite circumstances of the moment (a/c, alt, speed, terrain, evident mission of opponent, tactical position, etc).
Therefore, being intimately familar with how a TnB does what he does can be important to a BnZ pilot in determining how and when he will set up his attack, and planning for how he will responded based on his victim's probable actions.
If I were to continue with this it would lead us to a discussion of the concept of the O.O.D.A. Loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act). A very important and powerful element of combat flying, which I doubt many know much about, though it would be nice if I were wrong there.
As our favorite son, Skylump, will certainly not hesitate remind everyone ad nauseum, I am not a 'natural' pilot and know it. However, I am somewhat better than my physical talents or skills would make me because of the "thinking' aspect of combat into which O.O.D.A. Loop fits as the definitive approach.
However, O.O.D.A. is for another discussion, but I encourage everyone to look it up and understand the dueling thinking processes going on between two combatants.
To conclude, I believe both styles somewhat are, and definitely should be taught together, if for no other reason than comparative presentation instruction in either style. As also mentioned before, there is a somewhat unfortunate progression of skill and styles that seems to occur with most all new pilots. When I help a new pilot get started I try to clearly define, demonstrate, and teach both styles comparatively.
Also, I am a TnB pilot who has learned to use BnZ no matter what plane I'm in, if the situation calls for it.
