Buff Leathality Range

[214CaveJ]

juzz I'm gonna tell ya straight up:  you're nuts
if it were as you describe I'd be even more lethal on my buff guns than I am currently =)

[juzz]

I swear it's true - shoot out 90º to the right side of a buff and observe the tracers.

What I see is the tracers appearing to the left of the sight line, then "blowing back" to cross the middle of the gunsight at a certain range from the plane, which I assume is the convergence setting. Ie: they appear to follow top red line in the diagram.

What I would expect to see is the tracers start out along the middle of the sightline, then getting "blown back" due to air resistance - thus following the bottom red line in the diagram.

Intentional or not, there's certainly something odd going on here...  

[214CaveJ]

ok juzz, from which gun are you talking about?
are you firing all gun positions (primary fire) or just the station you're manning? (secondary fire).  If you're firing all positions you're seeing the tracers from the guns that are closer to the front.

I can tell you from experience that you _must_ lead your targets if you expect to get hits, even if they're only 200yds away.
The only times ya dinnae have to lead the target is a straight on six or head on 12 attack.  And then ya gotta lead the bandit if they veer off any from a straight line into the guns

[BBGunn]

Hmmmmmmmm! Did anyone at AH ever shoot trap and skeet or jackrabbits?

[eskimo]

BigJim:
I thought this sounded like a complaint from a guy who does not spend much time in BUFFs.  I just checked your stats and I was right.  In the B-26 and B-17 you have been killed 2 times and have 1 kill.  
In fighters you have killed 30 B-26's and been killed 12 times by them.  Against B-17's, you have killed 16, and been killed 10 times by them (Better BUFF killing stats than I have!).  The stats don't mention bails.  
Speaking for those of us who spend 1/2 or more of our time in BUFFs, we think that the odds already favor the fighters plenty.  
B-17's have enjoyed 1832 kills at the expense of 3269 deaths.  That is not a great ratio, especially if you consider that the BUFFS spend 3 to 5 times the amount of time getting to altitude and to enemy teritory as the fighters must spend to intercept them.
B-26's have 3019 kills, at the cost of 4255 deaths, a little better than the B-17, but still, a far worse ratio than any fighter experiences.
Personally, I would like to see Gunner improvements, such as automatically switching to the next gun when it is moved to the extent of it's track. IE, track a target down from the tail and automatically switch to the ball when the gun travel hits bottom.
I would like to suggest that you spend about 1/3 of your time in BUFFs for awhile and then tell us what you think of the BUFFs leathality.
Don't forget that there must be an incentive to fly any particular plane.  No one wants to just fly around and be someone's cannon fodder, which is often what BUFF driving is!
eskimo

[eskimo]

BigJim:
I thought this sounded like a complaint from a guy who does not spend much time in BUFFs.  I just checked your stats and I was right.  In the B-26 and B-17 you have been killed 2 times and have 1 kill.  
In fighters you have killed 30 B-26's and been killed 12 times by them.  Against B-17's, you have killed 16, and been killed 10 times by them (Better BUFF killing stats than I have!).  The stats don't mention bails.  
Speaking for those of us who spend 1/2 or more of our time in BUFFs, we think that the odds already favor the fighters plenty.  
B-17's have enjoyed 1832 kills at the expense of 3269 deaths.  That is not a great ratio, especially if you consider that the BUFFS spend 3 to 5 times the amount of time getting to altitude and to enemy teritory as the fighters must spend to intercept them.
B-26's have 3019 kills, at the cost of 4255 deaths, a little better than the B-17, but still, a far worse ratio than any fighter experiences.
Personally, I would like to see Gunner improvements, such as automatically switching to the next gun when it is moved to the extent of it's track. IE, track a target down from the tail and automatically switch to the ball when the gun travel hits bottom.
I would like to suggest that you spend about 1/3 of your time in BUFFs for awhile and then tell us what you think of the BUFFs leathality.
Don't forget that there must be an incentive to fly any particular plane.  No one wants to just fly around and be someone's cannon fodder, which is often what BUFF driving is!
eskimo

[eskimo]

BigJim:
I thought this sounded like a complaint from a guy who does not spend much time in BUFFs.  I just checked your stats and I was right.  In the B-26 and B-17 you have been killed 2 times and have 1 kill.  
In fighters you have killed 30 B-26's and been killed 12 times by them.  Against B-17's, you have killed 16, and been killed 10 times by them (Better BUFF killing stats than I have!).  The stats don't mention bails.  
Speaking for those of us who spend 1/2 or more of our time in BUFFs, we think that the odds already favor the fighters plenty.  
B-17's have enjoyed 1832 kills at the expense of 3269 deaths.  That is not a great ratio, especially if you consider that the BUFFS spend 3 to 5 times the amount of time getting to altitude and to enemy teritory as the fighters must spend to intercept them.
B-26's have 3019 kills, at the cost of 4255 deaths, a little better than the B-17, but still, a far worse ratio than any fighter experiences.
Personally, I would like to see Gunner improvements, such as automatically switching to the next gun when it is moved to the extent of it's track. IE, track a target down from the tail and automatically switch to the ball when the gun travel hits bottom.
I would like to suggest that you spend about 1/3 of your time in BUFFs for awhile and then tell us what you think of the BUFFs leathality.
Don't forget that there must be an incentive to fly any particular plane.  No one wants to just fly around and be someone's cannon fodder, which is often what BUFF driving is!
eskimo

[eskimo]

BigJim:
I thought this sounded like a complaint from a guy who does not spend much time in BUFFs.  I just checked your stats and I was right.  In the B-26 and B-17 you have been killed 2 times and have 1 kill.  
In fighters you have killed 30 B-26's and been killed 12 times by them.  Against B-17's, you have killed 16, and been killed 10 times by them (Better BUFF killing stats than I have!).  The stats don't mention bails.  
Speaking for those of us who spend 1/2 or more of our time in BUFFs, we think that the odds already favor the fighters plenty.  
B-17's have enjoyed 1832 kills at the expense of 3269 deaths.  That is not a great ratio, especially if you consider that the BUFFS spend 3 to 5 times the amount of time getting to altitude and to enemy teritory as the fighters must spend to intercept them.
B-26's have 3019 kills, at the cost of 4255 deaths, a little better than the B-17, but still, a far worse ratio than any fighter experiences.
Personally, I would like to see Gunner improvements, such as automatically switching to the next gun when it is moved to the extent of it's track. IE, track a target down from the tail and automatically switch to the ball when the gun travel hits bottom.
I would like to suggest that you spend about 1/3 of your time in BUFFs for awhile and then tell us what you think of the BUFFs leathality.
Don't forget that there must be an incentive to fly any particular plane.  No one wants to just fly around and be someone's cannon fodder, which is often what BUFF driving is!
eskimo

[BigJim]

heheh I got you thoughts the first time Eskimo.  I have a friend who flies the buffs alot and he gave me the same speech so maybe I better just keep quiet  

[This message has been edited by BigJim (edited 02-18-2000).]

[eskimo]

Sorry about the triple post.  I sent it on a computer at work that wouldn't show the reply.  I couldn't figure out what was going on.  Still havn't?
eskimo.

[smash]

As long as the buffs are being simulated as manned by a single, or at most 2 or 3 gunners, the lethality question is mute.

Just my opinion.