Bomber Gunners a WAY too Uber in AH

[bowser]

Coming from WBs, where most people don't even bother attacking bombers because of the deadly otto, I find the bomber vs fighter duel a fairly fair fight with a decided edge to the fighter if he is patient.  If you use slashing attacks where the bomber hasn't got very much time to get guns on you, the fighter wins most of the time.

bowser

[juzz]

 

Now consider the flexible mounted gun of a bomber gunner. The turret is powered but the guns are flexible. As the gunner swings his 60-100 lbs of Machinegun/ammo (depending on whether he is firing one or two guns) on to gun/target line he will greatly hampered by the inertia of his own weapon system. Just the push of the relative wind on his barrels will make alignment with target difficult. Any G's pulled by the bomber would make the gunners job impossible. A 60 lb gun would be 120lb at 2g's. Finally the recoil of his own weapon system in a flexible mount would send his bullets all over the sky.

This is for any powered turret, Sperry ball, Martin mid-upper, Chin guns etc...

1. The guns are FIXED in the turret, as much as any fixed forward firing armament on a fighter.
2. The gunner doesn't swing the guns, he uses the turret controls to give inputs to the motors which turn the turret.
3. Slipstream will have no effect for reasons as above, plus the turret is aerodynamically shaped.

[Minotaur]

KetteJG26;

I am assuming that you know the way BUFF gunners work in AH.

But in case you don't....

Individual gun positions can be synchronized and almost always are.  This means that all guns that can orientate to the same spot as the position that is actually being controlled will all do so.  

For example; if I am gunning from the tail position and you attack from the left rear upward quadrant.  The following guns will track you: tail, upper and waste.  

This means you will have 5 x 50's shooting at the same spot.  The trick is to analyze where each gun can fire and attack the point where the fewest guns can shoot at you.

Good Luck!  

------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

"Best is the trash talk. Severly and viciously going after your enemies, their mothers, and their shabby sheep."
StSanta

[eskimo]

Does this look uber?  (Tour 9)

The B-17G has 1760 kills and has been killed 2397 times.

The B-26B has 2006 kills and has been killed 2871 times.

The Ju 88 has 791 kills and has been killed 1627 times.

The Lancaster III has 942 kills and has been killed 1960 times.

It's all about how you attack a buff, giving him a bad shot, while you zip in, clean his clock, and zip out.  So far in Tour 10:

eskimo has 6 kills and has been killed 1 time in the Typhoon IB against the
  B-17G.

eskimo has 7 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
  B-26B.

eskimo has 4 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
  Ju 88.

eskimo has 3 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
  Lancaster III.

And I am just a good pilot, many are much better.

And then again I have not been unfortunate enough to have made attacks against buffs defended by gunners such as Mitsu, Nin, Citabria, Rollo, hedg260, KBman... (the list goes on) [Key word is gunner]

eskimo

[popeye]

Kette,

Have you flown a bomber in AH?  If not, give it a try, and then decide if it was too uber.

I've flown a lot of hours in AW, WB, and AH, and I think AH has the best bomber model around.  Not "realistic", true, but pretty darn well balanced for game play.  (They could be a BIT less accurate from high altitude.)

[Graywolf]

I'll raise a point that eith Pyro OR Hitech did some time ago (sorry can't remeber which'

Why to people think that having dispersion makes it harder to hit a target?

In reality it makes it easier as rather than a pencil thin beam of fire you have to get exactly on target you get a bloody big spray of lead you just have to manuver into the general area of what you're trying to hit (ie. overlap the target with your cone of ire).

This spread is already large from a single gun, as pointed out earlier in this thread. Now look at the way the gunnery in bombers works. One person aims all the guns that can bear on their aimpoint at the exact same thing.

Now making an assumption (and it's just that, I may be wrong the guys at HTC wil know for sure) that this aim point is a single point xxx yds out, like convergence, this mens that as you get further away from this point the spread becoms even bigger.

Now this spreading means that the dmamge inflicted is less, but then current gunnery aiming method means that in most attacks 5 to 7 o'clock attack 5 .50 cal MGs are pointing at the enemy. IF you can hold even this big spray (easier than a thin beam) on target for a second or two you are going to do a fair bit of damage.

This is one of the reasons why I think the 'all guns on one target' code should go.

------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>

[Fury]

I think that I have much better gunnery in my bomber than I have when flying a fighter.

Gunners are basically stable platforms (unless I am gunning for another pilot who is doing evasives).  I find it quite easy to line up shots, especially on anyone who is coming up my six or is giving me an easy headon shot.

On the other hand, when flying a fighter, I have a heck of a time landing hits.  I believe this has to do with the way I control the plane to get a shot in...I rarely have and easy shot because not only is the enemy moving around in my sights, I am trying to match his moves.

I think also that joysticks have something to do with it.  My Sidewinder 3D pro seemed a lot more "stable" when shooting buff guns than my current stick.  Even after tweaking the setup, I still have noticable "lag" in moving my stick, which often results in overshooting where I want to point the gun.

I've often wondered if a stable platform had more to do with the uberguns on buffs than anything else.

Try shooting guns while the pilot is evading -- I have, and it is damn near impossible to hit anything  

Fury

[KetteJG26]

  I definately think the "All guns on One target" should go.  Gunners were assigned a sector for a reason.  To provide all around security for the bomber.  Just as an Assault Line cannot make the fatal mistake of getting "tunnel" vision trained gunners are not going to stop watching their own sector, guarding it against attack to hit a fighter in another sector.  Gunners communicated over the ICS and called out relative positions of fighters so that when a fighter left their sector another gunner could pick it up.  This might tone down the bombers gunnery and make the fight more even.

[Fury]

Currently, there is no otto in AH (AI gunner).

Additionally, you can only have one gunner on your bomber (either you or another human gunner).

This means that only one gunner position is manned and firing at one time.

HTC added the "combined" option to simulate having all gunner positions manned.

I agree that each gunner would have an area to scan, that makes sense.  However, I think that if a plane came into view, it's possible more than one gunner would shoot at it.  At least to me, that make sense; I wasn't a gunner in the real war.  Possibly that's part of the reason HTC added the option (the other being that there is only one gunner on board).

It would be nice to have more than one gunner at a time; however, except for scenarios, I think that most of the time, the guy manning the guns is the pilot.

[eskimo]

Imagine,
You are the top turret gunner on a B-17 over Germany, 1944.
The tail gunner call out that a FW-190 is making a 6:00 high attack on your plane, he is the only enemy in sight of your bomber.
And you decide, even though you could easily bear your guns on him, "He's not in my sector, I'll let the tail gunner deal with him"!
Like hell you would!  It's do or die time!
Heck, even the radioman would have popped open the top hatch and slid out his single 50 to take a crack at the 190.  

My father-in-law was a B-17 gunnery instructor during WWII.  I have talked to him extensively, for hour on end about his job.  I also have met and talked to dozens of WWII bomber gunners about their exploits.  In general, bomber gunners shot at everything within their sights.  Heck, even escorting U.S. fighters were often afraid to approach our bombers because they would get shot at!

eskimo
 

[eskimo]

Ammo counts have been trackable since Beta tour 2.

Since then I have fired 855,963 rounds of ammo from "bombers" (mostly fron flying "bombers".  
I am sure that few gunners in WWII had the opportunity (or survived long enough)to shoot a few hundred thousand rounds at moving targets from their bombers.
As a result I have become a pretty good gunner.  Many others in this sim also have a heck of a lot of gunnery practice and are even better shots than I.  
In this sim, you are facing many deadly gunners that you can never give a square shot to (from a fighter).  The problem that you are facing is not the guns being uber, it's the uber-gunners!


eskimo

[eskimo]

LOL ketten!
I see the problem!
You have yet to fly a bomber mission in this sim!  (I just checked your score.)

With all due respect,
SHUT THE HELL UP UNTILL YOU HAVE FLOWN AND GUNNED FROM A BOMBER!

After you get your buff waxed a few times you will figure out how the good buff killers get you without giving you a good shot.  
You will also undoubtedly kill a few fighters and figure out how not to approach a bomber.

Re-post your opinions after you have experienced things from the recieving end.

eskimo

[LJK Raubvogel]

Kette:
Long time no see dude. Just a reminder, this isn't FA. Give it a few weeks before you form an opinion. You need to adjust your tactics, FA tactics don't work in here.Keep practicing, you'll find the best angles to attack each buff from.

------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[KetteJG26]

Hey eskimo...
"With all due respect..."
Cut the crap.
I'm not gonna stoop and try and return the flame.  Your right I haven't flown a bomber mission in AH.  I don't have too.  The gunners are way too accurate.  Its not a "sim" if it doesn't simulate reality within the limitations of a computer game.
When you use tactics that were successful against real bomber boxes with many bombers providing multiple coverage and it continually fails....its not a "sim".  It amount's too flying shapes that look like WWII fighters.  Might as well be X-Wings attacking a Klingon battlecruiser.  Head on Attacks were the tried and proven method of attacking bombers.  Worked so well the B-17G had a chin turret installed to try and counter it and Head on still was successful.  Crack a history book.  Sure there isn't 40 other bombers in a box in AH...niether are there 50 other fighters from your Staffle attacking.  If I'm gonna pay 30 bucks a month expecting a simulation then I want a simulation.  Go back and read the whole post m8 and return with an intelligent reason why "Ubergunners" are ok.  
So far we have the facts and history vs. Playability.
Playability is a strong argument.  IMO the guns shouldn't be realistic because Lone bombers were dead bottom line and that's not fun for the bomber crew.  However I think they should be toned down some.  In a head on attack the fighter has the advantage of range due to aerodynamic drag.  If a fighter has the patience to line up for a head on attack then chances should be in his favor.  That's not how AH is at all.  It should be dangerous to fly a bomber.  Fighters should be escorting bombers and jabo's.  Teamwork is all that needed..not Ubergunners.

[KetteJG26]

 

Originally posted by juzz:
This is for any powered turret, Sperry ball, Martin mid-upper, Chin guns etc...

1. The guns are FIXED in the turret, as much as any fixed forward firing armament on a fighter.
2. The gunner doesn't swing the guns, he uses the turret controls to give inputs to the motors which turn the turret.
3. Slipstream will have no effect for reasons as above, plus the turret is aerodynamically shaped.

Ahh...No they are not m8.  They are flexible mounts.  Even a 125mm cannon in a tank turret is a "flexible" mount.  They have to be boresighted constantly and rezeroed.  Because the gun moves in its mount after firing, expansion/contraction (tempature), even different ammo lots.
Fixed guns are just that...fixed m8.  You can't swivel at Mk108.  Its bolted to the Airframe.  You must point the WHOLE aircraft to aim the weapon.  The airframe absorbs the recoil.  Sure you must boresight and rezero the gun just as any weapon.  

Think of it this way.  Ask your father-in-law where the guns were put after a mission...the ARMS ROOM!!!!!  Now talk to a P-51 pilot and ask him where his guns were stored after a mission...the FLIGHTLINE...IN THE WINGS OF HIS P51. Crews could access the breechs for cleaning but you didn't remove the whole reciever. Why, because you have to steal the whole plane to take em or have a wrench and whole lot of time on your hands to get to em.
YES...slipstream would have an effect on the gunners ability to rapidly acquire a proper site picture.