Please add this if you care for bombers

[Wedge1126]

They don't converge on you.  The guns from a single bomber fire in parallel to each other.  Each bomber's parallel streams of fire converge with the other two bombers parallel streams of fire at 500 yards or so.

AH is non-Euclidean?

[Karnak]

AH is non-Euclidean?

This is what I mean:

(sorry about the bitmaps, but I needed to keep the images precise)

This is how most people seem to think bomber guns in AH work.  This is wrong:


This is how they actually work:

[Anaxogoras]

...and while you're at it, remove the warping drones from the game.

[aenigma]

Was it in AH1, AW, or WB or something? I could have sworn that they had it somewhere and took it out.

Someone already answered but in AW we had a lot of fun in a fully manned buff and having that option now would be another element of game play worth having.

[Lusche]

AH is non-Euclidean?

In addition to Karnak's images:


(picture by Fuzeman)

[Wedge1126]

I was actually just making a jab at Karnak saying the streams were "parallel" and that they converge in the same sentence.

Otherwise, great illustrations for new players to learn from. Thanks.

Edit: I just noticed Karnak said the guns on a single bomber fire parallel streams, not that each bombers stream is parallel to the other bomber's stream. So, I was in error. Seriously now, is this true? The guns on a single bomber do not converge?

[Karnak]

Wedge,

That is correct.

[JHerne]

Technically, there would be a convergence point, albeit a slight one, given that different gun positions are just that - different gun positions. A top turret and a ball turret, for example, would have the height of the fuselage difference between them. With both turrets firing at a co-level target, one would be firing upward, one downward, with the convergence point being at the target, correct?

J

[Karnak]

Technically, there would be a convergence point, albeit a slight one, given that different gun positions are just that - different gun positions. A top turret and a ball turret, for example, would have the height of the fuselage difference between them. With both turrets firing at a co-level target, one would be firing upward, one downward, with the convergence point being at the target, correct?

J

No, not correct.  The guns do not point at the target.  Look at my illustrations again.

[JHerne]

Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?

[NoBaddy]

Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?

It looks really cool!!

[Anaxogoras]

Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?

Besides the obvious function of allowing you 3 chances to hit instead of one when you fire at ranges past convergence?

[Karnak]

Then what the hell is the sense of having linked guns, aside from wasting ammo?

It is a shotgun effect.  It increases your odds of scoring hits.

[RMrider]

They don't converge on you.  The guns from a single bomber fire in parallel to each other.  Each bomber's parallel streams of fire converge with the other two bombers parallel streams of fire at 500 yards or so.

Yessir i know this, I should have worded that more correctly, as when i am in my own bombers  i can see that the cross at 500 yards or so. What i mean is that with every available gun still firing in your direction, nothing but bad things can happen for an attacking fighter. In WW2 many bombers could not fire their guns in fear of hitting a friendly Buff. This is where real life compares to the game i guess.