It takes 2 to HO....

[CAP1]

In fact...wasn't shooting a guy in the back the COWARDS way? 

Ho-ing takes the dogfight out of the combat...but so does alt money pic-tarding which was also mentioned in this thread. Folks with good dogfighting skills and maneuverable planes want the game to be about dogfighting, but like the real war, the MA is about more than that. All of this whining about "Ho-ing" is just an attempt at a guilt trip to force pilots to give the advantage to pilots with higher skill levels by only engaging 'highly skilled' kills.

It's probably true that the (many) highly skilled pilots in this game would never be killed by pilot of lesser skill if it weren't for pick-tarding, and Ho-ing. So rather than be cannon fodder until I develop that kind of skill level, I'm going to shoot at what ever I have a gun solution on. (most likely I'll miss anyway)
I'm simply not good enough to give up an easy kill by NOT pulling the trigger on a bandit dumb enough to fly straight at me. 

But I would suggest that is what makes the MA like the real war in that Skill level was often no guarantee of success.

Better break early. 

I HAVE to admit....i ho'd a few yesterday. the place was being horded. there were only 2 or 3 of us defending, and the cv was so close we could barley get off the runway. so.....outnumbered, and them all having alt......ho'ing was in the cards. i lost most of em anyway.....

 one was accidental.....was a corsair, i thought wasn't gonna get his nose around as fast as he did......was set up for a beautiful shot, that would've raked him from stem to stern......he got round, and it turned into a ho......i

 i don't like it, but when necessary, i do what i have to do. our defense was successful BTW. 

[*PAPA*]

In, Combat Tactics in the SouthWest Pacific Area By Major Thomas B. McGuire, Jr. Published and Distributed by Asst. of S, A-3, V Fighter Command 4 May 1944 REPUBLISHED BY FEAF A-3 TRAINING SECTION 20, Oct. 1944, The HO is referenced several times as a legitimate tactic against planes with weaker armaments.

[CAP1]

In, Combat Tactics in the SouthWest Pacific Area By Major Thomas B. McGuire, Jr. Published and Distributed by Asst. of S, A-3, V Fighter Command 4 May 1944 REPUBLISHED BY FEAF A-3 TRAINING SECTION 20, Oct. 1944, The HO is referenced several times as a legitimate tactic against planes with weaker armaments.

OK........

all you guys that wanna compare this to real life.


 here's what ya have to do.

 have your wife, girlfriend, or just a friend stand by ya while you're flying. when you enter a stall buffet, have them shake the poop out of your seat, and screech really loud, to simulate the stall buzzer.  if you do a hard turn...one that would normally knock your head on the canopy....have them slap ya in the side of the head with a frying pan.
 if you spin your aircraft, they'll spin you till ya hurl in your seat.

 and finally, if you start taking hits, they;ll stab ya many many times with an ice pick. blood on the canopy, they can splash some of yours on the monitor.

 there. now you only get one life. now the ho becomes a valid tactic, 'cause your life really might depend on you winning that gamble. 

[Ex-jazz]

The virtual air combat HO'ing is a joke. Get over it.
If you end up 'You vs many situation', then the unintentional HO situations just happened. So, what You would do right there?

In real life HO'ing, there's no netlag, no lost packets and no server side network predicting code. The hailing is REALLY on the way to you...

[dunnrite]

Some one say Tutu ho?

[Yenny]

Fugitive was right....THIS ISNT REAL LIFE so dont use real life stuff as an arguement, You dont see Soldiers saying anything about noob tubing people in Call of duty...because they know it isnt real life. I cant argue anymore...I know there isnt any use.....

lol on that note, I had my crew mounted a MK-19 instead of a 50 cal on my victor. Every day rolling out of the wire I look for an oppertunity to use it. Haven't happen yet =/

[Simba]

There were some situations in WW2 where HOs were approved of, or even ordered to occur:

1) The Luftwaffe fighters defending the Reich against the 8th USAAF soon found out that the return fire of massed rear-facing 0.50" Brownings usually shredded them something cruel during the approach, and that the bomber's armour was mainly disposed to protect the crew from the shot-from-behind. The 109s and 190s took to flying in large line-abreast formations and used a head-on approach to a) hit the least-armoured part of the bombers b) maximize the damage done by each hitting round by adding the closing speed to its velocity c) use the fear of collision to cause the bombers to break formation d) reduce the time they were exposed to the bombers' return fire. The tactic was attempted at least twice (and definitely succeeded on the first attack) against the bomber force that carried out Mission 250, the 8th USAAF's first mass attack on Berlin, 6th March 1944. Individual LW pilots had already worked out that this was the most survivable approach against a B-17 or B-24; which is why the later models of both were fitted with twin-gun turrets under and in the nose respectively to supplement the single-gun 'lash-up' mountings carried previously.

2) RAF fighter pilots were taught to turn towards any attacker enjoying an advantage, in order to make the bandit's firing solution more difficult and hopefully induce the attacker into entering a turn-fight. It was dinned into him NEVER to turn away. The result was that the merge often had an element of the HO about it.

3) Any fighter pilot unlucky enough to find himself directly in a HO merge against an enemy risked eventual destruction by turning away before reaching firing range; he'd expose himself to a snap shot without being able to reply, or lose energy and his opponent would then be in a better position to manoeuvre onto his six. And his blood would likely be up, of course, and he'd be damned if he was going to 'chicken out' before the other guy . . .

The HO will be a feature of of air combat all the time people continue to fight each other in the air. Nuff said.

 

    

[The Fugitive]

There were some situations in WW2 where HOs were approved of, or even ordered to occur:

1) The Luftwaffe fighters defending the Reich against the 8th USAAF soon found out that the return fire of massed rear-facing 0.50" Brownings usually shredded them something cruel during the approach, and that the bomber's armour was mainly disposed to protect the crew from the shot-from-behind. The 109s and 190s took to flying in large line-abreast formations and used a head-on approach to a) hit the least-armoured part of the bombers b) maximize the damage done by each hitting round by adding the closing speed to its velocity c) use the fear of collision to cause the bombers to break formation d) reduce the time they were exposed to the bombers' return fire. The tactic was attempted at least twice (and definitely succeeded on the first attack) against the bomber force that carried out Mission 250, the 8th USAAF's first mass attack on Berlin, 6th March 1944. Individual LW pilots had already worked out that this was the most survivable approach against a B-17 or B-24; which is why the later models of both were fitted with twin-gun turrets under and in the nose respectively to supplement the single-gun 'lash-up' mountings carried previously.

2) RAF fighter pilots were taught to turn towards any attacker enjoying an advantage, in order to make the bandit's firing solution more difficult and hopefully induce the attacker into entering a turn-fight. It was dinned into him NEVER to turn away. The result was that the merge often had an element of the HO about it.

3) Any fighter pilot unlucky enough to find himself directly in a HO merge against an enemy risked eventual destruction by turning away before reaching firing range; he'd expose himself to a snap shot without being able to reply, or lose energy and his opponent would then be in a better position to manoeuvre onto his six. And his blood would likely be up, of course, and he'd be damned if he was going to 'chicken out' before the other guy . . .

The HO will be a feature of of air combat all the time people continue to fight each other in the air. Nuff said.

 

    

.... and all of that is useless information. We are playing a game  in which one of the main objectives of the game is air combat. By going for, and using a "HO" your negating combat and gambling on a joust.  I don't know about others, but I find no fun in flying head on into someone guns a blazing to win some, and to loose some. On the other hand, if I fight for 5 minutes against one or two enemy win or lose, IT'S A FRIKIN BLAST !

To me, that's the difference between "war", and what we do.

[CAP1]

ho ho ho your boat gently down the streammmm........nmerrily merrily merrily, this game is but a dreammmmmmm

[Simba]

And some participants prefer to try and reproduce at least some of the elements of WW2 flying, AH being a WW2 combat flight sim. You pays your money and makes your choice.

I don't think the information I've taken the trouble to supply is a waste of time to people who use AH as a combat flight simulation - but it obviously is to an arcade-gamer like you, who has nothing positive to add to what was an interesting thread.

Out.

[Shuffler]

There were some situations in WW2 where HOs were approved of, or even ordered to occur:

1) The Luftwaffe fighters defending the Reich against the 8th USAAF soon found out that the return fire of massed rear-facing 0.50" Brownings usually shredded them something cruel during the approach, and that the bomber's armour was mainly disposed to protect the crew from the shot-from-behind. The 109s and 190s took to flying in large line-abreast formations and used a head-on approach to a) hit the least-armoured part of the bombers b) maximize the damage done by each hitting round by adding the closing speed to its velocity c) use the fear of collision to cause the bombers to break formation d) reduce the time they were exposed to the bombers' return fire. The tactic was attempted at least twice (and definitely succeeded on the first attack) against the bomber force that carried out Mission 250, the 8th USAAF's first mass attack on Berlin, 6th March 1944. Individual LW pilots had already worked out that this was the most survivable approach against a B-17 or B-24; which is why the later models of both were fitted with twin-gun turrets under and in the nose respectively to supplement the single-gun 'lash-up' mountings carried previously.

2) RAF fighter pilots were taught to turn towards any attacker enjoying an advantage, in order to make the bandit's firing solution more difficult and hopefully induce the attacker into entering a turn-fight. It was dinned into him NEVER to turn away. The result was that the merge often had an element of the HO about it.

3) Any fighter pilot unlucky enough to find himself directly in a HO merge against an enemy risked eventual destruction by turning away before reaching firing range; he'd expose himself to a snap shot without being able to reply, or lose energy and his opponent would then be in a better position to manoeuvre onto his six. And his blood would likely be up, of course, and he'd be damned if he was going to 'chicken out' before the other guy . . .

The HO will be a feature of of air combat all the time people continue to fight each other in the air. Nuff said.

 

    

None of that has a thing to do with this GAME.

If you fail to learn ACM then your destined to just have to HO.

[crazyivan]

There were some situations in WW2 where HOs were approved of, or even ordered to occur:

1) The Luftwaffe fighters defending the Reich against the 8th USAAF soon found out that the return fire of massed rear-facing 0.50" Brownings usually shredded them something cruel during the approach, and that the bomber's armour was mainly disposed to protect the crew from the shot-from-behind. The 109s and 190s took to flying in large line-abreast formations and used a head-on approach to a) hit the least-armoured part of the bombers b) maximize the damage done by each hitting round by adding the closing speed to its velocity c) use the fear of collision to cause the bombers to break formation d) reduce the time they were exposed to the bombers' return fire. The tactic was attempted at least twice (and definitely succeeded on the first attack) against the bomber force that carried out Mission 250, the 8th USAAF's first mass attack on Berlin, 6th March 1944. Individual LW pilots had already worked out that this was the most survivable approach against a B-17 or B-24; which is why the later models of both were fitted with twin-gun turrets under and in the nose respectively to supplement the single-gun 'lash-up' mountings carried previously.

2) RAF fighter pilots were taught to turn towards any attacker enjoying an advantage, in order to make the bandit's firing solution more difficult and hopefully induce the attacker into entering a turn-fight. It was dinned into him NEVER to turn away. The result was that the merge often had an element of the HO about it.

3) Any fighter pilot unlucky enough to find himself directly in a HO merge against an enemy risked eventual destruction by turning away before reaching firing range; he'd expose himself to a snap shot without being able to reply, or lose energy and his opponent would then be in a better position to manoeuvre onto his six. And his blood would likely be up, of course, and he'd be damned if he was going to 'chicken out' before the other guy . . .

The HO will be a feature of of air combat all the time people continue to fight each other in the air. Nuff said.

 

    

I think I was a WW2 pilot in a past life! It was either that or a princess. Happy Halloween.

[CAP1]

None of that has a thing to do with this GAME.

If you fail to learn ACM then your destined to just have to HO.

not necessarily.

you can pick. you can ram. you can lawndart. 

 or in my case, you can keep on dying to pretty much any other aircraft out there. 

[The Fugitive]

And some participants prefer to try and reproduce at least some of the elements of WW2 flying, AH being a WW2 combat flight sim. You pays your money and makes your choice.

I don't think the information I've taken the trouble to supply is a waste of time to people who use AH as a combat flight simulation - but it obviously is to an arcade-gamer like you, who has nothing positive to add to what was an interesting thread.

Out.

LOL!!! Gamer. No I have always been a dog fighter, that is what I've always thought these games are about. Getting in close, so close you can see the parts coming off! In the early days... over 10 years ago.. I wasn't very good at it and calmed my frustration by jumping in a buff, or helping capture a base with a goon run.

Your information is useless because unlike war, we get new planes after every flight, and we never, ever die. Seeing as we don't have to worry about flying that wreck home, or maybe bailing and becoming a POW it changes how people fly. Crashing into another plane doesn't hurt, and may give you the kill if you get enough round into him first. This is what drives a big percentage of the "gamers" these days.

I'm more like you than you'd think. While I have no illusion that this game is anything like war, I do look to have the illusion of the fight, the struggle, the tactics, and the maneuvering that a real fight "might" have had, and HOing to negate all of those possibilities is just foolish and a waste of time.

[CAP1]

I think I was a WW2 pilot in a past life! It was either that or a princess. Happy Halloween.

you could've been both.

do you wear panties on your head when you fly? do you grab a purse, and throw it at your wife when she tries to bother ya while you're flying/>?