AI gunners in non drone planes

[Skyguns MKII]

Even if your guns were automated you would still do better dogfighting them with the goal of getting behind them. You get the same firepower down range as with your tail gunner, and if you're behind them, they physically can't get a shot on you.

yes but your missing the point. Its a defence and of course will never be as deadly or accurate as your forward fixed guns. But i have a gunners position that deserves a gunner. I'm too preoccupied maneuvering and staying alive.

[Raphael]

personally after all this debate I am +1 to this wish if you had the option to turn it on/off in the hangar before your sortie, counting for anyhting that has gunner seats except for flak

[Skyguns MKII]

You  have no more controll of a tank while gunning than you do with a plane. You can turn the tank in either direction and speed up/slow down. You can do all this in a plane, AND you can turn on WEP while gunning too.

Like I said, no difference at all between the LOGIC. None, zero, zip. Some would just use it more than others, and that's true even between the planes you've listed.

If one is harmful to gameplay, and there is no difference in reasoning behind the two, why is the other OK?

Its not the same... similar may be but not the same. A tank your going 35-20 mph. A aircraft your going 200, 300, 400 mph. It does not make any sense applying this to gvs. You have a tank commander and can maneuver your tank just fine being at your speed and not having to worry about climb and decent and firing the main gun and BB guns just fine.

[Tank-Ace]

yes but your missing the point. Its a defence and of course will never be as deadly or accurate as your forward fixed guns. But i have a gunners position that deserves a gunner. I'm too preoccupied maneuvering and staying alive.

If I can do it, so can you. I've had a good fight with an A6M and an F4U-D before in my Ju-87. I've even shot down a typhoon and a spitfire in a fight with a P-51, spit 9, and typhoon. Manuver to defeat his guns solution, jump to the gunner, and fire at him as he tries to salvage his shot.



It would be more usefull to a plane true, but the logic and reasoning behind it (I can't fly/drive and shoot at the same time) is the same.

And you still haven't answered my earlier question of how the planes the auto-ack shoots down would be treated.

[Skyguns MKII]

If I can do it, so can you. I've had a good fight with an A6M and an F4U-D before in my Ju-87. I've even shot down a typhoon and a spitfire in a fight with a P-51, spit 9, and typhoon. Manuver to defeat his guns solution, jump to the gunner, and fire at him as he tries to salvage his shot.



It would be more usefull to a plane true, but the logic and reasoning behind it (I can't fly/drive and shoot at the same time) is the same.

And you still haven't answered my earlier question of how the planes the auto-ack shoots down would be treated.

logic also says that another body in the plane even if its AI is better than one live body trying to operate all.
plane auto ack would never be as effective as a live person being there but will still serve its perpose. HTC and aces high community can decide the overall efficiency of the guns and surely can be nerfed or boosted as needed.

[Tank-Ace]

See Rule #4

[Skyguns MKII]

See Rule #4

[PJ_Godzilla]

See Rule #4

[muzik]

Seriously. Would You gun for a Stuka? Would you (almost) waste your time?
He wasnt asking for an über autoack. I bet it would be inferior to an average gunner. If you gun in your d3a, stuka, b5n, tbm, 110c, boston sbd etc. youre dead in 5 seconds. The only exception is the a20g what has a bit more firepower in its back turret.
I give it a +1. Thos planes are already hangar queens, i would give them a chance, if they are already carrying that weight.

This is dead on.

The OP is right and almost everyone else is wrong. His idea has been suggested before I believe and is the best way to model it for all the reasons he stated.

-lag issues with joins
-flying (and maneuvering) while trying to gun is cumbersome, illogical, and unrealistic. And gunning in a vehicle is NOT the same thing. vehicles can only go left or right, aircraft MUST use climbs and dives also to successfully evade the enemy and they dont have trees to hide behind.
-It doesnt have to be programmed as a highly accurate gun, just enough to be a deterrence.
-gunning heavy bombers is not the same either, heavies have a dozen guns for defense.


+1

[Skyguns MKII]

This is dead on.

The OP is right and almost everyone else is wrong. His idea has been suggested before I believe and is the best way to model it for all the reasons he stated.


-gunning heavy bombers is not the same either, heavies have a dozen guns for defense.


+1

and drones

[PJ_Godzilla]

See Rule #4

[Tank-Ace]

See Rules #4, #6

[PJ_Godzilla]

See Rules #4, #6

[Tank-Ace]

It will be a near non-issue for anything without a .50 (only 3 airplanes in this category actually have one). People will just ignore the 7.92's tickling their plane for the 3 second it requires to knock his wing off.

[PJ_Godzilla]

It will be a near non-issue for anything without a .50 (only 3 airplanes in this category actually have one). People will just ignore the 7.92's tickling their plane for the 3 second it requires to knock his wing off.

Yes, but, the pilot gets to fly and maneuver with focus as well. I think it'll make the entire equation a lot more interesting, even if the outcome is generally the same. As someone else pointed out, you still want to save your radiator and engine oil. There is also the annoying possibility of the pw.