Ethics of HO Shooting.....

[Triton28]

After digesting some walls of text there, I'll say this. Most of the front quarter shots you guys are referring to is a situation where a guy is merging with you looking for a fight. He could keep his nose pressed completely to you, but just veers slightly to merge. It's very unsporting to then pop off a shot and say, "I win!" When it's pretty clear to you what his intent is.

It's not the shot that is annoying as the attitude and justifications that come with it. 2cmex ho's all the time in merges but I don't see him spouting off about how he got you and his elite skills with a mouse lining up a pretty static ho shot. I think that says something.

Moreover the hah I got you attitude reminds me of kindergartners on a playground intentionally being dicks because their mommy cut short their last breast feeding session. That's all.

I shoulda just had you write stuff for me.  WTG brevity.   

[Wiley]

After digesting some walls of text there, I'll say this. Most of the front quarter shots you guys are referring to is a situation where a guy is merging with you looking for a fight. He could keep his nose pressed completely to you, but just veers slightly to merge. It's very unsporting to then pop off a shot and say, "I win!" When it's pretty clear to you what his intent is.

Why is it so vitally important for you guys to fly through the bandit's cone of fire before the fight is on?

If you adjust your merge slightly, he misses the shot and the fight is now on or he dives away.  Why do you insist ad nauseum on putting yourself in a position where the guy can end the fight with a HO, when you have the power to avoid it?

Wiley.

[Skyyr]

Why is it so vitally important for you guys to fly through the bandit's cone of fire before the fight is on?

I've noticed this repeatedly. After several years of playing numerous combat sims, Aces High and AH alone is the only one where the player-base as a whole has no idea how to do an actual combat merge. They fly right at you and then act completely surprised when they get hit by the guns they flew directly into.

[Triton28]

We never stated that our tactics had to come from actual training material; our only point was that you come in preaching about ACM, only to complain and decry use of actual ACM tactics. Please quit trying to put words where they don't belong.

I would suggest not trying to make points about how valid something is in this game because it was used historically.

By the way, how's that engine cutting working for ya? I noticed you did it a few times when I shot your LA down a week or two back.

You better check your film dood.  Either that or you're dreaming about me... which would be weird.  

[Skyyr]

I would suggest not trying to make points about how valid something is in this game because it was used historically.

We don't, we make our points based on how effective and efficient a tactic is; history simply backs us up.

[Kruel]

Fair enough, but the baseball analogy is flawed.  First of all, real money and real careers are on the line, even if it is a game, it's still a massive business.  Second, there is a manager sitting in the dugout making millions of dollars to make the correct moves, so if he follows his gut and pitches to the slugger, slugger hits a home run, management is probably going to have a talk about his future with the organization.  Let's not even talk about putting that man on first base to set up a double play, make the opposing manager pinch run, etc.  In Aces High, if you don't take the HO shot and you lose the fight, the worst that will happen is your toon pride will be wounded a little and you'll have to climb back out again.  

Again, I think some reading comprehension lessons are in order, or at least learn why an analogy is used to prove a point. I'm on my lunch break so I will indulge you:

The analogy is applied to the fact that while walking the slugger might not be fun for the fans or the opposing team, it's the most effective/lowest risk alternative to taking the chance of letting him crush one into the stands and losing the game..not about the intricacies about the business of baseball..however, using your logic this could be said:

I should pass up on a front quarter shot which may or may not turn into a pure HO pass because I should consider that it might not be fun for the other guy if he doesn't his chance to use his ACM.skills to try to get behind me...

That might be fun for you..and in certain settings like the DA with agreements on how we will engage, it is acceptable, but in the MA we are playing 'war' and all is fair...

You say it makes for bad gameplay, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. We say we don't really mind it and accept the fact that's part of the game..no amount of arguing, ridicule, misdirection or rage PMs will change that.

If you want a more controlled environment where we could agree to no head ons, ganging, picking or whatever other arbitrary rule that you can think of; that's what the DA is for....

The MA is the wild west and the only rules that need to be adhered to are HTCs...everything else goes...

[Kruel]

You are also of the opinion that it takes more skill to win by getting on someone's 6 instead of taking the HO shot..when you die you blame the other guy for HO ing, picking or vulching and not giving you that fun fair fight that you both deserve

We are of the opinion that it takes more skill to win period.

Be it HO, from 6 O clock, rocket hit at 4k, "ganging", "picking", whatever it takes. When we die we blame ourselves for allowing whatever killed us to happen...I guess that's the fundamental difference in our ideologies..so we can keep going back and forth arguing our points of view but it changes nothing, if your plane is in front of my guns, expect to be shot at...If you don't take the same shot..that's on you.

[Zerstorer]

My opinion is that a bunch of intentional walks makes for a crappy baseball game and a bunch of HOing has about the same effect on AH.

Believe it or not I actually agree with you.

No one is advocating using the HO as the only tactic... Just one of many that can be used.

[Changeup]

Be it HO, from 6 O clock, rocket hit at 4k, "ganging", "picking", whatever it takes. When we die we blame ourselves for allowing whatever killed us to happen...I guess that's the fundamental difference in our ideologies..so we can keep going back and forth arguing our points of view but it changes nothing, if your plane is in front of my guns, expect to be shot at...If you don't take the same shot..that's on you.

This I can respect 100%.  Zero ambiguity.  No attachment to defense mechanisms, no fear of right, wrong, or indifference.  No autistic rigidity.  Simple. Concise. True. No playing to the crowd.

The clock is running now...

[JunkyII]

You are also of the opinion that it takes more skill to win by getting on someone's 6 instead of taking the HO shot..when you die you blame the other guy for HO ing, picking or vulching and not giving you that fun fair fight that you both deserve

We are of the opinion that it takes more skill to win period.

Be it HO, from 6 O clock, rocket hit at 4k, "ganging", "picking", whatever it takes. When we die we blame ourselves for allowing whatever killed us to happen...I guess that's the fundamental difference in our ideologies..so we can keep going back and forth arguing our points of view but it changes nothing, if your plane is in front of my guns, expect to be shot at...If you don't take the same shot..that's on you.

"When we die we blame ourselves" Not always true

[Zerstorer]

You are also of the opinion that it takes more skill to win by getting on someone's 6 instead of taking the HO shot..when you die you blame the other guy for HO ing, picking or vulching and not giving you that fun fair fight that you both deserve

We are of the opinion that it takes more skill to win period.

Be it HO, from 6 O clock, rocket hit at 4k, "ganging", "picking", whatever it takes. When we die we blame ourselves for allowing whatever killed us to happen...I guess that's the fundamental difference in our ideologies.. .so we can keep going back and forth arguing our points of view but it changes nothing, if your plane is in front of my guns, expect to be shot at...If you don't take the same shot..that's on you.

Bingo.

It's much less ego damaging to blame the other guy.

After digesting some walls of text there, I'll say this. Most of the front quarter shots you guys are referring to is a situation where a guy is merging with you looking for a fight. He could keep his nose pressed completely to you, but just veers slightly to merge. It's very unsporting to then pop off a shot and say, "I win!" When it's pretty clear to you what his intent is.

It's not the shot that is annoying as the attitude and justifications that come with it. 2cmex ho's all the time in merges but I don't see him spouting off about how he got you and his elite skills with a mouse lining up a pretty static ho shot. I think that says something.

Moreover the hah I got you attitude reminds me of kindergartners on a playground intentionally being dicks because their mommy cut short their last breast feeding session. That's all.

The interesting part is your description can be turned on its head and directed to members of your own "group".... But usually it's a complaint or conditional explanation for a perceived wrong:

" Dweeb... You had to pick me. "

" Took 5 of you 'tards to bring me down. Gang bangers. "

" What a dweeb you are for HOing me. "

 I've done it too.... I've stated before I've lost my temper about such things in the past. Now not so much... When you look at it from the perspective of being ultimately responsible for your own skin in game it becomes much harder to direct it outward.

Let's take those same examples and turn them around a bit to illustrate:

"I didn't see you drop on me as I was firing on your countryman. "

" I didn't recognize that our fight was attracting the attention of other red guys until to late. Bad SA on my part. "

"I was baiting you to take that shot and mistimed my evasive and counter."

Can you see the common theme?  

[Zerstorer]

"When we die we blame ourselves" Not always true

True... As I stated everyone is human and emotions run at times... But that's a far cry from actually taking it on as a fighting philosophy.

[Kruel]

"When we die we blame ourselves" Not always true

How so?

[Coalcat1]

I have no idea what was your original sentence, but this makes no sense in Hebrew. 
Says something like: "stop the fishing rods... repeat over subject"
Google translate FTW!

Gotta love it 

[JunkyII]

How so?

I've personally seen you say "took all 3 of you"

True... As I stated everyone is human and emotions run at times... But that's a far cry from actually taking it on as a fighting philosophy.

Your a waste of time, 15 months ago we can probably find a thread where your holding Changeup's hand about HOs

To try to say you guys don't blame the other person is just flat out wrong, everyone has seen it on 200(everyone does it) And a lot of the time certain scenarios do come out as a really no win for a pilot, nothing they could of done.

Example. Say a P51 runs into a CO alt dora with a spit 16 following behind at like 8K. P51 engages the dora then the Spit comes into view. Only way the P51 wins this fight is if he kills the dora. Say it's Krupnski in the 51 vs Pervert in the dora....that's a long fight because their skill matchs up pretty well. Now the Spit will have time to see this, is it a squad die in the dora? Does he let him fight it out until the death(these fights don't come along often in the MA) or does he easily saddle the engaged con.

Point being there are no win scenarios where a pilot can fly amazing but just can't get away and because dar bar isn't completely accurate SA does have some unpredictability you have to account for.