Buff Defensive Lethality

[Wiley]

3.
Movement vector of the involved parties
The subjective range can be varying depending on if you are shooting at an enemy flying away from your bullets or flying towards them. (Trying to find the threads where HT posted on this thing)

The simplistic example would be shooting from dead six with no closure at 300mph exactly 1500 yards away.  Suppose the bullet can travel 1500 yards then vanishes.  Suppose for rough illustration, the .50 averages about 1000 yards per second over the distance.  The fine details of reality would be slightly different because the bullets would slow down as they travel, the plane getting closer means the bullet wouldn't actually be in the air for exactly 1.5 seconds, and the exact numbers would be slightly different, but the principle is the same.

The bullet leaves the tailgun and travels the 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds.  In that time, the fighter is headed towards the bullet at 440fps.  So in that 1.5 seconds, the fighter actually gets 660 feet, or 220 yards closer to the bullet.  The fighter could actually be 1720 yards away from the muzzle when the bullet left it, and still get hit.

The reverse applies as well.  The same bullet leaves the trailing fighter and travels 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds.  In that time, the bomber has flown 660 feet further away.  That means the bomber would have to have been 1280 yards or closer, or the bullet is going to disappear.

Wiley.

[Wizz]

The bullet leaves the tailgun and travels the 1500 yards in 1.5 seconds.  In that time, the fighter is headed towards the bullet at 440fps.  So in that 1.5 seconds, the fighter actually gets 660 feet, or 220 yards closer to the bullet.  The fighter could actually be 1720 yards away from the muzzle when the bullet left it, and still get hit.

Wiley.

This is why it is so easy to pluck the wings off fighters from 1.5k in 29's.

[SpinMan]

Bombers are generally pretty easy to take down when you set yourself up correctly. Last I checked, my record vs bombers was somewhere near 30:1. While I occasionally think the bomber guns are rediculously accurate and much more effective than those on the fighters, I also don't think they need to be messed with. Buffs would become extinct in the MA if you nerfed them and I don't want to see that.

In AW many a night squads would get together and fill up a bunch of buffs and fly for hours bombing and occupying all positions....it was great fun...an experience not focused on here!  New players would flock to announcement that a 17 is looking for gunners please join!  Alter the dynamics of bombers and people will quit imho wouldnt happen, on the contrary I believe it would enhance the experience of flying buffs.  Scrambling a set for a big furball base defence is annoying, base defenders flying through a box as though it was an airborn flak panzer.  Buffs Biggest defence is altitude second fighter support and third are his guns.  Having a convergence of all guns to one players fireing point is also annoying.  Put a wall of lead up not a lethal condenced pointof fire by all guns.  What I want to see is not a game but an authentic sim, AH is so close in many other aspects and looking at the new Alpha its going to get better!  I the product as advertised:)). "Welcome to the best Ww2/Ww1 flight experience with the best combat simulator".   Says so right on the box:))

Spin

[SpinMan]

Oh and ro clarify I am fairly proficient at killing buffs when im patient there is alot less risk granted.  The only time I get frustrated is when you get the golden BB which is the lethal shot where as my previous suggestions would reduce. 

[Chalenge]

Killing bombers is, IMHO, pitifully easy. Bombers are actually one of the worst aircraft to defend a field with. The whole purpose of taking up a large plane like that is to soak up your ammo. The problem is that people see a bomber and they aim at a bomber size target. Aim at the pilot (soon you will have to kill the copilot also). My kill ratio against bombers is probably close to 1500:1 (might be a slight exaggeration), which should not serve as a metric to go by because I prefer killing bombers because of my weak eyesight and old-man hands (shaky).

[Lusche]

In AW many a night squads would get together and fill up a bunch of buffs and fly for hours bombing and occupying all positions....it was great fun...an experience not focused on here!  New players would flock to announcement that a 17 is looking for gunners please join!  Alter the dynamics of bombers and people will quit imho wouldnt happen, on the contrary I believe it would enhance the experience of flying buffs.

These days there are hardly enough players in the arena most of the time to get you a single gunner, not speaking of a full compliment of gunners.

Scrambling a set for a big furball base defence is annoying, base defenders flying through a box as though it was an airborn flak panzer.  Buffs biggest defence is altitude second fighter support and third are his guns. 

And that's exactly how it is in AH as well. Altitude, escorts, guns - in this order. Unless something has dramatically changed in the last 2 weeks, bombers upping to defend a base are a rarity. And mostly a product of desperation, or a much above average bomber pilot having some fun. Which may easily distort the perception, as the average buff pilot would simply die without effect.

Having a convergence of all guns to one players firing point is also annoying.  Put a wall of lead up not a lethal condenced pointof fire by all guns.

Not that all guns converge at a fixed point 500yds away. For long range shots (which is what folk complain about the most), the individual guns are shooting all over the place if you add up convergence issue and dispersion.


Against a well planned attack (which is mostly just a matter of choice on the fighter pilots side, and less one of skill level), bombers are mostly helpless at 20k or lower. Only above that the fighter pilots skill is going to be tested, the more the higher it goes.
It's mostly just the choice of most fighter pilots not to spend additional 1-5 minutes to get into position.
The last 3 years I spent the majority of my AH gametime flying bombers. Most fighters trying to intercept me invariably tried to do so from the dead 6 position. In most cases they could have easily opted for something different, they never did. They tried to slug it out, hoping for maybe one kill before they go down. Each time I saw someone continue to climb and overtaking me I knew I was in DEEP trouble.

[Wizz]

I guess what I dont understand is the complaint of buffs defending a base. It's a quick fix just pork the ords....

If an attacking team leaves the ords up it has no excuse 

B-17's are incredible at defending a base in the right hands. Of course it is gaming the game. It is also great gun practice

[bozon]

The simplistic example would be shooting from dead six with no closure at 300mph exactly 1500 yards away.  Suppose the bullet can travel 1500 yards then vanishes.

If bullets travel a fixed absoloute distance then this gives a big advatage to the bomber. If they travel a fixed time, the bomber still has a little advantage, but not that significant.

Relative to each other (fighter - bomber) the bullets come out at the same speed and need to cover 1500 yards. The problem looks symmetric. However! because the bullet max flight distance is relative to the ground, we have to look at the speeds relative to the ground - the plane's bullet adds the plane 300 mph to its ground speed, while the bomber bullet subtracts 300 mph from its ground speed and is slower relative to the ground. The result is that the fighter bullets covers its 1500 ground yards quicker and is removed from the game, while the bomber bullets still travels - it covered less ground distance, but the same fraction of the relative fighter-bomber 1500 yards as the fighter round did, except that the bomber round is still in the game and continues to travel and hit the fighter.

If on the other hand the bullets are removed from the game after a fixed time (instead of fixed absolute distance) then the fighter and bomber bullets will be removed together and if the bomber bullets can reach the fighter, so can the opposite - almost.

The "almost" comes from the wind resistance. The air is stationary and relative to the air, the forward traveling fighter round is faster (adds 300 mph) and suffers more drag, than the slower backward traveling bomber round. In the fighter--bomber frame of reference, the fighter is shooting upwind and the bomber is shooting down wind, which breaks the symmetry. So, the bomber still gains a little extra reach and hits a bit harder than the fighter. The wind effect exists anyway and adds even more to the advantage of the bomber in the case of "absolute flight distance".

I believe that in the game bullets travel a given ground distance and not a given flight time. This is a bit unfair towards the fighter, but I am sure that there are technical reasons why it is implemented in this way.

[hitech]

It's a fixed life time of the bullets. But the difference is do to drag.

Simple case, Muzzle vel is 300 mph.
Both planes are traveling 300 MPH.

Gunner shoots back and his bullet is traveling 0 relative to the ground and hence no drag and hence covers longer distance relative to the target behind him vs shooting stationary.

Fighter shooting forward, his bullet is now traveling 600 mph relative to the ground. Hence his bullet has increased drag and is slowing relative to the bomber.

Also remember drag is a Velocity  Squared function. So this is not a minor effect.

HiTech

[Wiley]

The drag magnifies the effect, but regardless if it's a fixed distance or a fixed amount of time, for that amount of time as the bullet is in flight, the fighter is closing on the bomber's bullets, and the bomber is moving away from the fighter's bullets.  That means the bomber still has a substantial range advantage.

Wiley.

[bozon]

It's a fixed life time of the bullets. But the difference is do to drag.

Simple case, Muzzle vel is 300 mph.
Both planes are traveling 300 MPH.

Gunner shoots back and his bullet is traveling 0 relative to the ground and hence no drag and hence covers longer distance relative to the target behind him vs shooting stationary.

Fighter shooting forward, his bullet is now traveling 600 mph relative to the ground. Hence his bullet has increased drag and is slowing relative to the bomber.

Also remember drag is a Velocity  Squared function. So this is not a minor effect.

HiTech

Thanks. I was always told it was a fixed travel distance. Fixed time makes more sense.

[hitech]

The drag magnifies the effect, but regardless if it's a fixed distance or a fixed amount of time, for that amount of time as the bullet is in flight, the fighter is closing on the bomber's bullets, and the bomber is moving away from the fighter's bullets.  That means the bomber still has a substantial range advantage.

Wiley.

Nope with out drag, there would be no difference between the fighter or the bomber.

Your forgetting that that when you are using the terms closing and moving away. Also has effected the speed of the bullet .
Say bullets muzzle are 1000 mph. and planes 300 mph.
The bombers bullets are traveling 700 relative to the ground and 1300 for the fighter.

And the bomber is flying away from the bullets of the fighter at 300 mph hence those 1300 mph bullets are closing on him at the original 1000 mph.

And visa verse for the fighter.


HiTech

[Wiley]

Nope with out drag, there would be no difference between the fighter or the bomber.

Your forgetting that that when you are using the terms closing and moving away. Also has effected the speed of the bullet .
Say bullets muzzle are 1000 mph. and planes 300 mph.
The bombers bullets are traveling 700 relative to the ground and 1300 for the fighter.

And the bomber is flying away from the bullets of the fighter at 300 mph hence those 1300 mph bullets are closing on him at the original 1000 mph.

And visa verse for the fighter.


HiTech

Ugh.  Yup.  Got it.  Thanks for the explanation.

Wiley.

[pembquist]

Drag Shmag, I want to know what time it is inside bullet #2 relative to the pendulum on the other plane.

[The Fugitive]

Oh and ro clarify I am fairly proficient at killing buffs when im patient there is alot less risk granted.  The only time I get frustrated is when you get the golden BB which is the lethal shot where as my previous suggestions would reduce.

Last tour,

B17 k/d .43
B24 k/d .32
TU2 k/d .30
Lancs k/d .23

Doesn't look like any buff is all that lethal.