lazs the F4U comparison was a strictly hypothetical example. I was trying to explain what I thought the reasoning was behind having hit % affect score. For certain there are many possible scenarios outside what I mentioned.
I never said that hit % alone is a good indication of 'skill'. There are lots of guys who 'fly' AH who have great eyes for 'tough shots' but don't have a high gunnery %.
I guess the best way to put it is this - a good shot like drex has a lower hit % because he's not trying to have a high hit %. He's firing an extra 25%+ ammunition per burst to 'make sure' he lands fatal hits. He's good at lining up tough deflections, and by firing early and adjusting fire he's making sure he'll get some fatal hits.
My gunnery % is usually much lower in scenarios/historical events/etc. than it is in the MA. The reason for this is that in the MA I am 'training' all the time in terms of gunnery - I try to set up a shot 'correctly' (from my point of view) almost every time before I take it. I try to make it so every round of every burst lands on target. Doing these things in the MA helps me practice at making tough deflection shots. But in a 'serious' event I 'take off the training blinders' and 'fire with reckless abandon'.
Another thing to look at with drex - what is he flying? Almost always an aircraft that carries .50 MGs in the wings as of late. This is always going to give you a lower gunnery % than if you were flying the P-38 for example. You have seen the most of drex up close and personal when he's been flying in your squadron - and shooting wing mounted .50 MGs alot. I saw him the most up close and personal when he was flying Bf 109s. While I never really tracked his gunnery % (if he shoots down what he's shooting at why bother), I gurantee it was higher in Bf 109s than it was in F4Us and P-47s.
I think your hit % is always going to be lower in .50 MG armed aircraft (regardless of gun location) because you can attempt deflection shots with a .50 MG that you would never bother attempting with some other weapons.
For me - if I don't try to miss with as few rounds as possible, it is *way* easier for me to score kills. My K/D, K/T, and K/S all go way up if I'm not doing the whole 'aim - aim - aim - short burst - watch burst - adjust - aim - aim - short burst - etc.' routine. But I 'punish' myself with that routine so when I'm in a serious event, or a squadron duel (where I constantly have to bail drex's overrated bellybutton out of the fire, if memory serves) it's 'easier' (for lack of a better term or description) for me to shoot guys down. Fewer self imposed restrictions like minimum aim time, no 'putting up a wall of lead' for the bad guy to fly thru, etc.
In short - think of the hit % affect on score as intended for the 'lowest common denominator' - an attempt to keep a guy with 1700 rounds per gun x 8 .50 MGs on a P-47 from emptying his barrels on an enemy at 950 yards every time to get a kill.
At least that's what I think the reasoning may have been. I'm not saying it always works, or that it works at all. But like I said before it would be interesting to see if there has been a change in rounds fired/sortie, etc. since they made gunnery % affect your score.
Mike/wulfie
p.s. The K/T scenario can get just as complicated. When I'm 25,000' above you earning 1/100 of a beer for every B-17 and/or Lancaster III I shoot down, I get in 1 fight every 30 minutes. But it's me vs. 2 bombers and 2-4 fighters. So my K/T is going to be low - but it's never a case of what you are talking about - 'cherry picking' the edge of a big fight (which happens for sure). The only way to make score indicative of real skill (and we both agree on what 'real skill' means in AH from what I've seen, winning when you start at a disadvantage, etc.) would be to make the data collected for scoring prohibitively detailed - # of enemy vs. # of friendly aircraft within 3000 yds. of you at time of kill, etc., etc., etc.
