Author Topic: Gunnery. (Read 352 times)

-nr-1- · « **on:** July 28, 1999, 07:32:00 AM »

Hi!

I dount think i will get an answer on this from HTC but here it goes :

Realistic or not i dont want to get killed from d4+. This is an mayor gameplay issue for me at least.

I really hope that you make the guns leathal in the d3- range and then tune em down drasticly d4+.

// -nr-1-

Jinx · « **Reply #1 on:** July 28, 1999, 08:15:00 AM »

I am very much against artificially limiting the range of the guns. If some one hits you in the head with a .50cal slug two kilometers away, you die just as much as 400 meters away. The chance of someone scoring a hit at over 600 yards or so should be negligible.

If someone can score effectively and reliably at long range something else is wrong. The airframe doesn’t vibrate, the gun recoils doesn’t effect the hit pattern and spread rounds all over the sky at extreme range, there are no thermals or air-currents that buffet the plane and ruin you aim…

HE rounds that had a timed fuse otoh should have a limited range and go *Poof* at what, 600 yards or so?

-Jinx (having a slow day at work..

)

fats · « **Reply #2 on:** July 28, 1999, 12:21:00 PM »

~1200m is what I recall seeing in the scans of LW weapons manual neck had up somewhere. Though with my level of german I could easily be mistaken.

~/fats

miko2d · « **Reply #3 on:** July 28, 1999, 12:32:00 PM »

Every extra 100 yards you have to trace the bullets adds enourmously to the CPU load, network traffic and graphics complexity. Not only you keep track of the bullet longer, there are more bullets in flight. If you hold the trigger for 3 seconds, there will be lot of bullets in the air.
Considering your chance to hit something in the air with a bullet that was in flight for 3 seconds and the cost of extra calculations, it is not worth it. Lose all the bullets after 2 seconds.

You can get hit in the head from 2 kilometers away and die from it, you can also die from the random engine malfunction or collision with a bird. You can get shot through the bellybutton from the ground by a guy with a rifle - that is a random chance. Or your left wing guns could fail to fire and throw you into a spin. We did not want those accidents modeled because it is not much fun to "die" from an accident after paying for an hour to get somewhere. And those ommissions actually screw up the strategy - lots of aircraft types were much less attractive when you considered malfunctions due to low reliability.

So I vote agaist long-range gunnery.

miko--

[This message has been edited by miko2d (edited 07-28-1999).]

stick- · « **Reply #4 on:** July 28, 1999, 12:36:00 PM »

will there be recoil and airframe vibration? I assume recoil, as the weapons page says "But realistic rates of fire, ballistics, and
recoil don't mean much if you don't get
the results you should when you hit your
target."

stick-

------------------
The 3rd millenium begins January 1, 2001

leonid · « **Reply #5 on:** July 28, 1999, 01:33:00 PM »

I'm against extremely accurate gunnery modelling if it outpaces present CPU load. What's the use in such detailed, and albeit accurate modelling if your system, and/or the internet, can't keep up with it? The gunnery modelling must be coded as accurately as possible, yet remain within practical present-day CPU load limits, as well as average ping rates over the internet.

hitech · « **Reply #6 on:** July 28, 1999, 01:44:00 PM »

Very well said leonid. Thats the type of considerations we do every day.

Jinx · « **Reply #7 on:** July 28, 1999, 01:57:00 PM »

I should probably be a bit more specific; I don’t mean track every bullet ’til it hits the ground. What I mean is track it as far out as reasonable, 1500 yards or so maybe. My point is that the energy a .50cal slug carries is not much less at a 1000 yards then at 400 and it should still appropriately damage whatever it hits at that range.

I hate to get killed by a random long range shot just as much as the next guy, its not very fair, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. What I mean to say is that it should be extremely hard to hit something at long range, next to impossible, but not because the bullet is magically removed at 500 yards.

-Jinx

Kats · « **Reply #8 on:** July 30, 1999, 02:22:00 AM »

Hitec/leoned

I am the biggest proponent of this. I believe in every short cut as long as the result reflects historical anecdote.

Sure you can get a lehtal hit with a 50cal from 1000 yards out, but the chances of landing the shot are next to none. Does that mean we have to model every siongle round etc etc etc. Great if you can, but I would just be happy with reducing lethality drastically after 500 yards. The net result would be almost the same.

------------------

dogftr · « **Reply #9 on:** August 02, 1999, 03:32:00 AM »

Do you remember WB ver. 2.6.

Please just make the damn guns work somewhere, then leave tham alone.

Pyro · « **Reply #10 on:** August 02, 1999, 11:08:00 AM »

2.5 was the last version that Dale and I put out.

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations