Shooting

[Gman]

You cant compare a post war gatling gun with all sorts of advanced sighting and radar aids to WW2 guns... First you use sniper rifles now gatling guns, wht not discuss WW2 aircraft guns fitted in aircraft in the wings with everything vibrating and shaking.

Ok mr mispelled L/W experten, kindly tell me the difference between the ballistics of a WW2 hispano fired 20mm and that from a Vulcan 20mm.  There really isn't any.  How will radar improve the dispersion pattern or the ability of the pilot to hold the pipper on the target?  At 1000 yards, flying in a level stern chase, which is teh only way I've ever been killed at that range in AH, what is SO different between modern day a/c guns and WW2 fighter guns of the same caliber.  Maybe a hot 500 fps if that, and slightly more lethality due to better explosives.  Also, you think that modern day fighter's don't shake either?

What he says balances perfectly with what I read from other pilots in regards to firing range.

But hey if you are saying that firing a rifle from a bench and hitting a stationary target at 1000yrds is equal to doing the same in the air I'll take your word for it  

Ya, his statement in your quote pretty much summed up exactly what I've said, he never spoke to the possibility of hitting at long range.  Also, I never said firing from prone is equal to doing it in the air, I've said pretty much the opposite, WITH the exception being that the much higher rate of fire WILL compensate for the less accurate platform and othe variables, so please don't create lies like that again to further your weak arguments.  Care to post an exact quote of where I said shooting a rifle is "equal to doing the same in the air"?  Ya, you can't can you.

Also, whoever brought deflection into this shouldn't have, I've never seen a 1000 yard deflection kill in AH more than a few degrees, and I doubt any of you have either.  The only time I get hit or hit other fighters at that range is in nice flat chases.



Also, whoever is saying that the .50 flies flat out to 1000 or 2000 meters, I'd love to have some of whatever you were smoking when you saw this.

709 gr .50 cal tables for trajectory:

200 yards : -4.8 inches
500 yards: -52.2 inches
1000 yards: -284 inches
1500 yards: -831 yards.

[GRUNHERZ]

Gman who cares about balistics everyone here argrees that bullets do indeed travel very far. Now stop trying to change the subject by arguing about how accurate sniper rifles are and how post war accurate radar assited sighting systems attached to gatling guns are and argue how likely it is to hit at 1000 yards with WW2 weapons.

Are you really that deluded and fanatic to think sniper rifles have any relevance to WW2 machine gun accuracy.

Tell me yes or no?  

Tell me how precision slow firing sniper rifle accuracy at 1000 yards has any bearing on that of full auto MG in a flexible shaking mount with no scope.

Why even bring up sniper rifles.

How bout you shut up about gatling guns with radar assited aiming and sniper rifles and discuss WW2 fighter armament for a change..

Damn fanatic....

[Toad]

It's unquestionable that 2 or 6 or 8 .50 BMG's can do serious damage at 1000+ yards.

It's unquestionable that HTC has ballistic equations for all the rounds in the game, not just the .50 BMG.

It's unquestionable that HTC has a method of "locating" the guns on a particular aircraft in the AH 3D "universe".

It's unquestionable that HTC has a method of plotting the ballistic trajectory of rounds from our guns from the moment of firing until they are no longer tracked at a certain point or time.

It's unquestionable that HTC has a method of plotting the position of the target or target aircraft in the AH "universe" and also the target's movement through the AH "universe".

It's unquestionable that HTC has a method of determining whether or not the bullet stream and the target track intersect.

Now given all of these unquestionable items, there seems little doubt that it IS possible to hit other aircraft at ranges beyond 200-300 yards that some think would be "realistic" based on what they read.

Because we do it in the game.

Now, if you don't think it should be possible, you'll have to find fault with the way HTC computes position of gun at firing, ballistic trajectory of bullet after firing and plotting of target movement through the AH universe or the method of determining the intersection of bullet and target.

I seriously doubt any one here has the capability to review the code and show an errror.

If you do, good. Please do so.

If you can't.. just play the game.

[Wotan]

I never said the 50 flies flat I have chart of jug converge and they clearly arc like the charts I have for the FW.

Gman and Toad you brought the whole ballistic (energy hit power etc....). Onepunch called this thread "shooting" and brought up range. Do you agree that for whatever reason "conditions" in AH allow for a greater probrability to get hits at above d600 that werent there in rl?

If you agree with this then why cant the answer to onepunch's original post be:

"in ah we have range, ammo counters and that allow the player the ability to get hits at that distance"

instead of trying to relationalize it as anything but that.

FYI

I have never seen a 1000yrd defelection either but someone posted a film of them getting killed at d1200 a while back.



Toad,

What if there is little or no relative motion between the two aircraft?

IE: Buff on autopilot at 250 knots, fighter steady and level behind him at 250 knots?

In AH this is what happens but taking what happens ingame are trying to apply it to rl wont work. Why do people fire at range in ah? Because they have a reasoable expectation of getting hits. Why in rl did they fire at closer distances? because they had a reasonable chance of hitting.

How do you balance the 2? well thats up to ht. Does he want rl "effects" or just to get things as accurate as possible and let the game go where it ends up.

Some players would want effect over number accurracy. But if you take game conditions and attempt to match that with real life then I think thats backwards.

Ofcourse there are folks who say they never see any of this so there aint much to say to them.

[GRUNHERZ]

Thats all true Toad!

But it's also unquestionable that we kill at much longer ranges than was comman in WW2.

So its unquestionable that something significant doesnt match reality.

But of course we can argue that I once hit a stationary paper target 1200 yards away with my scoped sniper rifle while prone and using a bipod and this makes AH correct.

But Toad I actually dont mind the AH gunnery setup, I really like that twin 13mm kill on a P47 at 850 yards - love how his whole wing just dropped off. Ohh yea!

[Wotan]

was typing when you posted toad,

what if it aint an error but other "gameplay" features that  facilitate it.

Are discussing these "features" taboo? or the topic?

[Urchin]

I think the only reason people can score hits at 'extreme' ranges (say 700 yards plus) is because of the range counters and hit strikes.  

Thats another thing IL-2 does different that I'm not sure is completely accurate or not but that I like better - MG fire doesn't do 'hit flashes' like it does here.  Cannons do, because you'll see the cannon round explode, but MG fire doesn't.  

Of course, in all the WW2 gun camera footage that I've ever seen of .50 calibers, they left a very clear 'hit strike' - you could see the flash where they hit very clearly.  I'm not sure what the range is on your typical gun camera footage though.

[GRUNHERZ]

I know for a fact WW2 .50 cal produced a bright flash on impact, in fact AH models it almost perfectly as seen on B/W stills. I cant recall if I'd seen it on color film or not though.

[Toad]

I've got my icons turned down so small I can't read range anymore. I still get hits at long ranges. Maybe it comes from 3 years of looking at and shooting at AH planforms?

If I didn't have ammo counters.. I'd still get those same hits. I just wouldn't know when the guns were about to go dry. Tell me, do you stop shooting at a con when the counters go low? I don't. Once I'm on a guy and I think I have a good chance of knocking him down, I'll continue to take shots until he's dead or I'm outta ammo.

So give me just a red IFF dot.. which is about all I can see now. I can't read plane types on the lowest icon size setting... and take away my ammo counters. I'll submit to you that my shooting style and percentages .. which aren't all that great anyway.. won't change much.

BTW, what are the shooting percentages of those guys that take 500+ yard shots? I think you'll find them in the sub-5% range.

Bottom line is I believe most players with a year or so under their belt would shoot about the same without range or ammo counter info.

Grun if you knocked down a wing off a jug with a small burst of 13mm at 850 either he was damaged prior to you hitting him or it's a damage model question.. not a gunnery question.

There is absolutely no doubt that 13mm will travel more than 850 yards. So it's quite possible.

Tell me, how many of you guys can consistently hit a well flown maneuvering target at 850 yards?

I think we can all hit a non-maneuvering target if we get a few "squirts" to zero in. I doubt if there's many.. if any.. that can score at 850+ on a maneuvering target on a consistent basis.

Now, I'm going to refer you all to something Eagl said.

[Toad]

COPYRIGHT EAGL

echo 1 > /dev/rant

That goes for HO's, ack lethality, moderation idiocy, etc. There's a lot of posting going on here about why one feature or another is broken, stupid, or whatever, and even more posting on what HT ought to do about it, but frankly none of that matters if HT thinks it's working as planned. As a simple purely hypothetical example, if random acts of moderation get rid of a few vocal players that are perceived to be detracting from the game, then it makes sense to keep such a system in place. Getting a moderator message saying "it's my game" makes HT's position on arena moderation very clear. The same goes for ANY game feature, from ack strength to coming up with some way to discourage headon attacks. HT will set up the game to encourage certain things, discourage other things, and whatever he doesn't care about he will leave alone.

My personal guess after playing HT's game for 7 years is that HT doesn't care very much about headons, otherwise he would have done something about it by now. I don't personally care so I've never asked, but anyone who does ought to pick up the phone and ASK before making any assumptions. In my experience, HTC is very accessable and willing to speak to players on the phone about almost any topic, so it's worth a shot.

echo 0 > /dev/rant

I think we can add "gun range" to Eagl's thoughts and just leave it at that.

[GRUNHERZ]

Wasnt a small burst I adjusted and aimed at his jinking at 800 yards, by 850 he was dead.

Like I said I love that I can do this but I doesnt make sense compared to anything I read about WW2.

[Toad]

Wotan, I think Eagl's quote pretty well covers the "gameplay" aspect.

It's not like HT doesn't know how the guns work here.

[Mathman]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Wasnt a small burst I adjusted and aimed at his jinking at 800 yards, by 850 he was dead.

Like I said I love that I can do this but I doesnt make sense compared to anything I read about WW2.

You know why this occurs in AH more than it did in WW2 (and I am not so bull headed to believe it didn't happen, just incredibly rare)?  All you need to do is go read my post above.  That contains the answer you need to understand why this occurs (and I am not trying to be a smart ass, just making a point that seems to be lost on all the beligerents in this case).

[Zaphod]

"For your information you pathetic little ranter my name in the MA is Tequilla and I have just come back after some time off. "


You dirty dog.......never told anyone did ya???  I leave, come back two months later and no Onepunch but some guy named Tequilla who I've never heard of just tearing em up in a Jug.

"Gee Mr. Obvious I never made the connection"

LOL Zaphod

[lazs2]

Guess I'm still not getting it..  Are some of you saying that the dispertion from 6-8  wing mounted machine guns would make it impossible to get hits on a plane flying straight and level?

what is different about Il2 that doesn't allow this?   is the dispertion wrong on one sim?  
lazs