Author Topic: Shooting (Read 2624 times)

Toad · « **Reply #30 on:** December 28, 2002, 07:40:29 PM »

Of course it's discussed here. It's continually discussed here.

Here's some simple .50 BMG ballistics:

@2500 yards
velocity=1266 fps
energy=2849 ft. lbs.
time of flight=4.135 seconds

Now, can you be hit at 1k? Absolutely. Will it hit hard? Well, I'd say 2849 ft/lbs is hard.

Yet our bullets essentially disappear ~ 1.1 or 1.2. Is that right? Is that the way it should be? From six or eight guns fired simultaneously that have a cyclic rate of ~ 850 RPM for the aircraft model?

Probably the easiest dynamic thing to program accurately in this whole online ACM game environment would be the gun ballistics.

After all, for the most part this data is known, is verifiable and is easily computed using standardized equations. In short, it's the kind of thing computers are supposed to do very well.

So why would anyone want to "fudge" the ballistics? It's probably the ONE thing that can be done correctly. And range is already "fudged" here to make it shorter. The bullets just disappear around 1.1; we all know they will go much farther.

As for your complaint that anyone is whining about IL2, I don't see any whines. I see folks that don't agree with the route IL2 took on ballistics. To you, that's probably a whine.

Nice thing is there is a choice. If you like what IL2 presents more than AH... good for you. It's SO easy to fly what YOU like, isn't it? Probably save you money in the long run as well.

What I DO see is a continual parade of IL2 supporters coming here to the AH BBS and sharing their diagreements with how AH does some things. I don't see those as whines either. They have their opinion and are certainly entitled to it.

I guess what I don't understand is the messianic drive to convert someone else.

I don't go to other boards and proselytize for AH. I think that's just common courtesy.

A true ACM junkie who becomes disenchanted with his present form of ACM entertainment will go looking for a new experience. If he's a true ACM junkie, he'll know what else is out there to try. I don't think anyone at WB or IL2 needs me telling them anything. They can find it on their own.

As I said, I hope they enjoy their game. It's best for all if they do.

And common courtesy should be much more common.

Gman · « **Reply #31 on:** December 28, 2002, 08:04:55 PM »

As I stated earlier Grunherz (shouldn't that be Gruenherz??), the first post, the one I responded to, wasn't asking the question regarding hit percentage, he specifically reffered to the ability for the round to kill. Onepunch said that being killed at that range should not be possible. He never said "hitting anything at that range is impossible".

I assure you it can at that range. Only the real fighter pilots amoung us who have fired at airborne targets at this distance will have actual knowledge of how difficult it is or isn't.

But rest assured, a .50 API, much less an HE 20mm will still pack a wallop at 1000 meters.

As for IL2, I have no opinion, other than that the creator is a diddlying commie nimrod I had the unfortunate pleasure of having to deal with for a while. I hear his game is great, but I'll never find out because I refuse to buy it.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #32 on:** December 28, 2002, 08:52:37 PM »

Toad they are whines... Imagine if somebody just accused AH of fudging the gun model without any evidence, oh wait we dont need to, we allready know what happends. They are classiofied as whiners, and so are people that attack the IL2 model with no data - or does that "where's the data" rule only apply to AH?

And why is it a whine and not merely a disagreement with how AH does anything when people complain here?

Wow Gman, so you are saying the guy is some sort of commie biased nimrod who wont model things right? You mean like a conspiracy?

Whiners! Cmon lets see some numbers proving IL2 is wrong. I know it's hard and personally I hate it but I'd love for any of you to prove its wrong so we could badger that "commie nimrod" to change it.

Toad · « **Reply #33 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:05:03 PM »

Haven't flown IL2 so I can't comment on their modeling.

However, if it is truly impossible to land a hit beyond 500, ballistic data alone should disprove that theory.

So get somebody to fly straight and level in front of you and see how far away he reports a ping. Do it a few times and use all your ammo.

If one is skilled in aiming in IL2, I'd think a few rounds would have to register, no?

Repeat at longer ranges.

As I pointed out, I think rounds terminate early here in AH. Clearly, some of these heavy BMG's will do damage out past 2500. Yet you never hear of any pings at that range, do you? Try as you might on the biggest target in the game and there'll be no a single ping in 1000 tests using the full ammo load.

BTW, I think most normal folks can distinguish between a polite position statement and a whine.

But if you want to toss the "whiner" term around indiscriminately, hey, it's your electronic ink.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #34 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:12:34 PM »

"BTW, I think most normal folks can distinguish between a polite position statement and a whine."

Not too many normal people here then I guess...

"But if you want to toss the "whiner" term around indiscriminately, hey, it's your electronic ink."

Just trying to fit in...

Innominate · « **Reply #35 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:15:45 PM »

It seems that in AH most gun rounds "time out" after about two seconds, dissapearing into oblivion. This would explain the range of the hispano/M2 vs the various other guns that should be able to reach that far(albeit with a significant drop) but dont have the velocity to get there in two seconds.

Toad · « **Reply #36 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:19:18 PM »

I feel for ya Grun, I really do.

You seem such an angry young man.. about everything.

Good luck!

Wotan · « **Reply #37 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:25:11 PM »

Quote

I see folks that don't agree with the route IL2 took on ballistics.

Like I pointed out above Il2 gunnery isnt that different then ah. It just matters as to what you hit the and angle at which you hit. And the fact you need to be close to have a reasonable expectation of getting hit.

I shot an il2 from with 30mm and round punched a whol in the wing went out the other side. In ah any hit any angle causes the same damage.

I shot down a p39q1 with 5 rounds 20 mm. The burnt to a crisp. I can post the Sturmlog as well.

Ah "ballistics" arent the question. But getting kills shots at 900 yards like they do in ah isnt "real". For whatever reason. Some will say that "well 900 really = 600" in that case it could also mean d1200. But from flying with squaddies who have all different connection types and from different areas in the world I have seen the 300+ lag like some imply.

In ah my converge in most planes is at d300. I fire and get most my kills at or near convergence. But I fly 109s with 30mms etc and its not that I cant hit at greater ranges its that with 60 rounds I wanna know when I fire I will kill them.

The "we are more experienced then ww2 pilots at firing our guns" is as much bs as someone claiming they could beat a nascar driver because they play a race car game.

Theres something that allows for kills at what are extreme ranges in ah that doesnt match up with rl. Range counter, Ammo counters, one size fits all hit sprits. Simplified damage where all rounds cause X amount of damage and hybrid rounds maybe it.

Onepunch's original post didnt refer to ballistics but just at the probrability of getting kills at 600 yards plus as lo.

Does this impact fun? In the main no because the mains a meat grinder. In events however where 1 life is all ya get and where plane performance itself is close it matters alot. Especially when the gun type on oneside allows for kill ranges like onepunch mentioned. Take a a6m2 vrs an F4F. The zeke climbs a bit better but that doesnt matter much when the f4f can jack his nose and spray and kill without fear of stalling. He knows he has a high chance of getting that kill at d600 so even he stalls so what.. Same with hispano armed AC.

Kill ranges can have a great and at times unbalancing impact on gameplay in events.

Heres a link to a Tony Williams Thread over on AGW

http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13544&highlight=Tony+Williams

In that thread it gets pointed out that there was a big difference between 'maximum' and 'effective' ranges.

The Luftwaffe figured their maximum range was typically 400m for rifle-calibre guns, 800-1,000m for cannon. However, the effective range (at which range it was worth opening fire because you stood a reasonable chance of hitting) was about half that or less. And this was against bombers.

Now lets get back on topic and answer why is the "effective" kill range in AH at seemingly further ranges then what one gathers from rl.

Or is this the case at all? I think this is true.

Heres a link to Tony Williams "IDEAL WW2 FIGHTER ARMAMENT"

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/ideal.htm

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #38 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:27:25 PM »

Hehe..

I'm angry about a few things sure, but then I find most young people have anger and/or energy for something.

It's not for this game though, however I do enjoy arguing on this board..

But I dont see what this has to do with your two faced approach to whining. Apparently its only whining when applied towards AH, but gentlemanly disagreement otherwise. Your midless devotion to AH is something for study...

udet · « **Reply #39 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:27:35 PM »

I think 1000yards kills are impossible,and down to 500yrds a matter of luck-spray and pray. From 500yards, maybe skill has a role. In WW2, pilots were reccomended to get as close to their quarry as possible. That should tell us something...

Toad · « **Reply #40 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:33:42 PM »

Again I'd point out that ballistics is a well established science with extremely repeatable results. Further, computers are well suited to handling these computations.

Therefore, given that ballistic computations are essentially easy, all that remains is "where is the barrel pointing when the gun is shot?" and "does the ballistic path of the bullet from this barrel intersect the target?"

If you give HTC credit for the ability to locate the barrel in the AH universe, chart it's ballistic path and then check to see if the (a) target intersects the path and "collides" with the bullet then there's not much to discuss, is there?

Somewhere you have to believe or accept. In any game.

I'm glad IL2 is a good game for you. I think AH is good for me as well.

Where's the problem here? Just fly the one you like.

Toad · « **Reply #41 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:45:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Apparently its only whining when applied towards AH, but gentlemanly disagreement otherwise.

No, for me and example of "whining" would be when:

1. A claim is unsupported by any sort of fact or documentation

AND

2. It is repeated ad nauseam by the same or various posters

AND

3. It is accompanied by demands for change to the repeated unsupported "new" position.

I don't see anyone here demanding any changes in IL2, do you? Most of the folks here are focused on AH. What a coincidence; it's the AH BBS!

When we get done studying me, can we study your mindless devotion to insulting nearly everyone you engage in a discussion?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #42 on:** December 28, 2002, 09:54:05 PM »

Uhuh.. So they are just complaining for evryones enlightenment...

Toad · « **Reply #43 on:** December 28, 2002, 10:12:56 PM »

I'll have to assume you're talking about people that have posted on the AH BBS noting things they don't like about IL2.

First of all, note that this IS the AH BBS and they are almost always replying to folks posting here about another game. You don't find many people here just starting an IL2 "bash" thread. In fact, I don't think I've seen one. So, these people are responding to someone else, right?

So if someone comes here to the AH BBS touting another ACM game, I'd think it would be normal for people to offer counter opinions. I'd expect it, in fact.

So, is offering a differing opinion complaining? Not to me.

Complaining would be going to the IL2 boards and telling them that their game is in error. I certainly wouldn't do that, although I'm sure there's some people that do.

Now, I'll agree that there's many of those here that could use some lessons in common courtesy and being polite. Not everyone has been a gracious host to our visitors.

But then, there's regulars on this board that insult nearly everyone that they enter into a discussion with, isn't there?

BenDover · « **Reply #44 on:** December 28, 2002, 10:19:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Of course it's discussed here. It's continually discussed here.

Here's some simple .50 BMG ballistics:

@2500 yards
velocity=1266 fps
energy=2849 ft. lbs.
time of flight=4.135 seconds

and that is of a round from what era?

a modern day round, or a ww2 round?