Author Topic: Realism-Gameplay gunnery balance (Read 1981 times)

Xjazz · « **Reply #45 on:** January 16, 2003, 04:14:46 AM »

"Captain H. Wind's Lectures On Fighter Tactics" from 1943

"When shooting from dead six, it is best to get about 20 meters from the enemy, where the prop-wash that was shaking your plane earlier settles down. It is like getting from "heavy seas" to a calm "backwater". It is very nice to shoot from the rear sides, and from there you most often shoot the enemy down, too. You should shoot in front of the armour into the cockpit and engine. The lead is also so small that it'll give you no trouble at all."

Read whole story from here.

straffo · « **Reply #46 on:** January 16, 2003, 04:20:52 AM »

@XJazz
I was asking not because I was questionning the value of the testimony but because lot of people have trouble evaluating distances with accuracy.

@Cyrano
I've hear of horrible turbulence stories but it was in general a light plane like a 152 following an A300 for exemple ...

CyranoAH · « **Reply #47 on:** January 16, 2003, 08:38:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
@Cyrano
I've hear of horrible turbulence stories but it was in general a light plane like a 152 following an A300 for exemple ...

LOL! Why would he get back there in the first place?

I have landed after a touch and go from a A320, but if you follow the standard procedure, with a steeper approach path and touching down further down the runway than the airliner you should find no noticeable turbulence.

Daniel

Kweassa · « **Reply #48 on:** January 16, 2003, 08:53:06 AM »

Quote

Just had another thought.

Maybe you guys could get all icons off in the CT and maybe somehow HT could turn off or adjust hit sprites in there too.

Best of both worlds again. Everybody has a choice to get what they want.

Maybe that's a path.

Sound reasonable.

Suggestions on hit sprites or other environmental factors doesn't necessarily mean it would be applied to all arenas. If it is implemented as an "option", I guess that would be enough.

ps) though, I must say suggesting more realism with the hit sprites is not the same thing as asking to do away with it totally.

Also, I found out that adjusting the icon size so very small, that you can see it, but not read the numbers or letters, can have some very interesting effect in flying. Maybe if the icon size was also given as an option that can be universally turned on/off or adjusted by a CM?

Charon · « **Reply #49 on:** January 16, 2003, 09:40:52 AM »

That Russian pilot also states that speed differences, at least relatively minor ones, were greatly overrated and that even slower planes like the I-16 had no problem breaking off an engagement whenever they wanted too. Sounds like the MA to me

He also states that dispersion did become an issue, but he clearly notes it is with extended bursts. And, he noted that the performance of the LW aircraft seems to be overrated in history (probably because you get the feeling that minor performance difference of all types were not all that important in the broader mix of things in RL)

I guess I'm one of those who hasn't noticed any real ability to kill beyond 500m. in an American or British plane. However, I do notice a lot of aircraft that start to fly wings-level at about d700 and count on a 20 mph speed difference to gradually move away. If you're back there in a US fighter with 1000 rnds of .50, you literally have 10 seconds or more to plink away -- a little low, well, lets try this. No, a little higher -- look there's a hit sprite. Not a kill, (though the occasional lucky systems hit), and if he's smart he'll just keep on truckin’ instead of panic. How many pilots in WW2 would feel comfortable fling a lazy wings-level extension 700 yards away from an enemy shooting at them with real bullets? I had a Hellcat spray at me in this situation for tens of seconds without a hit, but I was doing slow 1/2 rolls with a low g pull to one side, then a slow half roll with a pull to the other. Not a single ping with just a small amount of effort, too small even to kill any E on my part. I really would like to see a film of someone chewing up a plane at these ranges vs. the occasional fatal systems hit, with convergence set at 300-400.

You can easily hit targets with a M2 .50 at 800+ range - I've done it myself. Perhaps the physics are correct, but the arena lacks things like fear, adrenaline, vibration, cold, etc. that would have been distractions in RL. The quality of gunnery was admittedly very poor during the war (Bong getting extra training after his first tour in the Pacific even), and much of the real close killing was done, it seems, where the armament dictated the style for both accuracy and killing power. I've seen plenty of gun camera film from the pacific that is 300 yards or more, including a good spraying deflection shot at that range on a Zero. At high altitudes in Korea, 600 yard kills were common.

What about locking convergence at 400 yards max? This would be realistic historically and would give less ability to be a sniper at extended ranges by setting a 500/600 yard convergence.

Charon

Xjazz · « **Reply #50 on:** January 16, 2003, 10:36:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
Also, I found out that adjusting the icon size so very small, that you can see it, but not read the numbers or letters, can have some very interesting effect in flying. Maybe if the icon size was also given as an option that can be universally turned on/off or adjusted by a CM?

S! Kweassa

Very good idea!

Kweassa · « **Reply #51 on:** January 16, 2003, 10:43:23 AM »

Quote

"How many pilots in WW2 would feel comfortable fling a lazy wings-level extension 700 yards away from an enemy shooting at them with real bullets?"

"That's it, spray dweeb, try it at 500 meters and see if you can get any hit on me, waste yer ammo!"

...

Well, Saburo didn't exactly use those words, but I think I'm in the right track

700 yards, in WWII standards, is a distance where kills will occur and be decorated in the journals, because that's some dang lucky pilot to kill something out at 700 meters.

Wotan · « **Reply #52 on:** January 16, 2003, 10:58:41 AM »

Thats nothing big Charon, in a dogfight in the main speed only matters if you actually work at keeping up your speed.

In il2 this is true as well, fights are well below max speed and this is where accelleration make the difference.

Fighting a rata in il2 you arent going to do much making hi speed bore and zzzzzzzzzzz passes. He can avoid your you. You need to get aggressive. The slower more manuverable plane is counting on that.

Planes like the zeke, spit, niki 109f and others in ah get kills not as a result of speed.

So does top speed matter in a "fight"? No accelleration is much more important. Fighters in ww2 had cruise setting below max speed.

In ah guys who fly faster planes d9s, 51s, etc make an effort to keep up thier speed.

Mostly that speed is about 325 - 350.

As you can see from the replies in this thread you will have a tough time narrowing down what it is that allows for longer range gunnery. I dont expect ht to fix something that is undefinable. As I said before there isnt even any agreement on whether or not it happens.

Theres folks telling you they never see it happen. This discussion takes place once a month. Nothing new will come out of it.

SlapShot · « **Reply #53 on:** January 16, 2003, 11:01:37 AM »

Kweassa ... nice post !!!

But I am not buying the "empirical evidence of typical IL-2 multiplay environment".

* If people aren't really confident about being able to hit something over 400, 500 yards they tend to not spray.

I remember when I first started playing AH, that I was sprayin' and prayin' all over the place trying to effect the kill. I have flown with new players that exhibit the same behaviour. Also, a new player will have a hell of a time trying to "saddle up" on any experienced AH pilot and get positioned to less than 400 yds on the 6 position.

* If people cannot so easily confirm whether their shots landed or not, they tend to not spray.

Again .. from first hand knowledge and I see it everyday, this is not the case from my viewpoint.

* Also, when they know a few lucky shots won't bring down a plane, they tend to not spray.

One learns very quickly the damage that one 20mm round will inflict, so a new flyer in a N1K2 will spray and pray hoping to land that one luck shot. Also, one learns very quickly that a lucky shot could inflict enuff damage to the opposing plane so that its flight model is now porked and can move in for the closer kill.

Again, I speak from my own learning experiences and watching new pilots in our squads progress ... seeing hit sprites at all distances is a learning tool and the length of time that one relies on the spray and pray technique is lessened as the pilot becomes more experienced with ACM and gunnery.

Esme · « **Reply #54 on:** January 17, 2003, 02:11:15 AM »

Nice one, Kweassa. Real-life pilots didn't get to respawn and try all over again if they suddenly found their planes and bodies riddled by enemy fire. Therefore they had a really REALLY big incentive to try to avoid getting knocked out of the air. And they were flying to orders, not as they pleased - thus less opportunity to practice, more incentive to get it right. In MA's in games like AH, what is the downside in praying and spraying? Nothing vital, is one answer. In RL, if you didnt nail the other person you alerted them to your presence, giving them a chanc to nail you. Permanently. No respawn, no new account next week, just a wooden box 6ft under.

And personally, I don't think learning deflection shooting per se is terribly difficult, despite which I'm not a great shot in AH. Why? because I'm often simply outflown by better pilots who have better awareness of what my plane and theirs can do under the circumstances, and they do better at avoiding letting me get a GOOD line-up than I do at working my way into a situation where I can kill them. Straightforward deflection shooting, aye, that I can manage. Throw a plane around well, that too. Situational Awareness... oooh, there's my Achilles heel. I misjudge more often than is healthy for me, when in fighters (especially as I don't get much practice in 'em these days)

So, as long as the ballistics is modelled acceptably well, seems to me that the answer is for folks to fly in more realistic organised games like the special events in AH - and otherwise work on your SA.

If Ah lets people get deliberate long-range kills more than once in a blue moon, though, my first thought would be that something is amiss with the ballistics/damage modelling, unless those kills are always against large planes that didnt see them and didnt either manouvre or shoot back. Like buffs with their pilot using the bombsight. Really MUST get Otto into buffs in AH! :-}

Esme

beet1e · « **Reply #55 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:36:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oedipus
However (in general regarding "realims") IMO most AH players in AcesHigh wouldn't be able to hack it if many WWII aircombat conditions were modelled. If HTC introduced a different type of icon, took away the awacs radar, eliminated suicide bombing, forced "pilots" to sign up for a squad and "obey" the C.O, order them to fly missions they wouldn't want (versus what they used to do: bombing, jabo or dogfighing) and have them fly planes other than the Spit/La7/NiK2 and you could say "bye bye" to probably 80% of the players.

I agree 100%, but it makes me wonder about the prognosis for the Mission Arena.

mrsid2 · « **Reply #56 on:** January 19, 2003, 05:30:54 PM »

I have a film where I shoot a B17 with p47-d30 from d1.3 and paint him white untill he falls apart. That's 4-5 long and aimed shots.

Long distance shots are extremely easy (compared to real life)with .50 and they're easy ONLY because every hit gives a huge hit sprite like you hit him with a cannon.

I say remove hit sprites from distances beyond the range you can be expected to detect hits in real life. Cannon sprites are ok since they created heavy flashes in reality. At least when they hit something solid to detonate on surface.. If the shell penetrated the hull before detonation there might again be very little visual info about the hit.

Toad · « **Reply #57 on:** January 19, 2003, 06:41:50 PM »

Longest hit sprite I have ever personally had was 1.2 against a non-maneuvering target.

Was the B-17 maneuvering? I'll wager he was not. Beyond that, 1.3 is well inside max effective range for a .50 BMG, which is generally given as ~ 2000 yards.

brendo · « **Reply #58 on:** January 19, 2003, 08:46:40 PM »

I think 2 things add up to allow the long range sniper kills in AH.

And its not the physics.

1. Hit sprites that stay the same size at any distance.

2. No turbulence to affect my gunnery. ie I just point and shoot with perfect line up accuracy. If atmospheric turbulence was modelled even in a minor way, then I might not be such a sniper.

Widewing · « **Reply #59 on:** January 20, 2003, 01:42:02 AM »

There are many aspect of ballistics that are not modeled in this game. Cross wind being but one of them.

Typically, a .50 cal BMG round will drop 22 ft. at 1,000 yards. A 10 mph cross wind will move the bullet about 3 ft at 1,000 yards.

Increasing the temperature or altitude will increase the ballistic coefficient. Increasing the barometric pressure decreases the ballistic coefficient. It has the same effect as going down in elevation. Ballistics change with altitude and temperature. Is this modeled? Hardly.

On a whole, the accuracy of hand-aimed guns is far beyond reality. Most of these guns employ a ring and bead sight. These guns were NEVER zeroed after disassembly or repair. In many cases, the sights could be off SEVERAL DEGREES!!! There is also no risk of over-heating a gun. You can shoot without stopping until the gun(s) are empty.

What we have here is an over-simplified ballistics model, and laser accuracy far beyond that of the actual weapons. Maybe that's why this is called a game.

My regards,

Widewing