The Void between Machine guns and cannons.

[Toad]

BTW Batz... suppose that you could set up the CT with No Tracer as a mandatory setting, turn off all hit sprites, remove the ammo counters, turn off the icons and restrict on side to .50 armed aircraft only (no hybrid rounds).

Now, suppose somebody that could really shoot came in behind you and hosed you with .50's and killed ya dead. Hits sounding like a hail storm on a tin trash can. Hundreds of rounds.

And say upon reviewing the film, you found the guy was 1K back at the time.

What would be your opinion then?

(I must toss in that I think the ammo counter thing is kind of a red herring given the situation in the game. Running out of ammo just isn't that big a deal.

I think most of us routinely stay in the fight until the guns go dry; at least I do. Would I do any different without counters? Nope.

I'd never worry about running out on the first engagement. Wouldn't worry about the second either. Depending upon a plane's ammo load, I'd be thinking I need to get good shots on the third one. The fourth one I'd be thinking "I'll probably run out and have to bug out".

So, what's the diff for a guy like me?)

[brady]

" Brady: Ya it's crazy being able to nail planes at 1200 with 50cal's and Hispanos, "


  I still think it is Crazy to be able to do this consistantly and with the ashurance that I can kill at that range with them, but I also think their are a number of factors contrabuting to the ease with which this occures in AH, I dont realy as I mentioned elsewhear have any real big isue with the Balisitcs model per say though. Also were all beating a dead horse hear in more of a way then we ushaly are on this tierd old subject since things are going to change. I sugest we ajurn unitll after AH2 comes out and we have had time to digest all the new stuff.

[Toad]

Sometime lets go to the DA and you can take a .50's or Hispano plane and kill me consistently at 1.2. I'd like a film of that for my personal collection.



I still remember HT or Pyro asking for a film of a kill at 1.2. I think they eventually got... one. And there was some deal with that, like possibly the plane had been previously damaged or something.

But, hey... let's give it a try sometime.

[Batz]

Originally posted by Toad
Well, it has always seemed to me that it's good to bring questions and issues before the community because there's a pretty large knowledge base here. Usually everybody learns something. Lots of time the questions or issues can be answered or resolved.

OTOH, I think it's a bad thing to whack dead horses repeatedly simply because no definitive or acceptable solution has been offered. It's bad for the game overall and it's bad for the player(s) that have those concerns. It breed unhappiness.

I don't always expect HT or Pyro to jump in a thread and explain (for a lot of legitimate reasons... like keeping their code/plans to themselves) to the full satisfaction of all participants.

So, when an unresolved issue keeps coming up with no "official" answer and the posts about it keep getting more and more bitter and/or acrimonius, I think it's just better to "call the source" and ask in a polite manner. If they're too busy, they'll tell you.

If they're not, they will usually explain their position. I haven't talked with many folks that actually called HTC and chatted that didn't come away feeling better about the game and the direction it's going to take.

Glad you called him, glad it's getting looked at.

no its not a good thing who said that? I was using that to compare how some would address long range gunnery artificially.

BTW Batz... suppose that you could set up the CT with No Tracer as a mandatory setting, turn off all hit sprites, remove the ammo counters, turn off the icons and restrict on side to .50 armed aircraft only (no hybrid rounds).

So what? This aint my thread nor have I ever started 1 related to being killed at long range. I simply point out the obvious. You can dance around all ya want with your bc and irrelevant numbers but the longer range gunnery in AH is a fact.

As I said like in Il2 its still possible to get longer range hits and even longer range kills but the effective kill is is much closer. But I bet you get in a jug and try to spray me down at 800 and you wont even get close to a kill unlike ah.

So what was your point again?

In il2 you can fly and almost completely match pilot accounts. Like setting up an attack and just keeping enough energy to keep a steeper climb. In il2 they cant pull there nose straight up and get a d850 burst that blows your plane in half like you can in ah. The can pull get some hits but they stall. They may land a lucky hit or 2 but not one that cuts your tail off.

As F4u mentions the snapshot is king.

Theres no aiming at a point on an aircraft in ah just get them in front and hose away. Any hit causes equal damage. You dont even need a gunsite in ah. When I flew the g6 with 30mm I didnt use a gunsite or tracers and still had a kd of 5 to 1 in it.

And at 800 yrds no tracers you cant walk the the round on to me.

At 800 no d icons you cant really tell between 800 and 1k.

The ammo counter doesnt let you get hits or kills but you can watch and manage your spray. With ammo counters you know exactly how much you can spray and how much you have sprayed.

fyi - If what brady says is true then there would appear to be some rounds like the typre 99 mk  1 and mgff that suffer more so over range then others. As has been suspected. You calculations would not have shown that. They may not have been nerfed over a "secret hand shake" but theres still something to the claim. Just like your arguement during the 50s vrs p4s that turned out to be a huge hole in the p4. You brought up ballistics then too.

Maybe its just acute fanfoi 'ism or what I dunno but lotsa times where theres smoke theres fire.

[john9001]

<<>.

 could someone translate that for me.?
never mind i do it myself........WAHHH i gotn killet but i kant killt nobuddy WAHHH.......LW RuLlZ

[Toad]

LOL!

And the obvious is that you can be killed at "long range"? That's the fact of the longer range gunnery in AH"?

Well, yah. Can ya kill someone at 300 yards with the 13mm? Will it do enough damage? Sure you can. The .50 BMG has essentially that same energy at 1200 yards. So I guess you can be killed at long range in AH. Although the fabled "killed at 1.2 by .50's" is probably far more rare than routine. Basically, though, if you get hit, it's the same as getting hit by 13mm at 300 yards. Enough energy to kill in the game. That's what those "irrelevant numbers" tell us.

Most of the rest of your post seems to deal with the damage model for the objects in the game. I think it's good we're supposedly getting a more specific damage model. Never said I thought this DM was the be-all, end-all. In any post, anywhere that I recall.

And obviously, if you like IL so much... why punish yourself here in AH? Best to be happy.

Ammo counters? Yeah, you wonder how the planes without them ever accomplished anything in RL, don't you? Ammo counters don't matter in AH, I suspect they never will. The next batch of ammo is just a mouse/click launch away. However, be assured, it wouldn't bother me one bit if HTC took them away. I suspect there's many like me.

And if you'll review the .50/panzer thread, I believe I said it's not the hitting that's in question, it's the damage. The guns will hit; no doubt about it. IIRC, there was commentary about "can't hit from that range" in there too. To date, no one has shown the ballistics to be off that I've seen. Now, assigning the appropriate damage? That's quite different and I've said that too.

It may be that some of the chemical energy rounds are improved. Good! If it's right, it's right. I have no problem with that, never did. I think it's a shame it took so long/so many posts/so much angst to finally decide to go to the source when all that was ever needed was a simple phone call.

[SKurj]

Bit late for this one...

I have read anecdotal evidence of a B17 being shot down by a beaufighter  (accident of course)  using just 16 rounds hispano.  B17 crew all survived.



SKurj

[Toad]

Originally posted by Batz
Gunnery is more then just ballistics and its connected to everything else.  

NAVAL ORDNANCE AND GUNNERY, VOLUME 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO ORDNANCE AND GUNNERY
HOME   INDEX
INTRODUCTION TO ORDNANCE AND GUNNERY
A. General
B. Scope of the Text
                             INTRODUCTION TO ORDNANCE AND GUNNERY

                                                                                                      A. General

1A1. Definition of terms

This text is concerned with the study of Naval Ordnance and Gunnery. Together, the terms “ordnance” and “gunnery” embrace weapons and their use.

Ordnance comprises the physical equipment pertaining to weapons. This equipment is further classified as explosive ordnance, including such elements as gun ammunition, torpedoes, mines, bombs, rockets, and the like, and inert ordnance, which includes projecting devices (such as guns, launchers, and release gear), protective armor, and all the equipment needed to operate and control weapons. Aboard ship it refers to all elements that come under the general term “ship’s armament.”

Traditionally, gunnery is the art and science of using guns. However, in the sense used in this book, the term is broadened in agreement with modern usage, to include the operation and control of all elements of armament. Gunnery is concerned with the practical use of ordnance.

[Kweassa]

And the obvious is that you can be killed at "long range"? That's the fact of the longer range gunnery in AH"?

 We're talking about the 'frequency', not the 'possibility' here.

 You're repeating the same thing again, by ignoring everything else but what the theoretical numbers of ballistics, again. This whole dicussion, can be compressed into following four questions:

1) Can you be killed at long range in real life?
2) Can you be killed at long range in AH?  
3) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in RL?
4) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in AH?

 You're picking 1) and 2), and completely ignoring 3) and 4).

 What you're saying is like: "cancer, is a common disease and can happen to anyone.. nothing's special about that", when 20 people living on the same block suddenly die of cancer. It's the frequency of the disease happening in such a limited area that alarms people, not the possibility of it - since, a remote possibility happening in a concentrated regularity, is itself should be considered an anomaly.


 ..........


 So the 1.2k kill might be actually a rarity. Then what about 500yards? Or maybe 600? You're an adept P-51 pilot - which ranges do you open up in your Mustang?

 Up to which ranges you know you can shoot and kill the guy?

[Batz]

Thats deffinition of gunnery proves what?

Gunnery is concerned with the practical use of ordnance.

Thats exactly what we are talking about. Ballistics is just a part of gunnery in general.

I dont fly ah much at all. I havent flown in the main in months not because of "gunnery" but because of the poor gameplay. I am neither happy nor unhappy. You want turn this discussion into something more then it is. As I said  I dont try to rationalize the intent behind some one elses post. You otoh seem to think you are able to read minds.

I wasnt touting il2 but using it as an example to show how even with the same ballistics you get entirely different results.

The problem isnt just a matter of dm but with how easy it is to aim hits because of all the artificial "gamey" stuff. When folks use the term "cant hit from that range' they arent talking about ballistics. Like Hohun said

Whether Aces High requires the same degree of skill to achieve "perfect aim" as flying a real fighter does, I can't tell. However, I think this is more a matter of the flight modelling than of the ballistical modelling because the all-decisive question is "How well can you point the guns?"

You again shift to specific point like ammo counters like you did with ballistics. As has been  explained to you theres far more to it.

Ammo counters are a crutch and facilitate the amount pf spray and pray you see because after 1 or 2 engagements where a person has expended ammo they will be unsure how much they have left. In the main where their are high concentrations of enemy  one may be less likely to spray at long range and wait for a target thats closer in order to get the most out of his ammo load. Now one would look at the ammo counters see 200 rounds and think I am good for another pass. With out them hmm "how much ammo do I have? I'll go rearm". In planes like the hurr1 IIc typhie or the ho 5 in the ki 61 you run out of ammo quick. Withtheir high rate of fire its impossible to track how much ammo you have left. This is less a concern in jugs and ponies but it stillw will have an effect. This is especially relevent to events and scenarios. But you are focussing in on this like its the end all, much like your "ballistics".

I dont care to much if ht changes one or the other. My point is that given similiar ballistics modelling minus the other things I mentioned you see an entirely different result. One that is more in line with what you read about. HT may or may not want to change it but for now it seems to be well recieved as is.

But that has no bearing on how close to reality the effects end up.

[Toad]

1) Can you be killed at long range in real life?   Absolutely

2) Can you be killed at long range in AH?  Absolutely
 
3) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in RL?  No, it's rare

 
4) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in AH?  No, it's rare

I like to use my .50's at about 250. I'm comfortable using them at ~400. I will try to turn guys farther out than that. (Don't fly the -51 much anymore, usually in slower stuff.)

I think your definition of "long range" and mine are probably different though.

[Batz]

no long range is d700 +.

There have been plenty of films posted that show it and I bet just by taking a quick poll you will see kills at those ranges arent rare.

There was even a d1.2k killl film around that was posted.

read what wibuz says in this thread.

So it either comes down to everyone who points out long range gunnery is a liar or exaggerating.

Theres always been 3 camps on this in ah

1. It never happens you are lying or its lag.
2. Its rare thing and besides so what its a game.
3. It happens often.

All three cant be right. As many threads as there have been on this issue and from my own personal observation I am in number 3.

I myself have converge set at 250 but I fly 109s where the guns are in the nose so its not that big a deal. I fire between 200 and 100 yrds with the taters. I find this way I get better use of my ammo and expend less rounds then firing at a longer range. If I miss at range then I have to fight and rely on deflection shooting which causes me to use more ammo then I like.

I used this chart and set my convergence and I found when use .target the mg131 and mk108 match the the chart at 150m.

[Toad]

I don't think it proves anything. I think it explains why when somebody says "gunnery" I think of the event from the end of the barrel to the hit or miss of the target.

Apparently, when you are talking "gunnery" you're talking damage model and or leathality as part of it. I don't see that; I view those as separate and distinct from "gunnery".

OK, clear something up for me.

You say IL and AH have the same ballistics. To me, that means the same trajectories for identical weapons/rounds and the same kinetics.

Since I don't have it and haven't played it, help me out here.

I assume the leathality is different. By that I specifically mean the effect of each round, chemical or kinetic, is different between AH and IL. BTW, I don't consider damage by either chemical or kinetic energy as part of "gunnery". To me that is properly in the leathality area.

Now, the "artificial gamey stuff" that is different. That would be what, exactly? what are the differences in:

Tracers, hit sprites, range counters, ammo counters, every round/equal damage, hybrid rounds.

I think I know, but I want to be sure. Did I miss any other things that you feel make a big difference?

Now, suppose for a second, that all these things were identical in both games. Do you hypothesize then that suddenly AH shooting habits would be like IL shooting habits? IE: shooting at shorter ranges?

And would the results of the hits at ~ the same ranges be the same with respect to leathality/damage/destruction?

What's your opinion on that?




Look, YOU'RE the one that keeps on bringing up ammo counters like it's some BFD to a player. It's not to me and a lot of others like me I suspect. If I didn't have them, it wouldn't change the way I play. I KNOW I have plenty of ammo for one or two engagements in ANY case. After that, I'm still going to take any good shot, same as I would in the first two or three encounters.

Counters just don't figure into it for me or a lot of people. You make counters a key point of your argument as part of the "far more to it". I'm simply telling you that coutners don't matter to some folks, so you assumption isn't really valid in all cases, yet you continue to focus on it like it's an incredibly key factor.

Hey, like I said, take 'em out. I really doubt anyone will miss them, nor would they switch rides to get those critical counters back. As to reducing long range shooting, I think the effect, particularly in the MA, would be minimal. I know it wouldn't change my engagement tactics in the least.

[Toad]

One other thing to note. Way back when this was being churned around before, I think it was Pyro who pointed out that the "anecdotal" accounts were just as likely to underestimate shooting ranges as they were to be right on or overestimate.

Just something to ponder. Go ahead and discard it.

[Kweassa]

When it comes to this specific issue, I'd rather believe Tony than Pyro.

As a very rough rule of thumb, typical maximum effective firing distances in RL would seem to have been around 400m against bombers, 250m against fighters flying straight and level, and 100m or less against manoeuvring targets.

 ....
 
 And like you have said, we use the term 'long range' in a different sense. I'll rephrase it to 'range of more than 300yards', and then reinsert it to the '4 questions':

1) Can you be killed at a 'range of more than 300yards' in real life?
- Possibly, but not likely.

2) Can you be killed at a 'range of more than 300yards' in AH?
- Happens all the time

3) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in RL?
- No, it's rare

4) Is it normal for someone to be killed at such range in AH?
- It's abnormal not to be killed at such ranges. Shot down at 700~800 yards, is yes, not very common. But then, so is 50~100 yards. The former is rare because it is hard, the latter is rare because you don't have to go in that close.

 ..and if all these 'definitions', as you insist, must be re-defined upon correct terms, then fine. We'll rephrase the term 'gunnery' with the term 'the tendencies and results coming from AH gunnery, including outside influences that effect gunnery'. But does that really make a difference? I don't think so.

 .....

Now, suppose for a second, that all these things were identical in both games. Do you hypothesize then that suddenly AH shooting habits would be like IL shooting habits? IE: shooting at shorter ranges?

 I believe so, Toad, I belive so.

(..and if there isn't any difference still, even when the many factors concerning the process of shooting are exactly up to IL2/FB levels, then the case be humbly closed... At least we be content there is better eye-candy.)