The Void between Machine guns and cannons.

[Shane]

rebuttals:

4.  pilots also had the options to set whatever kind of tracers wherever and how much.  example: many would put tracers in the last 20 rds (for example) only to let them know exactly when they're running short. i could set mine to show the 1/2, 2/3 3/4 points on my belts. that's as an effective counter as anything would be. you could even use different colors.

5. the eye can pick up a lot more detail than what we perceive on our various monitors. for example, you'd see strikes on the enemy planes, you'd see bits and pieces falling off (and possibly even hitting some as you follow). not all vid cards/cpus or monitors are created equal.

6. tracers in r/l were not as wobbly as you might think. that's vibration on the camera mounts. see charon's post re: laser effect.  admittedly AH doesn't model recoil, which *would* have an impact on things - some planes more than others.

7. there's plenty of aim difficulty present in what many, many experience in AH as "nose bounce." fine control is harder in ah than in rl in some ways due to our inability to "feel" the plane going thru the virtual air.

8. no there's no air turbulence - i can imagine how difficult it might be to model in without some kind of "gamey concessions" like the current wind layers. would you like to give it a shot?

9.  you're free to turn off your icons in AH. altho' in the MA it might get a tad confusing. who was it that posted some RAF pilots were instructed to fire at 300 yds and wond up firing from between 800-1,000 yds out? (and probably scoring *some* hits). again the limitations of computers at present can in no way compare to good old fashion mark IV eyeballs. remember, pilots in general had to have at least 20/20 to qualify for combat duty. you wear glasses? maybe you shouldn't be allowed to play AH?

bottom line... you don't get hit at 600+ if you're doing what you should be. and if you are and still get hit, chalk it up to "not your day."

this of course relates to fighter to fighter shooting, not ftr to buff, altho vice-versa seems a tad too easy ( i can't hit squat with buff guns tho - why? because i don't "practice.")

[Batz]

Originally posted by Toad
Sure they do. Hitting at any range is dependent upon ballistics. But go ahead and pretend it isn't.

The charts show that if anything, range is undermodeled in AH. The rounds artificially terminate ~ 1.1 or 1.2

Nah, I'm not going to bother with IL2 until it's MMOG. Maybe then. Nice that you're so eager to make statements about it but not provide anything in the way of support of them.

Well, you're sure demonstrating your brilliance at pronouncements.

Even if you can't get a timeline right. BTW, nice reversal.

You are full of ****, its pathetic really.

Hiiting at range is dependent on good aiming more then anything. What allows for good aiming at range in  AH? Tracers and range counters. Add in a very large hit sprite and its down right easy. Even if HTs ballistic model was proked for the worse the things I mentioned still make long range gunnery easy.

As you said you have no more clue then the rest of how accurate hts ballistic model is. So even if with your charts they prove nothing especially if ah deals in hybrid rounds as niklas suggested.

Its a bull**** pointless point in the context of this thread. In the end its meaningless.

As Hohun stated

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?"

Whats helps you aim well in ah? Orange tenis ball tracers and range counters. The gunsite itself is visual hinderence for long range shots.

Ah 50 tracers



Il2 50s



see the smoke trail and big orange ball in the ah tracer?

Deny it if you must buts thats one of the biggets contributers to long range gunnery. Atleast when I fly 50 planes. Ofcourse those images are compressed and in game those tracers are even more visible.

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

he reposted that on 08-09-2003 06:56 PM I thought thats the thread you meant, But going back to his 1st post

Ya it's crazy being able to nail planes at 1200 with 50cal's and Hispanos, I got two Kills with the P47 on Gerges at 1000 in the CT daybefore yesterday, not that this is unushual mind you.

hes clearly talking about the same thing as the rest of us are. That is how easy it is to or as Hohun puts it ""How well can you point the guns?" . Not about ballistics.

later he even tells you that directly

In short that the Balistics/ trajectory of the weapons is not realy all that important hear ( nore was it realy a point i raised)

on  08-06-2003 12:50 AM

Mia389: I hate getting killed at 1.2 away. For the Bnz,ers its good though I guess. This gunnery we have now feels gamey to me.

He posted this on 08-09-2003 02:01 PM well after your diversion into ballistics. I take his deffinition of gunnery in the context of an online game to include all factors like the rest of us do.

And I do apologize for thinking everyone understood gunnery to be what gunnery is as it is defined.

Even the definition you provided contradicts you

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.

Thats exactly what we are saying in the context of ah

and all the equipment needed to operate and control weapons.

and

to include the operation and control of all elements of armament

Tracers ammo counters range icons and hit sprites fit right in with your definition. So which is it. Gunnery = is pure ballistics or do you go by the definition you provided.  

I checked the 1st and last in your timeline of quotes but even so the other quotes had nothing to do with ballistics.

The quotes from kweassa had nothing to do with ballistics either. Not only is it apparent in his posts that you quote from but he like everyone else said so.

Niklas was talking about the ballistics of hybrid HE/AP hisso round. Nothing you posted addresses that.  

Again Hohun hit it dead on ""How well can you point the guns?" and in ah its down right easy despite any of that "I am better trained then ww2 pilots were".

If nothing that we said contributes to long range gunnery then what difference does it make if its there or not? And what difference does it make that some of us hold the opinion that its the other things seperate from ballistics that are the main factors?

Like I said you are just full of **** at this point.

Everytime such facts are mentioned, it always digresses to some other subject... on how we should define gunnery, or how Batz should just go play IL2, or how he should read the posts right... and then, it returns to the point where we have to start all over again - 'long range hits are ballistics. If ballistics are right, everything else is also right'.

kweassa is spot on. Lets see what it shifts to know. My typing and spelling hasnt been pointed out yet.

[Batz]

fyi those 2 mages are from p47s firing all guns in a full stream. tell me which one would make long range gunnery easy?

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by Shane
well, if you had 1,000 trucks driving by every day with someone taking that shot, i'd imagine you'd see several a week.

You are wrong, long range kills (> 300 yards) is common and I see them ALL the time. What I dont see frequently is 150 yards or less kills, and when I see it, my next move is usually to bail out with a smoking/burning spit inside my cockpit.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Batz

Hiiting at range is dependent on good aiming more then anything.

Really?

Then go to the range and shoot a shotgun with slug ammo at a 1000 meter target. Post a picture of the target when you're done. Thanks.

You're supposed to be a shooter?

Thanks for the pics. You've finally decided to explain your prounouncements? What a change. Yeah, they're different. As for "smoke trail" seems like I see a lot of that in the US gun cam films.

Actually, I have talked to Pyro a bit about the ballistic trajectory calculations AND the damagae modeling when we were down at the Con. I'm pretty confident that he's using essentially the same ballistic computer that's available online. The results are very similar.

I also remember him saying that the AH damage model, LIKE EVERY OTHER GAME'S DAMAGE MODEL is always going to be somewhat subjective. There's no help for it as there is NO WAY TO STANDARDIZE DAMAGE IN A FORMULA.

Note: DAMAGE or LEATHALITY is not "gunnery". Like it says, Gunnery is the art and science of using guns. And the beginning, basic building block of gunnery is ballistics. In the beginning, there's the gun and the projectile. All your other elements are added later and are ancillary. Sorry you can't see the direct relation to comments about the "famous" 1.2 kills to ballistics.

You do remember HT asking for films of just one of the millions of 1.2 kills reported right? Took forever for just ONE to show up. It's bloody rare that a previously undamaged plane gets shot down at 1.2 and it's more rare if he's maneuvering.

Yet it's still preached like an everyday occurance and the faithful all genuflect.

[Batz]

There you go again, keep in the context of this game. It doesnt matter if ht modelled the ballistics of the 50s to match mg151/15mm. With all the visual aids present in AH it would be an easy adjustment in aim. The ballistic for all we know could be 100% correct or 100% wrong it wouldnt matter in this context.

As long as you can see and track the round  through out its flight path and where end the rounds goes its matter of adjustment.

The visual adds in AH go dirtectly to the point in determining how well you aim.

As kweassa pointed out and afaik US .50s did not have smoke trail tracers. RAF/LW cannon shells leave a pretty fuzzy line behind. AH tracers, regardless of MGs and cannons, leave a clear and precise trail of a grey line.  Theres plenty of guncam footage on the web and I remember just the other day watching Johnsons p47s shoot down a 190 and I dont recall the orange balls or smoke trail. You could see some of the bullets strike but the duration of the flash and its size was much smaller then ah.

Heres the hit sprite in AH.



Il2 50 hit (but each round has a specific "sprite". 3cm hit sprite is actual "bigger" then ah"

See three hits 2 7 mm 1 20mm exactly the same.



The thing with the il2 50 hit is that it the sprite duration is so short that while flying you dont see it at all but you see the particles that trail of the targeted plane. In that pic I had slowed down the game the paused it to take that pic.

Heres an il2 3cm strike. The round actualy passed through the horizontal planes making a hole the detonated on the other side instead of ripping the entire tail off.



As shown the visual aids in ah contribute to long range gunnery. Thats my opinion. I think its pretty solid.

I havent seen much randomization in the AH dm, 2 hits in the wing = x damage 1 more = wing breaks (numbers are just offered as an example). Angle of impact, probrability that some rounds may just pass through the wing with out hitting anything vital etc dont seem to be present.

Take bombers for instant in the AH event Big we tested weak points on bombers. We found that 3 20mm hits to a wing tip would seperate it every time. As such in 2 passes through 50+ b17s I killed 10. (8 credited 2 assists that I de winged but my wing man hit as well). No randomization at all. If thats not standard or close to it I dunno what.

I will say this the more randomization the more whining will occur. "I shot xx wing 5 times and he flew off" etc. Similiar to some of the p4 whines.

In the context of a computer game all those things that contribute to ones idea or persception of "gunnery" can be included for the sake of discussion as "gunnery" over all. For most of us we dont know why when we fire a type 99 mk 1 at 200 yards we get 50% less damage the the type 99 mk2 at the same range. In this sense is it DM, Ballistic, or lethality? In this thread its conceded that its not ballistics.

But  if we stick to the definition you provided then all those thing modelled in AH that contribute to the operation and control of elements of armament include the tracers, range counters, hit sprites and yes even ammo counters again.

I said what I thought long range gunnery meant and that d700+. As pointed out some say it never happens others say its lag, others say its rare and others claim to see it and do it all the time. I have sseen enough to know that kills in excess of d700 arent "rare" they may not be the "norm" but neither are kills in side 250m. My opinion is that the effective kill range in ah averages out to about 450-500 yards. Where as Il2 its inside 250m.

[Toad]

Ballistics in the context of the game? Ah, then I see you got my point. OK, in the game, why do rounds terminate ~1.2 when even the 13mm will go farther than that? We all want realism, right?

Tracer? A real quick search turned these up.


Watch the "Pacific Theater" clip at the bottom, second clip.

Tell me what you think of the tracer and hit sprites in that one.

And a couple of shots from the 339th FG. The Group was assigned into 66th Fighter wing of the Third Air Division, 8th USAAF on 4. April 1944, arriving at Station 378 Fowlmere, Cambs on the 5th, where they remained until 10 October 1945. Throughout this period the Group flew P-51Bs and Cs until equipped with P-51Ds.

12 Sept, 1944 - Capt Bradford Stevens downing a Me-109 - confirmed destroyed. Sequence of still shots taken from gun camera film.



Is that a smoke trail?



Yeah, I think it is.



Of course tracer are aiming aids. Sure they help in long range gunnery; that's why they used them. The question is, after looking at the above film clip and stills from actual guncam.... where is AH so far off? Some, maybe. Way off? I'm somewhat skeptical. Look at the "Miscellaneous" film clip, third sequence. Lot's of tracer smoke there (LW).

I would like to have more stuff falling off when hit as well. I think HT said we're getting that in AH2.

I've said many times the AH damage model could use more specificity and sophistication. We agree there; it's pretty basic right now.

I've said the Icons/range counters are problematic for several reasons. I've said it a few times, so you can find my comments pretty easy with a search. I also took the time to talk directly to the boss about them but we only agreed to disagree. It's his game. That's also why I don't post repetitive "icon" threads; I asked, he answered, it's done.

Ammo counters? Again? As I said, a nits, not lice. I think you'd see little if any effect on shooting habits if they were removed but I have no problem with removing them from aircraft that didn't have them. I just don't think in the MA it would matter in the least. It's just not that kind of place. Possibly more important for some people in scenario type operations, especially if the "quick rearm pads" (RL? ) were disabled. Possibly for some people in the AH2: TOD but who really knows at this stage of that operation. OTOH, in scenario play, the earlier you knock down the enemy and get an initial numbers advantage the better. So guys might be just a quick on the trigger. Who really knows.

I think the only other thing on the "laundry list" was hybrid rounds. I always guessed they did the averaging to simplify the coding back at the beginning. It'd be nice to get the specific rounds but I haven't heard any talk of that. It is, though, a very slightly double edged sword. By averaging, the "good" rounds in the belt are slightly downgraded by the "lesser" rounds. OTOH, all the "lesser" rounds are slightly upgraded by the "good" rounds. And, as I mentioned, there's the problem of tracking where the shooter is in his "belt" each time he presses the trigger so that if a hit occurs, the "right" calculations are done. I'm sure it can all be done. I assume IL2 tracks each type round and it's place in the belt? The question is will they bother and how much time will it take away from other things they feel are more important.

[Batz]

There were tracer rounds in intervals. Looks like a tracer to me.

In that clip you provided I am seeing AP/incendiary (white puff small white flash) rounds catch a zeke on fire at close range, not d800. So what? it was a fire ball anyway. Many of those hits leave nothing but a white puff with particles falling off. Like Il2. Are you comparing that to the ah hit sprite? Look at the 163 get hit with 50s

That grainy some what over exposed pic proves nothing.

I again where did I say i want realism? I said specifically I am not a realism Nazi. My replies deal with possible causes for long range gunnery in AH.

I never said tracers were "unreal" I said that I believe the visible tracers (which after testing offline are with every round) aid in long range gunnery. I am off to work right now but there plenty of additional film like the pac film you refer to.

I also said i am not an advocate on icons. Again the reference was to the possibilty that range counters help facilitate long range gunnery.

Ammo counter have a direct effect of the amount spray from planes with high rates of fire and smaller ammo loads.

When I fly Ah I am never watch the ammo couters while engaged. But whats happens after an engagement or 2 I check my ammo. This determines whether I rtb or not.

If a hurri IIc has less then 70 rounds of hisso left Id imagine he would look for a better target then just spray at long range even with the counters. But with the ammo counters gone after a few engagements he wont be sure now much ammo he has and may decide to use his ammo more wisely; ie less spray at long range.

Hybrid rounds deal with the same thing niklas mentioned in that an HE hisso shouldnt have the same ballistic charateristics as the ap. The higher velocity flatter trajectory means long rates hits are easier. Remember your science lesson?

When I get home from work I will find a link to Johsons guncam film 20851.

You can see at intervals tracer rounds (glow and smoke trail). It matches nothing we see in AH. You can also see the hits. Also remember that its hard to tell the exposure of these films but I am sure with your internet search capability you can found out. Also remember that these films are in "slow" motion but I am unsure of the Fps. I am sure you can find that as well.

I have that film on my hard drive but not enough webspace to post it.

[MANDOBLE]

Ammo counters are most usefull in some situations where you need to defend friendlies or CAP a zone and you dont want to RTB too early nor RTB without ammo for self defense. Of course, in any engangement you will try to dissengange and flee if you know only 10 rounds are left in your belts.

About smoke trails, looking at WW2 gun cam footage you will notice that these trails are much much more noticeable than the present in actual AH version, they were more like the trails in AH beta.

[Batz]

Every  RAF/LW cannon shells leave a pretty fuzzy line behind. Every 50cal doesnt.

[GScholz]

I think most of the gunnery issues in AH would be solved by:

1. Removing the laser rangefinders and display range only in 1k intervals. (Perhaps add an icon that tells you if the range is closing or opening, but not by how much)

2. Remove hitsprites for MG's. Reduce the hitsprite illumination over range for cannons, but perhaps leave a puff of smoke.

3. In the low-speed aspect of turnfighting add some buffeting or turbulence ... even if it can't be modelled accurately. It will add "feeling" to the game and increase the immersion factor drastically, effectively removing the "turning on rails" feel of AH. Perhaps some random wind speed fluctuation could solve this (I have never felt a wind as constant as in AH).

4. Remove the ammo counters. At least on the planes that didn't have them historically, and even those didn't display the actual rounds, but rather a simple bar system (see cockpit of 109/190 as an example). For those that didn't have counters, use the historical method of increasing the number of tracer rounds at the end of the ammo belt.

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by GScholz
1. Removing the laser rangefinders and display range only in 1k intervals. (Perhaps add an icon that tells you if the range is closing or opening, but not by how much)

THAT IS THE POINT, an icon that shows closure rate, but not range below 1k.

[Toad]

Watch the "Pacific Theater" clips again. There' two clips. The second one shows a line of tracer coming in from the left. Looking much like tracer in AH.


"That grainy some what over exposed pic proves nothing."

No, it proves Kewassa is mistaken. That's a smoke trail from a US tracer. There are gun cam films out there that show both smoke and no smoke from US. Could be different types of tracer material, could be lots of things. But his generalization is incorrect; some did show a smoke trail. And there's a picture of one.

You are also wrong about AH tracer being "every round". It's 1 tracer in every five rounds, unless it's large caliber, like tank rounds. All tank rounds are tracer, for example. Try taking off and shooting at the ground while in an arcing turn under G. This will spread your rounds out and you'll see that there are non-tracer rounds hitting between tracer impacts.

Yeah, my posts on Icons cover range counters as well. Always seemed counter intuitive that you get range in close when  you don't need it but not farther out where in RL you could see the aircraft shape as something other than a dot.

Ammo counters have no effect on any type of plane. They can only affect the player using the plane. Clearly, in today's MA, the effect would be next to nothing. Guys that suicide dive into hangars are going to worry about RTB'ing for ammo?

Going to specific rounds from hybrids will "randomize" cannon rounds far more than most MG. The various "beltings" of cannon use rounds with enough of a difference in BC to create a noticeable difference in trajectory. This won't be true of say the .50BMG, as those various rounds are much closer in BC. So, relative to to cannon rounds, .50BMG beltings will be much flatter overall.

BTW, the Type 99 issue is a bit more detailed than has been explained in this thread. They two rounds are thought to be close to correct at the "short" ranges, with only about a 10% difference in leathality. The question involves longer ranges, where the leath may need to be upped. If this happens, it's possible some or all HE cannon (chemical energy types)may get a boost in leath at longer ranges. Not exactly what some in this thread are hoping for; the old "be careful what you ask for".

Don't forget to watch the first clip for LW smoke trails. Much heavier than what we have in AH.

Later, it's busy 'round here.

[Kweassa]

No, it proves Kewassa is mistaken. That's a smoke trail from a US tracer. There are gun cam films out there that show both smoke and no smoke from US. Could be different types of tracer material, could be lots of things. But his generalization is incorrect; some did show a smoke trail. And there's a picture of one.

 Not really. As the different conditions of the atmosphere can bring different results. AFAIK RAF and LW tracer rounds were meant to leave a smoke trail behind, while the US .50 tracers were mostly visual tracers of magnesium/potassium flares. The .50 tracers would leave condensed trails at high alts or humid conditions, to my knowledge.

 In the clip you provided, I honestly can't make out if the blurring trail is due to bad footage, over exposure, or if they are really smoke rounds. In the pic, I'm willing to bet that was pretty high up in the air.

 Let's hope the real experts on this stuff can come around again and clear it up for us. If the .50 "smoking trail" is indeed something happening in only certain conditions, it would not be right to model it as a 'generic' feature for every instance. If it is a special type of tracer, still it should not should it be used as the 'standard', since we all know the AH planes arms/armament agenda almost entirely revolves around standard/normal/stock plane/armament. (unless willing to grant requests on other 'special' type of armaments and ammunitions on other planes)

...where in RL you could see the aircraft shape as something other than a dot...

 In real life people missed anyway, whether they see it or not. You yourself said people misidentified ranges, mistakenly thinking that it was close range, but actually a lot out further - thus, they missed the shot.

 So what's the big deal? As long as one can confirm just the closure and departure, one can wait until the target comes into sufficient range.

 Oh, I know what the deal is. In truth, the whole premise of the above statement is set totally upon taking longer range gunnery as something granted. What it really means is, "in real life, you could see the planes, but in AH, if it's further out than 500yards, I can't see it very well. So, I need the range counters to confirm the range 500d for me, so I can blast them with my .50s before having to go in close and take the dangers follwing them".

Ammo counters have no effect on any type of plane. They can only affect the player using the plane. Clearly, in today's MA, the effect would be next to nothing. Guys that suicide dive into hangars are going to worry about RTB'ing for ammo?

 This, is something I absolutely object to. You're saying that nobody cares about ammo anyway because every other person in the MA are just dorks. Well, in the H2H rooms where there are even more dorks, the change in ammo conditions, and the knowledge about that fact, influences the habit of gunnery on the individual pilot severely.

 Besides, if the effect is next to nothing as you say, then no harm in more historicity, is there? According to your logic, the only harm it can do is to those who count every shots with the ammo counters to manage it. (or wait.. is that really a "harm"? Or is it part of the differences in pros and cons of each aircraft type?)

 

Don't forget to watch the first clip for LW smoke trails. Much heavier than what we have in AH.

 Definately. That's what we're asking - the clean, crisp, grey laser-line has to go. Replace it with the blurry smoke trail.

[Steve]

AH is a lot of fun.