Let's try and stay at the 'frequentness' line. You're drifting to the 'possibility' line again.
LOL! Yeah, let's stick with the only possible argument you have, no matter how "unprovable" it is. You sure don't want to get into "possibility" here because then you have no argument at all. It's CLEARLY possible. Even you have to admit that!
Anyway, Sure, I'll play another round! Why not!
500 yards and slowly opening? I will absolutely give him a "good burst" for several reasons.
1. Yes, I can hit at 500 yards in AH, ESPECIALLY on someone that is not making any evasives (ie: dead straight) or only maneuvering slightly. These guys are just fooling themselves that they're getting away; don't evade, you'll die. The game is set up that way. Now, out around 700-800, light evasives will protect you; time of flight gets long enough.
3. I can hit with or without tracer on at that range (500) and I'm pretty sure I don't need range either, but I can't turn that off.
3. Using .50's, I have no hybrid rounds to worry about to any extent.
4. Don't need to worry about hit flashes either. In this situation, I just hold where I think I'll hit, hold the trigger down and slowly increase lead during the burst. Best way to get some hits, tracer on or off.
Without ammo counters, I'd shoot anyway, until the guns went dry.
Then I'd either auger for a new plane or
possibly rtb; but I don't play for score. I'd only rtb to deny someone a kill, like if the extender had pinged me, I wouldn't auger, I'd rtb. See, the fights and the kills are the "thing" for me. I hate to admit it, but I don't think I'm actually reliving those thrilling days of yesteryear when I play.
5. There's always a chance the guy will turn around an fight OR he'll do a big E burning evasive that will allow me to close the gap. I'll waste some ammo on that chance. I like the fights, not the chases.
Now, you're going to make the case that in WW2 REAL LIFE this just didn't happen. I'll simply point out that those guys didn't have range finders that read down to the yard with 0% chance of error. If they had and the yardage was shown on their guncam film, then you'd have an unimpeachable case for your argument because you'd KNOW what range they shot at then. But, as it is, you basically have anecdotal information on kill ranges, ie: "I opened fire about 200 yards". Now, do you swear by anecdotal pilot information on aircraft performance? Would you support anecdotal sources being used to program IL2's aircraft performance?
1) Are you prepared to deny the claimed fact that shooting over 300 meters' range in real life, was ineffective and undesirable?
I'd say shooting over 300 meters in WW2 aerial combat was less effective than it is here and it was most certainly undesirable to miss due to the RL constraints on the mission. IE: they couldn't land at a field, rearm and be back in the fight in 15 minutes except in "Battle of Britain" type situations.
2) Are you prepared to deny the fact that kills over 300~400 yards is frequent in AH, and ranges upto 400~500 yards are almost a confirmed 'kill range' for planes armed with .50s and Hispanos?
Yep, 300-400 yard kills are frequent in AH. 400-5000 are relatively frequent for most airplanes, regardless of gun set.
Now, your turn.
Are you prepared to deny the fact that all of these rounds will easily travel farther than 600 yards with more than enough kinetic and/or chemical energy to damage an aluminum aircraft?
Are you prepared to deny the fact that HT has made his intent clear regarding fun vs realism?
Are you prepared to deny the fact that HT has chosen fun over realism?
Lastly, despite your long campaign, are you prepared to deny the fact that it's pretty clear that HT isn't going to make the changes you desire? Are you prepared to deny the fact that if it's 300 yard kills you desire, you'd best just play IL2?
