Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: JB42 on January 01, 2005, 04:30:13 AM
-
Which do you think is the "skill" that is need to be best at.
My vote is gunnery. you can fly like a mofo, but if you can't hit anything, your not going to last long. Even the newest of noobs can get a lucky shot off.
-
Yeah you need to get better gunnery. Took you 2 passes in your LA7 tonight to kill my Goon. And I wasn't doing anything to you. You big meany you...LOL
JB42...Great work on protecting that base.
-
Definately gunnery.
Both in real life, and in the game.
-
acm... because you can always fly someone into the ground. and used properly acm will give you the multiple shot opportunities that poor gunnery will take to bring them down - or avoid someone else's better shooting.
of course, decent aim is very helpful. i'd rather have good acm with decent aim, than bad acm with fantastic aim. because what good is aim if you can't get your nose on target?
-
Gunnery every time, acm is just for show. If you can hit someone at 600 you don't need much else. Except maybe a D9 of course...hehe..
-
Can successful ACM tactics be defined as getting on someone's 6 at 400 or less? If ya cant do that very often (asI cant) then your gunnery has to be REAL good for them snap-shot thingies;
-
ACM.
If used correctly you can position yourself so close that aim is really irrelevant.
-
ACM
Shane and Furball pretty much covered it.
-
Definatly ACM. If the best pilot in ACMs(and bad in gunnery) met the best pilot with gunnery(and bad at ACM), ACM would win b/c the guy with gunnery would never get a chance to bring his guns to target. This is provided the gunnery guy doesn't HO on the merge ;) I'm horrible at gunnery but have an idea with how to do ACMs and I find it doesn't matter about my shooting b/c once I've got my position I can wait till they are d200 or less when it's very easy to hit them.
-
ACM.
A good gunner might be able to shoot you down, but he has to catch you first =)
-
According to Von Richthoffen; gunnery.
-
Im not sure which is more important but heres an example that could be considered.
My gunnery has always been great. My ACM started at useless and improved slowly through the last year and a half.
From the first day i played i got kills. my first 2 weeks i achived i think close to 200 kills despite being crap at flying. In AH1 i could easily hit a straight and level target from 1k, and regularly get kills from 800yrds. when AH2 came out the gunnery was harder but i still find it easy to ping from 1k although its very hard to do damage over 500yrds.
Now that my ACM is well improved, i can avoid dying alot better, and get into a possition that means i dont have to shoot such long distances.
so, it would seem obvious that gunnery is more important to get kills than ACM if you are new to the game, yet ACM is the master key to not needing such good gunnery.
in conclusion:
Without a little bit of skill in each department you you wont ever be on the best pilots list, But, overall, in all skill catagories, Gunnery is the most important for getting kills, ACM is most important for staying alive.
essentially, they are both vital.
-
Originally posted by Seeker
According to Von Richthoffen; gunnery.
Yes, but i dont think that applies here.
Von Richtofen's opponents did not get a big red icon above their head when he was approaching from 5k out (big red plane yes ;)) the sneak kill was far more common so gunnery was a big factor, plus the absolute innacuracy of first world war guns and lower rates of fire made aiming very important.
I dont think it applies to Aces High.
-
i'd rather have good acm with decent aim
What about good aim and decent acm?
Lol, HONDO. Yes there was an F4U about 5.5 behind me when I attacked you the first time. I tried to setup where I could make my pass and be in position to face the Hog. Much to my surprise, he never engaged. Made my second pass on you and then proceeded to kill Starlite's C-47. If you ever find out who that guy is, string him up lol.
-
My gunnery has always been sloppy feasious matter......I still struggle under the simplist of leads..........
How many folk have seen me glued to some saps 6 until my ammo has run dry..........
Just occasionally I get a full ruddered lead shot or some body actually stalls out at less than 200 in my sights.............
-
Gunnery is King, ACM is a Prince at best.
WIth good gunnery you dont need ACM because you get most kills in the 1st pass. One of the reasons I rarely fly the LA7 anymore is because I became amazingly good at off angle shots, and would kill folks crossing me at 90º regularly with very short bursts.
Its also a great talent because there is a huge advantage if you can shoot at 600 yeards -vs- someone who needs 300-400. When your farther out you have more time to react to your opponents actions and your less likely to overshoot.
-
Depends on your flying style doesn't it ?
If you are a typical fast plane BNZ Hit and run (P51,g10,190, Lala) etc then gunnery is the most important skill by far, as ACM is used sparingly.
If you fly some of the other planes and like to "fight out" an engagement then you would probably rate ACM as more important for the reasons stated.
-
You need both. ACM without gunnery skills means a lot of missed kills, or spending too much time getting the kill, thereby giving other enemies time to get to you first.
Gunnery skills without decent ACM means that you won't get nearly as many opportunities and are more likely to be a victim yourself.
Nonetheless, whatever your opinion, without good SA neither gunnery or ACM skills will keep you alive. SA is the single greatest item separating the really good pilots from the rest. Combine good SA with equally good ACM and gunnery and you will become one of those pilots everyone holds in awe.
My regards,
Widewing
-
ACM...hands down.
Enables you to get close range shots.
-
The best shot I've seen in the game, and I know there are others, is DMF/Levi/Todd. Now I know from his films that he is very good at the ACM stuff. But, I also know from his films and from personal experience that he is an amazing shot.
He can hit virtually anything that flies within the front 60 degrees of his aircraft within 500 yards using only about as many rounds as are required to kill the plane. It could be HO, or crossing or anything in between. I might make some of the low percentage crossing shots 10 percent of the time if I lined up on the angle just right and held the trigger down as the enemy flew through the bullet stream. He can seemingly hit the same shot 90 percent of the time and use 10 rounds to get the kill.
I tangled against the BKs one night and remember identifying him and his spit 5 by the way he was flying. I headed towards him and suddenly he finished off the plane he was engaging and headed towards me giving him a quick passing shot. I knew I was doomed :) I tried to duck in under, as we passed for what was a very low percentage exposure but having seen one of his films I wasn't surprised when I didn't make it.
Again, I know he has his ACM chops down but working to get that shot means something entirely different to a pilot like DMF and someone like me (who has to work an anemy into a "can't miss" 200 yard 6 solution).
Charon
-
Good topic.
Gunnery hands down. This last tour is a perfect example of it. Not alot of time flying this tour but all the flying was done over a few days one after another. Flying daily gets my ACM up to speed.
This tour I spent all my time in a spit 5 or a seafire. I don't open fire until 200 yards as a rule.
A furball flyer. The more the better.
What is missing is the gunnery. If you are in a multi con envirment the ability to kill is the most important part of the game. If you don't, as more come in, it gets to the point you can no longer handle the numbers and you die. You must kill efficiently. ( see levi )
24 sorties, 11 kills, 11 deaths
16 kills and 14 assists..AT 200 YARDS
1.33 k/d with gunnery 2.491% !!
If I could kill just half the assists I'd be real satisfied. If my gunnery was a measly 7% I'd break out the champagne.
ACM and SA I have a handle on. Givin the fact that I fly in the typical furball way I do ok. The vast majority of deaths are from not killing efficiently/quickly.
Just can't hit squat, tried everything. Because I can't the numbers become unmanagable. Watched lazs and Hooligan over their shoulder and their deflection shooting is beyond my comprehension. Levi's is from another planet, he just kills them as they come in.
I just don't get it, and if ever I do I'll be one baaaaaad mother..
Don't hold your breath.
-
Charon and Nopoop are right, while Levi's ACM skills are unquestionably superior, his gunnery is what really sets him apart from eveyone else. Its not just Levi either, as much as Shane makes light of his gunnery it is very much above average and IMO it is what makes him as dangerous as he is not his ACM. Most guys if you blow a shot and get over D400 away from them you are safe, but with those guys you are not safe until you are over D800 if even at that. The same can be said of most of the top echelon aces in my experience.
Gunnery is the source of most of my frustration with the game. I miss probably 75% of the shots I get into position for.
-
Think you guys are missing something, at least when discussing folks like Lev or Shane.
Both Lev and Shane fly it right up the other guys a** before they shoot. That's classic Richard Bong style and essentially how he described his efforts.
They don't waste bullets like someone like myself who isn't as good an ACM guy or 'pilot' in general.
That being said, from the films I've seen of Lev or Shane, or from the times having been on the receiving end of their bullets, they also are good shots as they can hit some tough deflection shots.
But again those deflection shots are right in their face deflection shots, not the spray and pray shots most of us take from too far out.
In the end the best sticks are blessed with the ACM skills to keep them alive while they get up close and personal before they shoot so accurately.
Accurate short bursts in close ends up translating into those high kill sorties from guys who aren't doing it by vulching
Dan/Slack
-
ACM.
What good is gunnery if you can't get the shot anyway? :)
You could be the best shot in the game, but it's going to take some ACM to get a shot.
-
I enjoy flying to within 200 on someone's ***. I enjoy the pasttime of watching them squirm as I anticipate their moves. Personally, I believe Gunnery is more important in the MA. The sight of another con 6.0k out makes you re-think a fight.
This is like a Corvette / Mustang debate.
Karaya
-
sorry to hijack the thread...
ESTES... shoot me an email, I lost your number.
mpoole (at) bops (dot) us
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
-
Obviously, both are important. In an engagement involving relatively co-E/co-alt state's with one opponent or perhaps 2 vs. 2 ACM is critical as you will likely be afforded the time and opportunity to execute a traditional merge then manuever into the 'saddle' for a relatively easy shot. In an engagement more complex than that, involving more enemy, the excellent marksmanship ability to quickly dispatch an aircraft with each and every gunnery solution gained no matter how harsh and fleeting is of paramount importance. It is excellent gunnery that can quickly turn an uneven fight into an even one or better when exploited to its maximum potential.
The principle distinction is that excellent gunnery requires only a split second and the harshest of deflection angles to get the kill on your opponent. Good ACM requires significantly more time, especially if the one using the ACM isn't a good shot and/or the opponent enjoys an energy adavantage. This leaves the ACM pilot exposed to the possible addition of more enemy and gunnery passes from his original foe while he seeks the 'saddle', equalized E states and the idiot proof shot.
In the strictest of definitions ACM are largely defensive in nature, unless you are on the deck you cannot kill with ACM alone, yet you can very easily deny the opponent a kill on you for a protracted period, possibly even indefinately. Gunnery on the other hand is offense, pure and simple. An excellent marksman need only have a solution for a fraction of a second and it's over, with an initial energy advantage he will almost always be afforded at least one such opportunity no matter how good you are at ACM's. The best defense is a good offense, great gunnery means faster kills which in turn means you are less likely to get cherry picked, bounced, BnZ'd, gang-banged, etc.
Of course there are those blessed with both skill sets in abundance, some of whom have been mentioned in this thread. Naturally, that is the ideal.
Excellent gunnery is the ability to kill quickly and proficiently from almost any angle at any reasonable distance with any weapon system. Good ACM is the ability to manuever in such a way as to deny your opponent a gunnery solution on you and hopefully produce one for yourself eventually, relative E states not-withstanding. All of us possess ability in both of these areas to some extent. Recognizing your strengths and maximizing them through engagement and plane choice is the difference. Also, recognize your weaknesses and work on strengthening them and minimize their negative impact by engaging in such a way and with a plane that does not further exacerbate those weaknesses.
Anecdotal history from WWII gives thousands of examples of this. Each successfull pilot had a 'killing blow' as it were, a method of attack and fighting that afforded them, personally, the greatest chance of success with their particular plane and their individual aptitudes and God-given talents. Aces High does a great job of recreating this 'feel'. As a direct result of this, almost all of us become 'niche' flyers to some extent, choosing to approach air combat in a way most conducive to our individual success, talents and personal enjoyment of the game.
Just as in AH there were the Zeke-type pilots who used the high and low yo yo's up close and personal to great effect. There were the 109 pilots who used altitude and the devastating 20mm laden BnZ pass. There were the P47/P51/F4U pilots who used power dives and zooming spiral climbs to energy fight the opponent into submission. It is the amalgam of all of these seemingly disparate methods, aptitudes and proclivities that makes WWII air combat history and AH so very interesting, paradoxically complex and enthralling.
Personally, to answer the original poster. I would have to say gunnery is the most critical in the MA. I only say this because, as mentioned above, ACM's alone are only most crucial to success (defined as destroying your adversary without yourself being destroyed) in a 1 vs. 1 or 2 vs. 2 co-e/co-alt similiar plane-type situation. Those situations are exceedingly rare in the very finite confines of the populous MA. In a crowd, where there is not likely sufficient time to safely work angles on a single opponent for a good gunnery solution or the aircraft in question have widely varying performance characteristics, marksmanship ability is master.
Zazen
-
What Zazen said.
Btw in the stats as a percentage what does the 0.080 mean actually - does that mean a hit on the taget 8% of the time?
-
Yes friend Schad, 0.080 would be 8%. 0.80 would be 80%..
-
I have to say ACMs as well.
If you can manouver your self into position for a unmissable shot then you are gonna down planes.
The longer you stay alive in a fight the more kills you will get. If you just have good gunnery then you wount stay alive for long.
Imho the 3 most important skill sets, ranked, are:
1. Situation Awarness.
2. ACM
3. Gunnery
Tex
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
If you can manouver your self into position for a unmissable shot then you are gonna down planes.
I usually have not much trouble getting on the 6 of most bad guys however with me (unfortunately) there is no such thing as an "unmissable shot". I have totally lost count of times I am glued on a guy 200-400 and I run my stupid guns outta ammo. If I could shoot I just maybe might almost be dangerous to someone else other than myself.
-
Originally posted by Shane
acm... because you can always fly someone into the ground. and used properly acm will give you the multiple shot opportunities that poor gunnery will take to bring them down - or avoid someone else's better shooting.
of course, decent aim is very helpful. i'd rather have good acm with decent aim, than bad acm with fantastic aim. because what good is aim if you can't get your nose on target?
Yes on ACM, but I found that if I don't bring someone down within 20 or 30 seconds, help usualy arrives (either friendly or enemy). If the goal is to get the kill and stay alive, you need good ACM and good aim. If you just want the kill, then ACM is good nuff.
-
This is a good debate. Personally, I'd go with gunnery (or aim) as being far more important than "acm", especially for your typical MA flyer.
I personally think it is more important for everyone, but your "average" player in the MA doesn't engage without the odds being on his side, so good gunnery will ensure more kills and fewer assists.
Most of the "aces" in AH that have "amazing aim" really don't. For the sake of my ego, I'll just lump myself into that category and tell you why my hit percentage is high. I usually take shots I almost literally cannot miss. About the farthest I'll shoot is 400 yards, and that is rare. Typically, I'm at 200 yards or closer. At that kind of range it really doesn't matter to much what the other guy is doing (whether it is a deflection shot or not), I don't have to do to much in the way of leading.
Another thing that helps in developing your aim is flying with the same gun package for a long time. Leviathn has been flying the Spit 5 since dinosaurs walked the earth, so naturally he has a very good idea of how to hit different shots with the Hispano.
I have horrible aim with the Hispano, because I'm more used to the MG151. With the Hispano, I lead even though I really don't have to.
-
Lol, what zanth said :D
-
Zanth said it right.
ACM is maybe more important for 1on1, when you have indefinit time to set up a nice shot from point blank. But even in this case, if you fly a 190 vs a spit, you can't saddle up for long. Usually, quick shots is all you gonna get.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by bozon
Zanth said it right.
ACM is maybe more important for 1on1, when you have indefinit time to set up a nice shot from point blank. But even in this case, if you fly a 190 vs a spit, you can't saddle up for long. Usually, quick shots is all you gonna get.
Bozon
Yes, that brings up an excellent point. Marksmanship is incredibly critical in every situation, in every plane vs. any plane in every type of engagement. Just being good at ACM's however, has limited value in situations where you are faced with an opponent in an aircraft that 'intrinsically' performs those ACM's more efficiently (ie: turning radii, roll-rate, sustained turn-rate, climb-rate). For example, a pilot in a Niki with even mediocre ACM ability can successfully outmanuever an opponent with vastly superior flying skill in a plane such as a P47D40 or Typhoon most of the time, all other factors being equal. If you are a great shot however, the significance of relative plane performance and individual pilot's ACM ability becomes minimal to almost meaningless, in terms of probable outcome, depending on the relative E-states of the aircraft in question.
This could be why folks like Levi, with obviously superior ACM ability, gravitate towards aircraft such as the Spit5, this minimizes the likelihood of an inferior pilot getting 'lucky' and outmanuevering them primarily by virtue of their plane's innately superior manuevering performance. I would even go so far as to make the gross generalization that pilots with alot of experience tend to fly the very nimble, slower planes if their ACM ability surpasses their gunnery ability and faster planes and/or planes with devastating weapon packages if their marksmanship ability surpasses their ACM ability. It just makes perfectly logical sense if you think about it.
Zazen
-
Han solo's view- Hokey ACM's, and gunnery are no match for a good horde at your side
and Lord Vader's- The ability of ACM is insignificant next to the power of the Horde.
-
A very enjoyable thread to read.
As several have mentioned, you have to include a "third" crucial skill, situational awareness, if you are looking for the "ace factor".
There is also the definition a "successful kill" to consider. Unlike the real world, being shot down after getting a kill is no big deal. If the definition is find your target, kill it, and escape, then here is my priority list.
1) SA - Gotta know where to hunt while avoid being the hunted!
2) Gunnery - Firing solutions are fleeting and they have to be exploited to the fullest.
3) ACM - Because good flying never killed anyone!
-
ACM
Once you have maneuvered close enough to fire, at minimum range, 100 yards or less, aim is not that critical. At that moment you are no longer sight shooting.
“I liked the whole front of my windscreen to be full of the enemy aircraft when I fired”
Colonel Erich “Bubi” Hartmann GAF
World’s Leading Ace, Luftwaffe
352 Victories, WW-II
-
If the guns were inaccurate, then all the aiming in the world wouldn't have helped.
Originally posted by Furball
Yes, but i dont think that applies here.
Von Richtofen's opponents did not get a big red icon above their head when he was approaching from 5k out (big red plane yes ;)) the sneak kill was far more common so gunnery was a big factor, plus the absolute innacuracy of first world war guns and lower rates of fire made aiming very important.
I dont think it applies to Aces High.
-
You gotta open your eyes when you shoot dude .
;)
Originally posted by Zanth
I usually have not much trouble getting on the 6 of most bad guys however with me (unfortunately) there is no such thing as an "unmissable shot". I have totally lost count of times I am glued on a guy 200-400 and I run my stupid guns outta ammo. If I could shoot I just maybe might almost be dangerous to someone else other than myself.
-
at minimum range, 100 yards or less, aim is not that critical.
you'd be suprised if you saw my gunnery...
at too close ranges, wing mounted guns become a big problem. I fly my jug with convergence set to 275 yards. when I was shooting at a c205 from ~100 yards the other day, I was hitting both tips of its wings...
Bozon
-
Rings in .....
Im gonna have to say in a target rich enviroment .... SA is 1st and formost .
ACM comes in second (Unless ur a ho dolt) you have to get the angle for the shot and stay alive while doing this.
gunnery is last even though it is very important if you want to land multiable kills all the time.
-
gunnery and acm go hand in hand .. tryign to sperate the two doesn't make much sense .. just because we have two words doesn't mean they are two seperate things
They are two parts of the same thing ......others said basicly the same thing .... but it seems most of you don't understand this
gunnery is actually contained within ACM .. it is a part of ACM
setting up a shot properly is key to getting kills.... this requires basic ACM ...
so the only answer can be ACM .... but it's a loaded question
-
Originally posted by thrila
Han solo's view- Hokey ACM's, and gunnery are no match for a good horde at your side
and Lord Vader's- The ability of ACM is insignificant next to the power of the Horde.
:lol :lol
-
i'll pop into my CO's thread...
i can not even count how many times i have been killed because of missing easy shots
even more how many squaddies have been killed while i took 30 seconds + to clear their six.
i am no ACM master, but i can stay on alot pf planes 6, only to spend all my ammo and go "how the F do i get out of the fight without him getting back on my six???"
my gunnery is piss poor, always has been. there are a few days i am "on" but they are few and far between. i'd say 90% of the time i lead to much, spray a good 1/2 second burst then ease up to see if i hit them. in the old AH you could see the hit sprites below the cowl, and i was able to get above 12% hit percent.
now i basically lose the fight easing back in the bank / turn to see if i hit, and losing the angle.... then i have to escape quickly.
maybe thats why i fly the dora most. i can get the heck away from that spit V i just keep missing.
what's really odd is there is no pattern to it. in a hard bank turn i will sometimes fire above, sometimes below, sometimes in front, sometimes behind, either way 90% of the time i miss that first, second, and even third lead shot.
lastly i can up a 109 instead, only to have only 150 or maybe 200 cannon. i tend to be REALLY stingy with this ammo unless i get pissed. when i am shooting i clip off maybe 5 rounds at a time, then trying to correct the aim, and another 5 rounds.
pretty soon i have missed 8 or 9 5 shot bursts, i look at ammo and go "CHT" i wont land any kills this sortie, i just wasted 30 minutes, and i wont be able to clear a squadmate because i wont have enough ammo to get the guy to break off.
even when we are in open plane set during "dweeb week" in the la7, i can at BEST get 3-4 air to air kills before i am totally bingo. thats almost 100 rounds of cannon per kill, usually more. these shots are all within 400 yards, but it does no good.
i have found saddling up on someone HARD (within 200 yards) the pull a hard stall last ditch evasive, i hit them then run into the remaining fuselage and die myself as they flip upwards from the loss of a tail for example.
i know ACM gets you kills, but without being able to shoot (even at 200 yards or a 0 icon i have emptied 200+ rounds with only hitting air) you'll not get kills.
actually i have to say the closer i get the more likely i am to over correct rudder and miss entirely.
just my opinion.
-
Every time you put your eye in front of the gunsight trying to hit an enemy you cant check your six neither evade any attacker. You need to minimize that time, so gunnery is primary unless you are playing 1 vs 1.
-
you miss because your approach is all wrong .. which has to do with ACM .......
gunnery is part of ACM
You need to set up your shot's ..... manuver your aircraft into an optimium fireing position
stop chaseing planes and setup up shots for where they are going to be......
don't chase ..... setup
if you chase you end up behidn a plane with his wings small flat targets ... if you setup above, at an angle, you have a whole broad wing to shoot at ..... there's basic example of why not to chase but to setup
-
Gunnery is part of ACM. I agree with that.
THIS IS WHY I SUCK AT BOTHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!1:lol :lol
I shoot and holler CRAP!!!! (ask my squaddies...I'm known as a curse):lol
JB73 you do fine with ACM from what I have seen. That fight the other night with that P47 near A5 was a great fight. What I could see of it from where I was at you were holding your own.
With no ACM you get no shots really.
Just my opinion:aok
-
ty redtop!
manedwew...
i set up the shot, but just miss by mere millimeters mostly, it's all about the millimeters in this game.
shots where i would have stiched nose to tail, and killed the plane, i just clip the wing root.
shots on the tail i just take the evelvator off.
shots on the engine, i just niche the side of the canopy, and pepper the wing root.
also the shots missed by the rounds passing in front of and in back of the wing as it passes.
all good setups, but rudder deflection off by a **** hair.
-
What kind of stick do you use 73? If you have any kind of twisty stick, try upping the dead zone for the rudder if you are hitting rudder when you don't want to, and upping the damping if you are "over correcting" (which to me means putting in more than you want).
-
Heheh:
You guys are touching a raw nerve with me here. I'd have to go with gunnery, since mine sux. I can almost always maneuver to get a halfway decent tracking shot, which I then nearly always blow. I may get another later, but even if I do, the next con is already on me.
Don't even talk to me about dead 6 shots at 400 - can't hardly ever hit 'em. Damn small targets...
Cheers,
Scherf
Edit - Just read 73's post, he and I should glare at one another in a battle of teh lame gunnerz - worst suxxorz ruleth - his story is mine exactly (I gave up the twisty, still suck).
-
Prolly gunnery. I know I'm doing real crappy when I miss my shots... In fact nothing affects my game so negatively like those days where I cant hit my targets.
-
Without ACM you won't live long enough to bring guns to bear (not counting HO's, of course). And, as others have mentioned, you can often fly your opponent to death.
There's a 3rd element, though, which is just as vital: SA. You really need all 3 to be complete.
-
One thing that one can add in the list of attributes needed and that is the patience of a hunter - do not commit unless you have been able to create the situation where you have all the advantages and your opponent has none.
-
Urchin wrote
Most of the "aces" in AH that have "amazing aim" really don't. For the sake of my ego, I'll just lump myself into that category and tell you why my hit percentage is high. I usually take shots I almost literally cannot miss.
I have to agree on the with the gunnery guys. I will say this however regarding urchins quote above. I really don't think that the "good" gunnery guys realize how difficult gunnery is for those of us who don't have good gunnery. I have watched a few of his films and seen him make shots that I know I simply can't make. It's very frustrating lol.
I can fly pretty decently but my gunnery bites. I cannot seem to hit the snap shots worth a crap and that will get me killed vs another pilot who can. Many times when I know I can get behind an enemy I also know there will be some nose to nose passes involved at the outset. If this happens my chances of winning decrease dramatically due to gunnery. Not to mention the length of time the fight actually takes for me vs another pilot who can make those shots. This is critical when dealing with multiple bogeys or in situations where enemy planes are filtering into the fighting area.
Zaphod
-
Originally posted by Zaphod
Urchin wrote
I have to agree on the with the gunnery guys. I will say this however regarding urchins quote above. I really don't think that the "good" gunnery guys realize how difficult gunnery is for those of us who don't have good gunnery. I have watched a few of his films and seen him make shots that I know I simply can't make. It's very frustrating lol.
I can fly pretty decently but my gunnery bites. I cannot seem to hit the snap shots worth a crap and that will get me killed vs another pilot who can. Many times when I know I can get behind an enemy I also know there will be some nose to nose passes involved at the outset. If this happens my chances of winning decrease dramatically due to gunnery. Not to mention the length of time the fight actually takes for me vs another pilot who can make those shots. This is critical when dealing with multiple bogeys or in situations where enemy planes are filtering into the fighting area.
Zaphod
That's another point that has been brought up in past threads on this same topic. There is something in the essence of marksmanship that is instinctual or second nature to some people. Being able to consistantly hit your target at high degrees of deflection in the briefest instant of a snap shot is an aptitudinal skill not a learned skill. Flying skill which is simply ACM knowledge applied, on the other hand, is very much a learned skill. Unless born with wings everyone 'learns' ACM's either by reading fighter combat manuals, reviewing films, trial and error, practice, immitation or a combination of some or all of these methods. True, some people are endowed with superior ability to think and operate three dimensionally, but by and large flying skill is simply advanced ACM knowledge applied, a learned skill not an innate one.
It is true that in WW2 some of the best aces owed their success to excellent gunnery, that success in turn was owed to a rural upbringing where they hunted fast moving or flying game from a very young age, a highly cultivated sense of deflection was second nature to these individuals. That sense of deflection, the core of excellent marksmanship, was deeply ingrained in their developing young minds, in a context similiar but not identical to that encountered in airiel combat. Noone flew from a young age, they all learned everything about flying during adulthood in the few months of their flight school training and later from their squadmates and foes.
Anyone can be taught ACM manuevers, they are not overly complex, nor difficult to perform individually, all that need be learned is when and how to execute them in a particular aircraft. This was taught to every fighter pilot in a few to several months of flight school training and from observing and immitating more experienced peers during their military service. Excellent marksmanship cannot be taught per se, that is why modern fighters are equipped with lead computing sights. If high deflection gunnery was a skill that could be taught this type of innovation would be totally unnecessary and superfluous. Even the highly trained fighter pilots from the Korean war to the present are not expected to have an innate aptitude for deflection gunnery, nor can they be taught it. For that reason a computer was engineered to calculate deflection for them. The innate ability for the fighter pilot to do so, reliably, for themselves is not assumed to be an intrinsic quality of their highly trained minds.
In AH, not only do the excellent marksmen have an uncanny feel for deflection but they maintain that feel while seemlessly switching between completely different aircraft with different guns, mounted in different positions, with widely varying ballistic properties. This adds further proof that an aptitude for deflection is to a great extent an innate talent. Very few pilots are equally proficient in many different aircraft, that is unless they have taken the requisite time and effort to painstakingly 'learn' each aircraft's individual nuances and adopt unique fighting styles for each that meshes with its particular flight characteristics. The point being, marksmanship translates very readily and effortlessly from one weapon system to another, that same transfer in ACM skill requires much effort, work and practice.
There are really no manuals or instructions on how to make those seemingly impossible high deflection snap-shots. Incredibly brief and severe angle deflection shots can be described ad nauseum, illustrated beautifully and explained with diagrams until the end of time. But, the ability to consistantly execute those shots in combat is very much a 'feel', similiar to a major league hitter finding the sweet-spot on a nasty split finger fastball for a game winning home-run. It's a tuning fork resonating in your trigger finger that echoes in your mind...NOW...when you have the proper lead and you pull for that killing burst, it's an instinctual 'knowing' precisely, exactly when to fire. Some have that natural tuning fork, some don't. Years of practice may help those that don't to some minor degree, but for the most part it is simply a matter of having the talent and innate aptitude for it.
So, in conclusion, this may not be what many would like to hear but, if you have year(s) of experience and your gunnery still stinks it's probably not going to improve much barring some epiphany from God. The best option for you is to 'learn' everything and anything you can about ACM's, master them methodically in one aircraft at a time, because millisecond snap-shot opportunities are not going to give you any kind of consistant success. Instead, what you will require is the nice steady 'saddle' only superior ACM knowledge applied that is flying skill can provide.
On the other hand, if you were born blessed with that innate deflection 'tuning fork' you have only to bring the enemy aircraft somewhere into your foward quarter, kick some rudder and blow his tail off with one short, decisive burst of fire. ACM knowledge will help to be sure, but even modest knowledge and application of basic ACM's will be sufficient for consistant success. If you have both vast ACM knowledge and innate marksmanship in abundance you will join the exalted ranks of the truly gifted such as Levi and a very few others.
Zazen
-
urchin i use an x45 throttle, CH fighterstick and CH Pro pedals.
i have the dead band up a bit on the rudder, but i have no clue how it "should" feel. where i have it set i can get full deflection, if i go higher i get this slow movement to the side, then after holding the pedal down for 2 seconds straight the rudder slams to the full deflection point and stalls the plane.
i dont know how else to describe what happens if do turn the dead band / dampening up more than it is.
i just have overactive feet. i tense up my legs, and push to hard or to quickly over compensating and next you know i am stalled, or completly out of line.
zanzen, i think you are on to something.
-
Unfortunately, the same analogy applies to ACM as well.
Some people fly better, other people don't. Talent increases with training upto a certain point, but some people obviously have a skill level much higher than one might expect from just training or experience alone.
There are people who can outturn Spitfires and shoot it down in P-47s. I can do that some of the times relying upon certain prerequisite conditions.
On the other hand, some people can almost always draw out such conditions with their flying alone, and that is something I can never do, which I know for a fact. The way they fly is just uncanny. Asking for an average guy to become that good in flying is exactly the same thing as asking someone to become a crackshot.
In the end, at a gross average, fighting against a Spitfire with a P-47 in close-quarters is a risk that has too high chance of failure for most people.
It's one of those risks that is statistically much wiser to never take at all - sort of like the risk of jumping off from a 20 feet ledge instead of taking the stairs. Oh sure, with right amount of training you probably would become experienced and fit enough to be perfectly safe most of the time. Except however, it only takes one mistake to break your leg.
So what do people do when they face a Spitfire in a P-47? Stick to E-wise and basic maneuvering, no high risks, and spray the guns whenever you see a chance and hope it connects. Keep to the basic rule of "don't put yourself into unnecessary danger". That's what people do.
ACM is always a double-edged sword. Those who rely on it take a gamble that the people they are fighting against will not be as proficient and skilled as them.
For someone who has a lot of confidence and good performance rates in the MA, it's no wonder he'd think ACM is what got him there.
That is ofcourse, until they lose the gamble. They'd meet someone better, or someone less skilled but squirming enough to take some time to set up a shot, which is more often than not much enough time for enemies nearby to gang up on him.
Ofcourse, when that happens - classic ch.200 rant, "it only took X of you blahblah gangbang blahblahblah no skill loser blahblahblahblah" and so forth.
One can 'ACM' his way only so far. The longer ACM lasts, the higher the danger becomes. The difference between gunnery and ACM is that relying on ACM has some huge drawbacks, while good gunnery is all advantages and no drawbacks at all.
All of the people emphasizing ACM over gunnery, from the start of the thread to now, essentially assumes an air-combat as a 1vs1 duel. This is a fundamental flaw in reasoning.
As much foolish it is to imagine that Aces High would be the same as WW2, it is near-sighted to assume that the only combatants in the air worthwhile considering would be you and the enemy at hand. There is no such thing as a "nice, steady 'saddle' " when there is more than one enemy plane nearby.
Ironically(indeed VERY ironically), as much as the people emphasizing ACM abhorr 'horde', in reality the only time one can really saddle up onto someone comfortably and start maneuvering, is when they have secured a local numbers advantage.
And how is local numbers advantage secured in the first place?
When multiple planes of roughly simular numbers meet, both sides make careful passes with hardly any kind of brilliant maneuvering. Only basic maneuvering can be found here. Long extensions, steady turns at safe distances, E-saving immelmanns, etc etc.
Eventually the side with better SA, better teamwork, and better gunnery shoot down more enemy planes than being shot down. They secure a local numbers advantage, and then they have enough people to each pick out an enemy plane they want and still have someone watching their back. Look in the MA and see how fights develop, get heated, and then decline. It's always like this.
By the time attrition has left one side with fewer number than the other, the battle is already won. The following phases where people actually start using ACM to really saddle up on someone is really nothing but a confirmation of something which has already been decisided by difference in gunnery.
A prime example of gunnery over ACM is the Japanese pilots. Some people may ridicule them for flying 'dweeb planes', but frankly many of them are really excellent pilots. The bizarre thing about them is they never, ever BnZ anything. Not even a conservative E-fight. Every fight every flight to them is a duel to the death. They enter maneuvering and don't think about anything else.
I've seen P-51 experts with equal numbers of P-51s nearby totally shred apart these guys and their squad time and time again. Hardly any maneuvering at all, just the good ol' "bore n' zoom" all day long. Proficient ACM and the best planes for the job, and these guys couldn't touch a single P-51D.
Ofcourse, flying like this, depending on gunnery only, and flying the planes specialized for that job might not be such a good thing for us who seek to enjoy a game. We play a game. We don't have to worry about one mistake. We don't die when we make mistakes, we just learn.
However, when it comes to winning - no holds barred, all-out multiplane environment - gunnery rules over ACM. Considering the risk vs gain, ACM has lots to gain but lots to risk. Gunnery has lots to gain but none to risk. Don't take a brain-surgeon to figure out which rules over which.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
...
All of the people emphasizing ACM over gunnery, from the start of the thread to now, essentially assumes an air-combat as a 1vs1 duel. This is a fundamental flaw in reasoning.
...
Uh. I assume quite the opposite, actually. ACM isn't just about close-in manouevering. All those moves are tools used to position you for attack or defense in a multi-plane environment.
There is one big drawback to relying on gunnery alone which is unique to AH (and games of the genre): you're relying on steady connections for you and the target. Rule #4 sayeth: "Warps: The Great Equalizer." I can't tell you the number of times people I fly with - who land 5+ kill missions routinely - end up dead because some bogey just couldn't be hit due to some blip in the Internet.
Again ... IMNSHO you need a combination of SA, ACM, and gunnery to be a complete A2A pilot in this game. Whichever one you excel at will govern to some degree your most successful style of play. Whichever one you suck at most will govern to some degree the reasons you get shot down most often. No one is more important than the others in the big picture.
-
All of the people emphasizing ACM over gunnery, from the start of the thread to now, essentially assumes an air-combat as a 1vs1 duel. This is a fundamental flaw in reasoning.
As much foolish it is to imagine that Aces High would be the same as WW2, it is near-sighted to assume that the only combatants in the air worthwhile considering would be you and the enemy at hand. There is no such thing as a "nice, steady 'saddle' " when there is more than one enemy plane nearby.
Ironically(indeed VERY ironically), as much as the people emphasizing ACM abhorr 'horde', in reality the only time one can really saddle up onto someone comfortably and start maneuvering, is when they have secured a local numbers advantage.
Kwe ... everything you said in the above is pure conjecture and it is you that is doing all the assuming, on behalf of those who emphasize ACM.
Those that happen to think that ACM is the key, don't by default, think that good gunnery is not needed too ... at least I don't ... I would not want to assume for all of them tho.
-
Uh. I assume quite the opposite, actually. ACM isn't just about close-in manouevering. All those moves are tools used to position you for attack or defense in a multi-plane environment.
Sorry for the overlook.
But quite frankly, the scope of "ACM" people talk about in this thread is sometimes wildly different. Some people specifically point out ACM as close-in maneuvering, a means to continue pursuit without breaking away or coming in for 2nd, 3rd passes. On the other hand, the ACM you're talking about is a very wide concept, which I think it cannot be described as just "ACM".
There is one big drawback to relying on gunnery alone which is unique to AH (and games of the genre): you're relying on steady connections for you and the target. Rule #4 sayeth: "Warps: The Great Equalizer." I can't tell you the number of times people I fly with - who land 5+ kill missions routinely - end up dead because some bogey just couldn't be hit due to some blip in the Internet.
That's a no-go Dok :) Warps and conn. issues effect everything in the game, not just gunnery. Close and maneuver all you want and sometimes the plane would warp away, and you'd have to start maneuvering all over again.
Again ... IMNSHO you need a combination of SA, ACM, and gunnery to be a complete A2A pilot in this game. Whichever one you excel at will govern to some degree your most successful style of play. Whichever one you suck at most will govern to some degree the reasons you get shot down most often. No one is more important than the others in the big picture.
Agreed.
But the Earth still rotates and gunnery is still much more important than ACM. :)
Let's try fantasizing a duel between a pilot who can get 99% of shots in but sucks in maneuvering, and a pilot who will outmaneuver 99% of people in the world, but has bad gunnery. Who'll win?
As funny as it seems, these things happen a lot in H2H rooms :) Try the H2H games some times - lot of fun options. Turn the lead-computing gunsight on and you'll notice there is basically no such thing as "ACM" in the rooms. Every first pass is a death pass. On the other hand, in a room full of newbies, I'm the superace when I take the Zeke up. These newbie guys will always turn.
So, in a H2H room full of newbies with lead-computing sight on, I can beat those guys all day long without using the LCS, until one actually discovers that they can use the LCS. So what happens if a total newbie with a LCS engages me not using LCS?
If he is higher than me I'm dead. If we both approach in a HO merge I'm dead. If I bounced him unnoticed, I win. If he sees me bouncing and comes to HO me, I'm dead. If I have an alt advantage and rope him with at least a distance of 1.5k plus max closure, then I might win. Basically, if he has his gun pointed at me inside 1k range, and knows how to control the joystick, whatever angle, whatever situation, I'm dead.
A person with perfect ACM still needs some gunnery. A person with perfect gunnery doesn't need ACM at all.
ACM helps the kill. Gunnery, just kills.
-
In 17+ years I've never once issued or accepted a challenge to a duel. Not my style. So whatever rules apply to that corner of nirvana I can't comment on.
But in a mega-player environent, you still need the combination of skills to succeed. Good flying and SA will compensate for less than stellar gunnery. Look around the BBS at all the posts by high scorers discussing planes, tactics, and films where they admit they're crappy shots.
And, of course, "success" is subjective too. If a player wants to have 5-kill Spit V missions, he damn well better shoot good. If you want to win 1-1's to "succeed", yeah, you have to shoot well - you'll only get a few chances to fire and they have to count. But plowing your formation of 4 into their formation of 6 and having all the friendlies come out alive and no one else - gunnery alone won't get you that.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
So, in a H2H room full of newbies with lead-computing sight on
THAT explains it. Not to hijack, but.... Was flying H2H just to check it out, and was geting tagged ALOT on the initial merge, using moves that, in the MA, would never get me hit. Was starting to irk me. Was wondering if it was connection, or what. Never even considered it was the lead-computing sight thingy.
After the 1st pass, I would saddle 'em and kill them every time. Never lost one fight, but was "hit" and dmg'd on that 1st pass MOST of the fights.
ALSO I agree that you must have the "total" package to be successful. The really "good" guys are fairly well balanced in ACM, SA, and Gunnery.
-
To avoid confusion I am going to re-state, in summary, what I am asserting...
If you have excellent flying skills but mediocre gunnery, you simply must consistantly outfly your opponents to have any reliable success, that is assuming you have the necessary time to safely do so which is by no means a guarentee. If you are up against someone with equal or even inferior flying skill but superior gunnery to yours, you can very easily lose even if you are not outflown. This same fact holds true if engaged by someone with inherently equal or weaker flying skill but in a plane that has a performance advantage in key area(s) and/or superior gunnery to yours.
Conversely, if you have excellent marksmanship but mediocre flying skill you can have great success even if you cannot outfly your opponents consistantly or even if you are outflown. You will have even greater relative success in those situations where you manage to outfly your opponent as well as out-shoot him. These successes require very little time, therefore subject you to relatively little risk, especially if you fly one of the faster planes that can disengage/re-engage at will.
The evolution of modern fighters, tactics and computer aided deflection aiming sight reticules lend credence to my assertion that flying skill is taught and learned, but deflection gunnery skill is largely an innate talent. Lead computing sights were designed specifically to compensate for the very common fallibility of the average highly trained pilot's aim and inherent weakness for independent and reliable computation of proper lead for deflection. There is, however, no such technical innovation for computer assisted devices that tell the highly trained combat aviator when and how to perform particular manuevers in combat. It is not necessary, he is trained to do this and if competantly trained knows exactly when and how without any 'artificial' assistance.
It is becuase of all of this that I must concur with the majority of actual WWII pilots that in multi-plane engagements, especially those involving plane types with very disparate performance characteristics, without the aid of lead computing sights of any kind, gunnery skill is of paramount importance.
Zazen
-
gunnery..mine sux..i can fly against two or 3 in a zeke if i dont bother trying to get a shot off lol. My big problem is killing the guy when i have the shot..and then manuevering against his wingman. takes me entirely to long to dispatch the enemy.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
A person with perfect ACM still needs some gunnery. A person with perfect gunnery doesn't need ACM at all.
ACM helps the kill. Gunnery, just kills.
Precisely...
Zazen
-
"The better I shoot, the less I have to manuver" - GE
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
"The better I shoot, the less I have to manuver" - GE
Again...precisely...
Zazen
-
i prefer the corollary "the better I manuever, the less I have to shoot."
:aok
-
Originally posted by Shane
i prefer the corollary "the better I manuever, the less I have to shoot."
:aok
With your LA7's short clip and poor ballistics properties that is probably true for you to some extent... ;)
Zazen
-
I guess I see this different due to experience. A lot of us old pukes came back to AH when 2.0 was released. Most of us had the same basic experience - our gunnery was sucky, but everything else was almost as sharp as the day we unplugged our joysticks how ever many years ago. ACM, instincts, SA, comm's, etc. - all came back within hours. As such, within days we were again landing multiple kills, being effective, and *not* being killed by the people who fly 25 hours a day.
In other words, we were "good" again even though our gunnery was pathetic.
I think there may be some under-appreciation for just how much skill and experience it takes to operate in a combat environment in the MA effectively. To engage in a fight while tracking all the enemas in vis range while handling comm's on multiple text and voice channels while performing complex ACM and knowing at all times where your plane is and what it's capable of doing at that moment from that angle and at that speed ... for as many different kinds of planes as you like to fly ... plus knowing what the opposing plane(s) is(are) capable of from it's angle and speed at that moment. That's SA+ACM ... all that combined dwarfs gunnery in terms of a learning challenge.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
That's SA+ACM ... all that combined dwarfs gunnery in terms of a learning challenge.
In fact, you are correct, but only because good gunnery cannot be learned. All of that other stuff can be. In terms of the game, after a year or so of experience whereby you have had the opportunity to take and make or miss about every possible shot imaginable you are as good at gunnery as you will ever be. That is to say your innate talent for deflection shooting + exposure to a wide variety of shooting opportunities and experience = your maximum marksmanship potential actualized.
Insofar as I know, SA and flying skill, defined as ACM knowledge applied in an engagement, knows no bounds. There is always more to learn about these things. No one has 'arrived' in terms of the accumulation and application of this knowledge compounded by experience in and vs. various aircraft. It is because of this fact I recommend those with particularly poor gunnery deeply explore advanced ACM's and endeavor to perfect them as much as humanly possible in at least one aircraft with above average manuevering performance. Those with excellent gunnery can also do this, but their success does not entirely depend upon it.
I'm intentionally avoiding the SA discussion as this is not within the scope of the original poster's question.
Zazen
-
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill" , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.
Who would want the MA to become like that ?
-
Originally posted by Redd
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill" , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.
Who would want the MA to become like that ?
Where have you been flying?!? That's pretty much the MA in a nutshell... It's rare to find someone NOT willing to accept a HO opportunity in ANY plane. Just ask Shane, he's as good a flyer as anyone but will push for a HO if given the faintest glimmer of an opportunity. .
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Redd
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill" , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.
Who would want the MA to become like that ?
Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?
I hope so, otherwise I must surmise Redd has absolutely no clue wtf he's talking about...again... ;)
Zazen
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Can I assume this was meant sarcasticly?
Yes
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
I hope so, otherwise I must surmise Redd has absolutely no clue wtf he's talking about...again... ;)
Zazen
thought you migh be able to spot irony , I''ll keep things simple from now on.
The arena is full of HO weenies, who have no understanding of ACM - how's that ;)
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Where have you been flying?!? That's pretty much the MA in a nutshell... It's rare to find someone NOT willing to accept a HO opportunity in ANY plane. Just ask Shane, he's as good a flyer as anyone but will push for a HO if given the faintest glimmer of an opportunity. .
Zazen
And good to see you back Zaz , we've missed you ;)
-
Originally posted by Redd
If ACM wasn't important and gunnery was the the "critical skill" , surely people would just use a 190 D9 or a mossie , or a Typhoon or an LA7 or a P51 or a 110, and fly around the arena trying to HO every plane they come in contact with , before running off to the safety of their teammates.
ROFLMAO Redd! I fell out of my chair when I read that. :)
-
My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's. In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???
Gunnery school. His method had been to get close enough so he couldnt miss. He didnt get to where he was at that time by relying on superior gunnery skills.
I also agree with Dok's points. If you drop and old flight sim vet, and someone with that innate gunnery ability both as newbies into AH, the vet has a vastly larger repituire to work with.
Tour 54 was the first full AH2 Tour. My stats:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.92883
Kills / Sorties = 2.45333
Hit percentage = 5.711 %
Tour 58 was the last Ive flown over 20 hours:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.72619
Kills / Sorties = 2.40769
Hit percentage = 8.376 %
In that case I can see where my gunnery adjustment period hurt performance. Or, where ample time with the gunnery model particulary helped overall performance.
-
murdr wrote:
My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's. In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???
Again I really think that "getting close enough so you can't miss" is misleading. I can't get that close. I really think that the folks who have great gunnery don't really understand not having great gunnery.
As far as an old flight sim with poor gunnery vet vs a newby with innate gunnery skills I agree if this is a one vs one engagement. I was referring to the MA in general. I really think that gunnery is more important in there.
I think that given a very good ACM skill combined with a poor gunnery skill vs a very good gunnery skill comined with a poor ACM skill, the good gunner has a better chance. Only because the very good gunner is likely to put some rounds into your plane before you can put your superior ACM to work. It only takes one pass for the good gunner to kill or cripple. It's very difficult not to give that one good pass, even if it's a HO shot.
This isn't always going to happen obviously, but the great gunner has a leg up in the first few seconds in my opinion.
I think the best have both, might be that some are better gunners than fliers or visa versa but the really good guys have both (that includes you Shane).
Zaphod
-
Originally posted by Zaphod
I think that given a very good ACM skill combined with a poor gunnery skill vs a very good gunnery skill comined with a poor ACM skill, the good gunner has a better chance. Only because the very good gunner is likely to put some rounds into your plane before you can put your superior ACM to work. It only takes one pass for the good gunner to kill or cripple. It's very difficult not to give that one good pass, even if it's a HO shot.
[/B]
I understand what you're getting at, but under the above parameters in my mind we are now talking about a very small number of players. Giving your opponent the most akward shot opportunity in virtually any situation is an artform in an of itself. There are very few people I encounter that can connect that passing shot, and fewer still that can do it consistantly.
Also this brings a previous gunnery discussion to mind where I asserted that good gunnery is all about the "site picture". Some people do in fact easily identify hit yeilding site pictures, and have the reaction time and smooth physical dexterity to connect those shots. Knowing, and getting the site picture are two different things. As mane eluded to earlier, a good part of gunnery is positioning yourself to have the optimum site picture. Stumbling around and squeezing the trigger when the site picture presents itself isnt all that handy when dealing with those who know how to deny you that site picture.
-
Originally posted by Redd
And good to see you back Zaz , we've missed you ;)
Hehe, ty, good to be back. I've been reading the boards while I was away but there really wasn't any posts I felt passionately about until this one came along.... ;)
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Murdr
My first thought browsing through this went the same direction as Slack's. In April 44, as the leading US Ace, upon tying Rickenbackers kill record Richard Bong got sent to guess where???
Gunnery school. His method had been to get close enough so he couldnt miss. He didnt get to where he was at that time by relying on superior gunnery skills.
I also agree with Dok's points. If you drop and old flight sim vet, and someone with that innate gunnery ability both as newbies into AH, the vet has a vastly larger repituire to work with.
Tour 54 was the first full AH2 Tour. My stats:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.92883
Kills / Sorties = 2.45333
Hit percentage = 5.711 %
Tour 58 was the last Ive flown over 20 hours:
Kills / Deaths + 1 = 3.72619
Kills / Sorties = 2.40769
Hit percentage = 8.376 %
In that case I can see where my gunnery adjustment period hurt performance. Or, where ample time with the gunnery model particulary helped overall performance.
Be carefull when using in-game hit % data to measure your raw gunnery skill. That data is more influenced by how many bombers you attack, your weapon system choice and how much you tend to vulch in a given camp than any other factor. My fighter hit% fluctuates by as much as 5% either way entirely based upon whether I choose to hunt bombers or not.
When measuring your gunnery effectiveness rely more on objectively and honestly evaluating your gunnery passes on fighters, how many one pass kills do you get on an evading foe per attempt? How many one pass kills on an evading foe when using a weaker gun package (ie: 6 X 50cals)? How many times does your pass only result in a glancing blow, producing no damage? How many times do you miss your foe entirely when he is aware of you and evading? That kind of evaluation is what indicates how effective a marksman you are...Using myself as an example, if I hunt bombers as well as fighters I may approach 18% hit % a camp, if I conscientiously avoid bombers 12-13% hit % is about the best I can do. .
Also, bear in mind the weapon package of your chosen ride(s) greatly influence your hit %. It is much easier to attain a higher hit % with nose/cowl mounted weaponry than with wing mounted weaponry for example as convergence issues are not a factor. The same holds true for weapon packages with varying ballistics performance, especially attributes such as rate of fire and drop-off/muzzle velocity/dispersion. It stands to reason and you can experiment with this to prove it to yourself, that the rate of fire of slower/older cannons (ie: Ho5's, MG FF 20mm) provide lower hit % than 50 caliber MG's for example, all other factors being equal.
I like this topic because when I started AW some 13 years ago it was the first flight sim I had ever played, so in this respect I am a fairly pristine base-line example. Immediately I found I was a very good shot relative to the average player. I was a good shot and could kill much more experienced and talented flyers with relative ease by virtue of this fact alone, while having no clue how to fly myself, basically. I gradually developed some flying skill to go along with the marksmanship and attained a level of play I am happy with, but from 13 years ago until now, I am just as good a shot as I was then, probably only fractionally better and only as a result of those many years of experience. In that time I have read countless books and have endeavoured to improve my ACM as much as possible in every way possible to very reasonable effect. I am a far, far superior flyer now than I was 10 years ago, 5 years ago, or even 1 year ago and I continue to develop, as does everyone else who puts forth a comparable effort.
In my years at this I have come to know many, many people and their styles of play, strengths and weaknesses. I cannot think of a single exception to my rule. Everyone I knew from 10 years ago with a minumum of one year's experience who had weak gunnery then still has weak gunnery even after all of that time and experience playing. However, all of those folks with weak flying skills 10 years ago, have since improved dramatically in that same time frame, myself included.
Zazen
-
Murdr wrote:
I understand what you're getting at, but under the above parameters in my mind we are now talking about a very small number of players. Giving your opponent the most akward shot opportunity in virtually any situation is an artform in an of itself. There are very few people I encounter that can connect that passing shot, and fewer still that can do it consistantly.
Agreed, there are very few who can do this consistently. In fact only a couple or maybe three come to mind right off the top of my head. You know, the ones who if given the slightest opening for a shot kill or cripple you. However there are a few others who while not quite this good are still pretty stellar in their ability to shoot. Too me this is still more important than ACM.
Also this brings a previous gunnery discussion to mind where I asserted that good gunnery is all about the "site picture". Some people do in fact easily identify hit yeilding site pictures, and have the reaction time and smooth physical dexterity to connect those shots. Knowing, and getting the site picture are two different things. As mane eluded to earlier, a good part of gunnery is positioning yourself to have the optimum site picture. Stumbling around and squeezing the trigger when the site picture presents itself isnt all that handy when dealing with those who know how to deny you that site picture.
I was actually considering this as being part of the gunnery skill. I suppose this would also fall into the ACM skill in terms of what you expect the relative positions of your plane and the other persons plane to be based on experience and knowledge.
As you said knowing and getting to the sight picture are two different things. However this is very dependant on gunnery ability too. I say this because it has to do with the kind of shot a particular individual is capable of making. In other words the sight picture that I have to get to is either easier or harder to achieve based my gunnery skill compared to the other pilot.
Urchin had posted a couple films that I watched that made this painfully obvious to me. I knew when he was going to get a shot as I watched the film. I also knew that it was a low percentage shot for me...like not likely to happen. However he did this several times consistently. In other words the sight picture he flew to was not one that would work for me because I am not that good of a shot.
For example I am in a scissors with an enemy plane. My gunnery is poor relative to his. I can make the tracking shot work pretty easy but to get to my sight picture I have to fly my plane onto his six. The other pilot has better gunnery and is capable of making effective snap shots. The other pilot can fly to his sight picture much easier and quicker than I would be able to.
I guess this is what I was considering when making my arguement more than anything else. Obviously if you are bad enough in your ACM skill then your likely going to fail to get your sight picture at all, no matter how well you shoot. In other words I really don't think that good gunnery trumps the best ACM skill set. However the best ACM skill won't make up for a really poor marksman either. I just think that in the MA good gunnery gives more of an advantage than good ACM.
Zaphod
-
Very interesting thread.thanks everyone for the input
I myself will always put SA first, even though as Zazen mentioned it was not part of the original posters question.
I put them in this order:
#1- SA
#2- BFM/ACM
#3- Gunnery
my reason being is without SA, you would not even know what or where to look for an encounter or have no idea where your attacker is coming from or how fast he might be , his/her alt....etc.......
then jumping to BFM/ACM, without using this how would you know how to go about lining up for even a quick HO shot, snapshot, crossing shot, deflection shot.....you will have to maneuver in some way to get into a firing position even if it is a Head On shot.........
then I would finish up with gunnery, for without good gunnery you would never get a hit or a kill.........
anyhow, that is my theory but I do agree with a lot of what has been posted here, just in a different order of events is all, all this pertaining to AH2 arenas and not to actual WW2 air combat...
Zazen mentioned something interesting about having a better hit percentage with nose/cowl mounted gun platform vs wing mounted guns. I find the opposite to be true, I get far better hits, especially deflection shots with wing mounted guns over nose/cowl mounted. I get better dead "6" hits with nose mounted verses wing mounted guns..........
again great thread.......some good comments/thoughts here.......... :cool:
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
...
Zazen mentioned something interesting about having a better hit percentage with nose/cowl mounted gun platform vs wing mounted guns. I find the opposite to be true, I get far better hits, especially deflection shots with wing mounted guns over nose/cowl mounted. I get better dead "6" hits with nose mounted verses wing mounted guns..........
I'm with you on this, TC. I find I get much better hit percentages with the P51 over like a P38. Maybe those hits are less damaging (i.e. not as concentrated a volley as a P38 would deliver), but at least I score the hits.
Someone also mentioned how after a year your gunnery is as good as it will get. I disagree. For the first 3 or 4 months I returned to AH, my gunnery was more or less guesswork - didn't think it would ever improve. Then around November sometime firing .50 cal's finally "clicked" for me. I was getting 1-pass kills on everything from P38's to Fw190's with the P-51, and scoring some wild deflection shots too. I still can't do squat with German or Russian 20mm's ... but the .50 and Hispano now "work" for me where they didn't for the months before.
Some small percentage of people will always have an uncanny knack for shooting. That's just natural. But gunnery is something you can practice offline and consistantly get better at.
-
If I force myself to practice every day in off line mode using the lead computing gun sight and attacking from every angle possible, after a week or two my hit percentage increases. But that also goes hand in hand with doing it as a warmup before going online for at least 2 hours. If I stop doing it and dont go online more than 2 days a week I have to start over.
Another thought, now that I'm with the 56th, I'm more concerned about covering my wing leader than if I'm killing anything. My ACM and SA is all about covering his tail, or running interference against multiple cons to let him escape with his smoking wreck.
It's hard with these experiences to not beleive if my gunnery were better, I would be surviving 2 or 3 cons. Or am I imagining the snap shots on each and every one of the cons as we dance around? I often die with over 1000 rounds per wing. I know spraying on a snap shot is useless. What counts is exactly the place your pipper is targeting leading the con and the timing of pulling the trigger to your combined velocities.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Someone also mentioned how after a year your gunnery is as good as it will get. I disagree.
I disagree as well. I checked my stats from Tour 12 to the present (and by Tour 12 I'd already been flying for one year), and I was shooting around 5-6% initially. So after playing for a year, I was pretty much a so-so shot at best.
Over the next couple of years worth of tours, this hit percentage climbed to about a 10% average for awhile, then to 15% for awhile. Now I'd say it falls somewhere between 17-20% most tours. This tells me that I've made incremental but steady improvement to my aim over time as I've learned new things and tried new tricks. Folks certainly are not locked into their hit percentage.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
I am of the opinion those that fly Cannon equipped planes will often hold a higher hit percentage over those that fly machine gun equipped planes ( 303 50cal, 12.7mm etc )
I fly alot of attack sorties with the F4U1C and for my AtoA I get alot higher percentage to where I fly fighter sorties in the F4U-1 with 50s I have a much lower hit percentage......overall anyhow.........but I never have actually worried about hit percentage, score, stats etc.........I would rather spend my time having fun, shooting down a few red icons and chatting with my friends...........most times I do not even know what my rank is unless someone points it out to me, or ask me to take over a CV.......and the way I spray & pray because the La7, P51, 190D9 or Tyhp etc etc are running for their dear life, I am lucky if my hit percentage is above 2 or 3 in all categorys :D
-
Lead computing sight? Doh! Guess I gotta look through all them arena settings and find that.
My warm-up is that the first thing I do when I get to the arena is find a field being vultched (I know that's a rarity), and hop in a field gun. Just killing a couple vultch-dweebs with that thing gets me back into the mindset of calculating time-of-fight.
I don't even know what my hit % is ... hell, I don't even look at my scores page. I just go by what I'm able to do in the air and the level of confidence I have when I pull the trigger.
Bustr brings up another interesting point relating to which is better to have. For his role, flying in a more structured squadron setting, ACM and SA are much more important. You can protect a wingman (or several) very well indeed without actually having to shoot anyone down. Rule #8 sayeth: "Fear Works." It helps to shoot 'em down, of course, but scaring enemas out of position - or dragging 'em to their doom - are valuable skills.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I'm with you on this, TC. I find I get much better hit percentages with the P51 over like a P38. Maybe those hits are less damaging (i.e. not as concentrated a volley as a P38 would deliver), but at least I score the hits.
Someone also mentioned how after a year your gunnery is as good as it will get. I disagree. For the first 3 or 4 months I returned to AH, my gunnery was more or less guesswork - didn't think it would ever improve. Then around November sometime firing .50 cal's finally "clicked" for me. I was getting 1-pass kills on everything from P38's to Fw190's with the P-51, and scoring some wild deflection shots too. I still can't do squat with German or Russian 20mm's ... but the .50 and Hispano now "work" for me where they didn't for the months before.
Some small percentage of people will always have an uncanny knack for shooting. That's just natural. But gunnery is something you can practice offline and consistantly get better at.
Maybe you guys are seeing this because you tend to near miss alot. When you miss in a p38, you miss with alot of rounds, you miss big. With wing mounted guns, you have a greater chance of getting one bank of gun hits while missing with the other bank. So, you can miss partially. With nose mounted guns you hit completely or miss completely most of the time. I think for people who consistantly hit a very large percentage of the time, my postulation about nose/cowl mounted guns holds true due to not having convergence issues...
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Be carefull when using in-game hit % data to measure your raw gunnery skill.
I was carefull. Tour 54 I was not acustomed to AH2 gunnery. By Tour 58 I was. Both were sortied under similar AFs and timespans. My point was that given those similar conditions with exception of the familerarity with the gunnery, there was not a spike of other stats associated with the gunnery.
Also, I thought it was common concencous that a majority of players struggled with gunnery when AH2 came in, and tour 54 is a pretty good baseline for that time period.
Beyond the conditions I mentioned I agree that hit% in general is not a definitive statistic. For my own stats I can vouch that I consistantly use low yeild shots as a psycological tool in fights that put my hit% 3-5 points lower than it would be if I instead were more particular with shots.
Zaphoid. Good discussion. I agree to disagree, but I think we are on the same page.
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Maybe you guys are seeing this because you tend to near miss alot. When you miss in a p38, you miss with alot of rounds, you miss big. With wing mounted guns, you have a greater chance of getting one bank of gun hits while missing with the other bank. So, you can miss partially. With nose mounted guns you hit completely or miss completely most of the time. I think for people who consistantly hit a very large percentage of the time, my postulation about nose/cowl mounted guns holds true due to not having convergence issues...
I agree on this as well. When I miss w/a P38 I miss everything. Have the same problems when using Yak's or La's. I'm sure if I had rudder pedals I could get more out of centerline mounted guns.
-
Dok,
Arena Flags is where the lead computing sight is turned on. Use your tab key to select the enemy to track. Kinda wish in off line mode the tracers were the cartoon style from AW that you could walk into your con, but with the AH2 hit sprites. The AW tracers stayed the same color and intensity to the con. Sortta like walking dots to the target.
HiTech has provided great tools to practice gunnery, but the real time visual feed back could be enhanced just a bit. The lead comp sight is one thing, but red dots that you can watch falling short or walking in to line up with the comp sight will show you faster just how much too soon or too late you are pulling the trigger.
These could be a setting in the arena flag. The natural progression would be comp sight and cartoon tracers. Fixed sight and cartoon tracers. Then fixed sights and AH tracers. I suspect many new players would improve faster with this. Even with the current comp sight(the tracers in AH are usless for tracking into a con) it is an art form to learning the gunnery. Add the second visual aid that shows the real bullet track along with the comp sight and it becomes a matter of practicing to imprint the habit.
I suppose this is a fantasy and many would decry it as arcade flummery. But it would work, just it would be a gimmick.
-
Hit % has alot to do with what plane I'm flying .
Say i spend the tour in a jug,p 38 or a f4u
my % will be way down . the more ammo i have the more i use or toss out for guys to run into .
if i spend the tour in a Spit or Yak my % goes way up ,as for they have small ammo loads and every round is precious . i still have yet to break past 7 kills in a spit 5 in ah2 without vulching . (my record in ah1 was 9 w/2 assists in one sorty)
I have had a couple of 5 kills w/ 4 assists sortys so Id say im getting close .
ive just switched back to tracers off so ill see if i improve this tour.
-
i switched back to tracers for a week...
i missed every shot imaginable LOL the "tracers" obscured the plane i was shooting at, and couldnt judge where i was off.
-
Thanks for the tip re: arena flags. I suppose there's no way to jump into films in the film viewer, to "re-shoot" missed attacks?
Cheers,
Scherf
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
Hit % has alot to do with what plane I'm flying .
Say i spend the tour in a jug,p 38 or a f4u
my % will be way down . the more ammo i have the more i use or toss out for guys to run into .
if i spend the tour in a Spit or Yak my % goes way up ,as for they have small ammo loads and every round is precious . i still have yet to break past 7 kills in a spit 5 in ah2 without vulching . (my record in ah1 was 9 w/2 assists in one sorty)
I have had a couple of 5 kills w/ 4 assists sortys so Id say im getting close .
ive just switched back to tracers off so ill see if i improve this tour.
Hi Roo ,
I agree with all of that. Seems the less ammo I have the more I try to make it count. I'm currently flying a plane that hasn't many rounds at all. It certainly makes you think before you pull that trigger. I have also found that small blips on that trigger is better than blowing and going.
-
Thanks ... I knew where to set things, just didn't know that the lead computing sight even existed.
My gripe w/tracers also is that the smoke from them really obscures your vision.
-
Murdr wrote:
Zaphoid. Good discussion. I agree to disagree, but I think we are on the same page
I think I was starting to argue your point in that last response lol.
Zaphod
-
For me SA/ACM/Gunnery are three legs of a stool.
You can adapt your game play to suit your abilities in each........if they are equal then the stool is "comfortable" if they are equal and great then it enables you to sup from the table with ease.
SA and ACM require one instinctive ability not always easily learned when lacking..........that of three dimensional perspective.
Given that, SA is quite simple, it just requires an eyes open dicipline. I tend to see it as a defensive asset.
Given that, ACM is fairly complex, but it is a skill and it presents the "learning challenge" across a variety of ac. It also IMO gives the greatest "reward" for achievement the game has to offer in as much as when (occasionally) I out manouver thru tactic rather than luck I get a real sense of accomplishment.
Gunnery also benefits from instinctive 3d perspective combined with the mental ability to compute/judge angles and velocities on the fly. Its obviously an attack asset.
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
my postulation about nose/cowl mounted guns holds true due to not having convergence issues...
I am curious as to why so many of the flyers in Aces High believe this to be true that nose/cowl mounted guns do not have any convergences issues?
I myself have done offline test on this and find that German planes the cannon drop is 50 to 100 short of the small caliber guns depending if it is 30mm cannon or 20 mm cannon, same holds true for the p38..........so if you set your convergences at 300 in the P38 and aim at a target 650 out you will be below the bullseye, if you set your convergence at 600 and aim at a target 400 out you will most likely be a bit above it.......
does this not relate to convergence although it is converging in the vertical sense and not horizontal?
I often set my cannons 50 longer than my Mg's so they hit near same spot most of the time....
I believe the theory of nose/cowl mounted guns having no convergences issues is a myth and that it may seem like it to those that fly these type gun platforms but in actuality it is the mental picture in your brain doing the sighting for you and you are not using the convergence at all........you have flown this type of gun platform for a good while and if you have converged to 600, your mental picture is telling you where/when to pull the trigger not the icon, same is with any convergence setting...just my opinion though....
how many after flying for a year or 2 still watch the icon? alot of you prob think you do but I would say it is the planes shape/size position in flight that tells that braincell to pull the trigger.....
and I apologize for side tracking this thread....
-
Is anyone else finding this common nowadays in game?
I mean the sittin on someones 6 - knowing full well u are in range, and not getting any hits? Seems like I have this more and more and am even slipping and sliding up and down to get more of an angle cuz I can't hit watermelon from the rear anymore..
NwBie
Originally posted by Tilt
My gunnery has always been sloppy feasious matter......I still struggle under the simplist of leads..........
How many folk have seen me glued to some saps 6 until my ammo has run dry..........
Just occasionally I get a full ruddered lead shot or some body actually stalls out at less than 200 in my sights.............
-
Originally posted by Nwbie
Is anyone else finding this common nowadays in game?
I mean the sittin on someones 6 - knowing full well u are in range, and not getting any hits? Seems like I have this more and more and am even slipping and sliding up and down to get more of an angle cuz I can't hit watermelon from the rear anymore..
NwBie
Yep, all the time, but I suck. I did a litle experiment last night. After firing 300 rounds from my LALA from distances closer than 400, I made one last pass, closed in at 200, zoomed in, lined up nowhere near the target and emptied the rest of the ammo using the ruder to spray all over the screen. No hits, pulled up to go home and then I heard the explosion. He died. Maybe I scared him to death :confused:
-
I'd say I tend to be more accurate in a 109 than in a 190, but that is balanced by the fact that the 190 has 4 20mm shooting, so you don't really need to be as accurate to get kills.
So I guess I'd agree that nose mounted guns are easier to hit with, provided you are familiar with the gun. I do better in the P-51 or P-47 than I do in the P-38 simply because I don't use 50s or Hizookas much.
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
I am curious as to why so many of the flyers in Aces High believe this to be true that nose/cowl mounted guns do not have any convergences issues?
I myself have done offline test on this and find that German planes the cannon drop is 50 to 100 short of the small caliber guns depending if it is 30mm cannon or 20 mm cannon, same holds true for the p38..........so if you set your convergences at 300 in the P38 and aim at a target 650 out you will be below the bullseye, if you set your convergence at 600 and aim at a target 400 out you will most likely be a bit above it.......
does this not relate to convergence although it is converging in the vertical sense and not horizontal?
I often set my cannons 50 longer than my Mg's so they hit near same spot most of the time....
I believe the theory of nose/cowl mounted guns having no convergences issues is a myth and that it may seem like it to those that fly these type gun platforms but in actuality it is the mental picture in your brain doing the sighting for you and you are not using the convergence at all........you have flown this type of gun platform for a good while and if you have converged to 600, your mental picture is telling you where/when to pull the trigger not the icon, same is with any convergence setting...just my opinion though....
how many after flying for a year or 2 still watch the icon? alot of you prob think you do but I would say it is the planes shape/size position in flight that tells that braincell to pull the trigger.....
and I apologize for side tracking this thread....
What you are referring to is shell dispersion. That is, the further shells travel the more they disperse over an ever wideneing area, shell drop is included in the dispersion effect. Convergence is a different animal in that guns are synchronized to fire at the same point from different angles at a certain distance. This is required because on planes without nose/cowl mounted guns the shells emnate from entirely different points of the aircraft. In the p38 for example all guns fire from the exact same location, so there is no convergence point. Convergence is not an issue.
Zazen
-
ACM,
I feel this because if you get caught in a ho and is fortunate to live or avoid the bullets, than you will need to be able to get behind the other's 6. If you cant than you have already lost. If you have a plane that has plenty of bullets such as a 38 or 47 than you will have plenty of shots if you can out maneuver the other plane.
Canaris
-
Got some new info for this discussion. I have changed to a completely new controler setup. My gunnery for this tour has dropped to near 3%. Partially from not being proficient with the action of the new stick, but mostly from having a mental block learning to use flight pedals instead of racing pedals.
Point is, my other stats are consistant with my past performance, and actually a little higher than last tour. Seems to support my ACM reply even further ;)
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
What you are referring to is shell dispersion. That is, the further shells travel the more they disperse over an ever wideneing area, shell drop is included in the dispersion effect. Convergence is a different animal in that guns are synchronized to fire at the same point from different angles at a certain distance. This is required because on planes without nose/cowl mounted guns the shells emnate from entirely different points of the aircraft. In the p38 for example all guns fire from the exact same location, so there is no convergence point. Convergence is not an issue.
Zazen
Air To Air Gunnery Revisited - Guns, Gunsights, and Convergence (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_031a.html)
-
It depends on the situation you are facing.
If you are in a pure 1v1 situation with both pilots in the same plane the order would be:
1. ACM
2. Gunnery
3. SA
Because of the nature of the engagement SA is not the desive skill here, you only have to track one single opponent.
Gunnery is important so you don't waste to many shot opportunities.
Ability to effectively position yourself behind the other guy is king here, it gives you the possiblity to avoid his gun pass at the merge (HO situation) and after that to stay behind him.
But in the usual MA furball situation the order would change to:
1. SA
2. Gunnery
3. ACM
SA is here the absolute dominating skill one most possess, it allows you to track multiple targets, friendlies, judge their position relative to you, analyse their "threat value" and to see opportunities were its easy to "cherry pick" an EA.
Gunnery gets more importance here, because to keep you "fast and running" you should be able to score in the "cherry pick" moments.
ACM is not so important because you will usually only need BFM to maneuver to the shot opportunities you see. You only have to depend on ACM here, when you are stuck real deep in trouble (which could have been avoided if your SA would have been better).
I speak from my own experiences as i never excelt at gunnery nor ACM, but my SA is above average. The more confusion around me the more succesful i am.
And because of this i would always choose gunnery over ACM for flying in the MA. Even more now, with a stupid spike issue on my joysticks x-Axis spoiling almost any deflection and track shots, reducing my gunnery to mere luck.
-
This is the most retarded thread I've ever seen go the distance that it has gone.
You people need to get something straight.
With out ACM there is no call for gunnery. How do you think that cross hair gets to where it does? Magic? Air Combat Manuver=ACM.
Get real. Those three little words say it all. Manuver being the most important one of all in dealing with what you are all debating.
I dont think I need to go any further than I have gone. But...
With out ACM you have no gunnery. Its need is non-existant. Whats so hard to understand about that?
All this thread does is prove to me that many think you can bypass any ACM, just throw it out the window because its not important.
Well HELLO!! Its the most important aspect of getting a shot off(Duh Gunnery!)... Period. I dont care what you say. You can't say anything against that, which will turn the facts any other way. Facts are facts. And if you dont understand what ACM is, maybe you better go figure it out. Because it looks like alot of you people have no idea what those three letters stand for.
-
I totally agree with u morpheus u absolutely right,anyways most people with a good ACM know when to take their shots
-
IMHO................. bein superior at either defines what kind of pilot u are. I think thats been said in a round about way. Although I do think the best pilots in AH, probably have the best aim.
-
Originally posted by streetstang
This is the most retarded thread I've ever seen go the distance that it has gone.
You people need to get something straight.
With out ACM there is no call for gunnery. How do you think that cross hair gets to where it does? Magic? Air Combat Manuver=ACM.
Get real. Those three little words say it all. Manuver being the most important one of all in dealing with what you are all debating.
I dont think I need to go any further than I have gone. But...
With out ACM you have no gunnery. Its need is non-existant. Whats so hard to understand about that?
All this thread does is prove to me that many think you can bypass any ACM, just throw it out the window because its not important.
Well HELLO!! Its the most important aspect of getting a shot off(Duh Gunnery!)... Period. I dont care what you say. You can't say anything against that, which will turn the facts any other way. Facts are facts. And if you dont understand what ACM is, maybe you better go figure it out. Because it looks like alot of you people have no idea what those three letters stand for.
I think you misunderstood what has been said. I don't think by saying that ACM is more importand than gunnery we assigned 100% importance to ACM and 0% to gunnery or the other way around. In a 1 on 1 situation getting the kill requires something like >= 90% ACM and <=10% gunnery (just number I pulled out of my ...). In a furbal or the MA mess I think its the oposite. ACM will get you killed while good gunnery will get you kills and get you out of there. I am not commenting on which flying style is better or what skill is better to have. Just staiting my observations.
Don't take this the wrong way but with all your flying skills, what has made the difference when we meet in the MA (most of the times I can remember) has been your gunnery. You seem to take me out from D600+ with angles that I would not even consider pulling the triger.
Bottom line, in the MA when not in a 1 on 1, manuver all you want. If you can't hit someone he or his friend will get you.
-
There is no such thing as "ACM" when it is pitte against gunnery. This is true both in real life and in the game. Anything other than the basic pitch up/down, roll clockwise/counter-clockwiseright, yaw left/right, is basically adding more and more unnecessary stuff to make up for the lack of gunnery. If ACM was so really important, the evolutionary process of WW2 planes would have been very different from what it was.
An ideal 1vs1 situation with both opponents being equal in E-status rarely happens. Everything is based on multiple engagements of all sorts of circumstances springing up at the same time.
These sort of fights where ACM really becomes important simply doesn't exist, or is much too rare to ever be considered important. It only exists in controlled environment. A fantastic wet-dream for people who just don't understand, or cannot accept that things don't work that way anymore.
Even in 1vs1 situations the odds are different everytime with very different variables. One can laugh and ridicule someone as a "bore-and-zoomer" all day long, but he'd still never even get a single shot landed on him if the BnZer knows what he is doing.
Everything else the defender can do is so obvious that basically everybody with some experience in aircombat games know about it. Lure him in? Equalize E-states? Same old trick every time.
The only reason ACM works in these 1vs1 is because usually, and thankfully, us gamers don't really care about living or dying. We want some wild goose chase fun, so we'll jump into a close-quarters fight after a couple of E-wise, secure passes, and then go risk an unnecessary risk by trying to latch on to a target.
The only reason good ACM works in this game, is because the other guy who's falling for it, basically let's you have a chance in the first place.
What's so scary about guys like Levi, Fester, Drex? Oh sure, these guys could (and maybe would) say that they personally think ACM is more important. But that's really totally irrelevant. On the receiving end, how these guys fly the plane is frankly nothing special at all. It doesn't matter if its a n00b or a super-ace, or how they fly their plane, when somebody is already lacthed on.
The real reason these famed aces are so scary in the game, is because their first merge is usually the last merge.
They don't even give you an ACM chance. You can't even drag them down low so your friendlies shoot them down right after he shoots you down. Wiggle all you want, tuck under his nose, go into -G, invert plane, break as tight as possible, stall on purpose, ... yadayadayada - nothing works. First pass, and boom, your wing falls off.
Shane often says that he doesn't back out from a fight. But I've never seen Fester back out from a fight either, unless its already something like 5vs1.
The difference is, Shane quite often gets caught up by multiple bogeys and dies a lot. Fester on the other had almost never makes this kind of mistake. Why? Because, Shane ACM sometimes backfires on him. Fester hardly even uses any real ACM in the first place, because he doesn't need to.
-
I said it before i'll say it agin ....
Just because you have two diffrant words doesn't mean you have two diffrant things...... stupid humans
acm and gunnery are the same thing ....
-
ACM
I'm not good at either but i have been working on ACM and i have been getting more kills.The ones that say Gunnery say it because they have bad ACM. WW was right SA is most important
THE megaSTUD:D
-
blah blah blah...
With out ACM you have no gunnery. There is no need for it without ACM. Almost all of you have completly over looked that one simple fact.
Air Combat MANEUVER.
How do you think that gun sight gets to where it does?
Im all done after this. Becuase if you dont get it by now, you never will.
I look at ACM as a race to an imaginary finish line with another plane. Where at the end shooting the other plane down is secondary to beating it to that finish line.
-
your right morph ACM is more important, BUT!!!!!
If i would have had better gunnery I would have shot you down twice!! they were cheryy picks but still i shoulda had you!
THE megaSTUD :D
-
Originally posted by streetstang
blah blah blah...
With out ACM you have no gunnery. There is no need for it without ACM. Almost all of you have completly over looked that one simple fact.
Air Combat MANEUVER.
How do you think that gun sight gets to where it does?
Im all done after this. Becuase if you dont get it by now, you never will.
You are still missing the point. No one is talking about using 0 ACM. Yes the gun sight get where it gets by using manuvering. However, when you are in a spit V and I am in a KI61 or worse in a 190, I am only going to get 1 or 2 snap shot opportunities on you, hoppefully lol (using ACM to achieve that). If I don;t kill you I am dead (unless I run but that would not be ACM right?). I can't count the times that I totaly out flew some one only to die since I could not finish the job and at the end the better plane won, ran out of ammo, or his friends showed up. Unless you define ACM as moving the stick in which case you are 100% right.
-
Originally posted by megadud
ACM
The ones that say Gunnery say it because they have bad ACM.
THE megaSTUD:D
Yep, you have it all figured out. :rolleyes:
-
We're talking about the importance of ACM over Gunner & vice versa...
Yes? Yes...
ACM beats gunner on importance any day of the week and twice on sunday.
How do I know this?
In a fight, I will work my way to a shot. I'll miss that shot so I'll imediatly start working for another shot. So on an so forth.
I've read along in this thread all the while listening to how with out good gunnery you can't survive. Thats nothing but a fairy tale. You work for a shot, if you dont make it, ACM will take over once again and you work for the next shot.
I know what gunnery is, yes its important, but its a very distant second in line with ACM.
-
Originally posted by streetstang
We're talking about the importance of ACM over Gunner & vice versa...
Yes? Yes...
ACM beats gunner on importance any day of the week and twice on sunday.
How do I know this?
In a fight, I will work my way to a shot. I'll miss that shot so I'll imediatly start working for another shot. So on an so forth.
I've read along in this thread all the while listening to how with out good gunnery you can't survive. Thats nothing but a fairy tale. You work for a shot, if you dont make it, ACM will take over once again and you work for the next shot.
I know what gunnery is, yes its important, but its a very distant second in line with ACM.
Well, you are 100% right. My only argument is that in the MA you will live longer if you did not miss the first shot. And the reason you live that long is because you don't miss the first shot. That gives you the oportunity to use ACM and SA to avoind the next bad guy and work on someone else. If you did miss 2 or 3 times, you would be giving people too many cherry pick oportunities.
-
Yup, fast kill's mean less risk of getting tangled up with multiple cons in a single engagment.
But when you are engaged by multiple cons, without ACM you may as well roll over and die.
-
Originally posted by streetstang
Yup, fast kill's mean less risk of getting tangled up with multiple cons in a single engagment.
But when you are engaged by multiple cons, without ACM you may as well roll over and die.
lol, I am not arguing that. I may as well roll over and die when I am engaged by 1 con :D
-
No I know your not and I should learn to be more clear when addressing certain groups of individuals.
Btw, I've met you 1v1, and you do anything but roll over and die.
-
Originally posted by dedalos
Well, you are 100% right. My only argument is that in the MA you will live longer if you did not miss the first shot.
This is why I say gunnery over ACM. Im average in ACM, maybe above average on a good day, but when my gunnery is off im horrible no matter how well I'm flying. When my gunnery is "on" I can usually take on 2-3 and hold my own because I can quickly turn it into a 1 vs me. Guys like Morph, Levi, Shane and others of that level I think dont really appreciate how much better their gunnery is than the average player. Shane always talks about how poor his gunnery is, and its just not so when compared to the average player, maybe its not as good as Levi's but its head a shoulders above us regular folks. Sure, those guys always outfly me, but they MAKE those low percentage shots that 90% dont make, and thats what separates them from the herd IMO moreso than their obvious ACM advantage.
-
Originally posted by streetstang
No I know your not and I should learn to be more clear when addressing certain groups of individuals.
Btw, I've met you 1v1, and you do anything but roll over and die.
Ah, yes, I remember. Was it when you were down low with only BBs and no fuel? lol
-
But when you are engaged by multiple cons, without ACM you may as well roll over and die.
What "ACM"? The only "ACM" against multiple cons in a bad looking situation I see around, even with the case of super aces, is:
1) run away if with superior speeder
2) climb away if with superior climber
3) partial extension so only one or two follow, and get them one by one
4) buy some time with basic evasives until the cavalry arrives
The rest of the multiple engagement situations with about equal numbers can be solved with simple teamwork and basic maneuvering:
1) watch each other's rear ends
2) lots of check6s and communication
3) don't do stupid stuff like going into an all-out maneuverung contest, dragging rest of your friendlies down to deck with you, so all of them die with you when enemy reinforcements arrive
Real ACM only happens later, when your side already have succeeded in significantly cutting down enemy numbers, so friendlies have a local numbers advantage for a short time -> in this case, some ACM starts, usually in competition against your own friendlies to gain the kill first.
Otherwise you're using the term "ACM" in a very wide sense which would be really more close to BFM than a real, all-out "combat maneuvering".
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
What's so scary about guys like Levi, Fester, Drex? Oh sure, these guys could (and maybe would) say that they personally think ACM is more important. But that's really totally irrelevant. On the receiving end, how these guys fly the plane is frankly nothing special at all. It doesn't matter if its a n00b or a super-ace, or how they fly their plane, when somebody is already lacthed on.
Heh, the MA is littered with the wrecks of those who actually saddled up, or tried to gang those guys. Though I wouldnt put myself in their catagory, many a pilot have went down after starting on my 6. How does that happen without acm?
Originally posted by streetstang
ACM beats gunner on importance any day of the week and twice on sunday.
How do I know this?
In a fight, I will work my way to a shot. I'll miss that shot so I'll imediatly start working for another shot. So on an so forth.
I've read along in this thread all the while listening to how with out good gunnery you can't survive. Thats nothing but a fairy tale. You work for a shot, if you dont make it, ACM will take over once again and you work for the next shot.
I know what gunnery is, yes its important, but its a very distant second in line with ACM.
I agree completely.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
What "ACM"? The only "ACM" against multiple cons in a bad looking situation I see around, even with the case of super aces, is:
1) run away if with superior speeder
2) climb away if with superior climber
3) partial extension so only one or two follow, and get them one by one
4) buy some time with basic evasives until the cavalry arrives
The rest of the multiple engagement situations with about equal numbers can be solved with simple teamwork and basic maneuvering:
1) watch each other's rear ends
2) lots of check6s and communication
3) don't do stupid stuff like going into an all-out maneuverung contest, dragging rest of your friendlies down to deck with you, so all of them die with you when enemy reinforcements arrive
Real ACM only happens later, when your side already have succeeded in significantly cutting down enemy numbers, so friendlies have a local numbers advantage for a short time -> in this case, some ACM starts, usually in competition against your own friendlies to gain the kill first.
Otherwise you're using the term "ACM" in a very wide sense which would be really more close to BFM than a real, all-out "combat maneuvering".
LOL yeah right. If you had a clue what you said here I'd be impressed. :aok
-
I really think they go hand in hand. If you have great acm's you will get shots that are relatively easy to hit, and if you are great at gunnery you can mow guys down at rediculous angles. However, unless you catch a guy unaware or get him in the first pass, acm is what will get the job done. Again, being a great shot is good but if you have excellent acm you only need average aim. If you have excellent gunnery, you still need decent or above average acm to even bring these skills to bear.
In my case, I was always a very good shot even when I was a noOb, but lacked prowess in the acm department. However, what I lacked in acm I more than made up for in agressiveness and that paid off a lot by getting me on more guy's 6's than not. I never really studied or knew what acm was what, I more or less found out what worked and what didn't through trying things out. Guys would describe different moves to me and what they were called and I'd be like "Oh, that's what that is? hehe I do that but didn't even know that's what it was." Flying in KOTH starting about two years ago is what showed me what real acm was and took my flying to the next level. I'd just never seen guys do what Wldthing, BigMax and other great pilots do because frankly there aren't enough of them in the MA to run into to see what a plane can really do. Seeing that kind of stuff and having to deal with it and learn to beat it made the jump for me. Pure aggressiveness gets the job done 99% of the time in the MA since most guys you face don't know their way out of a wet paper bag, but to down that top 1% you have to have great acm's, just having great aim won't get it done.