Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: mechanic on October 09, 2005, 11:11:36 PM
-
evidence A) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/longrange1.wmv (will stream)
evidence B) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/film209.ahf
tell me your opinion, is this exploitation of bad modling or practiced lead/gunnery estimation?
-
seems like decent gunnery, 38 guns nose mounted after all....
and if you took the big load of .50's you can afford to spray.
-
thats the way i see it too.
but it seems that any kill over 800yrds is deemed BS or bad modling.
-
the first slow-motion shows damge from 900+yrds. the range is obvious because seemingly no damage at all to the aircraft aside from the flap dropping off. Looking at the slow-mo closely shows that this flap would have been quite literally shredded off by tiny little 50cal holes. therefore on this i call good modeling, and concentrated fire proven as a method for longer range damage. this clip looks very similar to 303s dmage at 450+yrds.
the second part of the clip shows the slow-mo of the canopy shot, there is no doubt that more than 50 rounds hit the aircraft dead center along from tail to nose. i count 7 or 8 hits to the canopy itself and another 20 or so in the back of the cockpit and the left wing mounting. again the range is obvious as the structural damge is very minimal yet one or two of those round almost certainly found the pilot. this hit was ranged 756 yrds at the point of explosion. again, good modeling, doesnt kill the plane but the pilot goes down like jelly. the Me110 has a huge amount of greenhouse for the pilot to eat lead through.
note also the angle of the crecent nose guns on the P38, they were lined up to give a line of fire down the length of the aircraft.
finally note how as the first few pings hit the 110 rolls over into the horde of bullets exposing itsself to yet more punishment.
clearly the damge model is very acurate indeed even at long range.
the only questionable thing is does anyone have the eyes and the judgment to make that in real life? i doubt it but then ive never flown a fighter plane.
edit:in no way am i saying, 'im l33t look at my gunnery' it was just one of those ones that went right. this is just well documented evidence of a good topic for the forum imo.
-
good info ty.
yet still it is right that this can be claimed as good 'shooting' in the AH world as apposed to a 'BS buggy i'm loggin in a strop thing' ?
and if you had as much practice in real life as you do here somehow, then maybe it would be so hard to kill someone at 800yrds with 4x50cal mgs going full on for long bursts. luck is obviously all it is in this world or a dream world. but still we should recognise that it is possible and it is modeled as accurately as possible, stop being so keen to use excuses when an enemy surprises you.
-
Larger or smaller in game? (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25522&highlight=visual)
More object size examples (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24575&highlight=Part)
-
that is some good shooting. here's the rub though, the other day in a 109G6 I shot a fleeing La5 with my last taters at a displayed distance of 600m. I had 3 taters left to go. I had been chewing up the La5 with the 13mms but had depleted all 600 rds. I suspect the La5 guy had a pw and placed his La5 in auto pilot. I hit the combat trim on, zoomed all the way in for a good sight picture and let fly with the 3 taters. to my great satisfaction two scored!!! I was immediately greeted with a BS message. The fact is the guy is right it is total BS. WWII fighter aircraft didn't have Leupold vari X scopes. without the zoom there is no way I could have made the shot. it's gamey.
-
Originally posted by storch
without the zoom there is no way I could have made the shot. it's gamey.
If I remember correctly, HiTech once noted that zooming in fully represents the actual size of a target if you were flying in real life sitting in a cockpit. So what you're doing is zooming in to what you would have seen with your bare eyes anyway.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Yeah, I remember that too.
-
So what your saying is basically that: The zoomed in view is what youd see (more or less) IRL, the zoomed out view compensates for the fact that you need to display a whole cockpit on a 17'' screen.
Never knew that, just thought i was blind ;).
Edit: Leviathn, on your duel-film with Nomak you guys were talking about zooming. Now i was wondering, do you zoom in for snapshots, or do you stay zoomed-out for better SA?
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
So what your saying is basically that: The zoomed in view is what youd see (more or less) IRL, the zoomed out view compensates for the fact that you need to display a whole cockpit on a 17'' screen.
[/b]
Exactly. Using the zoom key is in no way gamey.
Edit: Leviathn, on your duel-film with Nomak you guys were talking about zooming. Now i was wondering, do you zoom in for snapshots, or do you stay zoomed-out for better SA?
I almost never zoom in for firing for a number of reasons, one of which you already mentioned. First, as noted, zooming in substantially lowers SA. That's not such a big deal in duels, but it is a huge deal in the MA. Second, when zoomed in slight movements in the stick correspond to massive changes in position whereas slight movements while zoomed out yield almost no positional changes. That means that when you fire zoomed out, you're doing so from a much more stable guns platform and are much less likely to miss due to minor stick adjustments.
It's mostly a matter of preference, but really the only time I'll ever zoom in is when I'm right on someone's six, and he's barely moving at all. Otherwise I stay zoomed out.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by storch
that is some good shooting. here's the rub though, the other day in a 109G6 I shot a fleeing La5 with my last taters at a displayed distance of 600m. I
Hey, next time let them know it is you on their 6. That would stop them from running :D
-
Originally posted by mechanic
evidence A) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/longrange1.wmv (will stream)
evidence B) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/film209.ahf
tell me your opinion, is this exploitation of bad modling or practiced lead/gunnery estimation?
:rofl Get over it man. All I said yesterday was that "I" could not see at 900 yards. If you can do it in a game thats fine, but the question was in real life. If you compare it with real life, "to me", it is BS or pure luck. Try hitting a target 9 football fields away while you both move at 300mph. No need to go creazy on me just because I cant see that far, lol
However, the 110 was flying straight so that improves you chances of hitting it. If the question was can the 50 do damage at that range, the answer is yes. Is it realistick? no if you can do it everytime. Once in a while yes, cause luck is realistic.
Non of this matters anyway because it is only a game.
-
Well...
I don't think that is the actual case, lev. You PERCEIVE that your stick movements are having a larger effect when zoomed in, but it is simply a perception. he amount of movement produced by a particular stick deflection is constant, given a constant speed and initial attitude.
Just yesterday, I was out shooting my AR-15, scoped with a 3-9x variable power scope. With it, I can "zoom in"on the target.
When I am zoomed in to 9x power, my heartbeat (!) causes a visible movement of the gun on the target--an inch or so, visible, at 100 yards.
When I am zoomed out to 3x power, that movement is not visible. Did my heart stop causing the movement? No. It's my ability to perceive the movement that has changed, based on the angular size of the target in my sights. The same applies in AH.
-
See Rule #4, #5
-
Rshubert, what I mean is that it is very easy to overcompensate when zoomed in for reasons described. What you've done is describe in a better way what I've been trying to say, so thanks for that.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Given the ability to repeatedly observe the effect of thier shots on "real" targets like players in the game have (if they pay attention) and guns that are not impacted by exessive firing then many ww2 pilots with 50s and Hispanos would have been bringing home gun film with bad guys so far away that you could barely make out the enemy plane if it was even in the FOV of the gun camera film.
In the actual war anyone shooting at 1000 yards would have been laughed at.
-
Real pilots didn't shoot at long range very often (it did happen though) because wasting ammo on low-probability shots is bad when it's your life on the line. There isn't any dying on a computer game so people take more chances. Most real pilots didn't deliberately crash their planes into ground targets, either, but nobody is going to call that impossible. As with long-range gunnery, suicide-crashing also actually happened from time to time. Point being---don't call something "impossible" just because it didn't happen all that often. Such "risky" behavior will always be more common in PC games because failure is relatively painless. It's no different than the Counterstrike players who rush around and take out a few guys before getting killed.
The vision granted by a computer monitor is so poor that if your real vision was that bad you'd be legally blind. Most people don't realize how far the eye can see in clear conditions because they never have occasion to actually try it.
J_A_B
-
You didnt hit a hitbox
-
IIRC, Hitech's comment was that the default gun zoom represented scale better, and the default forward view better represented the field of view. I'm still not entirely sure on that one, as monitor sizes and screen resolutions would be a major factor in there.
-
I suppose I could look it up, hub, but I'm too lazy. You go do it.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
I don't have to look it up. You may safely assume that I am correct.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I don't have to look it up. You may safely assume that I am correct.
Was that a pig I just saw flying past my window?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by mechanic
thats the way i see it too.
but it seems that any kill over 800yrds is deemed BS or bad modling.
It's all a matter of odds and how many times you have taken those types of shots. IRL, pilots weren't shooting at those ranges, for all types of reasons. In AH, you can afford to waste ammo, or go for the lucky shot, or try to ping the bandit to make him turn when he doesn't want to, etc.
Don't forget also, we are free from one thing that WWII pilots always had to take into consideration when shooting at range... Wind and buffeting.
It's kind of like trying to get a shot in basketball from half-court. In most cases, you don't see the shot happen very often because it's a low percentage thing. But once in a while, the shot is taken and it goes in.
It's all chance.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
I suppose I could look it up, hub, but I'm too lazy. You go do it.
-- Todd/Leviathn
He cant read. Can you point at a book with big pictures?
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Exactly. Using the zoom key is in no way gamey.
I almost never zoom in for firing for a number of reasons, one of which you already mentioned. First, as noted, zooming in substantially lowers SA. That's not such a big deal in duels, but it is a huge deal in the MA. Second, when zoomed in slight movements in the stick correspond to massive changes in position whereas slight movements while zoomed out yield almost no positional changes. That means that when you fire zoomed out, you're doing so from a much more stable guns platform and are much less likely to miss due to minor stick adjustments.
It's mostly a matter of preference, but really the only time I'll ever zoom in is when I'm right on someone's six, and he's barely moving at all. Otherwise I stay zoomed out.
-- Todd/Leviathn [/B]
Thanks for the info.
BTW, if i kill someone from d900, thats great shooting. If i get shot down, its bad modelling :p.
-
Originally posted by dedalos
:rofl Get over it man. All I said yesterday was that "I" could not see at 900 yards. If you can do it in a game thats fine, but the question was in real life. If you compare it with real life, "to me", it is BS or pure luck. Try hitting a target 9 football fields away while you both move at 300mph. No need to go creazy on me just because I cant see that far, lol
However, the 110 was flying straight so that improves you chances of hitting it. If the question was can the 50 do damage at that range, the answer is yes. Is it realistick? no if you can do it everytime. Once in a while yes, cause luck is realistic.
Non of this matters anyway because it is only a game.
man, what ever made you think anything i have posted has anything to do with you?
lets try and grip the bigger picture for a second vlaxos, if it was anything to do with your opinions of this instance in the CT i would have told you and posted so.
-
Originally posted by Midnight
It's all a matter of odds and how many times you have taken those types of shots. IRL, pilots weren't shooting at those ranges, for all types of reasons. In AH, you can afford to waste ammo, or go for the lucky shot, or try to ping the bandit to make him turn when he doesn't want to, etc.
Don't forget also, we are free from one thing that WWII pilots always had to take into consideration when shooting at range... Wind and buffeting.
It's kind of like trying to get a shot in basketball from half-court. In most cases, you don't see the shot happen very often because it's a low percentage thing. But once in a while, the shot is taken and it goes in.
It's all chance.
spot on, its all chance with a fair bit of virtual experience and lucky judgment of lead. if you watch the film the long burts that kill the 110 is fired at such a lead to look stupid to anyone not understanding speed, movement etc.
and also a note on the zoom, it wont show it in the film viewer as the zoom mode is a slider, but my zoom for shooting is only ever at a max of 15%. as mentioned i can't stand the difficult responses at such perspective and bad SA.
a 21" monitor helps, and the belief that that shot is not impossible.
heaping a stream of 500 rounds is going to kill from 800 yrds if it hits, is my only main point. that and the need for luck to achieve it.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
man, what ever made you think anything i have posted has anything to do with you?
lets try and grip the bigger picture for a second vlaxos, if it was anything to do with your opinions of this instance in the CT i would have told you and posted so.
:lol Nice, you got me now.
-
honestly mate, i am not trying to get anyone ever. i like you, i am not too good at the smak talk as i take things to literally at times. mainly because i dont mess around with what i have to say, so i expect others to be honest in their agenda.
S! for good fights last night.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
honestly mate, i am not trying to get anyone ever. i like you, i am not too good at the smak talk as i take things to literally at times. mainly because i dont mess around with what i have to say, so i expect others to be honest in their agenda.
S! for good fights last night.
What smak talk? I told you my opinion. You did not like it so you posted the above. Its OK though :aok
If you are talking about the unrelate dto this subject smak talking between me an dthe JG54, thats between us. I think we both enjoy it a little too much :D
-
Originally posted by dedalos
What smak talk? I told you my opinion. You did not like it so you posted the above. Its OK though :aok
stop, there you go again.
i promise you my posting of this had absolutely nothing to do with you opinion. i didnt give you a second thought.
ok, this is what i mean by smak talk. arguing the toss for no reason in essence.
i wont do it anymore.
finished.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
evidence A) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/longrange1.wmv (will stream)
evidence B) http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/film209.ahf
tell me your opinion, is this exploitation of bad modling or practiced lead/gunnery estimation?
Pfffff, I can shoot better then that.
-
exactly :D its not impossible at all.
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
BTW, if i kill someone from d900, thats great shooting. If i get shot down, its bad modelling :p.
Truer words were never spoken. :aok