Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Dead Man Flying on August 20, 2001, 02:01:00 AM
-
Pinpoint accuracy at 40k? No problem!
Increased range and lethality of guns in order to provide play balance? Bring it on!
But please at least force buff pilots to jump into the gunner positions to check for bandits just like vehicle drivers must now do. This would be both historically accurate and a reasonable play concession given that players can now auto-call "Check 6."
Thoughts or comments?
-- Todd/DMF
-
but im skeerd!
-
at least in CT, please. 100% agree.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying:
Pinpoint accuracy at 40k? No problem!
Increased range and lethality of guns in order to provide play balance? Bring it on!
But please at least force buff pilots to jump into the gunner positions to check for bandits just like vehicle drivers must now do. This would be both historically accurate and a reasonable play concession given that players can now auto-call "Check 6."
Thoughts or comments?
-- Todd/DMF
Hmm...I don't seem to have this "Increased range and lethality of guns..." in my buffs.
I have to get 50-100 hits at D100 in order to do any damage with my B17, and in a Lanc, forget it! I recently unloded 2 full Lanc guns on an F6 and when I died he was only smoking.
However, I do seem to have the opposite problem if I am on the attacking end. Buffs all seem to have lethal guns. Even those damn BB guns in the Ju88 tear me up.
What gives?
So, given the way my FE operates, I have to say I disagree TOTALY with getting rid of the external views. It's the only chance I have at survival.
One exception to my objection: The Il2. Given that it is a dive bomber and an attack aircraft, and can be flow like a fighter (better than some fighters IMHO) it should not have an external view.
As for the 40K laser Norden...windage, we need windage! Put some wind speed indicators in the sight and make us compensate. ;)
Viper
-
This has been debated over and over. As it is, a lone buff is free lunch. Limiting the veiws is not right. A B-17 had 10 pairs of eyes, not just looking around, but scanning every corner of the sky, because more than just their lives depended on it.
If you want some sort of realism concession for the CT, simply tone down buff gun lethality, forcing the need for formation flight.
In short, removing external view is wrong.
-
Here we go again......
some people just can't resist trying to weaken the poor old bufs....
sheeeesh! give it a rest.
If anything, the buf gun prohibition on the ground should be removed. It is nothing but a holdover from WarBirds and no longer has any purpose.
Leave the bufs alone.
:mad:
-
A very simple and fair compromise is possible here.
Limit buffs to autopilot level "X key" when in outside wiew.
If as all of you buff drivers always say, you never fly or fight in the external view, this change should have no effect on you, and there should be no resistance to this change.
-
I'm pro remiving the F3 function. All would be good and well if the buffs flew straight and level. The outside view would mean they'd be able to detect enemy threats earlier.
But more and more I meet turn fighting buffs; people who're using the rudders to spoil yer attack. B26's who use rear guns when yer behind them, turn with rudders to get a shot when yer below and if you go to the side to gain some alt, HO you. In short, they're defending themselves ver succesfully :).
Such skilled pilots can do that without the benefits of the f3 view mode.
-
These arguments are quite silly.
I could write a pretty good paragraph (not counting spelling and grammer) on why it is the "fighter" pilots who "game the game" in the fighter vs. buff debate. In fact, I've already done it somewhere else on the BB.
Leave the buffs alone.
-
Ok, if we are talking about "fixing" things with the Buffs, hows about this....
All the buffs had crews of what...3, 4..? crewmembers? Yet when ONE is hit, the whole damn plane blacks out. So, if you are in the tail gun and take a 20mm to the face, the pilot, sitting fat dumb and happy, is weaving in and out of conscienceness.
Further, as you get closer to an airfield, you pass out more frequqently! So, you can't land. Yet you bail out, and while sailing to Earth, you do not black out at all. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm :mad:
2 cents :)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
A very simple and fair compromise is possible here.
Limit buffs to autopilot level "X key" when in outside wiew.
If as all of you buff drivers always say, you never fly or fight in the external view, this change should have no effect on you, and there should be no resistance to this change.
I'd go for this concession, though I'd also add the other auto (angle and speed) settings as well.
-
But more and more I meet turn fighting buffs; people who're using the rudders to spoil yer attack. B26's who use rear guns when yer behind them, turn with rudders to get a shot when yer below and if you go to the side to gain some alt, HO you. In short, they're defending themselves ver succesfully :).
StSanta,
Once again you are trying to take away the Lancaster's historical (at least a semblance of it) defense.
When the tail gunner in a Lanc spotted an enemy fighter he would instruct the pilot to do a corkscrew maneuver in one direction or the other. The corkscrew was a tight diving turn that then becomes a tight turning climb. While the maneuver happened, the tail gunner would blaze away at the enemy.
-
Karnak:
1- This was done because Lancaster had no low defence. Not because it was a GOOD defence against someone in your low quarters.
2- This was done mostly to force the enemy NIGHTfighter to lose dar/visual track on the buff by starting a violent move the fighter couldnt predict.
3- This worked against Ju88s and Me110s, in night fights. No B-17 tried to do it at the light of the day and against a Fw190. With good reason: in the middle of daylight the fighter will assassinate the lonely buff if he tries to do any violent maneouver.
4- ANY of such moves had a DRAMATICAL effect on the gunner. HE wont predict exactly what the pilot would do and thus his gunnery would be screwed. Not to mention that not many gunners were trained to fire while in the middle of a corkscrew.
6- This is done by ANY bomber in AH. Not just the lancaster, but also the B-17 (when historically any violent maneouver would throw half the crew out of the plane)
7- You CANT stall a bomber from a gunner position by using rudders. You can turn as close as you want without having to get worried about losing control. Laughable.
8- You have a BIG FAT rangefinder on all the fighters's icons. You have ACCURATE ranges on anyone who attack you. I dont think that ANY Lancaster, B17, Ju88, or B26 had this ;).
9- not to mention the tuned up guns of the buffs
Summing up, if we are going to go historical and realistic, then you have much more to lose than to win.
In the MA put the buffs as you want. After all is a fantasy land. But in the CT, please -NO- External view,and -NO- tuned up gunnery for buffs. Thanks.
[ 08-20-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
My thoughts are that the outside view on bombers is a semi-realistic concession to account for the extra crew members looking in nearly every direction. As such, I think outside views for bombers are a good idea. I do however understand the issue with the guns.
Here is what I see: First of all I have absolutely no problems killing bombers. In fact if I see one I always attack it first, because I know I can kill it with at most minor damage. Every bomber in AH has a weak point, and if anything they are too fragile. There is also some type of perpetuating myth going around that the bombers' guns have been "turned up." This is incorrect, the damage they do is the same as the fighters .50 cal or .30 (.303). What is different is the effective range they have in rear facing positions. This is because of the realities of internet gaming. The fact is that when attacking a bomber at high speed the range seen by the fighter can be much less than that seen by the bomber. (With good connects about .4 seconds travel time difference.) Do you think anyone would fly bombers if they knew that any fighter attacking them at high speed could kill them before on their FE they were even in range!?! There are a couple things that I believe could be done that would be fair though IMO. First of all, implement the gun vibration effect just like in fighters. Hand held positions should have more vibration than turreted guns. This would act to increase the difficulty of hitting long range targets. I also think there should be more dispersion for handheld guns.
-
buffs need external view
Olgzr
-
uh-uh. You telling me the top turret of a lanc , 2X .303's shoots a fighter's wings out in a hi speed, hi angle , twisting fighter?
Not a fat chance in hell. Those guns ARE pumped up damage wise or convergence-wise. Something is mighty weird there. And it stinks.
-
I have no problems whatsoever if buffs have external view, to me its logical.
A common defensive tactic of bf110, was to go into a defensive circle when attacked, so to me, the rudder control when gunning should stay too, tho perhaps an adjustment made to limit deflection in the heavier buffs.
SKurj
-
Tac,
I nailed a P-51D's wing with my Lanc's top turret yesterday. Probably hit the wing with a good 25-30 rounds. You know what happened? Nada, zip, nothing. That's what happened.
If a Lanc's top, or nose, turret can blow a fighters wing off when the fighter does a high speed slashing dive, I'd love to see it because, frankly, I don't believe it. I bet the twin 50s in the tail were involved as well as a good dose of luck on the part of the Lanc.
-
As of 6:00 a.m.EST
Killed Was Killed
B17 2412 3404
B26 1631 2675
C47 166 2183
JU88 230 939
AR234 17 57
Lanc 1033 2678
TBM3 292 1490
Some thought should be given to toning down the lethality of the C47 and AR234.They are getting too many kills.
-
I think buffs should be harder to navigate, and harder to aim bombs, but keep the external view.
-
No prob Karnak, ill try and film every buff attack, you'll see the 1 ping of doom. BTW, im talking 38 here, ill try and get an F4U and P-51 and try it. It may be its the paper mache armour on the forkpork.
-
Audio doesn't directly represent the damage actually done.
-SW
-
I'd like external view removed at least in the CA. While I understand the "multiple eyes" view mentioned earlier, I still think the unlimited F3 views you can get from each turret represents more information than you could get even with 15 people on board. You can still see places you could not normally see even if you stuck your head thru the waist gunner windows at 150mph (not recommended).
Just my opinion from a buffer.
Fury
-
From the CA, at least, the external view option
The ability in the MA for a pilot to exit the airplane yet still have full control over the direction, speed and all of the weapons is very "Nintendo." Having the additional situational awareness of being able to see from the outside of the plane is a useful feature. But I agree with some of the posts above that control of the airplane and guns should be made unavailable when outside of the aircraft in the F3 mode.
MiG
-
Tac,
Yes the P-38 does seem excessively fragile, but I am still skeptical of peoples claims of losing major parts of the airframe to single .303 or 7.92mm hits. I dumped a bunch of 7.92mm rounds from a Bf109G-2 into a fleeing P-38 and nothing happened.
I am interested in seeing the footage. If you can get it from the bomber as well that would be "sehr gut".
Thanks.
-
IF you do not want to see Buff's flying around in the arena's, be it the MA or the CT, then by all means tone the buffs down, all the way around. Make it hard to hit fighters with the guns, amek it harder to bomb a target, make it harder to detect an attack (deletion of the F3 view). You can be assureed they will become less and less visible in the arena's.
Our strat system is not the best in the world, but if you downgrade the buff, then it will render it useless. we will have now use for strat, simply because it will be hard to flatten bases.
-
AMMO,I agree 100% with you.I posted stats on the board earlier.Fighters are killing buffs at a rate of 2.32 to 1.The guys crying about lethality of buffs are just whiners looking for easy kills.The figures that showed that C47s shot down 166 planes and Arados shot down 17 planes,both planes having no guns, show that there is a lot of pilot error by people trying to shoot those two type of planes down.If the same pilot error %s were applied to the buffs with guns and subtracted from the total buff kills, the total kills of buffs to fighters would go down much lower than what it is now.The more experienced fighter pilots have no big problem with killing buffs and I believe most of them do not think a change is neccesary.Its only the guys who see a big fat cow in front of them and think they have an easy kill ahead of them who bring this same thread up constantly.I have not heard one buff complain about hitting some fighters
15-20 times and the fighter bores in and kills them anyway.Or complain about running into 2-3 fighters and know they are going to get killed no matter what they do.Thats the luck of the draw.I have been killed in one pass by an experienced pilot many times and I have also taken out three F4Us in a row from the same squad on one mission.Which one of them knew more about killing buffs ? I enjoy buffing the way it is now,and its not easy with the amount of enemy you run into.Your lucky to drop a bomb sometimes with the amount of enemy fighters and the high caps.If the whiners get their way,I'll abandon bombing completely and become a furballer.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-:
IF you do not want to see Buff's flying around in the arena's, be it the MA or the CT, then by all means tone the buffs down, all the way around. Make it hard to hit fighters with the guns, amek it harder to bomb a target, make it harder to detect an attack (deletion of the F3 view). You can be assureed they will become less and less visible in the arena's.
Bear in mind that I did not advocate toning down the buff "all the way around." I have no problems at all with a number of concessions made to gameplay. In fact, I think they're good ones and totally necessary to keeping buff pilots happy and active. The only change that I proposed was to eliminate the F3 external view in order to force buff pilots to check the skies by jumping to various gunner positions and scanning from there. This also accurately simulates the fact that, say, B-26s did not have very good straight down visibility because the guns (and hence eyeballs) were unable to aim at that particular spot.
I'm not convinced that eliminating F3 would be a major blow to gameplay. Let's face it... Panzers no longer have an external view, yet the tank commander should be able to pop out of the hatch and look all around. I don't see ground vehicle drivers complaining about the lack of "realism" related to having to jump into the machine gunner spot to look around outside.
Think outside the box. :)
-- Todd/DMF
-
Originally posted by ET:
The guys crying about lethality of buffs are just whiners looking for easy kills.
Oddly, this is exactly what I am not. The notion that buffs should no longer be allowed to use the external view (and note that this was the only thing I advocated, not toning down lethality) came to me after a completely successfully B-17 run that resulted in three planes shot down and the vehicle hangar and a fight hangar destroyed.
I found the incredible situational awareness granted by F3 to be an insane advantage. That's not to say that I wouldn't have shot the fighters down and had a successful run without it, but it surely would have been more of a challenge. However, something just didn't seem right to me.
-- Todd/DMF
-
Bomber pilots in AH are pusses they need every crutch imaginable in the world to do anything.
Laser and GPS guided bombs from 40k? Check!
roadkill 3D outside ARCADE flight mode?
Check!
roadkill CIWS defense guns with 3 times realiastic range and upgraded hit poer and perfect aiming and convergence? Check!
roadkill roadkill roadkill! Thats all AH buff are.
-
Actually, I'm tending to agree with Grunherz here. The problem with Buffs, in my opinion, is that they are impossible to intercept once they reach 25k or so.
As an example, I attempted to intercept a geekdancer by the name of "bubbi109". I was in a P51D- an airplane that has some small ability at that altitude, I believe.
The geekdancer was in a B17 at 25k when I first intercepted him. His defensive "tactic" was to hop into the tailgun position and turn perfect little circles across the sky. No altitude lost whatsoever, no matter how hard the turn was. I'd turn and lose 2,000 feet, or lose 100 mph.
I think I frustrated him by not flying right up his 6 as I suppose he has been trained to expect. So as I stayed roughly 1.5k away trying to get in position for an attack run, he'd take potshots at me, scoring a few hits. I don't believe I took any damage from these hits, but the fact that he was able to HIT me from 1.5k says a few things to me -
1. He knows about what lead to give for his guns for a target flying perpendicular to him at 1.5K.
2. This leads me to believe that he actually makes a HABIT out of taking a b17 to 30k and cutting nice neat circles across the sky with the spare set of controls in the tailgunners position.
3. I don't believe that ANYONE could possibly find that exciting in the least...
My suggestion to this "problem" (obviously the 30k geekdancers don't think it is a problem) is simple. I don't think that buffs flying 25k or up that are for all intents and purposes untouchable, should have any effect on the game whatsoever. If they'd like to fly to 30k and use the tailgunner station to turn circles, more power to them. They shouldn't be able to A. drop bombs with any sort of accuracy from 30k+, or B. even see individual targets smaller than the hangers (I don't CARE if it is "visually realistic" either). This way, you could impose a "ceiling" on how high the geekdancers could fly and still affect the game (because their effects on fields are the ONLY reason anyone would try to intercept a bomber that high).
Or, if people still want to be able to fly at 30k to bomb targets. (I don't know why, I tend to do OK in the B17 at 20k, flying straight and level)- you have two other choices. A. Disable flight control from the gunner station. Yea Karnak, I know that in real life Lancasters corkscrewed wildly around the sky while "blazing away" at enemy fighters- but they did it much lower than 30k as far as I know.
B. Keep the ability to fly the plane from the gunners station, but "tone down" the guns. A fighter attacking a bomber (even from the dead 6 position) should not be subject to the fire of 3 positions all firing at the exact same spot at his plane. Unless the gunners were linked by some sort of neural network, they'd all be aiming in slightly different places. I don't know if the buff guns are stronger "per bullet" than the regular guns are, or if it is just the magical convergence, but if they are stronger they'd need to be taken down to normal strength.
I've got no problem with bomber pilots. I've flown a bomber or three in the time that I've been here (according to Deja's site I was 4th in K/D ratio in the B17 last tour, only had 36 kills in it though). What I DO have a problem with is buff drivers flying around at 30k, able to turn perfect circles in the sky from a gunner position, with all the defensive guns firing at EXACTLY the same spot even though they are firing different guns, and to be honest, if the buff guns are upgraded powerwise, I've got a problem with that as well.
-
If your going to take out the external view in bombers, then we should at least be able to fill gunner with people.
BeachS
-
I am ignorent of one thing. I did not think that you could be in a gunner postion and have access to flight controls. Is this true? I thought you had to be in the cockpit view to actualy steer the AC. Is this not true? I havent flown a bomber in a long time.
Todd, <S>
While I see your point about the same concession being taken away from the ground vehicle, it is a little different. The bomber has MUCH more attention given to him by enemy. And it has several people in it manning nguns and were able to scan the skies looking for bandits. They were all conncted be internal comm devices. Not to mention that the GV's are armored very well where the bombers are not. The Tanks only had one person really that commanded a good view, and only when he was outside the turret. While there are certainly issues with the GV's that IMO need much improvement, I will stick with the discussion at hand.
The bomber pilot that spends 45 min to an hour grabbing to 25K+ does that for his on virtual safety. Some call him a dweeb, whatever. He spent his time to get that high then i say more power to him. Fighter pilotsa hbave the luxury of a much higher rate of climb. If you want to defend your base from these hi alt bombers than you have to be prepared or just take the time to climb to the needed alt. If you climb directly to them and engage immediately, you are at a distinct advantage. The only way to do it right is get at least 2-3K higher than them and position yourself for a good attack. The trick is to force him to switch view several times by changing your position in reference to him. Make passes and extend, recovering all your altitude. I tend to have not that many problems with buffs using this tactic. but even so, I get hit sometimes.
Urchin, you shouldnt lose any alt as a penalty for turning a pony at 25K. you can actually immel the thing at that alt, a p-47 for that matter. If you were extremely slow to begin with in a nose high attitude then I can see that though.
They got to ahve concessions to make up for the sitting duck syndrome they had in real life. If there isnt these concessions, then they wont get used.
-
The sitting duck syndrome you mention was cured in RL.
Yep some fool got the crazy idea to escort the bombers with your own defending fighters.
Hmm I see no reason why this couldnt be a realistic feature in AH. It would certainly encourage teamwork.
But I guess our little bomber heroes wouldnt be bothered by such silliness.
-
I think this all comes down to one irrefutable point. Even with all of the gameplay concessions for the buffs, a lone buff is still at a disadvantage when faced with a lone fighter. And a lone buff confronted with 2 fighters working together might as well kiss his arse goodbye.
I think the external view for bombers should stay. In my opinion, the comparison to vehicles is made invalid by the fact that you can hop into one position in the vehicle and see in every direction that is necessary. Additionally, I'm not sure what some of you think is gained by being able to control the bomber from the external view. If you're being attacked, you're much better off manning the guns.
Personally, I would like to see a few changes to bombers. I'd like the steering ability from the gunner positions to be limited or removed completely. I'd like to see the effective range of the bomber guns brought back down to normal (from memory of what I've seen Pyro post in the past, the buff guns simply have less bullet dispersion out to a certain range past what fighters have with equivalent guns). I'd like to see the zoom function in the bomb site limited, but not removed. I think if you cut the bomb site view zoom down to 20% of what it is currently a natural side effect will be decreased bombing accuracy. Perhaps 20% is too low, but that could be played with. (btw, i don't think 25k is too high for a bomber in AH). I'd like to see the ability to have multiple player gunners. I'd like to see the mass-blackout effect be fixed or changed if it's not a bug.
In the end tho', I'm for keeping the buffs enjoyable to fly and possible to survive in once in a while. Hopefully none of my ideas contradict this. They don't, IMO, but I could be wrong. :)
SOB
-
Urchin,
I saw your unpleasant and unsporting tirade against that chap this morning on Ch1.
I'd like to ask you again what you thought you were doing trying to turn fight a B-17 at 30K? You're good enough to know that you have no chance in that situation, and old enough not to have to try and start a disruptive pissing contest about it with some one who's playing the game the way he wants to, in agreement with both the given performance parameters of the A/C and any rules HTC have put down.
Especialy as you've been so vocal on how useless the Ta 152 is. You had prime cause to use it here.
Deliberatly being unpleasant, provocative and insulting to some one you've never crosse words with before, simply because you're stupid enough to fly to his dictated terms hardly garners you any credit; and trying to continue the insults here is just lame.
Use the Ta-152 in Aces High!
-
Why are buff drivers "rutabagas"? Seems to me that they are the unsung heros who dedicate a substantial amount of time to helping everyone on their side.
BTW... planes without cannons aren't good interceptors regardless of high alt performance.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
The sitting duck syndrome you mention was cured in RL.
Yep some fool got the crazy idea to escort the bombers with your own defending fighters.
Hmm I see no reason why this couldnt be a realistic feature in AH. It would certainly encourage teamwork.
But I guess our little bomber heroes wouldnt be bothered by such silliness.
AH doesnt have the luxury of a structured military command authority. In WW2, they WILL have escort.
In AH we cannot control human behavior. the current mindset with most of the arena is to fly have fun and they decide how. So you can encourage all you like but it will not work.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Bomber pilots in AH are pusses they need every crutch imaginable in the world to do anything.
Laser and GPS guided bombs from 40k? Check!
roadkill 3D outside ARCADE flight mode?
Check!
roadkill CIWS defense guns with 3 times realiastic range and upgraded hit poer and perfect aiming and convergence? Check!
roadkill roadkill roadkill! Thats all AH buff are.
Sigh... If you don't like it Grunherz, then go fly somewhere else; Aces High don't need constant whiners like you! If you're not whining in the BBS then you're whining on open channel in the MA and even the CT. You're a good stick but you're making yourself look a complete and childish idiot. Cry all you want, you're either too impatient or just to damn lazy to plan a decent attack on a buff!
Ok....
Yeah, let's restrict external buff view, but only if enemy fighters are restricted to 10k :) It seems those that want to ban external view are those that never fly buffs and just want easy kills. Fly a tour in a Lanc and you'll soon change your attitudes.
Regards
Nexx
[ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Replicant ]
-
Heh, I saw the same B17 driver (mentioned earlier) flying at 30k last weekend sometime.
Have no idea if he ever dropped, but he was flying around Knight airspace for a while.
-
Dead Man Flying...My apologies for using the word "whiner" I usually stay away fom any name calling as it just distracts from the message here or in the MA.This thread has come up continously for a long time and it is always the same.Taking away the views will hinder the buff and change 10 pairs of eyes into 1 pair at a time.Taking away the turning ability while in the gunners mode will put the plane into the gunners hands and only in a straight line of flight.As it is now,if 2 planes come from 2 different directions and you are in gun postion,you can only see 1 of them and have to hope your timing in jumping to the next position is good or else you die quickly.Since fighters can not be killed by friendly ack they follow buffs over target and pounce when the buff is in bombsight and down to 1 set of eyes.It takes valuable time to take a buff to target and get the bombs out and with the amount of high base cappers waiting you are lucky to get in and out and back to base.So that is just some of the reasons I think the buffs should be left just as they are.
-
Originally posted by Seeker:
Urchin,
I saw your unpleasant and unsporting tirade against that chap this morning on Ch1.
I'd like to ask you again what you thought you were doing trying to turn fight a B-17 at 30K? You're good enough to know that you have no chance in that situation, and old enough not to have to try and start a disruptive pissing contest about it with some one who's playing the game the way he wants to, in agreement with both the given performance parameters of the A/C and any rules HTC have put down.
Especialy as you've been so vocal on how useless the Ta 152 is. You had prime cause to use it here.
Deliberatly being unpleasant, provocative and insulting to some one you've never crosse words with before, simply because you're stupid enough to fly to his dictated terms hardly garners you any credit; and trying to continue the insults here is just lame.
Use the Ta-152 in Aces High!
Seeker- I'm not entirely sure if you know what you are talking about here. I could be wrong.
I'll go by a line by line response, mostly
I'd like to ask you again what you thought you were doing trying to turn fight a B-17 at 30K? You're good enough to know that you have no chance in that situation, and old enough not to have to try and start a disruptive pissing contest about it with some one who's playing the game the way he wants to,
I wasn't "trying to turnfight a B17 at 30k"- I was trying to INTERCEPT a b17 at 30k. When the B17 at 30k can fly out of the tailgunner position to fly neatly across the sky, it makes it almost impossible to intercept them without flying right up their 6. I'll explain to you the phrase I use to explain to this behaviour. I call it geekdancing, for no other reason than there is a geek in the bomber trying to dance.
Since I am smart enough to NOT fly directly at a B17 from it's 6 OC, that pretty much renders the entire contest down to a good old 45 minute geekdance. This is how the Geekdance goes.
1. See a bomber WAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY up high.
2. Climb up to intercept the bomber.
3. Bomber of course sees you coming, so he switchs to a gun position (preferably the tail gun, as that way he can make sure he is always pointed in the right direction).
4. Buff flies straight and level - until you get within 2 K or so. Since you have climbed to 30k to intercept the geek, you are already going pretty slow.
5. Buff stays in the tail gun position, using the rudder to turn so that his tail is always pointed at you.
6. Fighter pilot can never do both of these - 1. Climb ABOVE the buff, and 2. Stay in position to make an attack once he is above the buff.
If you say I'm wrong, thats fine. This is all just personal experience anyway.
7. Buff continues flying in circles, attempting to "intice" the fighter into coming up his 6. In this particular case, the buff driver actually REVERSED, to come back closer to me on several occasions where I had gotten fairly far away from him attempting to climb. This in particular marks him as a geekdancer, in my opinion.
I qouted this earlier, but the truth in it just rang out so clearly.
You're good enough to know that you have no chance in that situation
Exactly, I AM good enough to know that I have no chance to win a fight against a geekdancing buff at 30k. This in turn renders another statement of yours patently absurd.
Especialy as you've been so vocal on how useless the Ta 152 is. You had prime cause to use it here.
Why would I waste 40 perk points even TRYING to intercept a buff at 30k when he will make SURE that I have to approach from dead 6 to attack him? And you can blame this on my "inferiority" as a pilot if you feel the need, but if a geekdancer CAN'T make sure that he has the advantage at 30k, then HE is incompetent, not the fighter pilot.
I'll give you a clue here, as to how frustrating it is to attempt to intercept a buff at 30k. The "vaunted" Ta-152 climbs at between 1.5k and 2k FPM at 30K. This is at probably 180 mph IAS. The BUFF is flying at at least 200 mph IAS. Furthermore, the buff can turn perfect circles in the sky, without losing any altitude, something that the fighter does not have the luxury of doing.
I'll just use my own "formula" for attacking buffs here, but it should do OK. I attack from the 3-9 line (or 9-3) from probably a 2-3K altitude advantage. The reason I do this is because it makes me a harder target for the 8 guns that are shooting at me anyway.
So, lets apply this to a buff flying at 30k. I'd like to be on a parallel course to the buff, flying at 32-33k. I'd then break into him from a distance of perhaps 2000 yards, make a pass and repeat from the other side.
The Buffs defensive "tactic" is to -
1. Fly straight as long as it appears the enemy fighter will attack from the 6 OC position.
2. If the enemy fighter moves off to one side, you use the rudder to turn away from the buff so that your tail is always presented to him. You use the gunner position for this turn so that you will never lose any altitude by turning, which would of course render it easier for the fighter to get in position for an attack.
3. Repeat as long as nescesary, I.E. until the fighter gets so BORED by your stupid tactics that he decides to come up your 6 OC with a very minimal speed advantage so you can shoot him down from 1.5K away. Oh yes, I forgot- if the fighter is not stupid enough to charge up your 6, you can take potshots from as far away as 1.7 K and you may get lucky. If the fighter still doesn't charge up your 6, and your golden BB's fail to kill him, commence geekdancing until he runs out of fuel.
Deliberatly being unpleasant, provocative and insulting to some one you've never crosse words with before, simply because you're stupid enough to fly to his dictated terms hardly garners you any credit; and trying to continue the insults here is just lame.
Yes, I was probably out of line in the MA last night. I'm not going to apoligize for it. By the way- this is another particularly absurd statement on your part.
simply because you're stupid enough to fly to his dictated terms
There are no other terms at 30k, dancing with a buff that can turn without losing any altitude (or speed? I'll have to check into that) when you don't have that luxury. If you want to intercept a geekdancing buff at that altitude, you will be coming up his 6, or you won't be intercepting him at all.
By the way seeker, I'd be perfectly happy to take a B17 to 30k and let you TRY to intercept me in a TA-152. I'd say out of 10 "intercepts" I'd win all 10. Let me know if you want to try it.
-
Buff tail gunner to pilot!! "hard left now!!" rat-at-at-at, "he's comin in again!" "hard right" !!
I think a lone buff would consider evasives in RL, as the chances of him makin it home alive were virtually nil.
SKurj
-
Originally posted by Urchin:
By the way seeker, I'd be perfectly happy to take a B17 to 30k and let you TRY to intercept me in a TA-152. I'd say out of 10 "intercepts" I'd win all 10. Let me know if you want to try it.
I'll give it a shot, lets do it in the name of research and developement.
-
Originally posted by SKurj:
Buff tail gunner to pilot!! "hard left now!!" rat-at-at-at, "he's comin in again!" "hard right" !!
I think a lone buff would consider evasives in RL, as the chances of him makin it home alive were virtually nil.
SKurj
I'd buy it IF they tried evasive manuevers when they were being ATTACKED. They don't.
I suppose your conversation would go like this
"Tailgunner to Pilot: Enemy plane behind us, 2000 yards back, about 7 O clock low"
"Pilot to Tailgunner: OK, I'll start a left turn to get him on our dead 6, then straighten out"
"Tailgunner to Pilot: He didn't buy it, he is still about 2000 yards away, flying a parallel course"
"Pilot to Tailgunner: Damn, I'll start another turn to get him back on our dead 6, then straighten out"
"Bombardier to Pilot: Didn't we take off in this bomber to BOMB something?"
"Pilot to Bombardier: No, we flew up to 30k to fly in circles and try to get morons to fly up our dead 6"
"Bombardier to Pilot: Oh, ok, wake me up when he runs out of fuel"
"Pilot to Bombardier: Will do"
"Tailgunner to Pilot: That bandit is still back there, about 2000 yards away, on a parallel course to the left now"
"Pilot to Tailgunner: OK, starting a gentle right turn to bring him back to our 6"
"Radioroom to Pilot: I'm picking up some funny noises on this thing, sounds like someone vomiting while trying to talk on the radio"
"Pilot to Radioroom: Oh, don't worry about that, that happens to everyone that is to smart to fly up our dead 6"
"Radioroom to Pilot: Oh, ok, sorry"
"Left Waist to Pilot: I think the Tailgunner fell asleep back there..."
"Pilot to Left Waist: Thats ok, he won't have to shoot anyways, the bastard won't fly up our 6 no matter how hard we try."
"Left Waist to Pilot: Good point..."
Of course, thats just how it'd be if you actually had a crew in the buffs, since you can fly from the gunner positions you will never hear that conversation. Well, maybe the geekdancer's family will, I dunno.
Oh, I also took the time to fly a b17 around in the tailgunner position. You can turn circles indefinately without losing any altitude at all, and the plane will not stall. I turned 4 circles and went from 220 mph IAS to 200 mph IAS, so it apparently doesn't lose very much speed either. It also seems that you are limited to a 45 degree bank while flying from the gunner position.
-
hmmm i realy wonder why this hard defense for B 17 and lancaster
why nobady ask for super lasers on ju88 ???
other thing BUFF = Bomber it main role is drop the bombs no les no more
if it have defense guns they are to use awoid defensles dead
not to bust up enemy fighter forces
gameplay : u say gameplay well b 17 got nice balanced gameplay lancaster have 2 laser beams i em sure that \
Pyro gived 15 % mor euber 7.7 calibers for ju88 like they was realy but it not balance anithing/
any 1 know i fly lotsa the Ju88 for real buff run
when i take B 17 i go more like lees for dweb ackstaring !!
when i em in lancaster i go level the half world
in arado is it a pure tactical buff run
so all my respect for arado and ju88 drivers
and any b 17 who fly around 18 k in formation the others are just ...............
and call me whiner and whine about my whine :p
-
ET, please remember that statistics dont say squat about a plane.
Fighters kill a lot of buffs in the stats, but remember that it is very likely that more than half of those kills come from the vulching of car bombers or from banzai buffs that fly low over fields and get killed by ack and the closest fighter gets a free kill and from ackstarring when FH's are down. Consider also that the amount of buffs seen in the air is mighty disproportionate to the amount of fighters up there.. i'd say buffs are kicking bellybutton and taking names.
I do believe a single buff should have something to give it survivability in the MA. But increased firepower is not the solution, its an irritation. I would be perfectly happy if the buffs took 4X the damage they take now to kill and I dont care if the nose gun can fire through the fuselage at a low 6 con, or that the guns have increased range due to lag issues. I do care about the perfect convergence/turbolaser damage those guns have. A single buff is to be approached with caution (in RL that lone buff wouldve been dead quite quickly), and a small formation has to be approached with either a LOT of E or a lot of friends, 3 B-26's in formation with people at the guns is extremely hard to get..and 3 B-17's are simply not even worth trying to attack alone, too many 57mm flying around.
BTW, uppped a pony and a 205 & 109's &190's and got some buffs in them... I was simply stupefied at the amazing amount of damage those things can take. I think the P-51 (most fragile of them all imo) can take like 8 pings before something gets whacked or plane gets torn apart. 109 is a tank. 190 engine dies but them beut cannons finish the job quickly *heehee* and 205 is a sheer joy to torment the gunner by doing circles all around the buff mwhahahaha :D
Conclusion: Buff guns do too much damage and the P-38 is porked. (not as if I didnt see that one coming..LOL).
[ 08-23-2001: Message edited by: Tac ]
-
Tac,speaking just for myself.I do not go low over bases when ack is up and do not do the carbomb thing.I have been killed by flak and M16s strafing after ack is down.
Most all of the times I get killed is by fighters between 15-20K.The singles coming down from altitude at a fast speed are the toughest.When there is 2-3 of them together you know your going down even if you take 1 or 2 with you.
I agree that the 190 and P51 take a lot of hits to kill.Sometimes I think I hit them them 15-20 times and they just bore in and get the kill anyway.No one campaigns to make them easier to kill and I'm not either.
As far as the stats go,its the only info I have to compare what is happening and those stats are put together by HTC.Just raw data from independent source.
-
Well its nice to see who the anti-buff folks are. Grun seems to feel anyone who flies a buff alone is a tard, but I challenge ANY of you who are NOT in a squad to go out into the Main Arena, announce you are going to take a B-17 or Lancaster to a heavily defended target (base, HQ, whatever...) and see if you can actually GET any escort.
If you DO take a buff, folks left and right will ask you to bomb this or that, but don't you dare interfere with their furballing and expect them to cover you. Sure, there are few folks in here that are pretty good about at least giving you a Check Six if they see a con climbing to a buff, and some guys might even try to plow you a path. But in over a year of playing and mainly bufsquealing, its a strong minority.
Can the buff be improved? Sure. Is the gunnery unfair? I dunno, that's pretty debatable. Are the bombs too accurate? Well, do you want BUFFs in the arena or not? If they have to calculate windage, drift and all those other real life factors, I think you furballers will get your wish and have less buffs bothering to up.
I'm just in awe at how many of the posts in here come across as anti-buff. Gee whizz, one of them shot you down and God Lord we know it simply wasnt your fault...obviously we must decompile the game and make sure this never happens again, eh? :D
(Ever hear of the Golden BB theory? It got the F-117a over the Balkins downed....simply put, if you throw enough ordinance in the air, you're bound to hit something!)
-
Urchin,
I don't for one minute doubt the frustration you felt. However, given that the plane will fly like that, and there's no rules to inhibit doing so, what's your solution? If provocative whining on Ch.1 worked, Grunhertz would be in heaven right now......(don't make me put you on "the list" :) )
Secondly, I'm certainly game to test the Ta thingy out. We bump into each other enough online, give me a shout next time we see each other and I'd be very glad to work on it with you. It could be you're right, a 30K buff is unassailable, but while I'm no great buff driver my self, I have doubts about your assertion that he can circle at a constant height _loaded_; and if he's empty, then you're just looking for a kill, no?
Actualy, I do have a solution, or at least the suggestion for one.
Dog fighting buffs (dog buffs) have been a pain in the bellybutton ever since DOK worked out you could do it. One thing that's been suggested a thousand times (but never, to my knowledge inplemented in any sim) is a drasticaly lowered Gloc number for buff gunners. While the gunner himself should be able to withstand 5-6 G; same as the pilot, what about all those ammo trays and feed chains? I reckon it was a rare buff gunner who could operate effectively at + 3G. Black 'em out at 3G, and maybe we'll get some where.......
-
A buff can circle at 30k Loaded but NOT very tightly. Full rudder for more than 180 degrees will cause a stall.
SKurj
-
Na, he was loaded. He bombed the base I was landing at after I ran out of fuel.
My "test" as it were, I was also loaded. I only flew at 15k though, not 30k. I'll try it at 30k, but I have no doubts that it can circle.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-:
I'll give it a shot, lets do it in the name of research and developement.
offer still stands urchin. Was it just a personal thing between yourself and seeker or are you really wanting to prove or disprove this?
-
nah ammo, I'll do it with you as well. Right now it is T-storming here, so I'm about to turn the computer off. I'm normally on at all different times after 3 PM or so. Give me a time that you are normally on and I'll pop in and give you a tell.
-
But please at least force buff pilots to jump into the gunner positions to check for bandits just like vehicle drivers must now do.
-- Todd/DMF[/QB]
I agree. Buffs are tough enough and near impossible to bring down wihtout the added advantage of being able to see where you are at any time, and still fly rings around an interceptor at 25k.
If a Buffer wants to milkrun an airfield all he has to do is take up a buff and not worry about being stopped. Contrary to other opinions stated, there does seem to be increased leth from buffs. I know, I got hammered by them yesterday while I was climbing up underneath em (safest approach these days). They began shooting at 800 yds and nailed me even as I attempted to dive away from em. Now for one or two 50 cals to be that accurate and that lethal from over 800yds, something has got to be wrong.
Fyrther, if playability is the issue, then shouldn't it be up to the buff pilot to enlist gunners? Its gotten so the most historically lethal interceptors to Hvy Bombers can't touch an auto gunned, 10X lethal, all seeing, acrobatic B17 or Lanc.
-
Buffs do not have auto guns. Any fighter except for perhaps some of the earlier models, can kill a 17 or a lanc or any buff in the game, from above in 1-2 passes.
Climbing up to a buff is errrmm nothing personal, but STUPID +)
Buffs are fine as is, go fly em if u don't believe me. The only buffs that get to land alot of the time either fly at 30k, or fly in the swarm of green with a horseshoe up their butts.
If u make buffs less survivable than they already are, the next time you want those hangars dropped and noone replies, you'll know why.
SKurj
-
A couple good slashing passes will bring down any buff. You just need to hit them right.
-
Originally posted by Don:
I know, I got hammered by them yesterday while I was climbing up underneath em (safest approach these days). They began shooting at 800 yds and nailed me even as I attempted to dive away from em. Now for one or two 50 cals to be that accurate and that lethal from over 800yds, something has got to be wrong.
The belly attack is SO predictable that almost all seasoned buff drivers know how to evade this attack. To me this approach is only any good if you have more than one fighter attacking, otherwise it's almost as dumb as approaching from dead-six. I rub my hands when I see a con trying to climb and belly attack my Lanc or B26 because they think you're can't defend.... but turn 90-120 degrees (hard or gentle) and they're bang on your 6.... you have your guns to aim at them then.
As others have mentioned, the best way to attack is to plan it... and preferably from directly above or a high speed high 10 or 2 o'clock approach which I find the hardest to defend.
I fly the Lanc a fair amount, and some attackers think that the Lanc is extremely weak and can't fire back. It's because of this that they get negligent and try an idiotic approach, and then whine if they get shot down. This is more apparent when flying the Ju88. Both the Lanc and Ju88 are tough planes, but the Ju88 has weak guns and the Lanc has only limited rear turret ammo. Make him waste his ammo. People forget that in WWII you'd often ghost a lone plane and take your time and try and wear them out, not just going in guns blazing trying to get a kill after only being in the air 10 minutes (109 G10).
Think again attacks.
As for losing the buff external view, the only thing that I think this would do is encourage AI gunners and that's the last thing I would like to see.
Regards
Nexx
[ 08-24-2001: Message edited by: Replicant ]
-
>>>"a lone buff is still at a disadvantage when faced with a lone fighter. And a lone buff confronted with 2 fighters working together might as well kiss his arse goodbye."
A lone buff shouldnt be alone, they are prey not predators (or shouldn't be) by themselves.
Lone Buffs tend to milkrun, which shouldn't be encouraged by providing them with ridiculous advantages.
Realism? Pfft! this aint real :) But it can be fun if it were fair.
One of you guys said it might require teamwork...amen ta dat bruther! Teamwork in AH's MA is sorely lacking but, thats another story.
Man! A guy can take a buff up, switch to tail or other gunner spot and look outside and still turn the plane? LOL! It's a miracle visited upon us lowly dweebs....mbaaaaaaa! :D
-
>>>"Climbing up to a buff is errrmm nothing personal, but STUPID +)"
Hehe, personal? Naw!! THis aint personal Skurj. It's about strange modeling of an airplane which by itself ought to be used with sense and only within it's envelope of believability. What should be stupid is taking a lone buff up over an nme base, but the full confidence that the a/c can do all of the amazing things it "shouldn't" be able to do makes it stupid like a fox.
Stupid is doing the same thing over and over again with the same result. Hehe, a Lanc doesn't have a ball turret gunner but can still kill you as you approach from dead underneath it; that aint stupid, thats crazy.
The result is, guys like me won't climb all the way up there to have to deal with a porked nme airplane. Sheesh! So much for playability.
Btw, it aint necessary for me to have to excuse you, avoid that by refraining from accusing a total stranger of being stupid, that aint cool
:mad:
-
Don i wasn't calling u STUPID, i was calling everyone who climbs up to a buff's 6 +)
I've flown Lancs and NEVER been able to fire directly below the aircraft. Don i suggest you fly a buff for a dozen missions, even fly them realistically if you wish.
Attacked 2 17's, they were at 12-15k ish, close enough to be able to just cover each other. With 2 scorts trailing them.
2 passes with .50's both 17's down, sure I was smokin, but a lone fighter engagin a lone buff is just as realistic as the MA +)
SKurj
-
You must be doing something different than me Skurj. I've never had much success attacking buffs with .50s. I need cannons to get the job done, and I need either 2 big ones or 4 20mm's to do it well.
-
Take a pair of b17's, sit them one in front of the other and have the nose gun (only nose gun) of the b17 in the back shoot the b17 in front (b17 in front is drone)... fire at a specific spot (say, inboard engine, right wing) keeping a distance of d800 if possible.
Repeat the same, this time the drone 17 vs a P38 (which is the only plane with .50's that doesn't (or shouldnt!) have a convergence issue. And its got 2 more .50's) on its tail firing at same spot at same range
Guess who kills the drone 17 first and with how much ammo?
-
Originally posted by Urchin:
You must be doing something different than me Skurj. I've never had much success attacking buffs with .50s. I need cannons to get the job done, and I need either 2 big ones or 4 20mm's to do it well.
I fly buffs a fair bit and the planes that I worry about the most are:- NIK2, Typhoon, 109s (if they got 30mm), 190A8/F8, Ta152, P51 and P47. The P47 can take so much damage so that even if he came up dead six slow he'll no doubt either kill you straight out, or wound the gunner then finish you off. As for the P51, these never used to bother me but lately I've found them the most effective plane for downing buffs - quite often in one well organised pass. Obviously a novice in a P51 hasn't got a chance. As for the Spitfire, well, as they're pretty slow you don't have to worry about them too much, unless they're a lot higher than you then their cannons are most effective. La7s often take several passes but because of their manouvrability they wear you out.
Regards
Nexx
-
Oddly, my K/D ratio in bombers and against bombers is above 1 for 1 in most Tours. I wonder why that is?
Well, for one thing, I set up my attacks on buffs and for another thing most people fly straight up a buff's 6.
A P-38 can blow a Lanc's wing off using only 12 rounds of .50 cal ammo. That is from extremely short range admittedly, but it does give an idea of how fragile these bombers are.
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]
-
Yep karnak. A p-38's wing is blown out with only 3 rounds .50 , tail with 2, engine dies with one. From long range it takes almost twice that (except tail..lol).
Maybe its because buff guns increased range they also increased the "close range punch" damage factor to be effective up to long range? That would explain all the BS of the turbolaser guns.
-
Urchin, P47 vs B17 +) Though even the lone 30 in g6 gets the job done in 1 pass with decent aim.
If i want to live and have the patience, I only engage a bomber once I am setup approximately 2k directly above him.
Whenever I don't do that... the buff flies on as I go down..(hehe quite often)
SKurj
-
A P-47 is the ultimate buff killer IMO. especially if the buff is way up there. No radiator worries, p47 performs sooo sweet at hi alt, and 8 big 50's. The tiffy and tempest have a very effective gun package, but one cost alot, and both arent all that at hi alt. The pony has a fragile radiator. The FW's are a pretty decent buff killer too with the A8's big guns and the A5's 4 mausers. But I can attest to the P-47 on Buffs, lookout. Its mean.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Bomber pilots in AH are pusses they need every crutch imaginable in the world to do anything.
Laser and GPS guided bombs from 40k? Check!
roadkill 3D outside ARCADE flight mode?
Check!
roadkill CIWS defense guns with 3 times realiastic range and upgraded hit poer and perfect aiming and convergence? Check!
roadkill roadkill roadkill! Thats all AH buff are.
What a rug chewer you are turning into.
Without outside view you would have to turn on otto. There is no way to maintain SA against multiple coordinated fighters with intenal views only. It is brutal with exteranl view on. With a dozen trained observers there would be.
-
It is time to enable all buf guns on the ground and put AUTO gunners back on the bufs.
The buf is entirely too weak to realistically represent what a Flying Fortress was in WWII.
Of course it is possible the players in Aces High are the only people in the world who know the real secret: the Army Air Corps never put up a B-17 manned by more than two people and usually just one! :D
Believe me, this could be bigger than ROSWELL! :D :D
(http://www.applink.net/thunder/sig/DHBG.jpg)
-
Yes, when I fly buffs I worry the most about P47's. But then, I don't fly the strato-buffs, I typically fly at or below 20k. I don't worry all that much about the German planes because you have to get within 300 yards to hit reliably with the cannons. Spits don't bother me because they are, as someone said earlier, slow. P47's do seem to take an inordinate amount of damage before you kill them (at least from a buffs POV, I can kill them OK in fighters). I worry about N1K2s because they have 4 cannons that can hit you out to 700 or so, thats sort of a scary feeling when they can come dead up your 6 and get you half the time.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
A P-38 can blow a Lanc's wing off using only 12 rounds of .50 cal ammo. That is from extremely short range admittedly, but it does give an idea of how fragile these bombers are.
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ][/QB]
>>>>This string is about fixing things and possible bugs with Buffs. A buff should not lose a wing to 50 rounds of .50 caliber ammo from close in. The B-17 especially was built far tuogher than that. But, when a Buff doesn't go down after receiving 20 mm cannon from 600 feet on in, then something is wrong there too. What seems to be consistent is perhaps the Bufffs ought to be looked at, and if bugs are found, fix them.
-
176 Squadron also provided other small detachments to Chittagong, and later Akyab and Ramree Islands as the Japanese were gradually pushed back. During this period one of our Beaufighters from Chittagong shot down an American Flying Fortress which failed to anwer a Very Light challenge when returning from a bombing mission. Fortunately all the American crew were able to bail out and were all safely returned to their unit. However on hearing that the Beau had used only four rounds from each cannon, they insisted on giving a party for the Beau crew - they just didn't believe that one of their fortresses could be shot down so easily.
taken from:
Beaufighter at War, Chaz Bowyer
Great book btw with lots of stories and pix
SKurj
-
O.K. I know stats can be made to say whatever and they don't prove a thing, but they are curious things to me.I went to the rank board and tried to pull up the top 100 fighter pilots but could not.I did get 6 of the lowest 10 and looked up their records against the B17 and B26,probably the most dangerous bombers in the game.To date the 6 pilots have killed 130 B17s to 11 deaths,a kill ratio of 11.81 to 1.The same 6 have killed 92 B26s to 16 deaths.A kill ratio of 5.75 to 1.Now my question is,what do they know about killing these 2 bombers that others don't know.
-
whats the point of the great graphics of you cant even see them???? keep the phaqueing outside/external view!!!!
-
I honestly don't know ET. All I know is I'm not one of em :). Today I downed something like 3 or 4 B-17s and 2 or 3 B-26's, but I died 3 or 4 times as well.
I remember the first death- it was actually the kind that really aggravates me. My and another guy were headed towards a B-17, headon, from about 10K away. As he closed with us (co-alt, BTW), I went to the right, in order to set up a pass from the side. The other guy went right on towards the B-17, and they exchanged fire. I turned back in so I was at a 90 degree angle (flying perpendicular) to the B17- but I misjudged my approach and I ended up passing about 600 yards behind him.
So as I passed 600 or so yards behind him, flying perpendicular at about 350 mph, he hit me with one burst that removed my entire tail and wounded the pilot.
I know it was what I'd consider a "snapshot" because he was still firing at my countrymate, who had flown right past him .
The other death that I remember was actually to the same guy (truker1). I had switched to a 190a8 (had been in a 109G10). I had already killed 2 B17s and 1 B26, and me and truker dueled for a little while. To his utmost credit, he did NOT geekdance.
I was about 1.5k from him (he was in a B26), and off to the right. I had just made a pass on him that showed no apparent damage (I was out of 30mm by that time). He made a hard turn into my pass, and kept turning. I pulled around out of my pass and cut inside his turn, leaving me about 300 yards back on his dead 6. That was a big mistake. I opened fire first, hammering his right wing with my cannons and machineguns as he was still in his diving turn. He switched to the tailgunner (pulling out of the diving turn) and started firing back. I foolishly assumed that I would be able to blow his wing off with 2 cannons and 2 machineguns, from 300 yards before he would be able to kill me with his 4 machineguns (tail and top turret, or maybe just the tail). Ehhh, no. Those 50s shredded one wing, my tail, and the cockpit. This is with what I would guess was maybe a 2 second burst. My 4 second burst of machineguns and cannons caused a fuel leak, and knocked out his engine on the right wing.
OH, and by the way- before you start with the "Everyone knows that you can't hit with MGs AND cannons at 300 yards" crap- guess again. I can, and do, all the time. I suppose you can say I'm a bad shot, but I'd say probably 75% of the rounds landed squarely on his right wing, which is where I was aiming.
It just seems abnormal that a B-26 can take that much punishment, but the 190 was shredded by a 2 second burst by at the most, 4 .50s. I'm not even certain that I was high enough that his top turret would have had a shot at me, so it may very well have been 2 .50s.
-
Beufighter has 4 Hispanos right?
So 16 rounds of Hispano right?
What did the LW say the average number of MG151 hits was to kill a B17.
20 hits.
What did the LW say it took of 30mm hits.
3 hits.
I know B17s dont die to 3 hits of 30mm even if they are conventrated.
How much 151 and Hisapano dous it take in AH?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
3 hits.
I know B17s dont die to 3 hits of 30mm even if they are conventrated.
A long time ago in the TA, Nath and I actually tested how many 30mm rounds it took, on average, to destroy a B-17 from about 300 yards dead six. I flew a B-17 while he parked straight off my six and carefully fired one after another of 30mm.
The result? Almost universally, the B-17 sustained catastrophic damage after the third or fourth 30mm hit. Wings came off, tails fell apart, elevators departed...
It's possible something's changed since then, either in 30mm lethality or buff toughness, but I don't recall HTC mentioning it.
-- Todd/DMF
-
Ive not had the same experience, sorry to say, but nath is better pilot than I am.
For example just last night I came in under a B17, he never saw me. I only fired the 30mm cannon in my 109.
I got 5 hits right into the center underwing root area all close to each other with flashes that covered each other. Then I got about 3 other hits spreding from the center cention and out. The B17 took no damage and no fuel leak no oil leak, no smoke, nothing.
He died on my next pass only after I put in 4 more 30mm hit flashes into his tail.
It was surprising.
-
BTW im not at all saying that the AH 30mm is not a good gun for buffs, but just that my experience doesnt match that report. Thats all.
-
I'm for removing external view in buffs.
the effect on vehicles of having no external view has been positive and beneficial.
add to that it would increase the requests for gunners in buffs. a feature that is highly under utilized in ah
[ 08-26-2001: Message edited by: Fester' ]
-
Urchin,I know a lot of strange things happen here.I have hit planes dead on my 6 between 15-20 times and I still get killed.Sometimes I think that people who live closer to the main computer get the benefit of their hits registering first and when my hits register,I am already dead.
-
Fester,I tried running buff without external view a couple of times.Jumping from gun position to gun position to check for cons is to say the least,very tedious and boring.If they set up buffs without the external view,I doubt if many people would bother with taking them up very often.Yes,it can be done,but it is more like work than having fun in the game.
-
I'm probably in the minority here but I do the opposite of ET. I only use the turret views and never use the outside views under normal conditions. I guess my idea of fun is not the same as everyone else's (surprise ;)) but any time I've tried using outside views because the guy gets out of my turret sight, I feel guilty as if I'm cheating. I actually do have a lot of fun popping from turret to turret looking for the bad guys.
-
I've actually got no problem with the external views. Which is sort of surprising considering that is what the thread is about, I guess :). I USE the external views when I'm flying a buff, and I actually use them almost exclusively when I'm not trying to fly in formation, bomb, or gun.
What I do have a problem with is the pinpoint accuracy of bombing, from however high you care to fly. The Zoom feature exacerbates this problem, and may very well be the only thing allowing people to take out targets smaller than the hangars from 25 or 30k.
Actually, what I really have a problem with is the fact that bombers can fly up to 30k and higher and be invulnerable to interception, but I think that the fact that you can still bomb just as accurately from 30k as from 10k is a big reason why people will climb up there.
-
Fester, how can one gunner hopping around the gun positions do the job of 8 guys scanning the sky?
Leave the external
SKurj