Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: humble on November 12, 2008, 07:44:39 PM
-
Just happened to film this one yesterday. It's a fight I never really had a chance in beyond a brief glimmer of a 1 timer early that would have been lottery winner type odds. For newer players or those developing dogfighting skills it might offer a bit of insight in 2 area's...
1) ACM over plane type, even an A-20 can "get around" well enough to T&B if you hit the sweet spots. All to often I run into (or worked with as a trainer way back) guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy (or gal). Learn to work the plane, dont let the plane work you...
2) Lose sight, lose the fight. Notice that even with the A-20 art work I pretty much know where the FM-2 is. If I dont pick him back up on my 1st option he's there at my second choice. This is actually essential for good ACM development. 1st you cant find the guy, then you can only watch him kill you, then you learn to counter, then to meet the move "even and finally how to "jump the route" and steal victory. Even though I got out flown here I had both an early look and then a brief glimmer of an overshoot. Slaps instinctive counter and awareness of where I was and what I was trying to do secured a W where a lesser stick might have faltered.
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/A-20/a-20vsFM2.ahf
-
Thanks for posting that. I love watching films like this. I wish more folks would post them up for those of us who are still learning to watch and analyze.
On a side note, a friend joined up as gunner would have made short work of that guy. Your turret would have been in play quite a bit if you had a gunner.
-
It's always hard for me to tell which films are actually going to help and which end up more as "look at me" clips. not that there is anything wrong the latter either...as long as there is an underlying merit. I've always marveled at the guys who seem to have the intuitive reversals, barrel rolls aggressive one timers down. I lost a fight in the SEA "furball" setup to stang last night on a shot that baffled me. He hit me from 500 or more with a P-39 37mm while in a full stall. To me thats the guy who trips driving for a last 2nd shot and tosses up an underhand half court shot as he does a face plant and gets nothing but net....then the SOB did basically the same @#$3 to me again....argghhhh. Bat always amazes me with his reversals, not just the ACM but the control and timing...literally it seems like the gun sight just magically aligns as the con flies thru...amazing.
Here is the other clip I was considering. If you look you'll see the similarity in the ACM except I have the room to fly more in the vertical. Two things to note in addition to the above is how much throttle work i'm doing. i'm not using the vertical for speed but for angles and lift vector management. This is a good example of what I mean by "jumping the route". I'm so far ahead of the hog driver I'm literally sitting waiting for the 4:05 to arrive. I end up way to far in front and have to wait on him to the point I bleed off to much E and cant finish the shot. Also notice on the run after the shot setting up that reverse to the water to force him off the other way. Now if he's not burning I probably lose that fight given the damage I took...
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/A-20/chogflambe.ahf
-
I'm curious to know why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down, though you yourself admit you didn't have much chance.
1) ACM over plane type, even an A-20 can "get around" well enough to T&B if you hit the sweet spots. All to often I run into (or worked with as a trainer way back) guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy (or gal). Learn to work the plane, dont let the plane work you...
I find your statement here too mystical to be helpful. Can you be more precise?
-
I'm curious to know why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down, though you yourself admit you didn't have much chance.
I find your statement here too mystical to be helpful. Can you be more precise?
You must be as a reed in the wind, neither resisting nor giving way.
-
You must be as a reed in the wind, grass-hoppa, neither resisting nor giving way.
:rofl
-
I think it means to be the pilot you can be. Know your plane and use its advantages and quirks against the enemy. Your thinking about the plane vs plane engagement. This quote, "why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down" proves it. He only knew he was in trouble because he knew it was "slap" in the F4F. Had it been an average player in the F4F he most likely would have won the fight..... thats why he fights a F4F with an A20. He pits his skills and ACM's against what should be .....on paper anyway.... an un-even fight.
That's what we are talking about in these threads about simmers fighting for the fun of the fight. Or teaching the "quake style" player how to play. Its not about where you sit on the scoreboard, its all about the fight. WHich do you think would be more fun, beat slap in his F4F with an A20, or beat him while BnZing in a 190D9? Slapshot is a good stick, but I wouldn't take a heck of a lot of pride in killing him with an D9, just means my aim was better than his jink on one pass. But a turning fiht in a plane that shouldn't ....on paper again even be in the fight would be something both pilots would talk about for hours afterwards.
Maybe its time you rethink the game :D
-
I'm curious to know why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down, though you yourself admit you didn't have much chance.
I find your statement here too mystical to be helpful. Can you be more precise?
i think what he means is that if you rely on the plane to kill them, it wont ever get you any better because YOU are not trying, the plane is. in cintrast, if YOU work the plane, you will get better, push the plane, someday it will pay off; maybe not today or tomorrow, maybe next week. thats how i feel.
-
I'm curious to know why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down, though you yourself admit you didn't have much chance.
I find your statement here too mystical to be helpful. Can you be more precise?
Why wouldnt I fight an FM-2 if thats what I found? From my perspective I can beat any plane in the game if I fly my best fight. Is that a realistic viewpoint...of course not...but then again I had a 5 kill SBD hop over tanktown last night (2 zekes, 2 ponies and a hurricane){of course I got discoed right on final so sometimes you can beat the otherguy but not misfortune}.
I almost got a great shot on slap early, I think I got 1 ping right around the cockpit area. Later in the fight I almost got a shot on the overshoot...I give a lot more credit to slap then I do to the FM-2 there. Now if you'd asked me why I bothered to fight slapshot 1 on 1 then I wouldnt have a good answer beyond that how you get better.
I dont see anything mystical at all about any part of my "statement"...care to elaborate on what you didnt understand? But I'll try and explain what I mean by a "sweet spot"...
While every plane has a performance envelope thats different there is much more difference at the edge then in center. low speed turning/high speed control authority/compression/stall are all significant variables. In the "mid-zone" where all planes can still pull Max G's the flow of the fight swings more on measured BFM's in response to (or to force the other guys hand) even as a fight moves toward the extreme proper ACM can provide a window of opportunity if not countered. Using the fight with slap as the example it was his textbook response to my move that denied any real shot on the overshoot. You'd be amazed at how high the % numbers are that I win on the overshoot in that scenario. Now in this case slap is managing the fight to negate my "moves" and force the fight to the edge of my flight envelope. Knowing its him I went all in early and just didnt get him on the way up. I regrouped and worked plan B and was busy rummaging in the glove box for a can of wupazz when I hit the water :O ;). Did I have a prayer...probably not but I was going to a vertical scissors rotating top type of deal hoping to catch him crossing back from his nose down shot profile. Nothing I was doing there was gamey or floppy...well strung BFM and proper manipulation of throttle and lift vector work in any plane...not just the uber ones.
-
I'm curious to know why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down, though you yourself admit you didn't have much chance.
I find your statement here too mystical to be helpful. Can you be more precise?
i'd say he probably thought it was gonna be fun, regardless of the outcome.
-
I dont see anything mystical at all about any part of my "statement"...care to elaborate on what you didnt understand?
Yes, I'll try to elaborate:
All to often I run into (or worked with as a trainer way back) guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy (or gal).
Part of me thinks "how could relying on the plane's ability be construed as a bad thing?" Getting the most out your aircraft is paramount. Perhaps you mean that these people lack a basic knowledge of ACM and just pull back on the stick hoping for something good to happen? If that's what you mean, I'm puzzled why you call that relying on the plane's ability, because if anything that's an under-utilization of the plane's ability.
Learn to work the plane, dont let the plane work you...
This is what I called mystical. It sounds like something a sports psychologist or an inspiring coach would say in a movie. "Don't let the plane work you," is so open to interpretation, whatever precise meaning you had in mind is lost in metaphor to the neutral reader.
-
i'd say he probably thought it was gonna be fun, regardless of the outcome.
I have the most fun when my opponents do their best not to let me shoot them down. ;)
-
I think it means to be the pilot you can be. Know your plane and use its advantages and quirks against the enemy. Your thinking about the plane vs plane engagement. This quote, "why you tried to fight an FM2 1vs1 in A-20, short of seeing how long it would take for him to shoot you down" proves it. He only knew he was in trouble because he knew it was "slap" in the F4F. Had it been an average player in the F4F he most likely would have won the fight..... thats why he fights a F4F with an A20. He pits his skills and ACM's against what should be .....on paper anyway.... an un-even fight.
That's what we are talking about in these threads about simmers fighting for the fun of the fight. Or teaching the "quake style" player how to play. Its not about where you sit on the scoreboard, its all about the fight. WHich do you think would be more fun, beat slap in his F4F with an A20, or beat him while BnZing in a 190D9? Slapshot is a good stick, but I wouldn't take a heck of a lot of pride in killing him with an D9, just means my aim was better than his jink on one pass. But a turning fiht in a plane that shouldn't ....on paper again even be in the fight would be something both pilots would talk about for hours afterwards.
Maybe its time you rethink the game :D
Going into the fight with the hope that the other guy will screw up just seems cheeky to me. It's big show of temerity, which is not a prized quality in a fighter pilot.
I also take offense against characterizing my criticism as representing a quake-style of play. Approaching the game as a simulation, which I do, is not consistent with intentionally getting shot down.
-
While every plane has a performance envelope thats different there is much more difference at the edge then in center. low speed turning/high speed control authority/compression/stall are all significant variables. In the "mid-zone" where all planes can still pull Max G's the flow of the fight swings more on measured BFM's in response to (or to force the other guys hand) even as a fight moves toward the extreme proper ACM can provide a window of opportunity if not countered. Using the fight with slap as the example it was his textbook response to my move that denied any real shot on the overshoot. You'd be amazed at how high the % numbers are that I win on the overshoot in that scenario. Now in this case slap is managing the fight to negate my "moves" and force the fight to the edge of my flight envelope. Knowing its him I went all in early and just didnt get him on the way up. I regrouped and worked plan B and was busy rummaging in the glove box for a can of wupazz when I hit the water :O ;). Did I have a prayer...probably not but I was going to a vertical scissors rotating top type of deal hoping to catch him crossing back from his nose down shot profile. Nothing I was doing there was gamey or floppy...well strung BFM and proper manipulation of throttle and lift vector work in any plane...not just the uber ones.
To be fair, that was some nice flying snaphook. :salute I try similar tricks in the 190F-8 when I am targeted by faster, more nimble aircraft, but frequently end up in the tower.
-
So how to you explain the success the fins had with the Brewster Buffalo and Hawk75 or the success that the Poles had with the PLZ (?) biplanes. Your making an assumption that you just got to choose your ride and the terms of engagement. While this is a flight sim its not a "war sim". So put yourself in the position of Floyd Parks who has 21 F2A-3's and just 7 F4F-3's to face the expected 100+ Japanese fighters and bombers expected to attack Midway and has to choose who will fly the available F4F's. Or how about Marion Carl (dont know who the 2nd pilot was), one of 2 survivors of the initial engagement with a flyable plane rolling with one other F4F to meet the expected 2nd attack on midway. To us rising to meet the incoming horde is a game, for him it was a reality. A-20's engaged in air to air combat fairly often, not out of choice but out of circumstance.
I dont ever make excuses or hide behing my choice of plane. I flew 3 hops vs slap in the A-20 and lost all 3...and trust me I'll be looking for 4 thru 6 if the chance arises.
-
So how to you explain the success the fins had with the Brewster Buffalo and Hawk75 or the success that the Poles had with the PLZ (?) biplanes.
Enemy mistakes. Most of us are too much in the habit of attributing successes to our own skill instead of the shortcomings of the enemy.
-
Going into the fight with the hope that the other guy will screw up just seems cheeky to me. It's big show of temerity, which is not a prized quality in a fighter pilot.
I also take offense against characterizing my criticism as representing a quake-style of play. Approaching the game as a simulation, which I do, is not consistent with intentionally getting shot down.
I'm not going in to any fight with the idea that the other guy will "screw up"...my intent is to kill him. I don't fly stupid and I don't "flop" but I fly with aggressive intent in whatever I happen to be in. IMO air combat can be summed up in a single quote "there are only to types of aircraft-fighters and targets" and I am never a target regardless of what i'm flying.
Now when you fly what are you "simming"? Do you always have a superior plane? Do you always have an exploitable advantage or number or altitude. Do you ever simulate the RAAF pilots at Port Moresby gamely clawing for alt flying up into the zekes dropping from 22k in their P-40's? Or the Finns climbing into the sun to face 190A5's in their Buffalo's? Do you ever purposely put yourself in an inferior plane facing daunting odds because 65+ years ago thousands of airmen spent their last few minutes screaming and bleeding in burning twisted metal because fate, honor and the fortunes of war sent them in harms way?
-
l
Enemy mistakes. Most of us are too much in the habit of attributing successes to our own skill instead of the shortcomings of the enemy.
That might be the most clueless comment I've ever read...
-
Now when you fly what are you "simming"? Do you always have a superior plane? Do you always have an exploitable advantage or number or altitude. Do you ever simulate the RAAF pilots at Port Moresby gamely clawing for alt flying up into the zekes dropping from 22k in their P-40's? Or the Finns climbing into the sun to face 190A5's in their Buffalo's? Do you ever purposely put yourself in an inferior plane facing daunting odds because 65+ years ago thousands of airmen spent their last few minutes screaming and bleeding in burning twisted metal because fate, honor and the fortunes of war sent them in harms way?
I've ended up in inferior positions often enough not to have to try to seek them out. The dramatically shifting dynamics of the arena battles ensure that, and then there are FSO's that sometimes put me at a disadvantage. It's no big deal.
That might be the most clueless comment I've ever read...
Unless you back that up with an argument, it's merely invective.
-
I'm not trying to be insulting or pick a fight with you. Air combat is about controlled aggression and sound thinking. While a superior plane can make a difference in the end success or failure normally falls on the skill of the pilot. An average pilot in a superior plane can "not lose a fight" but is hard pressed to actually kill a better pilot one on one. He can repeatedly strafe the other guy until he succeeds or runs out of ammo if he chooses, but normally if he engages in a true "dog fight" he will lose.
Now the uncertainty of initial positions and the disparity of plane type will effect this "equation" to a degree. As a pilot progresses in understanding he begins to learn to shape a fight and impose his will to some degree. Now in a fight between dissimilar planes a mental chess match ensues. If one plane is double negative then control of a fight can only be gained via a "false positive" where the pilot in the inferior position induces a mistake and then manages to secure and exploit the temporary advantage. Way back when as a trainer my focus was on intermediate level pilots. Normally these were guys with a fair amount of stick time who had some significant success in the MA's but invariably lost the majority of there 1 on 1's against the "good sticks". We had a pretty good system (as they go now) for matching trainers with needs. A couple of guys were great duelers (I've never been){+ we had fester (then citabria) Leviathan (then DMF) and a host of others around for that}. Others had tremendous patience and a knack for laying a good foundation etc...
Anyway invariably the 1st thing i'd do is have a guy grab his favorite ride and grab a few K on me and then try and kill me in a P-40 or such. Almost inevitably the initial results looked something like this. http://www.71sqn.co.uk/Films/P40vN1ki.ahf
When someone talks about "quake" pilots this is it. The guy was consistantly a "top 100" pilot but my left boot heel forgot more ACM then he'd learned at this point. Now this isnt his fault and he might be a great guy. but the system told him he was "good" so he only learned what the system rewarded. Now this was an MA encounter and normally i'd get the guy after a few of these and then tear him down and rebuild him with a better understanding of cause and effect in air combat.
-
Unless you back that up with an argument, it's merely invective.
What argument? Of course superior pilot training is in play. How many Finnish pilots had any combat flying prior to combat? Is the Buffalo superior to the Russian planes they faced? Did most of the Russians have both training and some combat experience. Air combat is all about aggression and forced mistakes. In almost every fight the end result is dictated by pilot error, thats what a good pilot does he forces an error and exploits it.
I get schooled all the time, just looking at wingzero and greebo they could put up a 100+ snaphook the bozo clips...its part of the process.
-
Yes, I'll try to elaborate:
All to often I run into (or worked with as a trainer way back) guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy (or gal).
Part of me thinks "how could relying on the plane's ability be construed as a bad thing?" Getting the most out your aircraft is paramount. Perhaps you mean that these people lack a basic knowledge of ACM and just pull back on the stick hoping for something good to happen? If that's what you mean, I'm puzzled why you call that relying on the plane's ability, because if anything that's an under-utilization of the plane's ability.
I got to this part and skipped the rest to reply. I almost quoted and commented on humble's quotes last night.
I'm not sure what the point that humble inteneded was. But I read "guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy" part and there is a very good point in there. What I observe very frequently are players who have been around awhile and have moderate sucess flying the "popular" planes, end up asking for help when they try to transition into one of the more average performing planes. The problem? They have been making basic and fundamental mistakes left and right but their normal rides performance masks or makes-up for their mistakes. By mistakes I mean very basic stuff like choosing maneuvers that are easily exploited by a knowledgeable opponent, or being careless with energy because they are used to a plane where E managment is of relatively little concern.
Most of the time the help they need is 95% breaking bad habits, and 5% aircraft model specifics.
So yes, it is very important to know your planes strengths and use them. But it is also important to know the best tactical options for a given situation and making the right choices. Making poor choices (out of ignorance or whatever) just because the planes performance can negate the downside of those poor choices is what I see as "relying on the plane".
-
ok......here's my take on this.
about a year or so ago, when all i could fly was the spit9 or 5, i felt uber. i dies, just as i do now, but i felt like i could kill anything in that spitfire.
then i ran in to 1duke1 in a p40. i don't remember which one it was, just thast it was a p40. he handed my arse back to me. he flew an inferior plane, in an inferior position, and just plain out flew me.
the reason i believe that happened, is because he actually knew how to maneuver that plane. he didn't depend on the aircraft do cover his mistakes. on the other hand, i think i was(and at times still do) depend on the "easy mode" aircraft to cover my mistakes.
i'm discovering this flying some of the american rides. it's adding a new challenge to the game for me, and is oprobably looonnngggg overdue. i should';ve gotten out of the "easy mode" planes long ago.
i also learned to NEVER under-estimate anything. i go into all fights assuming that their gonna make me work for my kill. unfortunatly, it still ends up the other way 'round more often than not. :rofl
so the point i took from the original post was....know your aircraft. know what it does well, and when. know how to make it do what you need it to. fly your fight, and you very well might come out on top.
<<S>>
-
My intent anytime I post a clip here is to provide something that might be helpful to those with an interest in ACM at an intermediate level vs other aspects of game play. I've posted clips using a variety of planes but have settled on the A-20 primarily since its not a "fighter" but isn't as nimble as an SBD or similiar plane. Angles clips in a spitty or E fighting in a pony dont really highlight the ACM as much IMO.
For the most part any ACM you can do in an A-20 can be done with any fighter in the game...
"Most of the time the help they need is 95% breaking bad habits, and 5% aircraft model specifics."
Most ACM is somewhat universal, once you get an idea of what is "right" then you can delve further into what works best for a specific plane in general and then vs a specific opponent. I'm still learning the A-20 and am always looking to push its envelope further. Anytime I get a chance to fly vs a really good stick like slap i'll take advantage of the chance to polish my game a bit. Now if I cant be at all competitive then i'll up a different ride (probably a tempest vs slap:)). But if you look at the 24-26 second mark you'll see I get awful close to a solid shot. If I wasn't so heavy gas wise I might have pulled it off...if you got to the 45 sec to 115 segment there is a lot of good that I just couldnt quite get right. Now a lot of that is obviously slap, but my tempo and throttle work isnt quite up to snuff and i'm out of sync a bit vs whats in my mind.
So in my mind i'm still working on the "95%" here polishing my understanding of "good" ACM vs a quality adversary.
-
You must be as a reed in the wind, neither resisting nor giving way.
You have learned the lesson very well Grasshopper. :) ..Sorry for the OT..just had to do it . :aok
-
My intent anytime I post a clip here is to provide something that might be helpful to those with an interest in ACM at an intermediate level vs other aspects of game play. I've posted clips using a variety of planes but have settled on the A-20 primarily since its not a "fighter" but isn't as nimble as an SBD or similiar plane. Angles clips in a spitty or E fighting in a pony dont really highlight the ACM as much IMO.
and most...if not all of us appreciate when guys like you, murdr, yanks, akak, and the new dude, skytiger, among others post these films. it really does help us learn.
was wondering though......has anyone ever posted actual MA films in which they were commenting on what they were doing, and why? during the fight? kinda like a commentary?
<<S>>
-
I got to this part and skipped the rest to reply. I almost quoted and commented on humble's quotes last night.
I'm not sure what the point that humble inteneded was. But I read "guys who seem to rely totally on the planes ability to outwork the other guy" part and there is a very good point in there. What I observe very frequently are players who have been around awhile and have moderate sucess flying the "popular" planes, end up asking for help when they try to transition into one of the more average performing planes. The problem? They have been making basic and fundamental mistakes left and right but their normal rides performance masks or makes-up for their mistakes. By mistakes I mean very basic stuff like choosing maneuvers that are easily exploited by a knowledgeable opponent, or being careless with energy because they are used to a plane where E managment is of relatively little concern.
Most of the time the help they need is 95% breaking bad habits, and 5% aircraft model specifics.
So yes, it is very important to know your planes strengths and use them. But it is also important to know the best tactical options for a given situation and making the right choices. Making poor choices (out of ignorance or whatever) just because the planes performance can negate the downside of those poor choices is what I see as "relying on the plane".
This is the kind of elucidation I needed, and I like this interpretation of "relying on the plane's ability." What really threw me off and prevented me from reaching this version on my own is that it makes "relying on the plane's ability" relative to what the other guy is flying. The Spit16 pilot can rely on his plane's ability vs a lot of the aircraft he can run down and outmaneuver. He can make mistakes and still pull out a victory. However, I can also rely on my plane's ability if I'm in a plane the Spit16 outclasses, e.g. the 109G-6, when I'm flying it against a P-40.
-
From my perspective, think Humbles saying that whilst the plane (and its characteristics) may change, ACM doesnt - you might have to utilies various sequences of moves in different ways, but once you've got a good knowledge of ACM, you can work past the planes disadvantages etc.
(makes mental note, get some more trainer time)
On a side note, thank you to all the trainers for their time etc
<S>
Wurzel
-
and most...if not all of us appreciate when guys like you, murdr, yanks, akak, and the new dude, skytiger, among others post these films. it really does help us learn.
was wondering though......has anyone ever posted actual MA films in which they were commenting on what they were doing, and why? during the fight? kinda like a commentary?
<<S>>
anytime anyone asks I'll to an MA hop or two with them in whatever ride they want. I had clips on various planes but most of them are gone. This one is still up on the web and is an MA flight with a guy I had spent some time working with 1 on 1 awhile back...http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/MAhop.ahf
-
was wondering though......has anyone ever posted actual MA films in which they were commenting on what they were doing, and why? during the fight? kinda like a commentary?
<<S>>
Look for Agent360's films. He does some where he narrates what he is doing during the fight. Very informative, and I find them to be a great learning tool.
-
beat slap in his F4F with an A20, or beat him while BnZing in a 190D9?
Shooting a decent flyer in something as maneuverable as a Wildcat with a D9 is pretty challenging too.
EDIT: Saying one would take "No pride" in shooting down an F4F ace 1v1 in a D9 is actually quite silly. The D9 may enjoy a massive advantage in engine power, but it also has a massive disadvantage in turning ability. I imagine most would be more likely to get the kill Wildcat vs. Wildcat than to actually put lead on him with the Dora.
Insert "Zero" where instead of D9 and the phrase would make more sense, since the Zero DOES hold most of the cards over a Wildcat.
Not like Snaphook's A-20 vs. a Hog or something, he himself pointed out that flying it is instructive because it doesn't hold an advantage over much in either E OR angles tactics.
-
. Its or beat him while BnZing in a 190D9? Slapshot is a good stick, but I wouldn't take a heck of a lot of pride in killing him with an D9,
My money would be on Slappy FTW.
-
My money would be on Slappy FTW.
:rolleyes:
-
Look for Agent360's films. He does some where he narrates what he is doing during the fight. Very informative, and I find them to be a great learning tool.
I second this, Agent360's films are great. I really wish there were more folks willing to post up their films.
-
I second this, Agent360's films are great. I really wish there were more folks willing to post up their films.
i would, but mine are generally on the order of merge-turn-pingping bang- tower :D
oo....and i have a bad tendency to hit the PTT button when i;m yelling at myself for doing something stupid. :rofl
-
shhh the internet pilots are speaking acm!!
-
Shooting a decent flyer in something as maneuverable as a Wildcat with a D9 is pretty challenging too.
EDIT: Saying one would take "No pride" in shooting down an F4F ace 1v1 in a D9 is actually quite silly. The D9 may enjoy a massive advantage in engine power, but it also has a massive disadvantage in turning ability. I imagine most would be more likely to get the kill Wildcat vs. Wildcat than to actually put lead on him with the Dora.
Insert "Zero" where instead of D9 and the phrase would make more sense, since the Zero DOES hold most of the cards over a Wildcat.
Not like Snaphook's A-20 vs. a Hog or something, he himself pointed out that flying it is instructive because it doesn't hold an advantage over much in either E OR angles tactics.
BnZ has a certain amount of luck. I pick my angle, anticipate which way slap is going to break, take my shot. If Slap is a bit off on his timing, or I get lucky and and pic the right spot and poof he's down. Am I proud of that kill, not really, I got lucky, or Slap was unlucky because he picked the wrong move. But if we fought it all the way to the deck twisting and turning picking pieces of of each other until one of us dies. Would I be proud of that kill heck ya !!
I've killed humble a number of times, most I wasn't to proud of, I played it safe and picked him apart from a distance while he kill many others. One fight we were both in hogs and we fought from 8k to the deck. I knew I was in trouble, and finally got picked by a nik I couldn't avoid due to all the parts humble knocked off. I lost, but that fight was over a year ago and it still gets my heart pumping to think about it.
Those are the kills to be proud of, those are the fights that keep me playing this game. Vulchin, pickin, ganging, no skill kills, but that is what most of the player go for because they are the easiest, takes the least amount of time to learn. Quakers learn the tricks and short cuts, simmers learn something new in each fight.
-
BnZ has a certain amount of luck. I pick my angle, anticipate which way slap is going to break, take my shot. If Slap is a bit off on his timing, or I get lucky and and pic the right spot and poof he's down. Am I proud of that kill, not really, I got lucky, or Slap was unlucky because he picked the wrong move. But if we fought it all the way to the deck twisting and turning picking pieces of of each other until one of us dies.
Or the BnZ's guy's aim is abit off, the TnB guys is on, and he kills his opponent with a difficult snapshot on the overshoot. Its tough shooting for either man.
I dunno, I just find the "what to do" alot more intuitive and straight forward when my plane can more or less turn at least as well as the opponents than when it is not the case. I don't find getting kills against awake opponents in a poor-turning late-war energy fighter nearly as "easy-mode" as some claim it is.
One of my squaddies favors the Spit9, and is pretty good in it. When we go SpitVSpit, it is 50/50. I don't think I've EVER shot him down Fw-190 v. Spit.
-
Or the BnZ's guy's aim is abit off, the TnB guys is on, and he kills his opponent with a difficult snapshot on the overshoot. Its tough shooting for either man.
I dunno, I just find the "what to do" alot more intuitive and straight forward when my plane can more or less turn at least as well as the opponents than when it is not the case. I don't find getting kills against awake opponents in a poor-turning late-war energy fighter nearly as "easy-mode" as some claim it is.
One of my squaddies favors the Spit9, and is pretty good in it. When we go SpitVSpit, it is 50/50. I don't think I've EVER shot him down Fw-190 v. Spit.
Ya sure, there are a million ways the fight "could" go, but I'm just talking about this instance. A BnZ pass isn't that big a deal. Out of the 46 kills I had in a pony last month most where BnZ passes and I'll darned if I can remember more than a couple of them. On the other hand I can remember hard fought battles from years ago.
Instinctively you may be doing ACMs you "think" are good, but on the other hand a good stick might be able to exploit a weak point in your ACMs because your use to the "spit" covering you for a sloppy maneuver.
-
There are classes of aircraft that are superlative in a multi-vs-multi environment, but which are poor 1vs1. The 190D-9 is one of those. Although it's superior to the Spitfire9 in general, 1vs1 isn't interesting.
-
Ya sure, there are a million ways the fight "could" go, but I'm just talking about this instance. A BnZ pass isn't that big a deal. Out of the 46 kills I had in a pony last month most where BnZ passes and I'll darned if I can remember more than a couple of them. On the other hand I can remember hard fought battles from years ago.
Instinctively you may be doing ACMs you "think" are good, but on the other hand a good stick might be able to exploit a weak point in your ACMs because your use to the "spit" covering you for a sloppy maneuver.
Nah, doesn't really matter in this case, it can be P-47s vrs. P-47s and it is still basically the same. It seems to me alot easier when the plane turns well enough relative to the opposition that you can fly to "saddle up".
-
Nah, doesn't really matter in this case, it can be P-47s vrs. P-47s and it is still basically the same. It seems to me alot easier when the plane turns well enough relative to the opposition that you can fly to "saddle up".
Thats what we are talking about, why go for "easy"? Whats the fun in always going for the easy way, only fighting when its safe? What's the point? Step out side the box, take up an A20 and turn fight spits with it. Think of the trill if you survive? ...get a kill? ... maybe two or more to land with your name in lights! More fun than going strait up with a like plane.
-
Thats what we are talking about, why go for "easy"? Whats the fun in always going for the easy way, only fighting when its safe? What's the point? Step out side the box, take up an A20 and turn fight spits with it. Think of the trill if you survive? ...get a kill? ... maybe two or more to land with your name in lights! More fun than going strait up with a like plane.
Well, I'm glad you know what you enjoy. I think it's boring when my opponents make themselves easy kills by doing the opposite of what their aircraft was designed for. In the same way, I want to challenge my opponents as much as possible, even when I'm in a 109G-6 in the main arena. That is what is fun to me. ;)
-
Thats what we are talking about, why go for "easy"? Whats the fun in always going for the easy way, only fighting when its safe? What's the point? Step out side the box, take up an A20 and turn fight spits with it. Think of the trill if you survive? ...get a kill? ... maybe two or more to land with your name in lights! More fun than going strait up with a like plane.
You are getting away from my point here. You implied that killing (insert good stick here) while he was in a F4F would be shamefully easy in a D9 or (Insert high-powered poor turning E fighter) but you would garner alot more bragging rights by hauling back on the stick in a t'n'b with him in a similar-turning aircraft.
I disagree. I think if anything a top speed/horsepower advantage takes more experience and gunnery skills to convert into a kill than a nimbleness advantage in a 1v1. That is all I mean.
-
You are getting away from my point here. You implied that killing (insert good stick here) while he was in a F4F would be shamefully easy in a D9 or (Insert high-powered poor turning E fighter) but you would garner alot more bragging rights by hauling back on the stick in a t'n'b with him in a similar-turning aircraft.
I disagree. I think if anything a top speed/horsepower advantage takes more experience and gunnery skills to convert into a kill than a nimbleness advantage in a 1v1. That is all I mean.
Personally, I fly the Ki84 most of the time and I really feel good about life when I knock a Spit16/LA7/N1K/etc out of the sky. I've enjoyed the game quite a bit more since I stopped flying Spits and N1Ks and switched to mostly the KI84. My problem is that I need a 30 ENY alternative plane to fly when ENY caps out. I have yet to find a 30+ ENY plane that feels right to me.
-
Personally, I fly the Ki84 most of the time and I really feel good about life when I knock a Spit16/LA7/N1K/etc out of the sky. I've enjoyed the game quite a bit more since I stopped flying Spits and N1Ks and switched to mostly the KI84.
Yup, I saw your ki84 yesterday.
-
don't trust steve hes the p51 on yah 6 :aok
-
There are classes of aircraft that are superlative in a multi-vs-multi environment, but which are poor 1vs1. The 190D-9 is one of those. Although it's superior to the Spitfire9 in general, 1vs1 isn't interesting.
You are getting away from my point here. You implied that killing (insert good stick here) while he was in a F4F would be shamefully easy in a D9 or (Insert high-powered poor turning E fighter) but you would garner alot more bragging rights by hauling back on the stick in a t'n'b with him in a similar-turning aircraft.
I disagree. I think if anything a top speed/horsepower advantage takes more experience and gunnery skills to convert into a kill than a nimbleness advantage in a 1v1. That is all I mean.
You guys are missing the point, your focusing too much on plane types! ....huh much like the heading of this thread :D
All I'm saying is if your in a "hotrod" against one of the old "antiques", YOUR suppose to win, so the challenge and yes the thrill level is lower. But if your in the old "antique" and you whoop up on the "hotrod" its a fight your not suppose to win, but now the challenge and thrill levels increase because of that. You use your knowledge of ACM and skill to to get a win out of a bad situation. Thats what we are talking about, not this plane vs that plane, not even "that plane I'm comfortable in".
-
Personally, I fly the Ki84 most of the time and I really feel good about life when I knock a Spit16/LA7/N1K/etc out of the sky. I've enjoyed the game quite a bit more since I stopped flying Spits and N1Ks and switched to mostly the KI84. My problem is that I need a 30 ENY alternative plane to fly when ENY caps out. I have yet to find a 30+ ENY plane that feels right to me.
Welcome to the Ki-84 club. You will be very happy you joined. Your collectible key chain is in the mail with your official club membership certificate.
Be prepared chew up N1Ks and Spixtweens while making it look easy. Laugh as the P-51 does the only thing it can against a Ki-84 and point it's nose straight for the deck, running with it's tail between it's legs.
The Ki-84 is IMHO the most underated plane in the entire LW set. Oh, and you can carry 2 x 250kg bombs if your into that kind of thing.
:aok
-
BnZ has a certain amount of luck. I pick my angle, anticipate which way slap is going to break, take my shot. If Slap is a bit off on his timing, or I get lucky and and pic the right spot and poof he's down. Am I proud of that kill, not really, I got lucky, or Slap was unlucky because he picked the wrong move. But if we fought it all the way to the deck twisting and turning picking pieces of of each other until one of us dies. Would I be proud of that kill heck ya !!
I've killed humble a number of times, most I wasn't to proud of, I played it safe and picked him apart from a distance while he kill many others. One fight we were both in hogs and we fought from 8k to the deck. I knew I was in trouble, and finally got picked by a nik I couldn't avoid due to all the parts humble knocked off. I lost, but that fight was over a year ago and it still gets my heart pumping to think about it.
Those are the kills to be proud of, those are the fights that keep me playing this game. Vulchin, pickin, ganging, no skill kills, but that is what most of the player go for because they are the easiest, takes the least amount of time to learn. Quakers learn the tricks and short cuts, simmers learn something new in each fight.
Joe this is right on.
There are those that get it, and there are those that don't. You just can't explain it to the ones that don't. They don't understand about the good fight. All they care about is their name in lights to validate their uber skills in the game. Never mind that their validation comes from picks and vulches, in their minds it makes them the big men of the game.
-
You guys are missing the point, your focusing too much on plane types! ....huh much like the heading of this thread :D
All I'm saying is if your in a "hotrod" against one of the old "antiques", YOUR suppose to win, so the challenge and yes the thrill level is lower. But if your in the old "antique" and you whoop up on the "hotrod" its a fight your not suppose to win, but now the challenge and thrill levels increase because of that. You use your knowledge of ACM and skill to to get a win out of a bad situation. Thats what we are talking about, not this plane vs that plane, not even "that plane I'm comfortable in".
No, you're missing the point. Let me put in another way: 1vs1, it's frequently easier to kill an antique with another antique than with a hotrod. It's more of a challenge to kill a Spit9 with a 190D9 1vs1 than viceversa. Even more strange, it's easier to kill a Spixteen with a 109F-4 than with a 190D-9.
Stop this "ACM conquers all" nonesense. What sort of acm does a 190D-9 use to beat a Spit9 in a 1vs1 fight, short of the Spit9 pilot making a big mistake? You don't want to talk about aircraft because talking about aircraft forces specifics, and when we get to specifics your position doesn't hold up. Using ACM to get a win out of a bad situation always supposes that the opponent screws up. It's great when it happens, but foolish to rely on it.
-
You guys are missing the point, your focusing too much on plane types! ....huh much like the heading of this thread :D
You keep trying to change the subject on me. Hint, I'm not the guy embroiled in a broad philosophical discussion with Snaphook. I was addressing ONE particular error, which you repeat right here:
All I'm saying is if your in a "hotrod" against one of the old "antiques", YOUR suppose to win, so the challenge and yes the thrill level is lower. But if your in the old "antique" and you whoop up on the "hotrod" its a fight your not suppose to win, but now the challenge and thrill levels increase because of that. You use your knowledge of ACM and skill to to get a win out of a bad situation.
Suddenly it is about plane types again...
I repeat, 1v1 in actual gameplay, the late-war "hotrod" is not necessarily superior to the theoretically inferior earlier kite. If the guy in the late war brick bounces the guy in early war kite, both being competent, he must have good acm and good gunnery to have much of a prayer of converting his advantage to a kill, or the fellow in the more maneuverable aircraft will just keep dodging his way to a stalemate. And if the guy in the energy fighter gets bounced at low speed by the early war fighter, he will have to do some very fancy flying to even get away, much less get the kill. So yeah, a plane like the Dora is not really "easy mode" compared to something like the Hurricane IIC, no matter what their model-year is.
-
" Using ACM to get a win out of a bad situation always supposes that the opponent screws up. It's great when it happens, but foolish to rely on it."
Your entirely missing the point of ACM which is to either force or entice a mistake. Air combat does not assume that you have a superior plane or a superior position. It is not "foolish" it is simply the skill required to succeed against the odds vs simply only engaging from a position of superiority.
-
BnZ I always welcome the chess match. In the end the guy flying the "buzz bomb" either has to commit to more of an energy fight or accept low probability shots or give up. I don't ever expect the other guy to fly "my fight" and recognize that I need to give him an attractive target to entice a shot window.
-
BnZ I always welcome the chess match. In the end the guy flying the "buzz bomb" either has to commit to more of an energy fight or accept low probability shots or give up. I don't ever expect the other guy to fly "my fight" and recognize that I need to give him an attractive target to entice a shot window.
Correct.
I've done Dora vs. Spit. Lately I've had the occasion to do abit of F4F vs. Spit. I know which one is easier. The advantage of the Dora is being able to say "f-- it!" and RTB when they bring nine Spits against you in the MA. Otherwise killing a single with the Wildcat is usually easier unless they run.
-
Your entirely missing the point of ACM which is to either force or entice a mistake.
I disagree that the point of ACM is to cause the opponent to make a mistake. The point of ACM is to make the right maneuver at the right time to maximize the probability of a kill. When you're at the point where your best chance is a swindle, you've already lost the ACM game, because a correct move on the part of your opponent will always defeat the swindle. In that way, there's no such thing as "forcing a mistake." They can be induced with clever ruses, but the responsibility for mistakes always lies with the one who makes it.
-
There has never been a perfectly flown fight vs a quality opponent in either real life or on a sim. Air combat is at its core a game of mistakes.
-
Here's how I look at the issue...
Take two identically skilled pilots and put them into identical aircraft... If a fight starts at precisely equal E states, it should be a never ending draw. But seriously, how realistic is that entire scenario?
There are always inequalities. Different aircraft abilities... Different Energy states... Different skill levels...
I believe that a highly skilled pilot can be victorious in an inferior plane through the superior use of ACMs. This of course implies that he will outfly his opponent who is in a superior aircraft.
Which I think is exactly what Humble is trying to communicate.... Through superior application of Air Combat Manuevers, a skilled pilot can defeat a pilot in a better aircraft. So we should worry less about what we are flying, and concern ourselves more with how we are flying. By doing so, we can be victorious in situations that some people would believe were impossible for us.
-
There has never been a perfectly flown fight vs a quality opponent in either real life or on a sim. Air combat is at its core a game of mistakes.
It's funny that air combat is often compared to chess, but in a way it's an accurate metaphor. ACM is a general theory that espouses certain principles that manifest themselves in specific maneuvers. Other things being equal, the pilot who has greater mastery of ACM will win. Good chess play is also a general theory that espouses principals which have concrete application in certain circumstances. Just as their has never been a perfectly flown example of air combat, no human has ever played a perfect game of chess. However, one of the quickest ways to find yourself checkmated by a good chess player is to hope that he will make mistakes, and to make moves that rely on an inferior response. There are some fun examples of master chess players being swindled when their opponent is on the ropes, but they are the exception rather than the rule. The best way to advance in both air combat and chess is to make the move that anticipates the best possible response from the opponent. Perfection cannot be achieved, but perfection is the target at which we aim.
-
Just defining what a "mistake" is is a huge portion of the game. As murdr pointed out 95% of his job is actually correcting misconceptions regarding what is correct ACM. How do you learn correct ACM and what do you do when you meet a tempest or pony in your dora that has E and alt on you? Most good spit IX drivers dont fear a high dora because the pilot is usually lacking in basic skills.
If you look at the 2 SBD clips you'll see both the seafire and the hurricane offer me their tail at one point. The hurricane did it correctly with proper regard to the situation while the seafire tried it at the wrong time (not that it mattered in the end). My ACM vs the hurricane was poor. now what part of this was wrong in general and waht was plane specific. IMO at this point it was pretty much plane specific but i'll review my understanding of general principles as well and then contemplate how I better approach a fight with a plane that handles better at high AoA is more docile at unusual attitude and has superior control authority by a wide margin in a low speed nose up configuration.
All of what I learn is applicable in general, specific to the hurricane in any plane and finally in my quest to leanr how to beat a hurricane even up in an SBD (which i'm 90% confidant I can do)...
-
Hmmm if we give each chess player a .45 and let the winner shoot the loser I wonder how much more common those "swindles" will be.
-
Hmmm if we give each chess player a .45 and let the winner shoot the loser I wonder how much more common those "swindles" will be.
:rofl I don't think anyone would play!
-
I think there is an unfortunate tendency is this game right now to define only some variation of angles fighting as "good fighting"
I also think I might understand what Anax trying to get well enough to illustrate through film.
Okay, on this film, after clearing a guy's six, I avoid a pass by a N1K and flame it.
http://www.mediafire.com/?mmpdfn4aayl (http://www.mediafire.com/?mmpdfn4aayl)
On this film, I run down a P-51 and shoot it.
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?jntergzg359 (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?jntergzg359)
Now, by the standards some of you guys are espousing, I do much better ACM by setting the N1K on fire than I do in the 190 film, because I start from a disadvantage in a supposedly un-uber "early" fighter. I disagree. The fact that I get the N1K is purely a matter of a chain of mistakes on his part and a little luck on mine. He comes in a with excessive closure. I give him a bad angle. He does not have the patience or discipline to go vertical and set up another shot. He does not succeed with the shot against the bad angle. He does not immediately switch to the vertical, but chases a bad solution. The guns on a 110 are enough to make hay on the least little fleeting snapshot that I am lucky enough to hit. Note that if I had been in the supposedly more "uber" LW P-51/D9/P-47 with less low-speed maneuverability and lesser guns I would actually have had alot more trouble making the N1K pay.
Now look at the 190D film. I found this kill much more satisfying because it was based strictly on using good energy management to overcome a more maneuverable fighter 1v1, not on gross mistakes by my opponent, luck or insane gunnery on my part. Even though this was definitely an "off" gunnery day for me, I fly myself to easy gun solutions to get the kill, never loose control of the encounter or find myself in real danger from the opposition. To me this was based much more on real ACM and strategy rather than one part trickery and one part luck. Like I say, more satisfying.
And comparing this P-51 kill to the P-51 kill on the first film, I can only say that I feel the supposedly "uber" late war Mustang would have stood a much better chance against another Mustang or a D9 closing in on its six than it did against the 110's turning and guns.
-
All I'll say about the first is you forced the NIK into his bad position with your ACM, due to him being a newb he tried to force a bad situation and it cost him. The pony "fight" in the first film can't be used in any comparison. You picked a target fixated newb, nothing more. The guy had trouble closing for a shot. Of course what can you expect from furball lake in the DA The guy never knew you where there.
The second film I'd consider a more "like plane" engagement. The planes are very similar. Yes you maintained your "E better to close and get a good shot. I wonder tho, watching the film from the ponies seat makes me think that he may have been flying with some damage. Even when hes running flat out he's working his nose all over the place. Looks to me like he might have been missing a wing tip tho the film doesn't show it. He is yawing to the left quite a bit.
Neither fight shows what we are talking about. First film is clubing baby seals, and second looks to be chasing down a wounded pup.
-
I mentioned the first kill on that film was merely clearing a guy's six. I left that part in the film so that I might segue into my bit about how the late war "uber-fighter" is not nessecarily so uber if you have the speed to catch it in an "antique".
P-51 in the second film is missing no parts in the outset. These films will show you missing parts. If you go into the other pilot's view and he has a PW, it will show you. This P-51 pilot had neither. Nor does a P-51 fly so fast so long or manage break turns in both directions below 300 mph without flipping while missing a wingtip. I actually chased that thing for about 4 minutes that I cut out.
Funny, Batfink has posted about a million films with overshoot kills in his Mossie like the one in my 110 film. Of course, there are guys telling him that what he does is based at least partially on the mistakes of the other pilot too, which is true to an extent, but I doubt you are in those threads being dismissive and saying "mere baby seal clubbing." Same principles, same attack, same setup, same shot...after all, I learned it by watching those Bat films. Judge things by the "brand name" much?
Trying to come up with some excuse to discredit these bits of my flying because you disagree with me philosophically about the game...not good or becoming to you, all I gotta say for that.
-
I'm sorry I didn't stroke your ego here, but clubbing baby seals is just that clubbing baby seals. How can you possibly use that information to support a point here? First the guy you "picked" was lead strait to your guns. All he knows of SA is that they are 2 letters in the alphabet. As for the NIK, same thing, over speed on his run cuts out a lot of options. His only thought was to "pick" you....and it almost worked as you were fixated on the pony. Had your aim been a bit worst so it took you a second longer you would have been just as dead. All you proved here is with a big club (cannons of a 110) you can kill baby seals. Had someone with average skills been in the NIK or the pony things may have come out a bit different.
As for the second film, I wasn't sure if plane damage was show on other planes in the films. While watching the film it just looks like chalenges plane is yawing a lot to the left while trying to run strait. He has been around awhile and knows the pony pretty well so I thought he would have had a much steadier hand while trying to extend. To you it was a "memorable kill", to me it was a chase down in like planes. Chalenge didn't fight you, it looks like he was just trying to get away either due to damage, no ammo, or saving his score. Either way it wasn't much of a fight.
We are talking about using your ACM to get the kill, not by using the strengths of your plane. In both of these films you use strengths. Cannons on newbs in the first, and speed and cannons on someone who didn't want to fight in the second.
-
---snip--
J
All of what I learn is applicable in general, specific to the hurricane in any plane and finally in my quest to leanr how to beat a hurricane even up in an SBD (which i'm 90% confidant I can do)...
The fact that you admit to "90% confidant" is gonna bite you in the butt. :) The missing 10% needs to be incorporated into your "positive thinking processes". Your either "in the zone" or your not. Anyone that enters a situation with the slightest doubt is pretty much defeated before he/she begins...IMMHO. YMMV....works for me...etc, etc. :)
-
While watching the film it just looks like chalenges plane is yawing a lot to the left while trying to run strait. He has been around awhile and knows the pony pretty well so I thought he would have had a much steadier hand while trying to extend.
AH film does a very poor job of representing the actual movements of other aircraft. I've watched myself in other people's films and it looks like my aircraft is porpoising all over the place, when in fact it was smooth flight. What you can see in BnZ's film is that Challenge's P51 accelerates and reaches 300mph+ speeds just fine like a normal P-51 should. I see nothing suspect there.
I also saw good ACM in the P-51 film: lag rolls and high yo-yos are the order of the day to overcome a more maneuverable bandit. The reason why you don't see the 51 go offensive is because BnZ doesn't make a mistake. Challenge likely realized this 190 pilot was going to be patient and keep working his advantage for as long as necessary to bring him down, and therefore decided to look for help.
Fugitive, I think you're being overly negative here. You keep going on and on about baby seals, but the whole point was that BnZ found the P-51 kill more satisfying because it was a more challenging kill. The kill against the N1K was a merely the exploitation of a big fat mistake, which is exactly the kind of stuff that was praised early on in this thread.
-
Chalenge is a good stick and I got no indication he had any problem at the start beyond poor circumstance (unless he had a PW). However he flew that particular flight very poorly and to the weakness of the pony. I'd guess he's got a lot more experience E fighting the pony from a position of either advantage or with some air under his wings. Had BnZ faced a more seasoned pony driver he's have had a much harder time. As for B&Z's flying it was decent but not great. It was safe & secure but would have had little chance of success vs a good pony driver. At no time did he actually force an error...
That is not ment to be disparaging to the fight flown. It efficient and successful and different responses from the pony might well have brought about different responses. My observation is that the fight went on to long and left B&Z exposed to intervention. The other aspect is that the 190 is not a plane designed to be anything other then a scavenger. This is not really an "ACM" fight but an opportunity fight where success was dictated by circumstance.
Here would be my SBD equivalent
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/SBD%20109%20bounce.ahf
I expect to win a fight from a position of advantage. I also don't want the fight to linger or to give my opponent the chance to gain an even footing or get outside help.
-
AH film does a very poor job of representing the actual movements of other aircraft. I've watched myself in other people's films and it looks like my aircraft is porpoising all over the place, when in fact it was smooth flight. What you can see in BnZ's film is that Challenge's P51 accelerates and reaches 300mph+ speeds just fine like a normal P-51 should. I see nothing suspect there.
I also saw good ACM in the P-51 film: lag rolls and high yo-yos are the order of the day to overcome a more maneuverable bandit. The reason why you don't see the 51 go offensive is because BnZ doesn't make a mistake. Challenge likely realized this 190 pilot was going to be patient and keep working his advantage for as long as necessary to bring him down, and therefore decided to look for help.
Fugitive, I think you're being overly negative here. You keep going on and on about baby seals, but the whole point was that BnZ found the P-51 kill more satisfying because it was a more challenging kill. The kill against the N1K was a merely the exploitation of a big fat mistake, which is exactly the kind of stuff that was praised early on in this thread.
All the films and points are what "should" happen, or what one "should" do. Stepping out side the box or using ACM to force a mistake is what we are talking about. Had I been in the pony in either film the fights would have gone fare different. I'm not saying I would have won, but a skilled stick would have with ease. In the first film my SA would have been better and I would have broken off the first con and done a slow climbing extend. This would have either split the two cons (one run for home or look for an easier target), or gotten both in the same view and plane so they would have been more manageable. And the fight would have been on.
In the second, I wouldn't have run. No other cons in the area I would have fought. I'd have slowed a bit to bring the target in closer and go for an over shoot move much like BnZ did against the NIK in the first film. Had he pushed for the shot hard enough I would have had a shot as he blew by. I would continue this untill he either ran to reset his "E", or one of us was in the tower. Sure BnZ enjoyed the fight in the second film, but had he had to fight harder, push his plane into that area where its NOT so comfortable Wouldn't the fight have been more memorable... more fun.... more exciting? That's what this game is about, not who has the best score, who has the most kills and so on.
As a matter of fact I think they should add a new scoring category. "Top ten fights of the month". No cherry picks, no vulches, no gang fights. Just knock down drag out hard fought fights.
-
Never mind that their validation comes from picks and vulches, in their minds it makes them the big men of the game.
Everyone in the game picks... including you. It never fails to amuse me when people start crying about "pickers". In a furball of 10v10, there isn't 10 1v1's all going on in the same area. News flash, some guy that turns his plane in circles is not necessarily any more skilled than some guy who e fights.
-
I think there is an unfortunate tendency is this game right now to define only some variation of angles fighting as "good fighting"
Quoted for truth.
-
I don't mean to imply that at all. E fighting (both + & -) is the true expression of ACM. In the game we play we take a historical plane and place it in artificial situations (outside of FSO and scenario's). A plane with superior performance and superior positioning is normally expected to win...and IMO so is the inferior plane with superior position. So the real question is what happens when two planes meet under relatively even conditions or ones that allow enough time for creativity. I dont ever truly angle fight an A-20...just doesnt have it in her. I do work for neg E to pos E transitions and back all the time which may look like "angles" but its not. I'm relying on a manufactured discrepancy in E state.
My issue with any clip that doesn't start from a neutral or inferior position is that it normally shows the exploitation of initial advantage...nothing more.
-
A plane with superior performance and superior positioning is normally expected to win...and IMO so is the inferior plane with superior position.
Not necessarily. It frequently happens that if both pilots fly correctly, the most the attacker ends up with is a stalemate in the form of a tail-chase back to his own territory. E.g. a superior plane like a 190D-9 attacks a Spitfire IX.
Of course, everything is different if it's a 2vs2 fight.
-
Not necessarily. It frequently happens that if both pilots fly correctly, the most the attacker ends up with is a stalemate in the form of a tail-chase back to his own territory. E.g. a superior plane like a 190D-9 attacks a Spitfire IX.
Of course, everything is different if it's a 2vs2 fight.
No...
If I have a position of superiority I will in fact kill you a vast majority of the time. There is not a single thing the inferior pilot can do to prevent me from killing him unless he forces an error or survives my attack. I lost a fight in an A-20 vs a 110 (not sure if I have the film or not). Now this the 1st time I recall ever losing a 1 on 1 to a 110 in an A-20 in the MA that wasnt a pure bounce type situation. I took out 1/2 his cannon and his tail gunner but missed the pilot somehow and was left hung out...so it happens.
Now I do not fly "safe"...if i have a positional advantage i'm going to lock on in 30 seconds or less almost all the time. I do not B&Z. Now if my superiority is marginal I might be more passive or not...but the stronger my position the more abrupt my attack.
-
There is not a single thing the inferior pilot can do to prevent me from killing him unless he forces an error or survives my attack.
There ya go.
The thing is, you cannot "lock on" in a Fw 190. It's AoA limitations prevent that, unless you're locking onto another 190. ;) The idea of forcing an altitude advantage on a Spit9 with a 190D so that you can just position on his 6 and blast him away is not realistic. We're both knights. Next time we're both on we can try it in the DA or TA if you like.
-
I can kill a spitty in a 190 with no real problems beyond my normal gunnery issues. However my real issue with the 190 is that its an inferior plane (outside of the A5) so its boring to fly. You can't force a plane beyond its actual FM so the 190 is a very simple rinse and repeat type of ride. This limits aggression to a relatively small set of vertical manipulations and cutbacks and/or reversals. Basically its simply a slasher with little room for artistry. Easy to fly, easy to kill with and very survivable...but not all that satisfying to fly. Basically just a series of drive by muggings...
-
Many Spit pilots are new and therefore easy to kill in any plane. Come up against a good one, though, and even with gobs of extra energy they're difficult to kill with a 190 in a 1vs1 fight.
I'm kind of shocked that you call the 190 series inferior.
-
Many Spit pilots are new and therefore easy to kill in any plane. Come up against a good one, though, and even with gobs of extra energy they're difficult to kill with a 190 in a 1vs1 fight.
I'm kind of shocked that you call the 190 series inferior.
not the series, the A5 is a well balanced plane, the A8 is optimized for ground/buff work and is excellent in its intended roles. The D-9 was designed to give inferior pilots a measure of survivability in a hostile environment and it shows. The biggest issue in learning to fly the D9 is realizing most of the time you have to much E...having "gobs of E" is a sign of poor ACM. The goal in flying a 190D is to induce a defensive move in conjunction with a reduction of your own E state and a refinement of your AOT to create a window that allows either a high % snapshot or a semi tracking shot that does not comprise your control of the enemy's 3-9 line...
i'll fire up a 190D and fly a few hops to show you what I mean. Basically the 190D is ACM with training wheels.
-
having "gobs of E" is a sign of poor ACM.
energy can be kinetic or potential, which you know. Lots of potential energy is not a sign of bad acm.
-
"potential E" is altitude and to much is the sign of a timid flyer. Once you engage you shold never be more then 1.5 K or so from your adversary in a +E state. Anything beyond that is simply giving him to much room.
-
One could also say that attacking a Shawk who is at that moment so complacent that he just pulls his C-Hog for a shot that leaves him in a bad position after the miss and who doesn't even drop his external tank until he realizes he is in a bit of trouble-and blasting him with 6 nose-mounted .50s is more or less equivalent to catching Chalenge on a bad day with the D9....same goes for following around and ultimately killing a N1K who tried to more or less HO a P-40 from a bad angle, thus giving up the angles, who then tries to solve his problems by hauling back on the stick to out-turn what is after all a *fairly* maneuverable plane instead of using his excess energy to go up and set up a better attack.
On the other hand, that P-51D vs. Spit clip Snaphook posted once...unquestionably brilliant IMHO. The Spit didn't make any huge mistakes, nevertheless, from first to last Snaphook controlled it, never gave the Spit any kind of a shot, never fatally compromised his superior position chasing a low% shot, and flew to a gun solution even I could hit. :aok
Expanding on what I have to say on the "angles" vogue, I get the impression that "good acms" and "good fights" are terms often applied to fights which involve one or more of the fighters being what I would consider recklessly aggressive. Situations where there are repeated exchanges off angle snapshots followed by exchanged overshoots until one plane falls, where there is actual opportunity missed for one of the planes to take a slightly more patient tack and establish themselves firmly in the rear quarter...the extreme example being some fights that actually seem to consist of stick heaving and semi-HOs called "brilliant"...and they are in terms of reflexes and shooting abilities, but not nesecessarily strategy. Is the standard for a "good fight" visceral excitement?
I was under the impression that the point of ACM was to fly yourself to as easy a gun solution as possible while giving as little opportunity as possible for the opponent to put guns on you. (My Jujitsu instructor always emphasized "You need to get the position before you get the submission".) Or kind of like hunting, the point of which is IMO ideally getting so close to the quarry a spear could do the job. In a perverse way, you could even say the worse the gunnery on the part of the pilot, the better the strategy required to fly to a kill.
BTW, the 190 A-5 is very little superior to the D-9 in turning ability, still behind the P-51D and most other aircraft. And the D9's thrust can help even things. If it can't be done with a D9, it probably can't be done with an A-5 either.
-
Absolutely no question that shawk was complacent, however lets look at his opening moves. He actually killed himself early in the fight and died later. In the circumstances of that fight the extra drag was partially compensated for by the added mass since it was a "zoom" fight. I'm in no way faulting you for your tactics vs chalenge...I also didnt post the shawk film initially and almost not at all. I've got a hundred of those lying around and always consider them more of "look at me" vs instructional in nature.
The D9 and the Tiffie are the 2 true predators in AH (non perk). They are in almost complete control of there environment and have the ability to force a fight at will. All planes are susceptible to positional disadvantage but none can turn the tables as quickly as a 190D.
The primary benefit of the shawk clip IMO was to show the value of "jumping the route". At the time shawk considered it an almost miricle shot when it wasn't. I literally overplayed it and actually got to far out in front of him and had to freeze the nose.
My comments on the 190 are not ment to be derogatory to you or Anax...they are ment to encourage you to explore the limits of the plane and use it more aggressively as the true energy fighter it is and not simply as a flying gun platform.
-
My comments on the 190 are not ment to be derogatory to you or Anax...they are ment to encourage you to explore the limits of the plane and use it more aggressively as the true energy fighter it is and not simply as a flying gun platform.
Oh, don't get me wrong. There is some real brilliance to the even being able to exploit a mistake that well in a C-Hog vs. A-20 fight, no question, and it does succinctly demonstrate what a less maneuverable fighter can do to get guns...I was more or less demonstrating that it is possible to nitpick practically anything to death if one is motivated to do so. ;)
You'll notice that after the initial chase-down of that P-51 I was what, 40mph faster most of the time? Just enough.
An altitude advantage beyond a certain point is irrelevant/detrimental to maneuvering for the kill. A speed advantage beyond a certain point is irrelevant to maneuvering, though not to over-all strategy and survival.
IMO, while the ability to engage and disengage at will IS perhaps the most desirable trait in for a fighter plane in real life, in sim flying we are not too concerned if we die every so often and would very much like to shoot down other airplanes not just regularly, but with great frequency in target-rich environments. Thus top speed becomes merely one of many desirable advantages, and is arguably perhaps even below such things as turning ability and guns when it comes to what makes a plane desirable, "uber" or "easy mode" for sim-combat.
-
I was under the impression that the point of ACM was to fly yourself to as easy a gun solution as possible while giving as little opportunity as possible for the opponent to put guns on you.
Be careful, some holier-than-thou turnfighter will come in here and call you a pick dweeb or some such moniker.
Frankly the above quote is part of my approach to the MA. I see each flight as a vastly dynamic strategic event, not just a string of fights. I want to kill my opponent quickly so I don't fall prey to his teammates. I want to kill my opponent as efficiently as possible, while retaining enough E to deal with other bad guys. For me, the MA is a gigantic, three dimensional chess match and as such, I try to stay several moves ahead of my foe. I may be shooting at plane A but I'm already figuring what to do with planes B, C and D, with the notion to survive often in the equation. .
I do not possess spectacular ACM abilities. I try to compensate by getting my plane to the right spot via anticipating what my intended foe is going to do. I also try to overcome my average flying ability by making my shot opportunities count. For this, I get called all sorts of names. I'm like the roadrunner: flyin my pony is my idea of havin fun.
There's nothing wrong with "living for the fight", it's just rediculous to whine about getting picked when you are yanking your plane around in circles, willingly oblivious to other planes beyond your immediate foe. I also know that several of these types complain about getting picked but are really masking their lack of SA. Whether they are not aware of the circumstances around them or simply choose not to consider them is moot, bad SA is bad SA.
-
Be careful, some holier-than-thou turnfighter will come in here and call you a pick dweeb or some such moniker.
Well, picking or not is kind of beside the point, though I agree Steve. What I was talking about was the perceived preference for more "aggressive" maneuvering at all times, pulling for the first shot of any kind, which can be quite workable if you are dead shot, and quite necessary if you are not in a plane or position where you can use a less aggressive angles or energy move. This of course leads to what seem to be considered the "good fights"-fast reflexive encounters with exchanges of positions and tough snap-shots. I just think this is a narrow definition though and a rather "boa constrictor" approach- trying to patiently consolidate small advantages without presenting any real exploitable mistake-doesn't necessarily suck. Especially if you can't shoot worth beans and don't want to give up position for a shot that probably won't end the matter anyway.
-
1st,
Steve is a far from "average" pilot ACM wise and I have nothing against anyone flying in whatever manner they see fit. ACM is universal however the application of ACM is both plane and situation specific. Since a plane that has speed has the ability to force a fight or disengage less emphasis is often placed on correct (or optimal) ACM. The slower plane is forced to react and defend and use ACM to in someway create a window for offensive action. The "chess match" analogy is used very often...and almost always incorrectly. chess implies an even start and equal resources while air combat almost never is even or equal in nature.
Steve's flying is predatory not an "even fight" type of combat. Nothing wrong with that at all and certainly not an ACM deficient style of flying either.
-
chess implies an even start and equal resources while air combat almost never is even or equal in nature
It certainly does. And as we sit in the tower, deciding what to do, where to launch, even what team we are on, the chess board is unsullied and perfectly pristine before each of us. No-one has an advantage. It is only after we make certain decisions, then take certain actions that the board tilts one way or the other.
-
It certainly does. And as we sit in the tower, deciding what to do, where to launch, even what team we are on, the chess board is unsullied and perfectly pristine before each of us. No-one has an advantage. It is only after we make certain decisions, then take certain actions that the board tilts one way or the other.
Very simplistic and factually incorrect...
-
Very simplistic and factually incorrect...
What's uneven about two guys sitting in the tower deciding what to do?
-
chess implies an even start and equal resources while air combat almost never is even or equal in nature
No, that is a false. White starts with an edge. All of opening theory in chess is about White trying to make something of the first move while Black tries to gain parity or turn the tables. It is a game of imbalances and trade-offs, and in that way is even more comparable to ACM than most think.
-
1) while chess is uneven in the sense that white plays for the win and black the draw. In a match sides alternate so the presumption of overall equality is there (although admittedly not 100%)
2) While you'll decide your options you cant control the environment around you. So yes you control your plane choice, starting position and where you fly based on the information available to you. You can use that do generate an advantage or multiple advantages (to some degree). But players on different sides do not have equal variables to manipulate. From ENY to numbers to relative skill and play style of countrymen on at a given time. To a large degree choice of plane determines the style of play or at least the potential success for a variety of styles. In effect the object is to create an uneven playing field not a level one.
-
1 But players on different sides do not have equal variables
The field is even in that you can choose what side to fly for.
-
I think you're all pushing the semantics a little more then needed at this point. I think we get the general idea. Back on point now! :D
-
Don't think plane...think ACM.
1) ACM over plane type, even an A-20 can "get around" well enough to T&B
...
-
Enemy mistakes. Most of us are too much in the habit of attributing successes to our own skill instead of the shortcomings of the enemy.
a good fighter always plans on the shortcomings of the enemy
-
When comparing this game to chess and to say balance is everyone is equal as to starting in the tower, might be correct then and there if everyone were to up at the same time. When one plane has a headstart, IE they up at different times, thats like giving white 4 moves before black can make 1.
-
It's unfortunate that this thread has degenerated into an arguement over an analogy, rather than a discussion of the original topic. Welcome to the internet, I guess.
-
For what it's worth. I had a euro guy come in the TA one time who just wanted to duel with a trainer for a bit. He was very good on the fundamentals. He did all the right things. He was getting perplexed though because I still kept getting solid first shots on him. I explained that while maneuver for maneuver, he was doing the right things, he was also very agressive at trying to take the most direct route get his guns on me. What I was doing was positioning myself in a way where if he tried to get guns on me in one maneuver, he would have a flight path overshoot, and then I would exploit it.
He came up with the chess analogy. As he put it, he was only thinking about the next move, where I was thinking two or three or four moves ahead. Which was in essence, spot on for the reason I was gaining the advantage.
-
No, you're missing the point. Let me put in another way: 1vs1, it's frequently easier to kill an antique with another antique than with a hotrod. It's more of a challenge to kill a Spit9 with a 190D9 1vs1 than viceversa. Even more strange, it's easier to kill a Spixteen with a 109F-4 than with a 190D-9.
Stop this "ACM conquers all" nonesense. What sort of acm does a 190D-9 use to beat a Spit9 in a 1vs1 fight, short of the Spit9 pilot making a big mistake? You don't want to talk about aircraft because talking about aircraft forces specifics, and when we get to specifics your position doesn't hold up. Using ACM to get a win out of a bad situation always supposes that the opponent screws up. It's great when it happens, but foolish to rely on it.
I've turn fought 2 La7's while scraping my Ta-152 wings on the water. Not just a single turn either. I shot both down while witnesses were in disbelief.
Also, I enjoy the Ki-61 immensely. I'll turnfight ANY ride in the planeset and make anyone's life hell while in it.
"It's the Indian, not the Arrow." 10 times out of 10.
-
"It's the Indian, not the Arrow." 10 times out of 10.
pretty much... "cartoon planes don't kill cartoon pilots. cartoon pilots kill cartoon pilots."
our planes are just tools, meant to be used, abused and confused. <bite me i had to add something to make it meteric!!>
Here are the raw materials: air frame, guns, ammo, fuel, ord (if any), map. It's up to the architects of the air to create a masterpeice - or more commonly, something only the most loving of mothers would post on the fridge.
-
It's not just the pilot and it's not just the plane, it's both. :aok
-
It's not just the pilot and it's not just the plane, it's both. :aok
I hate to get into one of these arguments, but here I am. I agree with the above statement. If aircraft type didn't matter there would be no motivation to upgrade, improve, and replace aircraft with higher performance models. This is such an easy reductio ad absurdum [cheap shot] only the biggest narcissists refuse to admit it [/cheap shot]. :devil
-
^_^ if plane doesnt matter like some claimed! I'm still waiting to see someone out turn my La-7 in their D9 like they claimed!
-
^_^ if plane doesnt matter like some claimed! I'm still waiting to see someone out turn my La-7 in their D9 like they claimed!
ACM does not always equal "out turn". The la-7 is a very formidable plane and is close to double superior to the 190D at lower alts. Its a fairly even matchup on the deck with the 190D having a slight edge at middle level alts. Given equal pilots the 190D should win or draw on fights starting above the deck but its an interesting matchup.
-
Yes I've taken an LA-7 in my D9 in DA. But I had to spiral roped it. We merged at 8k, I pop up above 10k right away while baiting the LA-7 to follow me up. Knowing my climb > the LA7 at 10k which worked out perfectly. The fight lasted a min and 20 secs or so after merge. We were never 1.5-2k away from each other. However, that's using OTHER method then TnB.
I found if an La-7 KNow what he's doing the D9 is gunna end up doing a nose down donig scissors etc trying to keep that E at a good turning speed so he can maintain the best turn radius. THat will eventually end up on the deck and then the La-7 Eat up the D9.
Here's the film of that fight.
http://files.filefront.com/190D9vLa7ahf/;10092241;/fileinfo.html
-
I cant be anything other then straight up with you here Yenny.
1) the la flew a horrible merge
2) you totally lost the 190 at the top and were probably dead vs any decent la driver right there
3) you offered up a prime time shot that the lala just misses on your recovery
4) you flew right up thru the la's stall and then buried the la under your artwork
5) the shot you hit while nice was poorly set up and easily avoidable by a decent foe
You "won" because the other guy was just about clueless and make every mistake he could. Who continues to climb up under a con in a near stall and then flies a predictable path as the guy rolls over one him. I also know that the clip is 6 months+ old and you've gotten much much better...but the la had enough speed he could have just followed you right up if he'd actually seen you vs just flying his merge.
-
To me the most critical elements of a spiral climb are as follows:
1) your creating a true spiral path that has both a rate of climb and a rate of turn
2) you've established a spiral path that allows you to maintain a view on the con(s)
3) you've established a smooth trajectory that minimizes E bleed while forcing the con attempt to pull lead along both a vertical and flight path component...
4) that you maintain complete control of your airplane in transition
5) your tming is such that you begin transition prior to your opponents stall auch that your fully in controlled flight and arrive at your guns solution during a period when the con has minimal control surface authority...
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/spiral%20climb.ahf
I took this from the 1st 190 hop. NoW I havent flown a 190 in a long time, this is a universal move not a 190 move. Obviously you need to tailor it to circumstance but you do not need a lot of room or a huge advantage in E to execute it. Like all things ACM its a judgement call and subject to pilot error...
-
5) your tming is such that you begin transition prior to your opponents stall auch that your fully in controlled flight and arrive at your guns solution during a period when the con has minimal control surface authority...
I mess that part up on ropes all the time.
-
^_^ if plane doesnt matter like some claimed! I'm still waiting to see someone out turn my La-7 in their D9 like they claimed!
Are you directing this at me?
-
Hmm I don't recall you ever claim that, so I don't think so.
-
Hmm I don't recall you ever claim that, so I don't think so.
You obviously didn't read my post on the previous page then.
-
^^ Musta went vs new la7s pilot=)
-
^^ Musta went vs new la7s pilot=)
No biggie, was just thinking "Damn, I make a post this morning and already...."
:salute
-
I think we can all agree that you WILL find yourself caught in a bad situation in the air time to time, and being ready to exploit a mistake on the opponent's part is better than letting go of the stick and going to get a coke. :)
-
No biggie, was just thinking "Damn, I make a post this morning and already...."
:salute
lol sry i'm at work so kinda just skimming through, didn't see ur earlier post sorry=)
-
I hate to get into one of these arguments, but here I am. I agree with the above statement. If aircraft type didn't matter there would be no motivation to upgrade, improve, and replace aircraft with higher performance models. This is such an easy reductio ad absurdum [cheap shot] only the biggest narcissists refuse to admit it [/cheap shot]. :devil
Again, it seems to me your confusing real life with the game again. We are talking about the game Aces High, not real life pilots and aircraft.
-
Again, it seems to me your confusing real life with the game again. We are talking about the game Aces High, not real life pilots and aircraft.
Explain to me how the progression of fighter performance in Aces High is not comparable to real life, please.
-
Again, it seems to me your confusing real life with the game again. We are talking about the game Aces High, not real life pilots and aircraft.
Why play then when u r better at rammin people and kamakazing O.o ^^ why bother fightin at all?
-
Explain to me how the progression of fighter performance in Aces High is not comparable to real life, please.
Please enlighten us, regale us with heroic tales of "Anaxogoras' views on AH."
-
Explain to me how the progression of fighter performance in Aces High is not comparable to real life, please.
Your kidding right? This is a game, there for most of the info that applies to the real world fighters and such do not apply here. There is no way to compare what we "fly" to what was really flying....unless you have a couple of wings of WWII aircraft squirreled away someplace to test and compare. HTC does a wonderful job of making a FM that we assume is comparable. HTC gives us an environment to use these things in ...which has no wind, eddies, air currents, updrafts and such, and enemy for us to shoot at..... time and time again. People can't even agree that the coloring of the skins is correct....check out the skins thread if you don't believe me.
Basing anything we do in this game to real life is like basing your skills in NHL08 against a real hockey player on ice. It just isn't the same. The general idea is there, but you'll never get close.
People choose planes for a few reasons, mostly its because its one of the fastest.....so they can run, or its got the biggest guns...so they can HO. Thats about all they think of when it comes to performance. All of our fighters are of "historic" value, you won't see HTC build a better engine for the pony, or redesign the wings on a FW. They just add what there was.
Why play then when u r better at rammin people and kamakazing O.o ^^ why bother fightin at all?
It was so much nicer when you weren't polluting the boards, your break wasn't long enough. :D I don't play to ram or kamikaze anyone, I fly for the fight. I can't see why you would even say that. This is a game. We are given certain parameters to play with in and simulate dog fighting in WWII style aircraft. To compare the GAME with real life is just ridiculous. Unless of course you do pick up really hot chicks in that Maserati you drive in your killer video game on Xbox.
-
Your kidding right? This is a game, there for most of the info that applies to the real world fighters and such do not apply here. There is no way to compare what we "fly" to what was really flying....unless you have a couple of wings of WWII aircraft squirreled away someplace to test and compare. HTC does a wonderful job of making a FM that we assume is comparable. HTC gives us an environment to use these things in ...which has no wind, eddies, air currents, updrafts and such, and enemy for us to shoot at..... time and time again. People can't even agree that the coloring of the skins is correct....check out the skins thread if you don't believe me.
Basing anything we do in this game to real life is like basing your skills in NHL08 against a real hockey player on ice. It just isn't the same. The general idea is there, but you'll never get close.
People choose planes for a few reasons, mostly its because its one of the fastest.....so they can run, or its got the biggest guns...so they can HO. Thats about all they think of when it comes to performance. All of our fighters are of "historic" value, you won't see HTC build a better engine for the pony, or redesign the wings on a FW. They just add what there was.
It was so much nicer when you weren't polluting the boards, your break wasn't long enough. :D I don't play to ram or kamikaze anyone, I fly for the fight. I can't see why you would even say that. This is a game. We are given certain parameters to play with in and simulate dog fighting in WWII style aircraft. To compare the GAME with real life is just ridiculous. Unless of course you do pick up really hot chicks in that Maserati you drive in your killer video game on Xbox.
This is one of the finest posts I have ever seen on here. Why? Because it is so blunt and true, it will hurt some.
-
hey Fugi S!
i believe what gavagai was saying is that our 190A5 compared to our 190D9 sees a similar margin of performance increase to the real life counterparts. Not so much that we can relate AH flight skills to real flying. I only skimmed the last page so i dont mean to step into this one, too much fun in general discussion got to run :D
-
We're tryin to simulate reality, I prefer to look for the experience of it=). I think just gettin a plane up and suicide it sux. Totally a turn off on the game. Which was why I kinda took a break, it just not what I'm looking for in a flight simulation!
-
It was so much nicer when you weren't polluting the boards, your break wasn't long enough. :D I don't play to ram or kamikaze anyone, I fly for the fight. I can't see why you would even say that. This is a game. We are given certain parameters to play with in and simulate dog fighting in WWII style aircraft. To compare the GAME with real life is just ridiculous. Unless of course you do pick up really hot chicks in that Maserati you drive in your killer video game on Xbox.
was an example of what coudl happen if no one care about reality of the game. Along w/ dive bombin lancecaster etc!!
-
was an example of what coudl happen if no one care about reality of the game. Along w/ dive bombin lancecaster etc!!
Agreed here, I believe the game MUST change. Too many "quake" style players. I suggested a "score keeping" change to promote better play, just to try to get better game play. This game has a lot to offer as a GAME there are many things to do, and many ways to have fun. We certainly don't need divebombing lancs and such.
-
Am I the only one who is not so terribly pessimistic about the MA right now. Every time I up a plane, I can find large numbers of planes trying to kill me, I try to kill them and come out the other side with a whole plane, and this is not a task so easy I am bored with it.
-
Am I the only one who is not so terribly pessimistic about the MA right now. Every time I up a plane, I can find large numbers of planes trying to kill me, I try to kill them and come out the other side with a whole plane, and this is not a task so easy I am bored with it.
I've been having quite a bit of fun in the MA. Of course, I wasn't around during this fabled golden age of flight sims that is so often talked about.
-
I'm with you BnZ and Dave, when i get a chance to fly i usualy find wall to wall fun and you usualy have turn the power off to stop me having one last sortie.
-
hey Fugi S!
i believe what gavagai was saying is that our 190A5 compared to our 190D9 sees a similar margin of performance increase to the real life counterparts. Not so much that we can relate AH flight skills to real flying. I only skimmed the last page so i dont mean to step into this one, too much fun in general discussion got to run :D
Oh my God! You see? This is what happens when you put some thought into reading!
Seriously, you have two comparable hypotheses. One says gavagai believes AH air combat is just like real life. The other says gavagai believes that late war aircraft in AH being better than early war aircraft is comparable to real late war aircraft being better than real early war aircraft. Which do you choose?
Fugitive, that was one of the most inept AH bbs straw-man attacks I have ever seen.
-
Fugitive has a very good points still. It happens, we all misread something in between the real good quality crap, calm down its not like you were stating a cure for aids and being misunderstood :angel:
-
Oh my God! You see? This is what happens when you put some thought into reading!
Seriously, you have two comparable hypotheses. One says gavagai believes AH air combat is just like real life. The other says gavagai believes that late war aircraft in AH being better than early war aircraft is comparable to real late war aircraft being better than real early war aircraft. Which do you choose?
Fugitive, that was one of the most inept AH bbs straw-man attacks I have ever seen.
Maybe you should look into a writing course or two. Again, I say they are NOT comparable. Real life WWII was about improving aircraft so the pilots did a better job, and returned home to fly again. Here we have a set of toy aircraft that ....in most cases people pretend to fly and die only to reup in a brite new plane. How can any of that compare? A rolling plane set might "simulate" advances in technology, but you'll never see that in AH.
Yes I can still find fun in the MA's, but it was a lot easier in the "old days". It was rare when you spotted someone bombing stuff to milk run. Some of the biggest fights were escorted missions hitting HQ to knock out radar. In those days you'd see 15-20 goons running supplies in to get dar back up. These days everyone says "let the other guy handle it, I have some vulching to do" :rolleyes:
-
Fugitive has a very good points still. It happens, we all misread something in between the real good quality crap, calm down its not like you were stating a cure for aids and being misunderstood :angel:
If you heard me say it in person, the subtle heights of irony and sarcasm my tone of voice conveyed would have left a different impression. :devil But, yeah, I get worked up when people interpret my words in the worst possible way.
Fugitive, stop trolling. I'm done.
-
Refer to Shaw (http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Tactics-Maneuvering-New/dp/0870210599), chapters 3 and 4 if anyone is confused on whether the similarities or dissimilarities between aircraft is an important factor for determining the tactics to apply to an engagment. It is a fundamental factor to base ones tactical approach on.
Also a quote regarding discussions in the help and training forum comes to mind as I browse this thread...
Anyone attempting to coerce other players into thier style of gameplay is wrong to do so. It is one thing to offer up the different styles, but it is an entirely different matter when one attempts to force other players to play 'thier' game.
Telling another player they are wrong in the way they wish to play the game is akin to telling someone they should not like Apple pie as Cherry is much better. You are wasting your time and just creating friction in doing this.
-
I'm pretty sure banana creme pie is best :D
-
For whatever reason this has strayed far from its original intent, which really was pretty simple...
What I was trying to show is that within the limitations of its flight envelope most planes are capable of creating significant issues for an attacker. The actually measure of difficulty is determined by both the initial circumstances and the relative ability of the 2 pilots. Regardless of the decisions that lead up to the encounter most of us find our selfs "out gunned" on at least some occasions. All to often I see cons on the defensive fall into a completely defensive mode even when confronted with a 1 on 1 or 1 on 2 scenario where an offensive mindset might provide a glimmer of hope. History is full of accounts of well trained pilots in "inferior" planes winning against overwhelming odds based on clear thinking and aggressive tactics. We have always recognized that success is more often then not based on the the spirit and tenacity of the victor then his raw ability. sometimes its not the "size of the dog" that matters most.