Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: KetteJG26 on November 12, 2000, 02:32:00 PM
-
Bomber Gunners are way too Uber in AH. Bombers need to be escorted...ask any 8th AF vet lol. You could write a book on ballistics of Air to Air gunnery so this is not an end all...just brushing the surface. Please bear with and read.
Lets examine the Air to Air gunnery problem. I am a career soldier in combat arms in the US Army. Its is difficult to hit a fixed target at a known distance with a fixed gun. Many factors influence the ballistic path of a bullet. Variations in tempature, humidity, bullet weight, powder amount, ignition speed of the propellant etc... not to mention the shooters skill combine to make fixed gun/fixed target shooting difficult. Now add in just the environmental factors in Air to Air gunnery and its a miracle that with fixed guns mounted on a fighter you can hit anything. Galland said "You just get the feel for the right amount of lead". That's because the ballistic influence's are so great that each shot is different. That's why most fighter pilots waited til the "whole windshield was black with enemy" before firing.
Wind velocity greatly influence's your ballistics. A slight breeze can mean holding a .50 cal bullet several meters off target to compensate at 1200 meters. Now consider your plane traveling at several hundred miles an hour. As soon as that bullet leaves the barrel the relative wind begins to influence it. Its called Aerodynamic Drag and the size, weight, and shape of the projectile determine its exact effect. That is why most shooting is done from 6 or 12 o'clock. This is why a stern attack on a bomber is suicide. The relative wind pushes the bomber gunners bullet toward the attacking fighter but slows the fighter's bullet down degrading effective range. If there is any deflection angle then the relative wind blows the bullet off course related to its value. The greater the deflection angle the greater the influence. That's why you didn't attack bombers from the side..just about impossible to hit.
Gravity also influence the round and the firing platform. Gun barrels flex m8's. The slight force of a rifleman gripping his rifle will move the point of impact. That's why "floating" barrels are put on rifles. In a fixed wing mounted gun any G's pulled by the plane will bend the barrel further complicating the ballistic problem. Engineer's term this "trajectory jump". Basically it means that the Gun-Bore line and the point of impact can be radically different.
Now consider the flexible mounted gun of a bomber gunner. The turret is powered but the guns are flexible. As the gunner swings his 60-100 lbs of Machinegun/ammo (depending on whether he is firing one or two guns) on to gun/target line he will greatly hampered by the inertia of his own weapon system. Just the push of the relative wind on his barrels will make alignment with target difficult. Any G's pulled by the bomber would make the gunners job impossible. A 60 lb gun would be 120lb at 2g's. Finally the recoil of his own weapon system in a flexible mount would send his bullets all over the sky. During WWII the US .50 cal outranged the German fighters guns. German fighter pilots lining up for a shot on a bombers would see tracers buzzing all around them making any attack unnerving. The fire from the bomber gunners was extremely inaccurate though due to the overwhelming ballistic problem faced by the gunner. During the Schweinfurt raid on 17 August 1943 B-17 gunners claimed more German fighters destroyed than were even present at the battle. The 8th Air Force allowed most of the claims to stand for morale purposes. The reality is that in JG 26 (approximately 118 aircraft that made contact with the bomber stream and attacked) only 5 pilots were hit by B-17 gunners. 1 was KIA and 3 WIA and 1 pilot had to bail out but was unhurt. The 3 WIA made it back to base.
BOTTOM LINE- Unescorted Bombers should be fighter fodder.
Ketten
Sources:
1. "Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering" by Robert L. Shaw - Excellent book written by a 20 year fighter pilot and engineer. Required reading for US Fighter Pilots
2. "JG26 War Diaries: Vol II 1943-1945" by Don Caldwell - Day by Day chronicle of one Luftwaffe fighter wing from the beginning of WWII to the end. Transcribed from the units official War Diary it includes allied/axis ground controller input, victory/casualty list, and Allied/Axis personal accounts. One of the best books I've found on the Air War in Europe..even has gun camera stills ID'ing pilot and plane being destroyed. Rather pricey though, the set will run 100 bucks.
-
Recall if you will that the 8th was flying thousand bomber raids, and did indeed have escort. In short, there were plenty of .50 cals in the air. In AH, you are hardly ever going to get escort, and raids with more than two bombers are rare (i.e. few guns in the air). Please also note that there is no AI gunner in AH. All gunners are humans. Buff guns are fine...there is also a net lag problem for the buff as well when any fighter attack is from the rear.
-
It detracts from the fun of the game when you make a 90 degree deflection attack on a bomber and get killed long before your fighter can even line up to attack. Or you are killed in a head to head attack. Both happenend to me. We actually halted major daylight bombing raids using unescorted bombers because the casualty rates were too high. The development of long range escort fighter (P-51) was considered crucial to the continuation of the bombing campaign. It wasn't until Doolittle changed the 8th AF fighters mission from "bring back the bombers" to "destroy German fighters" and freed them to actively hunt did the Allies win Air superiority. Before that German fighters could concentrate on simply piercing the escort screen and killing bombers. After that they had to fight from the moment they left their fields just to reach the bomber stream. It wasn't bomber gunners that brought down the Luftwaffe. They were simply the bait to lure the Jagdwaffe into a war of pilot attrition Germany couldn't afford. More often than not attacking a lone bomber is suicide in AH....that is no where close to a simulation of Air to Air combat in WWII.
Flex mount gunnery just needs to be more difficult than it is now. This could be easily done by making the sight "float" to simulate inertia so that it is much more difficult to line up and not as precise. When the gun is fired simulate recoil by having it jump. Wouldn't be hard and would add realism. I think it would be cool to be lining up on a bomber and see tracer whizzing past me. Its not cool to be smoked 9 out of 10 times by AH hokey flakship's.
-
Bombers are not very common now, a lone fighter who wants more kills against buffs is all this looks like to me.
A buff stands a good chance against 1 fighter, rarely in RL did a lone fighter attack a buff in RL either. If you want to fight against buffs bring a friend, coordinate attacks.
Without being able to replicate large buff formations, a buff needs uber guns.
Personally I think bombers are modelled ok at the moment. If it were riskier than it is now to fly a buff we wouldn't see any. If it were any easier we'd see too many...
My thots
SKurj
-
Lone fighter who wants more kills against Buffs....
Please m8..I bypass bombers in AH if at all possible.
Unless-
1. There is more that one fighter attacking with me
2. I have plenty of alt and can go H2H
The ONLY Argument for keeping such unrealistically accurate bomber gunners is "game" Play...
Well that would adapt just like it's adapted to the "Flakship's" AH has now.
Only difference is even more teamwork would have to take place. That's not a bad thing is it? I would like the challenge of penetrating an escort screen.
-
Lone bombers were dead meat m8. Why do you think the AF's of the world emphasize tight formations? Mutual support. Look at the Luftwaffe's kill points system. You got more points for seperating a bomber from formation than killing a lone one. 3 for an outright kill..2 for separating one from formation..and only ONE for killing a straggler. 1/2 point if it was a twin engine bomber.
-
That's the point... we don't have the numbers to have large formations, so AH can't have lone buffs being as easy to kill as the would be "in real life". It's a game, so adjustments must be made for gameplay's sake.
With the right fighter and a bit of patience, a lone buff is still meat on the table. It's a bit more of a fight I'll grant you, but that's the fun part I find. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs http://www.flyingpigs.com (http://www.flyingpigs.com)
(http://tuweb.ucis.dal.ca/~dconrad/ahf/lepht.gif)
"My P-47 is a pretty good ship, she took a round coming 'cross the Channel last trip.
Just thinking 'bout my baby and lettin' her rip, always got me through so far."
- Steve Earl
-
You do know that all buff guns are player controlled?
Accuracy comes from the pilot, not the computer.
Flex mounts: only in the waist.
Head on attack? Not against the B-17G! (6 maybe 7x.50 cal)
-
Bombers in AH are easy to kill with any fighter.
If you haven't learned how then go get some practice in the TA. Don't whine about it and try to get the whole game modified so that you can kill them without any threat to you. What you propose would result in no bombers being flown in AH.
Frankly, I find them too easy to kill. 12 hits from a 50 cal will pop the wing off of a 17 or Lanc.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
It's not a whine so quit trying to flame me. The effectiveness of AH gunners needs to be toned down not elimated. Any mount were the gun moves is a flexible mount. Fire a Machinegun mounted with TO&E and tripod sometime. Now its more solid than freegunning but still isn't superacurate. The Brits ran a sniper school outside of Caen in WWII. To demonstrate the effectiveness of sniping they set up a range with equal numbers of targets from 400 to 800 meters. The students sat in the bleachers center of the range. A camoflaged machinegun bunker with a tripod mounted MG was on on side of the range in the woods and a sniper on the other. Everytime the Sniper team would have ALL of their targets knocked down before the MG was close to being through. Any Military MG is going to be about a 3-4 MOA weapon right out of the box. That means at 600 yards your cone of fire can be as large as a 4 foot circle and at 1200 yards an 8 foot circle. MG's are designed for rapid not accurate fire. That's not taking into account any other factors just the inherent inaccuracy of the gun itself. Wear and tear on it will reduce this quickly. Its seems very solid in that turret till the trigger is pulled. The mechanism that allows the gun to swivel by nature of the fact that it moves makes it unstable under recoil.
-
You have some interesting info, thanks for sharing. But the bottom line is that the bombers gunfire is as accurate as the fighters that are attacking them, In this game. And a lone bomber is at the mercy of any fighter that has alt or patience to get into postion. Also please consider that some of the people you run into flying bombers have spent some serious time learning to man their guns quite well. Most of them are on one way trips and want to make them count (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Explain how the guns mounted in a Sperry ball turret are flexible...?
-
Kette.. I have earlier made some posts like the one you have made, so I know very well what you mean. But I dont think bombers are a big problem right now. In earlier AH versions the bombers seemed much stronger and we saw swarms of em used as Ackplatforms. As it is now, I think its allmost acceptable. The problem is that levelbombing in real life wasnt very fun, while most memories by fighterpilot show that flying a fighter even in a real war was quite fun. IMHO thats the main problem with having level bombers in an arena sim. If flying a levelbomber was boring and frustrating in real life then a simulation cant be accurate without making it boring and frustrating. So.. If we want levelbombers in AceHigh we gotta accept some compromizes between gameplay and historic accuracy.
IMHO levelbombers are not a very big problem in AH anymore. For some time ago I feared that the effiency of the levelbombers would do that nobody would use divebombing (jabo) with fighters. Time has shown that it isnt true. Most base captures I participate in is done by pure Jabo attacks.
So Kette if you see a lonely B17, let him fly, untill you get some friendly fighers to back you up.
------------------
GrinBird
-
That seems to be the prevailing wind grinbird.
If you read my entire post then it explains how the guns of a sperry ball turret are flexible mounts....Just as a TO&E is a flexible mount M8 even though it is "Locked" for firing.
-
All I know is that I die on more bomber missions than I live through. Between piloting, bombing and gunnery any less accuracy (I can't hit a barn), I wouldn't want to fly one.
Eagler
-
Coming from WBs, where most people don't even bother attacking bombers because of the deadly otto, I find the bomber vs fighter duel a fairly fair fight with a decided edge to the fighter if he is patient. If you use slashing attacks where the bomber hasn't got very much time to get guns on you, the fighter wins most of the time.
bowser
-
Now consider the flexible mounted gun of a bomber gunner. The turret is powered but the guns are flexible. As the gunner swings his 60-100 lbs of Machinegun/ammo (depending on whether he is firing one or two guns) on to gun/target line he will greatly hampered by the inertia of his own weapon system. Just the push of the relative wind on his barrels will make alignment with target difficult. Any G's pulled by the bomber would make the gunners job impossible. A 60 lb gun would be 120lb at 2g's. Finally the recoil of his own weapon system in a flexible mount would send his bullets all over the sky.
This is for any powered turret, Sperry ball, Martin mid-upper, Chin guns etc...
1. The guns are FIXED in the turret, as much as any fixed forward firing armament on a fighter.
2. The gunner doesn't swing the guns, he uses the turret controls to give inputs to the motors which turn the turret.
3. Slipstream will have no effect for reasons as above, plus the turret is aerodynamically shaped.
-
KetteJG26;
I am assuming that you know the way BUFF gunners work in AH.
But in case you don't....
Individual gun positions can be synchronized and almost always are. This means that all guns that can orientate to the same spot as the position that is actually being controlled will all do so.
For example; if I am gunning from the tail position and you attack from the left rear upward quadrant. The following guns will track you: tail, upper and waste.
This means you will have 5 x 50's shooting at the same spot. The trick is to analyze where each gun can fire and attack the point where the fewest guns can shoot at you.
Good Luck! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
"Best is the trash talk. Severly and viciously going after your enemies, their mothers, and their shabby sheep."
StSanta
-
Does this look uber? (Tour 9)
The B-17G has 1760 kills and has been killed 2397 times.
The B-26B has 2006 kills and has been killed 2871 times.
The Ju 88 has 791 kills and has been killed 1627 times.
The Lancaster III has 942 kills and has been killed 1960 times.
It's all about how you attack a buff, giving him a bad shot, while you zip in, clean his clock, and zip out. So far in Tour 10:
eskimo has 6 kills and has been killed 1 time in the Typhoon IB against the
B-17G.
eskimo has 7 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
B-26B.
eskimo has 4 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
Ju 88.
eskimo has 3 kills and has been killed 0 times in the Typhoon IB against the
Lancaster III.
And I am just a good pilot, many are much better.
And then again I have not been unfortunate enough to have made attacks against buffs defended by gunners such as Mitsu, Nin, Citabria, Rollo, hedg260, KBman... (the list goes on) [Key word is gunner]
eskimo
-
Kette,
Have you flown a bomber in AH? If not, give it a try, and then decide if it was too uber.
I've flown a lot of hours in AW, WB, and AH, and I think AH has the best bomber model around. Not "realistic", true, but pretty darn well balanced for game play. (They could be a BIT less accurate from high altitude.)
-
I'll raise a point that eith Pyro OR Hitech did some time ago (sorry can't remeber which'
Why to people think that having dispersion makes it harder to hit a target?
In reality it makes it easier as rather than a pencil thin beam of fire you have to get exactly on target you get a bloody big spray of lead you just have to manuver into the general area of what you're trying to hit (ie. overlap the target with your cone of ire).
This spread is already large from a single gun, as pointed out earlier in this thread. Now look at the way the gunnery in bombers works. One person aims all the guns that can bear on their aimpoint at the exact same thing.
Now making an assumption (and it's just that, I may be wrong the guys at HTC wil know for sure) that this aim point is a single point xxx yds out, like convergence, this mens that as you get further away from this point the spread becoms even bigger.
Now this spreading means that the dmamge inflicted is less, but then current gunnery aiming method means that in most attacks 5 to 7 o'clock attack 5 .50 cal MGs are pointing at the enemy. IF you can hold even this big spray (easier than a thin beam) on target for a second or two you are going to do a fair bit of damage.
This is one of the reasons why I think the 'all guns on one target' code should go.
------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>
-
I think that I have much better gunnery in my bomber than I have when flying a fighter.
Gunners are basically stable platforms (unless I am gunning for another pilot who is doing evasives). I find it quite easy to line up shots, especially on anyone who is coming up my six or is giving me an easy headon shot.
On the other hand, when flying a fighter, I have a heck of a time landing hits. I believe this has to do with the way I control the plane to get a shot in...I rarely have and easy shot because not only is the enemy moving around in my sights, I am trying to match his moves.
I think also that joysticks have something to do with it. My Sidewinder 3D pro seemed a lot more "stable" when shooting buff guns than my current stick. Even after tweaking the setup, I still have noticable "lag" in moving my stick, which often results in overshooting where I want to point the gun.
I've often wondered if a stable platform had more to do with the uberguns on buffs than anything else.
Try shooting guns while the pilot is evading -- I have, and it is damn near impossible to hit anything (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Fury
-
I definately think the "All guns on One target" should go. Gunners were assigned a sector for a reason. To provide all around security for the bomber. Just as an Assault Line cannot make the fatal mistake of getting "tunnel" vision trained gunners are not going to stop watching their own sector, guarding it against attack to hit a fighter in another sector. Gunners communicated over the ICS and called out relative positions of fighters so that when a fighter left their sector another gunner could pick it up. This might tone down the bombers gunnery and make the fight more even.
-
Currently, there is no otto in AH (AI gunner).
Additionally, you can only have one gunner on your bomber (either you or another human gunner).
This means that only one gunner position is manned and firing at one time.
HTC added the "combined" option to simulate having all gunner positions manned.
I agree that each gunner would have an area to scan, that makes sense. However, I think that if a plane came into view, it's possible more than one gunner would shoot at it. At least to me, that make sense; I wasn't a gunner in the real war. Possibly that's part of the reason HTC added the option (the other being that there is only one gunner on board).
It would be nice to have more than one gunner at a time; however, except for scenarios, I think that most of the time, the guy manning the guns is the pilot.
-
Imagine,
You are the top turret gunner on a B-17 over Germany, 1944.
The tail gunner call out that a FW-190 is making a 6:00 high attack on your plane, he is the only enemy in sight of your bomber.
And you decide, even though you could easily bear your guns on him, "He's not in my sector, I'll let the tail gunner deal with him"!
Like hell you would! It's do or die time!
Heck, even the radioman would have popped open the top hatch and slid out his single 50 to take a crack at the 190.
My father-in-law was a B-17 gunnery instructor during WWII. I have talked to him extensively, for hour on end about his job. I also have met and talked to dozens of WWII bomber gunners about their exploits. In general, bomber gunners shot at everything within their sights. Heck, even escorting U.S. fighters were often afraid to approach our bombers because they would get shot at!
eskimo
-
Ammo counts have been trackable since Beta tour 2.
Since then I have fired 855,963 rounds of ammo from "bombers" (mostly fron flying "bombers".
I am sure that few gunners in WWII had the opportunity (or survived long enough)to shoot a few hundred thousand rounds at moving targets from their bombers.
As a result I have become a pretty good gunner. Many others in this sim also have a heck of a lot of gunnery practice and are even better shots than I.
In this sim, you are facing many deadly gunners that you can never give a square shot to (from a fighter). The problem that you are facing is not the guns being uber, it's the uber-gunners!
eskimo
-
LOL ketten!
I see the problem!
You have yet to fly a bomber mission in this sim! (I just checked your score.)
With all due respect,
SHUT THE HELL UP UNTILL YOU HAVE FLOWN AND GUNNED FROM A BOMBER!
After you get your buff waxed a few times you will figure out how the good buff killers get you without giving you a good shot.
You will also undoubtedly kill a few fighters and figure out how not to approach a bomber.
Re-post your opinions after you have experienced things from the recieving end.
eskimo
-
Kette:
Long time no see dude. Just a reminder, this isn't FA. Give it a few weeks before you form an opinion. You need to adjust your tactics, FA tactics don't work in here.Keep practicing, you'll find the best angles to attack each buff from.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Hey eskimo...
"With all due respect..."
Cut the crap.
I'm not gonna stoop and try and return the flame. Your right I haven't flown a bomber mission in AH. I don't have too. The gunners are way too accurate. Its not a "sim" if it doesn't simulate reality within the limitations of a computer game.
When you use tactics that were successful against real bomber boxes with many bombers providing multiple coverage and it continually fails....its not a "sim". It amount's too flying shapes that look like WWII fighters. Might as well be X-Wings attacking a Klingon battlecruiser. Head on Attacks were the tried and proven method of attacking bombers. Worked so well the B-17G had a chin turret installed to try and counter it and Head on still was successful. Crack a history book. Sure there isn't 40 other bombers in a box in AH...niether are there 50 other fighters from your Staffle attacking. If I'm gonna pay 30 bucks a month expecting a simulation then I want a simulation. Go back and read the whole post m8 and return with an intelligent reason why "Ubergunners" are ok.
So far we have the facts and history vs. Playability.
Playability is a strong argument. IMO the guns shouldn't be realistic because Lone bombers were dead bottom line and that's not fun for the bomber crew. However I think they should be toned down some. In a head on attack the fighter has the advantage of range due to aerodynamic drag. If a fighter has the patience to line up for a head on attack then chances should be in his favor. That's not how AH is at all. It should be dangerous to fly a bomber. Fighters should be escorting bombers and jabo's. Teamwork is all that needed..not Ubergunners.
-
Originally posted by juzz:
This is for any powered turret, Sperry ball, Martin mid-upper, Chin guns etc...
1. The guns are FIXED in the turret, as much as any fixed forward firing armament on a fighter.
2. The gunner doesn't swing the guns, he uses the turret controls to give inputs to the motors which turn the turret.
3. Slipstream will have no effect for reasons as above, plus the turret is aerodynamically shaped.
Ahh...No they are not m8. They are flexible mounts. Even a 125mm cannon in a tank turret is a "flexible" mount. They have to be boresighted constantly and rezeroed. Because the gun moves in its mount after firing, expansion/contraction (tempature), even different ammo lots.
Fixed guns are just that...fixed m8. You can't swivel at Mk108. Its bolted to the Airframe. You must point the WHOLE aircraft to aim the weapon. The airframe absorbs the recoil. Sure you must boresight and rezero the gun just as any weapon.
Think of it this way. Ask your father-in-law where the guns were put after a mission...the ARMS ROOM!!!!! Now talk to a P-51 pilot and ask him where his guns were stored after a mission...the FLIGHTLINE...IN THE WINGS OF HIS P51. Crews could access the breechs for cleaning but you didn't remove the whole reciever. Why, because you have to steal the whole plane to take em or have a wrench and whole lot of time on your hands to get to em.
YES...slipstream would have an effect on the gunners ability to rapidly acquire a proper site picture.
-
Why don't you have to? (fly a bomber mission in AH) What makes you so all knowing?
Do you really think that everyone who reads this is going to think that you know all just because you say you do?
I, like many other simpilots in this game, am also a WWII aviation buff. I, like many other simpilots in this game, could list dozens of books that I have read that have helped me develop my OPINIONS of tactics and gunnery. But that's all they will ever be, opinions. And that's all that you will ever have, opinions.
I am, however, pointing out that your perspective is extremly limited and narrowminded, that of a simpilot who flies only fighters.
One of my points is that there are many gunners in this sim that are far better shots than typical WWII gunners, simply because they have a heck of a lot more virtual experience at gunnery than any WWII gunner ever did at real life gunnery. The performances are bound to be different. In this game, we all have the opportunity to make virtual fatal mistakes dozens of times each night, and learn from them. Not an option in WWII.
The single greatest point that I have made that suggests that buff guns aren't uber, is that bombers in AH have K/D ratios between .73 and .48. (Even including kills of ground vehicles by bombs.) You can argue all you want about the guns being uber, but the stats clearly suggest that they are not.
If buff guns are so uber, how did I manage to get a K/D ratio of 20/1 against them so far this tour? (My overall K/D ratio this tour is only just a bit over 2/1)
{Hint #1, I use a variety of several different tactics, mostly German, when attacking bombers.}
[Hint #2, for example: When making a head-on pass, I roll! It really screws up the gunners aim.]
I looked up just a few of the others who I know are also good buff killers: (Tour 10 results, so far)
Ypsilon 21/0 Mooj 28/4 Mitsu 15/2
Ketten,
It is extremely arrogant to suggest that an element of this game is porked simply because things are not working out how you want, or expect them. The great thing about attacking bombers with a fighter is that you get to decide if, and when the attack will occur. If you don't enjoy taking on buffs, then don't. Otherwise, take the time to learn how to attack bombers.
Don't expect that everyone is here just to be your cannon fodder. Buff drivers spend a heck of a lot more time to get into the combat zone than the fighters do, they won't give up easily. A lot of buff pilots think that this game is porked because THEY get killed too often! The only people who have valid, unbiased opinions (IMO) are those who fly bombers and fighters.
IMHO, buffs should be even harder to kill, for the sake of gameplay alone.
eskimo
-
KetteJG26,
I do understand where you are coming from, but I have to disagree. I have found bombers VERY easy to kill in AH, although I must admit that my one HO attempt ended badly for me. Bombers are already rare and making them harder to defend or, as another thread requests, harder to hit the target with, would cause them to all but disappear.
Another thing to consider is that an hour or more of effort in a bomber can be ended very quickly by five to ten minutes of effort in a fighter. There is a large disparity of time investment between the two.
I flew a Lancaster mission tonight. It took me an hour to climb to 11,000ft and fly a fifth of the way across the map. After dropping 1 1000lb bomb on the Bishop's city I proceeded to their HQ. As I was on my way I was intercepted by a Spitfire MkIX flown by loser111. He came down on me from my 6 o'clock high. At a range of 900 yards I opened up on him with the two 50s in my tail turret and the two 303s in my mid upper turret. I nicked him and he flip-rolled and climbed away from me until he was 2000 yards above and a bit behind me. At that point he dove to gain speed and get below me. I knew he was going to try for a belly shot as my Lanc lacked any defense to that attack pattern. I jumped to the cockpit and did a hard turn to the right to spoil his pattern, and then leveled out and jumped back into the tail turret. He was already firing by the time I got a solution and returned fire. Once again I nicked him with the two 50s and he broke off, but this time it cost me my number 1 engine. Again he maneuvered for the belly shot and again I broke right to spoil it. As he came up again RAFBader, a countrymen of mine, flying a P-51 nailed him from behind. I was already shooting and I hit the Spitfire after it was already breaking up. I had 40 rounds left in each of my 50 cals after that fight. If it hadn't been for RAFBader, I don't think I would have survived. Because I hit the Spitfire last, I got credit for it. I then dropped my remaining 13 bombs on Bishop HQ and dove for safety. Just after I got to 100 feet off of the ground I came under attack again. I jumped to the Mid upper turret and gained the target in time to nick mrfish of the Fat Drunken Bastards before he killed me. I don't know what he was flying, but I think it was an F4U-1D.
Now, if I had been in that Spitfire MkIX (my normal ride) I would have climbed above the Lanc and come down nearly vertical on it from about 5,000ft above it. As I came down, I would aim for a wing as it is the most vulnerable part of a bomber (it also has the added benefit of not quite coming straight at the defesive guns, it throws their aim just a tad). Walking the fire into the wing I would then dive past the bomber and pull up and climb ahead of it. I have never had to make a 2nd pass on a bomber with altitude while using this technique. Every time I do this I think that this is the time I have to make a 2nd pass, but I look back and every time the bomber is missing a wing. I have also never been damaged while using this technique. I use it against B-17Gs, Lancaster MkIIIs and B-26s. I have never encountered a Ju88A-4 when I had a fully functioning Spitfire (or any other fighter).
I have only ever landed two bombers. One was a B-17 that was missing its #2 engine, both aerilons and its top, ball and tail turrets. The other was a Lancaster that was escorted by a P-38L. Though the P-38 lost, it tied up the enemy to the point where he couldn't intercept me. I have probably flown about 20 to 30 bomber missions in AH.
I don't fly much and am not very good, yet my Tour 8 record against bombers was 11 to 3.
I REALLY do recommend that you fly a few bomber missions.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 11-15-2000).]
-
Originally posted by eskimo:
Imagine,
You are the top turret gunner on a B-17 over Germany, 1944.
The tail gunner call out that a FW-190 is making a 6:00 high attack on your plane, he is the only enemy in sight of your bomber.
And you decide, even though you could easily bear your guns on him, "He's not in my sector, I'll let the tail gunner deal with him"!
Like hell you would! It's do or die time!
Heck, even the radioman would have popped open the top hatch and slid out his single 50 to take a crack at the 190.
Instead, right now, in Aces High we have the scenario where there in an enemy inbound on the 6 on a bomber and one doing the more sensible (but much more difficult to set up) 12 o'clock attack and even though the bomber has guns that can bear on both targets one of them will get to make is gun completely onopposed (provided they egress sensibly).
This is a fundamental flaw in the model.
As I've said I really, really want AI gunners in bombers, they were flown by a *crew* not one man.
I don't ever expect to see it though, can you imagine the whining there would be if we did? =)
------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>
-
I agree that this is a problem and would also like to see it resolved, Greywolf.
Apparently having several gunners in one ship does funny things, I.E. causes warps etc. I don't know much about the code and the details, but I will take HiTech's word for it. In WB, you could/can have up to 6 human controlled gunners in a B-17. It was a blast, my squad would occasionally put 14 guys in 2 ships and go trolling. HTC doesn't want to repeat the same mistakes/problems that occurred in WB.
Most people don't like the Sgt. Otto approach.
I guess it comes down to an argument that parallels the auto-formation argument:
Do you want to fly the plane, or man the guns? One could argue; learn to shoot, just as some argue learn to fly (formation). The bottom line is, however, that B-17s had a 10 man crew, and we as sim-pilots are expected to do them all. (Or if you get a gunner, up to 6 jobs per man.)
I think a good compromise would be to allow the pilot to man a set of guns and still allow 1 additional gunner to join him. This would give the Buff at least a pathetic chance against 2 coordinated attacking fighters.
eskimo
-
I'd be one of the first to whine about otto in AH.
At least with human gunners, you are dealing with humans who are shooting. With otto, you will *never* be able to make both sides happy. It will always be either too accurate or not accurate enough.
How many times has HTC change the way ack behaves in this game? Ack is otto right now. It's either too deadly or too easy. Currently, it's easy. Every time I've died from ack, it's been my fault -- there is a simple way to game the ack as it currently is set up.
I'd much rather worry about human gunners than the all-knowing, all-seeing otto. At least now I have a chance to jump a buff, especially if his head is down (unless he has brought another gunner with him).
And as a buff driver, I'd rather man my own guns...even if my head is down. And also, I don't want some stupid otto wasting all my ammo on bad shots....or not opening up at d1.4 because it's only programmed to open up at d800....or be such a bad shot that it hopelessly trails a good fighter pass, wasting all my ammo. No way.
Fury
-
Hehe fury,
I remember years ago, when I played WB.
A spit trailed my B-17 just at the guns max-otto range. He danced around for a few minutes as otto ran out of lead. He then slid into my six, drove up to D150, and hosed me! Lesson learned.
I prefer manning the guns myself also.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by eskimo:
Hehe fury,
I remember years ago, when I played WB.
A spit trailed my B-17 just at the guns max-otto range. He danced around for a few minutes as otto ran out of lead. He then slid into my six, drove up to D150, and hosed me! Lesson learned.
I prefer manning the guns myself also.
eskimo
I did that also (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I still do in AH sometimes when I have time to play with the buff.
Long time ago in WarBirds, I did turn gunners on and off to conserve ammunition, if someone tried to get guns out of ammo (and sometimes giving out a burst so he thinks I am firing.. then he comes in and WHAM (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
-
Originally posted by eskimo:
Why don't you have to? (fly a bomber mission in AH) What makes you so all knowing?
Don't pretend to be "ALL" knowing eskimo. Pick up history book and read about what worked in WWII Air combat. If its a sim then it should work here.
Do you really think that everyone who reads this is going to think that you know all just because you say you do?
I listed the resources in the begining..check em out yourself.
I, like many other simpilots in this game, am also a WWII aviation buff. I, like many other simpilots in this game, could list dozens of books that I have read that have helped me develop my OPINIONS of tactics and gunnery. But that's all they will ever be, opinions. And that's all that you will ever have, opinions.
Events recorded in History are not Opinions.
I am, however, pointing out that your perspective is extremly limited and narrowminded, that of a simpilot who flies only fighters.
I never said I haven't flown bombers. Just not in AH m8.
One of my points is that there are many gunners in this sim that are far better shots than typical WWII gunners, simply because they have a heck of a lot more virtual experience at gunnery than any WWII gunner ever did at real life gunnery. The performances are bound to be different. In this game, we all have the opportunity to make virtual fatal mistakes dozens of times each night, and learn from them. Not an option in WWII.
Same with fighter pilots in AH.....and?
The single greatest point that I have made that suggests that buff guns aren't uber, is that bombers in AH have K/D ratios between .73 and .48. (Even including kills of ground vehicles by bombs.) You can argue all you want about the guns being uber, but the stats clearly suggest that they are not.
If buff guns are so uber, how did I manage to get a K/D ratio of 20/1 against them so far this tour? (My overall K/D ratio this tour is only just a bit over 2/1)
{Hint #1, I use a variety of several different tactics, mostly German, when attacking bombers.}
[Hint #2, for example: When making a head-on pass, I roll! It really screws up the gunners aim.]
Gee your good m8! Must have learned how to take out the "Klingon Battlecruisers!"
I looked up just a few of the others who I know are also good buff killers: (Tour 10 results, so far)
Ypsilon 21/0 Mooj 28/4 Mitsu 15/2
Ketten,
It is extremely arrogant to suggest that an element of this game is porked simply because things are not working out how you want, or expect them. The great thing about attacking bombers with a fighter is that you get to decide if, and when the attack will occur. If you don't enjoy taking on buffs, then don't. Otherwise, take the time to learn how to attack bombers.
I only made the post after asking a few questions from other pilots in the game.
Thanks for assuming that I am only trying to make things easier for me....
I think its extremely arrogant of you to hop in start flaming. The only sensible argument you have made is the one I gave you about playability.
Don't expect that everyone is here just to be your cannon fodder. Buff drivers spend a heck of a lot more time to get into the combat zone than the fighters do, they won't give up easily. A lot of buff pilots think that this game is porked because THEY get killed too often! The only people who have valid, unbiased opinions (IMO) are those who fly bombers and fighters.
IMHO, buffs should be even harder to kill, for the sake of gameplay alone.
eskimo
You know its amazing that only a few people have agreed with my post which is fine. Most people disagree and are fairly content with how the game is set up now. Hey I'm not the only one flying here and that's why we have a bulliten board. To discuss things about AH that concern us and give feedback to the developers. Of all the people who have responded eskimo you are the only one who's acted like a jerk. You make alot of assumption's about me personnally off a few lines of text in a discussion forum.
-
Kette, did you run a search of the BBS of "Buff Gunnery" before posting?
Wilfrid
-
Why don't you have to? (fly a bomber mission in AH)
Well Ketten?
"I listed the resources in the begining..check em out yourself."
Just because you say that you have read a few good books does not mean that that they support your point of veiw. In fact I see little connection
"Events recorded in History are not Opinions."
Sorry, I don't get it? Perhaps you read that 190s and 109s HOed B-17s and killed em. Therefore everytime you HO a B-17 it should die otherwise the system is porked? How the heck do you know that you are doing things just as they were done in WWII? No sim will ever repeat all events that happened in WWII. Even if the flight modeling and balistics in this sim were perfect, things would rarely turn out just as they did in WWII, because we are just sim pilots, playing for fun.
"I never said I haven't flown bombers. Just not in AH m8."
DUDE! THIS IS WHAT YOUR ENTIRE POST IS ALL ABOUT!
BUFF GUNS IN AH! Other sims don't matter.
"Same with fighter pilots in AH.....and?"
and... if you get in a dogfight with a fighter, you had better hope that Ypsilon or ons or mooj (the list goes on) aint in the other fighter.
and... if you attack a bomber, you had better hope that Mitsu or Cavemanj or rollo (the list goes on) aint in the buff.
"Gee your good m8! Must have learned how to take out the "Klingon Battlecruisers!"
And so have countless others who took the time to learn how to attack them.
Call them (buffs) what you want, but they have K/D ratios between .73 and .48.
"I only made the post after asking a few questions from other pilots in the game.
Thanks for assuming that I am only trying to make things easier for me...."
And if it's easier for you, who is it harder for?
...the buff driver. He already has a hard enough job.
"You know its amazing that only a few people have agreed with my post which is fine. Most people disagree and are fairly content with how the game is set up now. Hey I'm not the only one flying here and that's why we have a bulliten board. To discuss things about AH that concern us and give feedback to the developers. Of all the people who have responded eskimo you are the only one who's acted like a jerk. You make alot of assumption's about me personnally off a few lines of text in a discussion forum."
Believe it or not Ketten, each one of your post sounds arrogant and one sided.
eskimo
-
"One sided and arrogant"...
And yours don't eskimo?
Hey m8...visit the library and check the info I posted if you think its wrong and dispute it.
-
I have been flying fighters and buffs in AH since day 1 of Beta Tour 1. I look at this game from the perspective of a fighter and a bomber pilot. How is that one sided?
You seem to understand all about this particular game after flying fighters in it for 2 whole weeks.
You also keep ignoring several of my questions.
eskimo
-
Ketten;
Your original post says basically 2 things.
#1. It's really hard for a moving ariel target to hit another moving ariel target for a variety of reasons.
We know this ketten. Most of the regulars in this sim have a good understanding of the balistic issues that you brought up. It's pretty basic stuff. You write as if you expect the readers to know nothing about ballistics and figher-bomber attack tactics. Dude, most of the people in this sim are WWII aviation buffs.
"Its called Aerodynamic Drag". Thanks for letting us know this, Ketten, but most of the pilots in this sim are well educated. Most have had high school or college physics (or both).
But the truth is, as far as gunnery goes, a lot of bullets collided with a lot of airplanes in WWII. It happens a lot in this sim also.
Some of what you brought up is irrelevant to the issue of ARIEL gunnery. Barrel flex from a riffleman's riffle? So what? A little spread can be good in a 50 Cal. MG, especially in ariel gunnery.
Some of your stuff is just plain wrong;
"That's why you didn't attack bombers from the side..just about impossible to hit."
What makes you think this?
One of my father in law's jobs in WWII was flying the RP-63.
This was an armor plated P-63 that was used to make mock attacks on B-17's for training purposes. The B-17 gunners would shoot powdered lead/bakalite 30 Cal. Fragible bullets at the RP-63s. The RP-63 had strike sensors that would light a light in the spinner, indicating a hit.
He often made side attacks on the bombers. He was instructed to do this because it was a typical German tactic.
The 3-9 attack is a well known and effective bomber attack tactic. It gives the fighter a fair shot, and the bomber gunner a lousy one.
I use it in AH whenever I get a chance.
Point #2 from your post;
Bomber gunners greatly over-claimed kills on ONE mission.
So... What.
The RELEVANT truth is,
A lot German fighters shot down a lot of U.S. bombers.
And... a lot of U.S. bombers shot down a lot of German fighters.
U.S. bomber crews and German fighter pilot greatly feared each other.
This is my opinion.
It is not from reading only 2 books, but from reading a small library of books and articles on the subject since childhood. And from talking to other hobby/historians who have also studied the subject in-depth. And from testing what I have learned in flight sims. And from talking to a handful of people who were actually there.
eskimo
P.S.
My father in law said that he always knew when one of the instructors was manning the guns because they would always nail him, regardless of the attack. The instructors had a lot of experience, and were good.
So are a lot of buff gunners in AH.
The unrealistic problem that you are facing is that MANY experienced gunners in this sim have far more experience than WWII gunners ever did. As a result, they are damn good shots.
-
Ketten..
Fly a buff, any your choice, and I'll attack ya (and I suck vz buffs in a fighter)
Give me 3 tries, we'll see who wins.
Then perhaps ask Eskimo to do the same thing.
Just look at the bomber stats man!! In a buff its a very rare occurence that you get to rtb.
Make buffing even more fatal, and we won't see any.
SKurj
Leave the bombers alone
-
Kette, give it time. Most buffs have a dead zone their guns can't cover. Learn it on each buff, and avoid hot spots.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
<door opens slightly... unidentified hand tosses in BBS grenade with message attached ... Kette reads message.. "Kette - tell them whats wrong with F4U-1C cannons" ... door slams and sound of running feet>
hehehe
GDR
-
Eskimo..
My first post states that B-17 gunners claimed alot of German aircraft destoryed m8. They should have told the Germans that because examining the actual losses after the war it wasn't true. Gunners in the Schwienfurt raid claimed more german fighters than were even present. Because the 8th AF let those claims stand to boost morale there is alot of misinformation out there. That's why I like Don Caldwell's book. He list's the claimed and the actual losses from both sides. Early war the Luftwaffe overclaimed alot but by midwar the RLM was fairly accurate. The RAF grossly overclaimed the whole war and the USAAF was hit and miss. The RLM made mistakes but with a average of a year long investigation into each claim and the fact they crossed referenced intelligence assest's with pilot statements as well as physical evidience they were the most accurate.
I wasn't talking down to anyone...HOW THE HELL CAN YOU TELL MY STATE OF MIND FROM ONE POST? If you already know the information be secure in yourself and assume it was put there to educate those not as well informed as yourself.
A side attack was not Luftwaffe tactics m8. It is not the smartest attack the fighter can make at all. Sure it happenend.
In a side attack the advantage would lay with gunner. He is looking at a target coming straight at him with very little deflection while the fighter is facing a 90 degree deflection. The relative wind would be full value for both.
That dispersion of bullets over a wide cone you keep toting as an advantage is not m8. Sure you might get lucky and put one bullet into a vital location and bring the target down but not likely. If that was the case why did they send your father-in-law to gunnery training? Just teach em to spray and pray! Having been under hostile myself its real easy to tell if the enemy is just shooting your direction. Suppressive fire isn't the number of bullets thrown downrange. Its the first time someone looks out from cover and gets their head blown off. All those around em say "F--K THAT!!" and hunker down not even looking. A wide dispersion might scare the enemy but it won't bring down many planes.
-
Originally posted by KetteJG26:
The gunners are way too accurate.
So what do you suggest? Take away peoples' accounts if they too high a gunnery percentage in bombers?
You do know that all those "too accurate" gunners are real people, don't you?
The problem isn't the bomber modelling, but rather the gunnery model. Yes, in the real war, bomber gunners probably didn't hit toejam, and didn't kill anywhere near as many fighters as were claimed. In AH though, we have a gunnery system that makes long distance kills ridiculously easy (as in any game that's been released to date), and that's why bomber gunners kill you in your fighter if you make the slightest mistake.
Real life tactics still work, gang up on a target, and approach from as much of a dead angle as possible, and a lone bomber is still easy meat.
------------------
Rickenbacker (Ricken)
-ISAF-
the Independent Swedish Air Force
[This message has been edited by Rickenbacker (edited 11-16-2000).]
-
Ketten.. that dispersion I think would be an advantage over the current system in AH now.
When gunning a buff now, if u don't exactly hit the location the attacking fighter is in, all 5 .50's you may be blasting away with miss. Dispersion.... ok if I were just using 1 gun position, that fighter on my 6 would be hit just a few times with as many or more misses. Now consider I am firing 5 .50's guess what ... throwing that much lead at you with hits occuring when my aim is slightly off and the same number of hits when my aim is right on, results in a fighter going down. The dispersion would help those buff gunners who don't take many fighters down now (the majority) especially against 6 attacks.
Leave buffs alone.
Once you've been in Aces for a few months, and seen all areas of the sim, from all POV's, feel free to criticize +)
SKurj
-
"In a side attack the advantage would lay with gunner. He is looking at a target coming straight at him with very little deflection while the fighter is facing a 90 degree deflection. The relative wind would be full value for both."
ROTFLMHO
Ketten, stop and think about it for one second before you make any more stupid comments! BOTH planes are moving! That means, from a waist gunner's point of view, a side attacking fighter is going to zip across his field of view, from front to back. The fighter is only pointing at him for an instant! It is pretty damn hard to track a plane that is closing at 400 mph, while panning your gun from 1:30 to 4:30 in one or two seconds.
In this attack, the bomber ends up flying through the fighters stream of fire. It gets raked from nose to tail. From the fighter pilot's point of view, all that he has to do is make sure that the pitch of his aircraft is good. If the bomber flies through his sights, from side to side, it's getting whacked.
These same principles are what makes the vertical attack also so effective. I suppose that now you are going to say that the Germans didn't do vertical attacks. Whatever dude.
Ketten, attacking a bomber, such as the B-17 that has a 360 degree field of fire, a deflection shot is the way to go.
Try it and your frustrations with buff hunting will end!
Now if you would spend less time supposing, and just hop in a dang bomber, all of this wouldn't be so confusing.
As far as cones of fire go, WE AREN'T TALKING ABOUT A 45 DEGREE SPREAD. A 1 or 2 degree spread will give you a deadly cone of fire. Bombers used MGs, not sniper riffles.
Why do you think hunters use shotguns on moving targets.
eskimo
-
Troll?
-
Eskimo....
That's not me supposing m8 that tidbit comes from Mike Spick. He's a historian/author who has written several books on Air to Air combat. "Fighters at War","Designed for the Kill", "Modern Air Combat", and "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces: The tactics and techniques of the Experte".
If 90 degree deflection attacks were as succesful in real life..don't you think an Air Force at war would adopt em?
so....ROFLMAO..
Hey its ok m8....someone will think ur cool..
By the way I escorted 3 lanc's to target. All but one came home and they got more kills than the escort. 6 enemy to 4 of us..
-
Hey eskimo..
your father-in-law used RP-63's as target drones? When?
I was in Beta testing for AH too m8. I wasn't gonna pay 30 bucks a month for AH though when it went out of beta.
[This message has been edited by KetteJG26 (edited 11-16-2000).]
-
Here's a useful article: http://www.combatsim.com/htm/aug99/fighter-tactic1.htm (http://www.combatsim.com/htm/aug99/fighter-tactic1.htm)
This one seems particularly relavant...
(http://209.61.188.28/htm/aug99/jpg/swooper.jpg)
THE SWOOPER
Lead Squadron of Group, Any Combat Wing
TACTICS DESCRIPTION
In the diagram above, the single-engine aircraft makes a diving attack from 10 o'clock, high, swooping down under the squadron. Seldom is the fighter closer to the Fortress squadron than 500 yards, and in this type of attack the fighter comes down from an angle of between 30 and 40 degrees, without rolling over. The fighter pulls out of the dive when clear of the squadron.
IMPORTANT: This type of diving attack can be and often is made under the high and low squadrons, as follows:
(1) Under low squadron, from any position between 6 to 12 o'clock, high.
(2) Under the high squadron, from any position between 12 to 3 o'clock, high.
The diving attack under the lead squadron is often made from any position between 9 to 1 o'clock, high.
VARIATION
While in the majority of these swooping attacks the figher goes under the squadron formation, sometimes it goes over the formation. If the combat formation is bad, the fighter may dive and go through the formation, i.e., between the lead and high squadrons or, if diving from the 12 to 3 o'clock positions, between the lead and low squadrons. Almost invariably, when the fighter dives and pulls up over the formation, the pull-up is over the high squadron.
TACTICS LESSON
Diving attacks with deflection are what we like. The fighter is at a disadvantage. He has a hard shot and can get in only a short burst. Gunners have plenty of time to shoot him down.
That said, I find that a 90º deflection diving attack is what works best for me vs B-17's also...
-
Does anybody know if a bombers crew can be killed? If you can kill the gunners, disable that gunner position in the first pass, this could add some needed realism to attacking bombers. Rambling 'cause I'm sure this has been brought up in the past (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/redface.gif)
Lars
-
Turret positions can be knocked out. It's quite distressing to not be able to shoot back (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Fury
-
Yes, they can be killed. There's also a bug here that means that if any of your gunners is injured or killed, the pilot is injured as well.
------------------
Rickenbacker (Ricken)
-ISAF-
the Independent Swedish Air Force
-
MrLars,
Yes, gun positions can be knocked out, but it's better NOT to rely on that. Rely on speed and position to get you through an attack on a bomber (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
As to the rest of this discussion ... GEESH!
buhdman, out
------------------
Walt (buhdman) Barrow
(formerly lt-buhd-lite)
The Buccaneers - "Return with Honor"
home.earthlink.net/~wjbarrow
-
Thanks for the info guys! That's something I didn't know.
Lars
-
Seems to me the something is porked in the sim when the most successful attacks against bombers in AH are exactly the opposite of Historically successful attacks.
-
I think the modeling for bomber gunners in AH is fine. From a historical perspective it seems to hold true. In my prior life as an AF fighter pilot, we trained against B-52s making mock gun attacks with F-15s. I find the similarity in success/failure very similar. Same things that worked there work in AH and in WWII: high deflection raking inplane gun pass pulling lead and firing from nose to tail on bomber, then quick reversal and get out of there! Stagnate your attack inside gun range, you die!
-
I think the few here who have had the opportunity to fire an M2 will agree...
Muzzle bounce and it's effect are not modeled. This is, IMO, the reason why bomber gunners have the success that they now enjoy.
It's modeled in the Panzer and Ostys main guns and should be included in bombers, especially for the Waist and Chin positions. That's just my opinion...your mileage may vary.
Lars
[This message has been edited by MrLars (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
You got a point there Lars.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
I agree Lars. Not modeling weapon recoil on a flexible mount would make them much more accurate.
-
You want to complain about recoil, but the B29 fire control is OK? That seems a lil whacked to me.
Lizking
-
Most of the bomber pilots flying these days are uber. Catching an idiot in a bomber is not only rare, it is a sacred thing. On my last tour I had better than 2:1 vs fighters in a B-26. On a good sortie I will get four fighters.
Lone Buffs did very well against fighters in the pacific, 2:1 regularly, 4:1 on occasion. Buffs in bomber formations suffer, we don't have these kind of problems in aces high (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
In the last tour I had 3 kills and zero losses vs buffs. This tour I'm breaking even, in past tours I'v gotten 6:1 and 10:3 vs B-17's.
Attacking at B-26 is near suicide since nine times out of ten the buff pilot is uber. The only cure for the uber B-26 is the already uber C-hog with turbolaser hispano's. Attacking in most any other aircraft is suicide.