Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: dirt911 on February 02, 2009, 02:51:53 PM

Title: gun damage ratio
Post by: dirt911 on February 02, 2009, 02:51:53 PM
i dont know if this is been posted before..........but we need the gun damage ratio upped its too low and guns are bad using like 50 bullets on one enemy,...............


not worth it i give this idea a :aok
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Steve on February 02, 2009, 03:02:21 PM
huh?
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Karnak on February 02, 2009, 03:05:00 PM
Improve your aim and tactics to match the weapons of your chosen fighter.  Guns hit plenty hard.  Nothing takes 50 well aimed .50 cal rounds.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: SectorNine50 on February 02, 2009, 03:11:14 PM
If you read combat logs, you'll notice that most pilots will go through hundreds of rounds on a single contact.  The guns are just fine. :aok
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 02, 2009, 03:20:50 PM
If you read combat logs, you'll notice that most pilots will go through hundreds of rounds on a single contact.  The guns are just fine. :aok

Unless it's a K-4, then there is only 85 Taters to go through.

 :lol
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Motherland on February 02, 2009, 03:22:07 PM
...65...
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 02, 2009, 03:23:17 PM
fixed    :aok

(damn  luftweenies)  :furious

 :noid
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Serenity on February 03, 2009, 12:31:39 AM
(damn  luftweenies)  :furious

Says the JG-11 pilot...

I think you're just used to the doggy-style fighting in your fluffy-wulf 190.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: BnZs on February 03, 2009, 01:20:45 AM
Odd, most people complain the guns are TOO lethal for some reason.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: dirt911 on February 03, 2009, 01:25:18 AM
i dont fly the stupid 190 i like the p47 but all day today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: BnZs on February 03, 2009, 01:27:17 AM
From 1K no doubt...

The minimum number of .50 caliber bullets to destroy a Lanc is 1 I believe. Right in the pilot's forehead.



i shat .....

 :lol
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Nilsen on February 03, 2009, 04:54:34 AM
Guns are lethal enough.

A 30mm to the brain wont do any good if it misses by 100 feet... much like a clue that doesnt hit the same area.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Tec on February 03, 2009, 05:10:13 AM
I think he meant he shat all his bullets AT a set of Lancs.  I fly the Jug quite a bit and it absolutely destroys bombers, even from long range.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 03, 2009, 06:54:46 AM
i dont fly the stupid 190 i like the p47 but all day today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out

You must not be good enough, yet      :D

I think I got your point.  I'm just not sure if I totally got it from your gross lack of grammar and punctuation.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Saxman on February 03, 2009, 07:29:31 AM
Where did you shoot him? I can take down three B-24s with the six .50cal in my F4U-1A and still have plenty left for a couple or four fighter kills. If you blew all your load on one Lancaster (which isn't nearly as tough as the Liberator) with nothing to show for it you're doing something wrong.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 03, 2009, 07:30:35 AM
I concur.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: ScatterFire on February 03, 2009, 10:02:29 AM
If you read combat logs, you'll notice that most pilots will go through hundreds of rounds on a single contact.  The guns are just fine. :aok
I have like a 1.78% hit ratio; takes a lot of ammo to kill a lanc like that  :rofl
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Steve on February 03, 2009, 10:22:16 AM
i dont fly the stupid 190 i like the p47 but all day today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out

you missed. I can post plenty of films of me blasting lancs in a feeble p51D which has a fraction of the ammo and not as much firepower as the 47.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 03, 2009, 10:38:23 AM
Agreed, Steve.

WHERE you hit them also make a world of difference.  Just randomly hitting something that large with scattered groupings won't cut the mustard.

In, addition, each type of buff has it's weak spot.  I personally go for a 3/9 shot on Lancs and 17's, trying to slice off the tail.

With 24's its top down and going at the wing root.

These are obviously if I can't get a good cockpit shot.    :devil
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Saxman on February 03, 2009, 11:02:05 AM
Aiming center of mass is fine against fighters, you're bound to hit SOMETHING important (I don't aim for individual components against fighters, I'm not a good enough shot for that). Bombers are entirely different. WHERE you shoot is more important than how much you hit and with what.

As Messa said it depends on the target, although hitting the cocking in a head-on shot works for all of them. I also find a vertical drop on the wingroots is effective against all BUFFs, though as indicated the B-24 is most susceptible to this.

But you have to concentrate your fire. Waving your guns and scattering hits all over isn't going to do you any good. Keep your attack run steady and focused on one point. Just break off before you run in to him.

And DON'T sit on his tail. It takes a lot more fire to cause enough damage to bring him down that way than it would if you make a high-angle pass that gives you a clean shot at one point.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: BnZs on February 03, 2009, 02:19:02 PM
Well, you know Saxman, I think the "aluminum tube" portion of our bombers is a little tough. Realistically speaking you'd have fluid lines of various sorts, bombs to hit, as well as crew members. I think taking out the gun positions from a rain of bullets that would surely puncture at least some of the crew is a little harder than it should be. Whereas ingame you get little to no effect.

Spot on about the B-24 fire "button", although they often fly burning long enough to accomplish their mission. The really supremely annoying bombers are the B-17s and the fast ones like B-26s running on the deck where you can not make a diving attack in the pure vertical without augering.


Aiming center of mass is fine against fighters, you're bound to hit SOMETHING important (I don't aim for individual components against fighters, I'm not a good enough shot for that). Bombers are entirely different. WHERE you shoot is more important than how much you hit and with what.

As Messa said it depends on the target, although hitting the cocking in a head-on shot works for all of them. I also find a vertical drop on the wingroots is effective against all BUFFs, though as indicated the B-24 is most susceptible to this.

But you have to concentrate your fire. Waving your guns and scattering hits all over isn't going to do you any good. Keep your attack run steady and focused on one point. Just break off before you run in to him.

And DON'T sit on his tail. It takes a lot more fire to cause enough damage to bring him down that way than it would if you make a high-angle pass that gives you a clean shot at one point.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Enker on February 03, 2009, 03:25:32 PM
Aiming center of mass is fine against fighters, you're bound to hit SOMETHING important (I don't aim for individual components against fighters, I'm not a good enough shot for that).
Saxman, that is a load of bull, you are one of the best shots in the game.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Saxman on February 03, 2009, 03:35:15 PM
It's a lot easier to hit when you don't shoot outside 200yds. :D
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: splitatom on February 03, 2009, 05:18:12 PM
i think weapons hitting power has gone down some because my snap shots in my f4u1a don't take out 109's like they used to it seems it was changed with the il2 update
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: moot on February 03, 2009, 05:30:25 PM
i dont fly the stupid 190 i like the p47 but all day today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out
Show   some   film
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: dirt911 on February 03, 2009, 06:02:38 PM
i have fighter kills but it requires too many bullets just now i sho a p51 in the engine and cockpit so he has no engine its not runing and he keeps climbind for 5mins after his engine went out
that should be fixed then today i shot another p51 with i dont even know how many rounds
and guess what
                                           NOTHING
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Motherland on February 03, 2009, 06:04:24 PM
i have fighter kills but it requires too many bullets just now i sho a p51 in the engine and cockpit so he has no engine its not runing and he keeps climbind for 5mins after his engine went out
that should be fixed then today i shot another p51 with i dont even know how many rounds
and guess what
                                           NOTHING
Show   some   film
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Saxman on February 03, 2009, 06:10:04 PM
dirt,

Let me introduce you to some friends of mine. Their names are:

, - Comma
. - Period
! - Exclamation Point
? - Question Mark
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: The Fugitive on February 03, 2009, 06:22:12 PM
i have fighter kills but it requires too many bullets just now i sho a p51 in the engine and cockpit so he has no engine its not runing and he keeps climbind for 5mins after his engine went out
that should be fixed then today i shot another p51 with i dont even know how many rounds
and guess what
                                           NOTHING

Whats your ingame name?
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Spikes on February 03, 2009, 08:13:13 PM
i dont fly the stupid 190 i like the p47 but all day today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out
1.) a good 190 stick could own your P47 any day.
2.) you missed
3.) I can take down a set of Lancs with a Ki-61, only using cannon rounds. 3500+ rounds vs 250? Somethings wrong here.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Banshee7 on February 03, 2009, 10:41:14 PM
dirt,

Let me introduce you to some friends of mine. Their names are:

, - Comma
. - Period
! - Exclamation Point
? - Question Mark

 :rofl
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Serenity on February 03, 2009, 10:53:09 PM
today i shat probably all my rounds int one set of lancs not even any smoke goes out

[Larry the Cable Guy Voice] Well, THERES yer problem![/Larry the Cable Guy Voice]
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Saxman on February 03, 2009, 10:54:56 PM
[Larry the Cable Guy Voice] Well, THERES yer problem![/Larry the Cable Guy Voice]

That's from Mythbusters. Get it right!
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: frank3 on February 04, 2009, 06:33:47 AM
I'd never go for the rear or head-on attacks on a bomber. Like 9 out of 10 aircraft, the armor is placed exactly for these angles. Better go for the heads-up attacks instead (even gives you a 'larger' target!)
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: AKHog on February 04, 2009, 11:49:33 AM
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned convergence. I find that a 1 second burst at the convergence range to almost any meaty part of a buff will do enough damage to take em down (with most gun packages). Once you are inside convergence range you are just waisting ammo.

For buff hunting its best to have your convergence set pretty far out so you can take a burst shot and roll out to avoid return fire.

Like others said, aim for wing roots on most buffs. If I don't have cannons sometimes I'll dive into a H/O shot and aim for the pilot area. Again, set up so you have your gun solution at your convergence range, this is very critical especially when you are aiming for a small area (cockpit). If you are aimed perfectly but not at your convergence, your bullets will not hit the target where they need to. 

Take some buffs up into a dog fight and do some gunning. This will quickly teach you what planes make easy targets and what planes are hard to hit. You'll learn that when attacking buffs, keeping your speed up and slashing sideways through the formation is likely the safest approach.

Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: VonMessa on February 04, 2009, 12:37:26 PM
I, personally, just assumed that we were speaking in terms of the proper convergence range.

 :o

Good point.   :aok
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: mtnman on February 04, 2009, 05:40:12 PM
Dirt911-

I think these guys have hit it on the head.  You're experiencing some basic, common problems.  It isn't the lethality of the rounds.  Those are set at more than adequate strength.  Look at this clip to see what effect the guns have if you do three things right.  Set your convergence correctly (or at least effectively), shoot at convergence range, and actually hit your target in a vulnerable area long enough.  I'm doing those three things in this clip.  The F4U has enough ammo for about 10 bomber kills, and has the same guns as the P47 (except only 6 guns...).  My convergence is set at 275.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/czdvwnnnzyi/Buffs.ahf

I'm sure you think you're hitting the target enough to get quick kills, but I highly doubt you are.  The hit sprites can be misleading.  It doesn't take a lot of hits to light up a target pretty brightly.  The sprites are "huge" when compared to the actual hit, especially when it's something like a .50 round from a P47.  You need to hit one area long enough to do adequate damage.  The .50's just punch holes (they don't explode like cannon rounds do) so it takes a concentrated stream (of long enough duration) to do the job.

The good news is that your "problem" can be fixed.  Proper set-up, practice, and experience will have you knocking those buffs down fairly easily...

Look up a trainer if you'd like some 1 on 1 help.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Serenity on February 04, 2009, 06:44:50 PM
That's from Mythbusters. Get it right!

lol. I wouldn't expect this guy to recognize a Jamie or Adam reference. Larry seemed easier to understand.

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own!"
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Steve on February 04, 2009, 08:05:21 PM
Dirt, here's a 1 minute film of my 51D vs. lancs. It's the whole fight, start to end.  Watch the film and you will see nothing unremarkable or magical, you can do the same thing with practice. Check it out.

Edit: to get the exact same view I have, move your head position so only the bottom half of the sight is visible in the reticle.  leave the dot at the very top.


http://www.mediafire.com/?2ow5tq2wzyz (http://www.mediafire.com/?2ow5tq2wzyz)
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: stroker71 on February 04, 2009, 08:15:19 PM
I don't change my convergence for buff hunting.  Usually come in High 3/9 position and hit a target area for the bomber I am attacking.  The other day (using a c205) killed 6 lancs and had ammo left over.  Short burst at convergence ususally in tail or wing root and POOF..or atleast set on fire. 
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: mtnman on February 05, 2009, 08:15:37 AM
I don't change my convergence for buff hunting.  Usually come in High 3/9 position and hit a target area for the bomber I am attacking.  The other day (using a c205) killed 6 lancs and had ammo left over.  Short burst at convergence ususally in tail or wing root and POOF..or atleast set on fire. 

I don't change mine for any particular target either.  I've had mine set the same for several years apart from some measuring/testing in the TA.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: SmokinLoon on February 05, 2009, 06:21:40 PM
I find the .50 cals to be the most accurate guns in the game.  That doesnt mean I hit well with them.   ;)   I will use the 8gun jug to pounce on Buffs and it does well.  People swear by the 190A-8, but the 30mm have a trajectory like a slow pitch softball so I try risk my neck every time I go up in one hunting buffs because I have teh conv set to 300.
Title: Re: gun damage ratio
Post by: Lusche on February 05, 2009, 06:25:52 PM
People swear by the 190A-8, but the 30mm have a trajectory like a slow pitch softball

When the A8 was my premier buff buster for a time, I decided against taking the 30mm package:  4*20mm + 2*13mm are absolutely sufficient, while having more firing time and most important: no mixed trajectories issue.