Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Slate on May 15, 2009, 10:23:46 AM

Title: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Slate on May 15, 2009, 10:23:46 AM
   OK I know we need another Ho thread like we need a Hole in the head but here I go anyway. This is meant for those who use the ho exclusively or find it thier only alternative.
   To me a Ho is like a Joust with the event being over in a few seconds. No real skill but getting your lance in position and hoping for the best. Flying 5 minutes to have a fight end in 2 seconds is not fun for anyone. If you don't learn maneuvering you will always be at the mercy of those on your six. 
   Dogfighting is more like a Boxing match with each fighter getting in position and dealing blows until one is overcome with damage.
   Imagine you just paid for a Pay per View fight and the fighters come out with a Baseball bats and the one that swings first knocks the other guy out. You would feel cheated. Would you admire the winners skill?
   So Avoid the Ho when possible and enjoy the true spirit of a Dogfighting Game as your best your opponents with your Intellect, Skill, Trickery, or just dumb luck.  :cool:
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 15, 2009, 10:47:01 AM
what you guys are experiencing is very simple.  You put all your attention into this thing called the "Ho" because it frustrates you....but I tell you, its all about overcrowding.  In an arena with 60-80 people Ho'ing just is not a problem.  There is freedom of movement, freedom of maneover.  Put 250-350 peeps in a single arena, even a big one, and they all end up coagulating in central areas and the overcrowding leads to alot of "ho jousting" because there are simply too many of you.  It will never cease as long as the arenas are overcrowded.  Learn Ho, Live Ho, Love Ho.

Or......suggest that maybe HiTechs dream of a thousand people in a single arena would end up like so many rats in a box.  They end up eating each other alive.  Suggest we go back to a WBs era cap of 110-113 people per arena.  Then, just maybe, your lofty aspirations of "gameplay" would materialize.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: SEraider on May 15, 2009, 11:08:11 AM
I usually don't HO, but I confess, I ho'd some dweeb the other day.  I feel soooooo guilty.  :cry

Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Slate on May 15, 2009, 11:11:12 AM
(http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk52/promise8002/yes.gif)

 "Despite of my rage I'm still just a rat in a cage"
 
 I know the Ho won't end I'm just giving some a reason why not to. (plus if you put Ho in your post people will read it Shhhhhhhhhh!)

 Forgive me Hitech for I too have Ho'd
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: druski85 on May 15, 2009, 11:16:12 AM
Isn't it despite all my rage, I am still just a rat in a cage?   :D  I'd probably have Billy Corgan's babies.

Anyway....

I'm sure you would get less head-on shots in a smaller arena,  but I have no idea how that would eliminate the problem.  Still plenty of HO's to be found when our current arenas are down in the 80-100 player range.  (come on at weird hours)  I do like the jousting comparison, but not so sure about the boxing one.  Float like a butterfly, sting like a -- oh wait I just got picked.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Slate on May 15, 2009, 11:23:41 AM
Isn't it despite all my rage, I am still just a rat in a cage?   :D  I'd probably have Billy Corgan's babies.

Anyway....

I'm sure you would get less head-on shots in a smaller arena,  but I have no idea how that would eliminate the problem.  Still plenty of HO's to be found when our current arenas are down in the 80-100 player range.  (come on at weird hours)  I do like the jousting comparison, but not so sure about the boxing one.  Float like a butterfly, sting like a -- oh wait I just got picked.
  You're probably right on those lyrics, I can't distinguish words in songs sometimes.  :confused:
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Lusche on May 15, 2009, 11:26:30 AM
I fly both at prime as well as "weird" hours.

When the aren is full of people, I see a lot more "Ho's" that are in my opinion just FQ shots, instinctively pulling the trigger when someone in a furball more or less suddenly appears in front of you.

But genuine HO's, the real thing where 2 players face each other at a distance, put their gunsight on each other and just joust (the John Wayne Merge)- Those happen at off times with 30-100 players just as often as when the arena is crowded.

And yes, I hoed this morning.  Was up for some buff slaughter when unexpectedly a Yak-9U came in. He really went for the Ho, and started to fire from quite a distance. "Well, " I thought, "if hoing an A8 is what you really want..." :D

Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: stroker71 on May 15, 2009, 11:30:13 AM
Float like a butterfly, sting like a -- oh wait I just got picked.

Can I use that in my sig....that's funny stuff.  Funny cuz it's true...sad but true.  After reading alot in this BBS and other places there is alot of options in the HO situation.  If they come in for a true HO attack it usually makes them an easy target.  
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 15, 2009, 12:11:54 PM
--Originally posted this in other thread, but moving here--

The thing about HO-ing: it takes two.  If I pull off and the other guy snapshots me on the way by, it wasn't exactly a HO at that point.  OTOH, if I stay H2H with him and he shoots me in the face, I kind of have only myself to blame for taking the gamble that he wouldn't pull the trigger.  Yes the person would likely be lame for doing it (depends on the circumstances), but I'd be dumb for not expecting it.  I've had times where I waited and thought the guy was going to fly-by cleanly, only to see tracers pop at the very last second, at which point I feel stupid for not doing the same (if you fire at me going H2H and I have time to react, I will probably fire back...I'm spiteful that way).  Again, it takes two to setup a HO.

And of course, I've got enough personal ROE exceptions on this in my head to fill a phone book. 

E.G.:
-If I am in a 110 or similar and they go H2H with me under any circumstances, that's an HOin'.  Anyone should know better than this.
-If they are in a Stang, LA7 or Tempest and **repeatedly** disengage and flee every time I get on their six, only to come back when they think I have given up the chase, at some point I will say "fark it, that's a HOin'" if they present it, because they're just wasting my fuel (after a point).  I call this "The Allison Rule" (to honor the inspiration/cause for my instituting this policy).
-If they screw up their rope-a-dope and come down H2H with me, that's a HOin'.
-If I am defending a ridiculous mob, just got off the runway, and am at a major E disadvantage, that's a HO-HO-HOin' all day long if they are dumb enough to give me the shot.  I've got nothing to lose at that point...my plane is pretty disposable given that I've only been up for 30 seconds or so, where as I can make them spend 5-10 minutes returning to the battle.  The battle trade-off heavily favors me in that situation (and at that point I'm playing for battle strategy).

Related story:
Yesterday I listened to somebody get yelled at on VOX for "stealing" a countryman's kill (I observed the entire event from a couple K above).  Person A was chasing a field vulcher to the deck, when person B who just upped in his IL-2 saw the bogie coming right at him, turned into him, and rightfully HO'd the guy to oblivion.  Did the vulcher complain?  Nope.  But person A went completely bonkers.  But what was person B going to do?  Let the vulcher pick him?  I say no way...squash the bastard. 
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: druski85 on May 15, 2009, 12:57:27 PM
Can I use that in my sig....that's funny stuff.  Funny cuz it's true...sad but true.  After reading alot in this BBS and other places there is alot of options in the HO situation.  If they come in for a true HO attack it usually makes them an easy target.  

Sure man, quote away if you like.   :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Bark0 on May 15, 2009, 03:34:21 PM
I HO (sometimes)

Why not? Did they HO in WWII? yup. is this a WWII Based game? Yup.

Do I complain about HO's? Nope.


Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: FireDrgn on May 15, 2009, 03:50:02 PM
Ya they hoed in ww11  alot of good men died doing it to..
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Traveler on May 15, 2009, 04:07:47 PM
what you guys are experiencing is very simple.  You put all your attention into this thing called the "Ho" because it frustrates you....but I tell you, its all about overcrowding.  In an arena with 60-80 people Ho'ing just is not a problem.  There is freedom of movement, freedom of maneover.  Put 250-350 peeps in a single arena, even a big one, and they all end up coagulating in central areas and the overcrowding leads to alot of "ho jousting" because there are simply too many of you.  It will never cease as long as the arenas are overcrowded.  Learn Ho, Live Ho, Love Ho.

Or......suggest that maybe HiTechs dream of a thousand people in a single arena would end up like so many rats in a box.  They end up eating each other alive.  Suggest we go back to a WBs era cap of 110-113 people per arena.  Then, just maybe, your lofty aspirations of "gameplay" would materialize.

I guess you have never flown in the early war arena or mid war arean.  lots of HO's in both and the numbers are the numbers you suggest for the perfect gamming experience.  People HO, why not.  Someone turns in at you and because your head on, you don't pull the trigger?  who you kidding?
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 15, 2009, 04:51:34 PM
--Originally posted this in other thread, but moving here--

The thing about HO-ing: it takes two. 


Wrong. It has always been two to merge, one to HO. You mat not change the definition.

Quote
If I pull off and the guy   snapshots me on the way by, it wasn't exactly a HO at that point
  Wrong again,   If you pull off the other guy to avoid a HO/collision and he fires... it's still a HO.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 15, 2009, 05:49:09 PM

Wrong. It has always been two to merge, one to HO. You mat not change the definition.

You know what I meant.  You cannot get HO'd without putting yourself there.  If you go nose to nose with someone and don't expect that they may fire on you (however much you disagree with it) and don't know how to avoid it, you're foolish.

Quote
Wrong again,   If you pull off the other guy to avoid a HO/collision and he fires... it's still a HO.

No, it's not.  An HO is a head-on shot.  Hence "HO".  "Head On".  By strict definition you're wrong.  Unless you'd like to tell everyone at what angle you approve of as "not an HO" so everyone can take notes.  Unless you're talking about doing so at the very last second, in which case see the last point.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 15, 2009, 06:08:26 PM
I guess you have never flown in the early war arena or mid war arean.  lots of HO's in both and the numbers are the numbers you suggest for the perfect gamming experience.  People HO, why not.  Someone turns in at you and because your head on, you don't pull the trigger?  who you kidding?

If it's a 1-on-1 even fight, I will generally try to gauge the other guys intentions.  If it looks like he's going to fly by (i.e. he doesn't keep making small adjustments to re-aim his nose at my face) I generally won't shoot.  If he does, I'll either shoot back (again, spite) or start my turn.

If I make an H2H pass and I do get killed for my poor judgement, it's my own damn fault.  I may get a bit angry but... *shrug*

If I change course and he still puts 2 in my head, hey, nice shot.  If I did my job properly it would have been a hell of an angle.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: uptown on May 15, 2009, 06:16:15 PM
Why do we have 3 "i got hoed" threads everyday?! :furious
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: truss51 on May 15, 2009, 07:10:35 PM

 "Well, " I thought, "if hoing an A8 is what you really want..."   :D

Did the A8 win?  :lol  :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 15, 2009, 07:31:56 PM
You know what I meant.  You cannot get HO'd without putting yourself there.  If you go nose to nose with someone and don't expect that they may fire on you (however much you disagree with it) and don't know how to avoid it, you're foolish. 

You're foolish ... or maybe just unlucky that you couldn't avoid.   I'll go with you on that.    :aok

Quote
No, it's not.  An HO is a head-on shot.
I don't care about strict feinition.  I care about AH deifnition.  If a guy shoots you as you try to avoid the HO, it's a HO.  It's okj if you don't like it, but it's a HO.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: stephen on May 16, 2009, 08:10:09 AM
HO, its a tactic..., loser die's.

IT TAKES 2 TO HO....dont want bullets in your face? Turn away... :rock
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: lazydog on May 16, 2009, 09:17:00 AM
i flew late war blue most of last night .and yes there were a lot of ho attempts but easy to avoid. you have to think everyone is going to ho. but i did find a lot of good fights thought.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 16, 2009, 11:53:18 AM

IT TAKES 2 TO HO....

This is wrong, always has been wrong. It takes two to merge, one to HO.  Attempt to change a long standing definition:  DENIED
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: DamnedRen on May 16, 2009, 05:54:18 PM
You guys are gonna make me get FAT!!!

(http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/ren1795/catcorn.gif)


Ren
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: DamnedRen on May 16, 2009, 05:55:15 PM
This is wrong, always has been wrong. It takes two to merge, one to HO.  Attempt to change a long standing definition:  DENIED

(http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/ren1795/perfect10.gif)
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 17, 2009, 11:26:35 AM
This is wrong, always has been wrong. It takes two to merge, one to HO.  Attempt to change a long standing definition:  DENIED

BUT YOU PUT YOURSELF THERE.

That is what we are saying.  Where's the confusion?  :rolleyes:

Even by your definition, you must still place yourself in a position to be shot.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: bj229r on May 17, 2009, 12:00:34 PM
This is wrong, always has been wrong. It takes two to merge, one to HO.  Attempt to change a long standing definition:  DENIED
Damn right :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 17, 2009, 12:25:06 PM
BUT YOU PUT YOURSELF THERE.

That is what we are saying.  Where's the confusion?  :rolleyes:

Even by your definition, you must still place yourself in a position to be shot.

There is no confusion.  Your definition is wrong.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: crazyivan on May 17, 2009, 08:26:25 PM
There is no confusion.  Your definition is wrong.
HOs have no skill on first merge. Its the first thing you learn to do. point and click. Second merge I've seen everyone do it, which means I wasn't fast enough. :rofl
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: StokesAk on May 17, 2009, 08:54:29 PM
Why do we have 3 "i got hoed" threads everyday?! :furious

Cause people are only complaining and not doing anything to improve whan it happening.

This is a ery cleche awnser but, Avoid it i know people with downs that could.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 17, 2009, 09:27:43 PM
There is no confusion.  Your definition is wrong.
seems to me you are making a pointless point  :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: bj229r on May 17, 2009, 09:48:04 PM
seems to me you are making a pointless point  :aok
If it serves to make ONE Lgay drivers think that perhaps there might be a better way to kill stuff than ho'ing it, he made a worthwhile point
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 17, 2009, 10:06:23 PM
seems to me you are making a pointless point  :aok

I cannot compensate for those who don't get it. You are one of them.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Crash Orange on May 18, 2009, 12:09:16 PM
   To me a Ho is like a Joust with the event being over in a few seconds. No real skill but getting your lance in position and hoping for the best.

Au contraire, mon frere! Jousting looks simple and is often compared to HOing in this forum but in reality it requires a LOT of skill and athletic ability - you have to hold a ten-foot long pole rock steady with one hand while riding a fast-moving horse without using either hand to control or hold onto the beast, then stay on said horse, still without using either hand, after being slammed dead-center with a couple hundred foot-pounds of kinetic energy. There's much more than luck involved and it's nothing like HOing.

But I understand what you mean.  ;)
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 01:10:40 PM
There is no confusion.  Your definition is wrong.

So a head-on shot is not a head-on shot.

Got it.  :aok  That is my definition: getting shot head on at the merge.  Seems consistent to me.

Tell me what you think my definition is and why it's wrong.  I think your definition seems to be "any shot taken prior to a H2H pass".  No way for me to tell though, since you won't describe it.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 01:23:12 PM
I cannot compensate for those who don't get it. You are one of them.

Others cannot compensate for your inability to explain your point.  Again, cop-out.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Shuffler on May 18, 2009, 01:35:41 PM
Frosty try going back and reading what he posted again. Then take awhile and think about what you read. Then you should see what most everyone is trying to explain to you.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 18, 2009, 01:36:52 PM
I cannot compensate for those who don't get it. You are one of them.
oh I get it.  I get it just fine thanks.  who are you again?
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 18, 2009, 01:37:28 PM
oh I get it.  I get it just fine thanks.  who are you again?

I'm one of the many who get it.  You aren't.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 01:39:19 PM
Frosty try going back and reading what he posted again. Then take awhile and think about what you read. Then you should see what most everyone is trying to explain to you.

Enough of this silly obtuse stuff.  Just define it.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 01:51:10 PM
I'm one of the many who get it.  You aren't.

Congrats on your supreme knowledge of a video game, Steve.  Now, care to explain your definition?
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 18, 2009, 01:52:16 PM
So a head-on shot is not a head-on shot.

Tell me what you think my definition is and why it's wrong. 

What the guy is saying ........is that as long as neither plane fires then its not a HO (think of the term HO as an unregistered expletive).  Technically a head on pass is a head on pass whether hot or cold but we are not really ww2 combat pilots, we dont really fly war planes shoot at and kill people.  we play a game and call each other jokingly insulting names...... so if some guy wants to push a long held BS definition (cheap slander) around the forums like it matters worth a crap then let him.

Get out there, enjoy the game best you can.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 18, 2009, 01:54:11 PM
I'm one of the many who get it.  You aren't.
worthless drivel.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:17:03 PM
What the guy is saying ........is that as long as neither plane fires then its not a HO (think of the term HO as an unregistered expletive).

That's about what I was beginning to think.  :lol  Thanks.

IIRC, Air Warrior on AOL actually disabled bullet damage from a certain range of front-angles.  One would think if HTC really saw this as as big a problem as certain people make it out to be, they'd do the same (unless it's simply too much of a hassle).

Quote
Get out there, enjoy the game best you can.

Always.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 18, 2009, 03:18:33 PM
worthless drivel.

Only for the dull witted.  You are dismissed. I've no inclination to try to cure your stupidity. 
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:21:12 PM
Only for the dull witted.  You are dismissed. I've no inclination to try to cure your stupidity. 

Wow. :cry
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 18, 2009, 03:23:30 PM
Only for the dull witted.  You are dismissed. I've no inclination to try to cure your stupidity. 

the door out of here is in front of you, I suggest you use it before you hurt yourself.  silly little childish banter will get you nowhere with me.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: DamnedRen on May 18, 2009, 03:26:42 PM
Hmmmm...took a HO thinking I had avoided snailman but he stood so hard on his rudder spraying and preying that he got a 20 in and plaster me I couldn't roll and stand on the pedal fast enough to avoid his HO.  :rofl. I was actually surprised it would have been him. Go figure. :)

Ren
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Yeager on May 18, 2009, 03:31:06 PM
IIRC, Air Warrior on AOL actually disabled bullet damage from a certain range of front-angles. 
did AW have a collision model?
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:32:47 PM
did AW have a collision model?

You mean in terms of airframe collisions?  Good question...that I don't recall.  I do remember flying H2H straight into newer players' gunfire and letting them waste their ammunition (on AOL...I think Kesmai online had HO shots enabled). 
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Lusche on May 18, 2009, 03:36:20 PM
Hmmmm...took a HO thinking I had avoided snailman but he stood so hard on his rudder spraying and preying that he got a 20 in and plaster me I couldn't roll and stand on the pedal fast enough to avoid his HO.  :rofl. I was actually surprised it would have been him. Go figure. :)

Ren


Hmmm... You talking about last night?

If yes, that's how that HO looked like on my FE :

(http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9953/renn.jpg)

(http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1507/ren2.jpg)

 :)
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 18, 2009, 03:38:25 PM

Hmmm... You talking about last night?

If yes, that's how that HO looked like on my FE :

[

Oh noes!  Taters!
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:39:31 PM

Hmmm... You talking about last night?

If yes, that's how that HO looked like on my FE :

(http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9953/renn.jpg)

(http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/1507/ren2.jpg)

 :)

That first pic.... :rofl

Were you jumped by an airshow team?
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Shuffler on May 18, 2009, 03:40:20 PM
Enough of this silly obtuse stuff.  Just define it.

Why don't you get off your lazy duff and reread the definition. People can't be holding your hand all the time. The only thing silly in this thread is your ignorance of what has been posted many times on these threads. If your actually that ignorant..... well I feel sorry for you. If your just playing ignorant... well your really good at it.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Lusche on May 18, 2009, 03:41:01 PM
That first pic.... :rofl

Were you jumped by an airshow team?

Neg, the two spits and 190 were on poor Spartin2 in his low & slow P-47. I tried to save him, but to no avail. I did a good job at shooting empty air most of the time that night ;)
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:43:42 PM
Why don't you get off your lazy duff and reread the definition. People can't be holding your hand all the time. The only thing silly in this thread is your ignorance of what has been posted many times on these threads. If your actually that ignorant..... well I feel sorry for you. If your just playing ignorant... well your really good at it.

Uh huh.  Go follow Steve.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Shuffler on May 18, 2009, 03:44:52 PM
I prefer to watch you kids make a fool of yourselves in front of others
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 03:54:00 PM
I prefer to watch you kids make a fool of yourselves in front of others

Who started the name calling and hostilities?  Lordy, some of you guys get so off-base.  It's not healthy.  Relax.  It's a game.  You certainly should holster your invocation of the "kids" label after such a tirade.

I ask a guy a simple question: tell me what he thinks an HO is, plain and simple.  Instead he resorts to child-like posing and arrogance, rather than answering said simple question.  It's ok though, as someone already answered for him.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Crash Orange on May 18, 2009, 04:01:57 PM
Enough of this silly obtuse stuff.  Just define it.

The fact that the other guy swerves before the moment of impact doesn't change the fact that you were playing chicken.

HOing is playing chicken in cartoon airplanes, with the addition of automatic weapons. More or less. HTH.

  :salute
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 04:22:43 PM
The fact that the other guy swerves before the moment of impact doesn't change the fact that you were playing chicken.

HOing is playing chicken in cartoon airplanes, with the addition of automatic weapons. More or less. HTH.

  :salute

Right, so here's my question.

Everyone can agree that it takes two to play chicken, correct?  That was the point that I was trying to get Steve to acknowledge.  My thinking was that one could avoid that HO shot by simply refusing to play chicken in the first place. 

Or is ANY frontal-angle shot on the initial pass considered cheap?  Honest question.  I feel like there is a lot of disagreement there.  I'd like to avoid being a cheapshot (unless it's warranted  :)). 
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Crash Orange on May 18, 2009, 04:44:47 PM
Right, so here's my question.

Everyone can agree that it takes two to play chicken, correct? 

I would say no, because whether you're playing chicken depends on your intent. To extend the car analogy, I'm thinking of the scene in "A Clockwork Orange" (hope you've seen it) where Alex & his droogs are playing "Hogs of the Road" - they were playing chicken, the other cars weren't, because the other drivers' intent was for the cars to pass each other in adjacent lanes.

Or is ANY frontal-angle shot on the initial pass considered cheap? 

I can't speak for Steve or say there are *no* exceptions, but generally, I'd say yes. (But of course not everyone agrees as to how lame or not it is to take a cheap shot.)
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 05:10:25 PM
Got it.  Good analogy.  :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Shuffler on May 18, 2009, 05:25:43 PM
ahhhh ignorance is bliss....... frosty...... your a lost cause.

My suggestion, go to the TA.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 05:35:37 PM
ahhhh ignorance is bliss....... frosty...... your a lost cause.

My suggestion, go to the TA.

There you go again, just trolling away...why so bitter? 

Life's too short.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Steve on May 18, 2009, 07:05:56 PM
Right, so here's my question.

Everyone can agree that it takes two to play chicken, correct? 

  No.  One guy could be heading towards oncoming traffic with the intention of passing safely by, he may have no intent to play chicken. It takes one to make it "chicken".    :aok
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Lye-El on May 18, 2009, 08:17:13 PM

IIRC, Air Warrior on AOL actually disabled bullet damage from a certain range of front-angles.  One would think if HTC really saw this as as big a problem as certain people make it out to be, they'd do the same (unless it's simply too much of a hassle).


It did. You actually had to fly against your victim. It didn't toss all hits but made it a very low percentage shot as I recall. So just upping a cannon bird and flying head long into your opponent didn't pay big dividends. It made for better pilots in my opinion.

Or they left.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: Shuffler on May 18, 2009, 09:10:57 PM
There you go again, just trolling away...why so bitter? 

Life's too short.

lol I'm not bitter. Just stating the facts. I do feel sorry for you though.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: frosty on May 18, 2009, 10:34:12 PM
I do feel sorry for you though.

Feeling's very mutual.  :D
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: RumbleB on May 18, 2009, 10:34:56 PM
Why not have sex with prostitutes without wearing a condom?

You might get away with it once or twice but eventually you're gonna pick up some nasty damage.
Title: Re: Why not .....................................Ho
Post by: RufusLeaking on May 19, 2009, 02:56:23 PM
Why not have sex with prostitutes without wearing a condom?

You might get away with it once or twice but eventually you're gonna pick up some nasty damage.

Ouch.  I thought it was odd that her freckles were moving. 

To get back on the thread of the other HO …


Head on shots are in the game.  For me, it is not fun, but I have taken them.   

It is counterproductive to whine as it feeds some people’s ego and they will HO even more.  Some guys are just that way. 

These sorry people are why kill shooter exists.  There are sociopaths who would fly around shooting countrymen just to hear them complain.