Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: gyrene81 on September 12, 2009, 09:23:38 PM
-
:rofl Just using the pointy stick to stir some natives... :D
Excerpt from the last interview with Lufwaffe ace pilot Eric Hartmann:
I was in a duel with a Red Banner flown Yak-9,
and this guy was good, and absolutely insane. He tried and tried to get in
behind me, and every time he went to open fire I would jerk out of the way of
his rounds. Then he pulled up and rolled, and we approached each other head
on, firing, with no hits either way. This happened two times. Finally I rolled
into a negative G dive, out of his line of sight, and rolled out to chase him at
full throttle. I came in from below in a shallow climb and flamed him.
Someone here said it was never done in real life...maybe Hartmann lied.
-
Whoever said it wasn't done in real life, didn't have a clue.
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
Til then, it doesn't work for me :)
-
Whoever said it wasn't done in real life, didn't have a clue.
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
Til then, it doesn't work for me :)
well said Dan. :aok
-
Whoever said it wasn't done in real life, didn't have a clue.
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
Til then, it doesn't work for me :)
QFT
-
In AHII when both commit to a HO it almost invariably results in two aircraft too damaged for further combat. This is why it is frowned upon. I think in real combat with no-icons and a fast closure rate and little time time to see, decide, and shoot, the hit% of such shots would be greatly reduced. Notice that no hits were scored on either HO pass, Hartmann actually killing the Yak driver after what sounds like an overshoot.
-
The Hartmann in AH is also a Hoer in his tater gun! :D hehe Don't think he's on the bbs though. I kid I kid.
Didn't Hartman grow up in China hmmm? Anyway to have that many kills he must of been 1 good ho! :D
-
QFT
QFQT :D
-
Generally agree with Corkyjr, but I will HO any chance I get if I find myself in a 3-4+ on 1 with no real chance of surviving. You know that at least one of them will oblige in their impatience to compete for the kill. :P
-
Whoever said it wasn't done in real life, didn't have a clue.
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
Til then, it doesn't work for me :)
+1
-
Didn't Hartman grow up in China hmmm? Anyway to have that many kills he must of been 1 good ho! :D
fail
-
In AHII when both commit to a HO it almost invariably results in two aircraft too damaged for further combat. This is why it is frowned upon. I think in real combat with no-icons and a fast closure rate and little time time to see, decide, and shoot, the hit% of such shots would be greatly reduced. Notice that no hits were scored on either HO pass, Hartmann actually killing the Yak driver after what sounds like an overshoot.
I remember reading somewhere that while it was done IRL. It wasnt exactly encouraged because to acheive guns solutions often resulted in the same undesirable results we often have here. A collision.
Probably why there are a whole lot more medals given post mortem then to live ones.
-
no it wasnt encouraged............
but it was taught as a combat maneuver......... as it has been taught since the beginning of combat flight and is still taught in flight training to this day... even with our modern birds
what I find funny is someone was quick to point out that no damage was done on either HO pass...... but they still didnt recognize the fact that even Eric Hartmann couldnt avoid the HO TWICE
-
fail
Err yeah he did actually spend his early childhood in China. His Dad was a doctor and worked in Chengsha. They moved back to Germany in 1928 I think, because of the start of the Civil War between the Kuomintang and the Communists. Hartmann would have been 6 when they moved back to Germany.
-
Err yeah he did actually spend his early childhood in China. His Dad was a doctor and worked in Chengsha. They moved back to Germany in 1928 I think, because of the start of the Civil War between the Kuomintang and the Communists. Hartmann would have been 6 when they moved back to Germany.
I was talking about the "joke"
-
I also am confused about the China "ho" joke. Not really funny whatsoever, unless there is some big inside laugh I am not invited to.
Guppy's quote represents the truth, no other comment necessary.
-
You shouldnt even HO when getting ganged, that leads to bad habits.
-
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
As an excuse for ...what? Why should there be any excurse for flying HO and shooting in HO? ...an excuse for bombing targets? ...an excuse fro shooting the other plane from behind?
No justification is needed for anything that is just part of playing this game! There is nothing more stupid than sulking and whining about HO:s. That is what reveals a true dweeb.
-
You shouldnt even HO when getting ganged, that leads to bad habits.
Yup Junky, and *******ation makes one blind, right? :rofl
-
I was talking about the "joke"
So quote just the joke then.
-
Yup Junky, and *******ation makes one blind, right? :rofl
Rehabilation? :D just my opinion on the matter where people say its alright to HO when getting ganged, the way I see it your either a HOer or you dont HO at all(im in the dont HO category) :salute
-
Maybe I have a slightly different take on the Head On that some.
Right off the bat yes it is valid and yes it is/was taught and in certain plane matchups encouraged.
But... is it a good move in Aces High?
Lets think that through a bit.
The answer really depends on what you are tying to achieve when you are flying that sortie.
Is your goal to kill a certain plane at all costs? (i.e. that pesky 262 you will never saddle or the player you KNOW you can't beat in a straight up fight)
Is your goal to kill that plane about to shoot your goon/squaddie/teamate/friend etc, etc.
Is your goal to kill at least ONE of the 2,3,4,5+ bad guys that are swarming all over you and your are going to be dead soon anyway.
Any of the above are reasons I might take a HO shot on someone and I in fact have done 'em all.
But is it a GOOD move?
Outside of a select few circumstances no, not really. It isn't a very good move in most situations for two reasons.
The first and most glaring problem I have with a Head On is that you are giving your opponent a free shot at you. If I was given a 50/50 chance of living or dying I would consider that pretty cruddy odds. If you factor in that you will probably take damage and the NEXT bad guy is gonna kill you I would put your survival at closer to 70-30 or 80-20.
I don't like doing maneuvers where 80% of the time it means that my death is imminent. When I take off I plan on landing and rarely if ever will take off with the intent of NOT coming home. Some players fight to the death no matter what or could care less if they land. Some players are happy with one kill (if) each sortie. I personally am not one of those players. I am gonna make it home and preferably with a bunch o' kills.
The second thing to consider is if you miss the Head On you are now at a positional disadvantage. If you opponent did a simple merge move as you were spraying away trying to face shoot you are now in trouble. Not only did you not hit them but you are now starting the fight at a disadvantage. Most of the time I am 1/2 way into my initial move as my HO'n opponent is letting off the trigger and I am well on my way to having them saddled and dispatched. The HO'r starts the fight with their nme (if their opponent has a basic grasp on ACM and BFM) allready well on their way to killing them because of their choice in moves.
Think about that a bit. Use your hands to simulate a merge. Have one hand fly straight and level (the ho'r) and have the second hand do a simple break turn right before the merge. Look at where they are right after the merge. The non Ho'r has a HUGE positional advantage. (ok, not the best example but it gives you an idea of what I'm talking about)
Now the KEY here is to learn what works and what doesn't vs. the HO'r. Remember that they are going for a shot. Use that against them. You KNOW where their plane is going to be. You can even dictate which way they are going to break (when they realize they missed) by how you approach them. If my opponent is flying a plane that turns better to the left it is in my best interest to make their NEXT move after the HO attempt to be a right hand turn. So I setup my merge so I am on their right and are pulling slightly to the right to get the shot. After they fly past and have missed they will then pull as hard as they can in Lead Pursuit to try and get their nose around on me. They are all ready in a right hand turn so they generally will go into a hard right hand turn. (won't always work, but usually does) So I not only know where their plane is going to be before and during the merge, I also have a pretty durn good idea what their next move will be. (neat!)
The HO then extend pilot takes a bit more time. Generally after totally missing you for the 3rd of 4th time they will TRY a move. That is when ya' kill 'em but you need to be looking for it. Don't be lulled by their extending the last 3 or 4 times. They WILL eventually try a maneuver (it is super rare that they do no) and you just have to be ready for it.
With some practice you will have them saddled and dead within one or two moves.
You will often see me say that I love opponents that try to HO me. The above is why. Once you get the timing down head on attacks by the nme are pretty easy to manipulate to your advantage. Giving them what they THINK is a shot and timing is key but it really isn't hard to learn and a typical night of flying gives you dozens if not hundreds of opportunities to practice.
So is a Head on Attack a good move in Aces High?
Not for me no, but I plan on landing.
-
Maybe I have a slightly different take on the Head On that some.
Right off the bat yes it is valid and yes it is/was taught and in certain plane matchups encouraged.
But... is it a good move in Aces High?
Lets think that through a bit.
The answer really depends on what you are tying to achieve when you are flying that sortie.
Is your goal to kill a certain plane at all costs? (i.e. that pesky 262 you will never saddle or the player you KNOW you can't beat in a straight up fight)
Is your goal to kill that plane about to shoot your goon/squaddie/teamate/friend etc, etc.
Is your goal to kill at least ONE of the 2,3,4,5+ bad guys that are swarming all over you and your are going to be dead soon anyway.
Any of the above are reasons I might take a HO shot on someone and I in fact have done 'em all.
But is it a GOOD move?
Outside of a select few circumstances no, not really it isn't a very good move in most situations for two reasons.
The first and most glaring problem I have with a Head On is that you are giving your opponent a free shot at you. If I was given a 50/50 chance of living or dying I would consider that pretty cruddy odds. If you factor in that you will probably take damage and the NEXT bad guy is gonna kill you I would put your survival at closer to 70-30 or 80-20.
I don't like doing maneuvers where 80% of the time it means that my death is imminent. When I take off I plan on landing and rarely if ever will take off with the intent of NOT coming home. Some players fight to the death no matter what or could care less if they make it home. Some players are happy with one kill (if) each sortie. I personally am not one of those players. I am gonna make it home and preferably with a bunch o' kills.
The second thing to consider is if you miss the Head On you are now at a positional disadvantage. If you opponent did a simple merge move as you were spraying away trying to face shoot you are now in trouble. Not only did you not hit them but you are now starting the fight at a disadvantage. Most of the time I am 1/2 way into my initial move as my HO'n opponent is letting off the trigger and I am well on my way to having them saddled and dispatched. The HO'r starts the fight with their nme (if their opponent has a basic grasp on ACM and BFM) allready well on their way to killing them because of their choice in moves.
Think about that a bit. Use your hands to simulate a merge. Have one hand fly straight and level (the ho'r) and have the second hand do a simple break turn right before the merge. Look at where they are right after the merge. The non Ho'r has a HUGE positional advantage. (ok, not the best example but it gives you an idea of what I'm talking about)
Now the KEY here is to learn what works and what doesn't vs. the HO'r. Remember that they are going for a shot. Use that against them. You KNOW where their plane is going to be. You can even dictate which way they are going to break (when they realize they missed) by how you approach them. If my opponent is flying a plane that turns better to the left it is in my best interest to make their NEXT move after the HO attempt to be a right hand turn. So I setup my merge so I am on their right and are pulling slightly to the right to get the shot. After they fly past and have missed they will then pull as hard as they can in Lead Pursuit to try and get their nose around on me. They are all ready in a right hand turn so they generally will go into a hard right hand turn. (won't always work, but usually does) So I not only know where their plane is going to be before and during the merge, I also have a pretty durn good idea what their next move will be. (neat!)
The HO then extend pilot takes a bit more time. Generally after totally missing you for the 3rd of 4th time they will TRY a move. That is when ya' kill 'em but you need to be looking for it. Don't be lulled by their extending the last 3 or 4 times. They WILL eventually try a maneuver (it is super rare that they do no) and you just have to be ready for it.
With some practice you will have them saddled and dead within one or two moves.
You will often see me say that I love opponents that try to HO me. The above is why. Once you get the timing down head on attacks by the nme are pretty easy to manipulate to your advantage. Giving them what they THINK is a shot and timing is key but it really isn't hard to learn and a typical night of flying gives you dozens if not hundreds of opportunities to practice.
So is a Head on Attack a good move in Aces High?
Not for me no, but I plan on landing.
very well put :salute
-
We all recognize that fact that head-on shot is a part of actual air combat tactics. However, within AH, many of us under a 1v1 scenario would prefer a merge, leading to a break turn, and then engaging into competitive ACM. Perhaps one way of eliminating the ambiguity at the point of merge is to show a wing rock approaching the merge to signal your intent of entering a turning fight, versus a head-on kill. No wing rock, then fire head-on at your discretion. What do you folks think???
DAGO :salute
-
It is not a HO it is the John Wayne merge face to face guns blazing. sounds fair to me.
-
As an excuse for ...what? Why should there be any excurse for flying HO and shooting in HO? ...an excuse for bombing targets? ...an excuse fro shooting the other plane from behind?
No justification is needed for anything that is just part of playing this game! There is nothing more stupid than sulking and whining about HO:s. That is what reveals a true dweeb.
The way I look at it,
Real life was "Kill the enemy" sometimes at all costs.
In the game, there is no kill the enemy, because no one dies. In the game its suppose to be about the "combat" and a ho/joust isn't combat, it's just a waste of time and electronic pixels.
-
When the situation comes along that I can send you to the tower faster by shooting you in the face rather than shooting you in the butt, I'm going to shoot you in the face.
If you choose not to shoot back in defense due to some self imposed, chivaly inspired, straight jacketed, silly rule then that's all the better for me and my team.
Take the shot. It may be the only one you get.
-
In the game its suppose to be about the "combat" and a ho/joust isn't combat, it's just a waste of time and electronic pixels.
Where is it stated that AH is about "combat", by which you possibly mean knights of air in a honorable WWI-style duels?
AFAIK, AH is a game which can be played with various styles, from aerial quake to strategy generals. My point is that it is stupid to whine about HO. It just sometimes happens, and in some occasions it may be a good choice, most often it is a bad and fatal choice, still it is a choice made by a player and if one "dies" because of it, so what. Take a new plane.
I myself HO vary seldom, but when I do, I do it because I see it a good option in that situation, quite like WMLute described above. If the opponent has all the card and still fails to avoid my desperate move, it is his fault. He makes himself a bigger fool if he then starts whining about it :)
I also like to land my kills, but I accept that I play in a chaotic environment. So there is no point to whine about what other people do.
-
The situation I fail to grasp is when your opponent has an E and alt advantage on you but still insists on screaming down and trying to shoot you in the face.
Seems silly and lazy to me.
wrongway
-
:rofl Just using the pointy stick to stir some natives... :D
Excerpt from the last interview with Lufwaffe ace pilot Eric Hartmann:
Someone here said it was never done in real life...maybe Hartmann lied.
Ok, perhaps your boored, or perhaps your favorite tactic is to HO with a cannon bird, and often times get criticized about it on 200.
Here are some suggestions.
1. Tune out 200, once you are over the age of 13, it fails to have a purpose.
2. Learn that a Head On Pass and what AH refers to as an "HO" are different things by definition
3. Learn that everyone interprets the definition differently
4. Understand the only people who complain about HO's are the ones in flames
If you go Nose on Nose, your a tard. If you go 12 to 12 with 50 feet lateral clearance off the wing tips, and use rudder to pull a shot, you are doing a "REAL LIFE HEAD ON PASS".
If you are hoping that 50 feet of vertical clearance while you are still nose to nose is going to work out... your high.
Tards and adrenaline will always force a shot.
The best have lobbed their effort at 1K and are already pulling off, the rest force it.
Always break RIGHT. And the man with Altitude pulls up, the low guy stays level or Neg G Dives.
Rules to live by.
-
..using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game..
As you smartly noticed, this is a game. No excuse is needed whatever you do.
-
HOwhinners....can't we send em on a tour of the outlying provinces ta get rid of em?? :x
They invariably are the ones who set it up by pulling into the already commited attacker and then complain that it was a HO!! lol
HO's are a fact of life in this game (has been since '86 as I recall) - so live with it or at least suk it up ....QUIETLY please!!
I really get tired of some people trying to tell everyone else how they have to play the game their way.
Maybe for some reason YOU think this game is only about combat/furballs - line-em-up co-alt and charge - did you ever consider the possibility there just might be other views about what "combat" game play is?? - stop being so narrow minded and rude - if you don't like it maybe you should consider going to play some where else. No one is FORCING you to take the HO!!
Many of us would like to enjoy this game without being constantly castigated by people who just don't get it (their way).
sheesh........gimme a break!
(with all due respect of course) :D
cheers eh!
-
HOwhinners....can't we send em on a tour of the outlying provinces ta get rid of em?? :x
They invariably are the ones who set it up by pulling into the already commited attacker and then complain that it was a HO!! lol
HO's are a fact of life in this game (has been since '86 as I recall) - so live with it or at least suk it up ....QUIETLY please!!
I really get tired of some people trying to tell everyone else how they have to play the game their way.
Maybe for some reason YOU think this game is only about combat/furballs - line-em-up co-alt and charge - did you ever consider the possibility there just might be other views about what "combat" game play is?? - stop being so narrow minded and rude - if you don't like it maybe you should consider going to play some where else. No one is FORCING you to take the HO!!
Many of us would like to enjoy this game without being constantly castigated by people who just don't get it (their way).
sheesh........gimme a break!
(with all due respect of course) :D
cheers eh!
Most people that HO, miss 99% of the time, they just keep going, avoiding the "fight" at all costs. For many of us, it is a waste of time to try and play against them, as they want to get kills without fighting, and we wouldnt want a kill without fighting.... :aok
-
Most people that HO, miss 99% of the time, they just keep going, avoiding the "fight" at all costs. For many of us, it is a waste of time to try and play against them, as they want to get kills without fighting, and we wouldnt want a kill without fighting.... :aok
Now that's a reasonable thought - you have your opinion and as long as you are NOT telling others they have to play your way then go right ahead. It's a BIG playgound - go play however you want - no one is gonna stop you. I have no problem with the likes of you.
Too many players take part in the HO and then complain about it - go figure. You obvisously will refuse the HO and fly on (having lost no game time) looking for "the good fight". It's your style of play and you have every right to play that way. Won't find any objection from here.
My annoyance is those who insist you have to play their way (whatever their flavour of the game is) and if you don't then you are ruining the game. LOL
"Tuff titty said da kitty as he passed da uder udder to da uder brudder, but da milks run dry!"
Maybe their mothers never give em nuff milk eh! :D
-
I knew better but chimed in anyway, but the eternal debate goes on. I suggested a possible solution to quell both sides of the argument, but apparently to no avail. Over and out on this subject!
DAGO :salute
-
Ok, perhaps your boored, or perhaps your favorite tactic is to HO with a cannon bird, and often times get criticized about it on 200.
Here are some suggestions.
1. Tune out 200, once you are over the age of 13, it fails to have a purpose.
2. Learn that a Head On Pass and what AH refers to as an "HO" are different things by definition
3. Learn that everyone interprets the definition differently
4. Understand the only people who complain about HO's are the ones in flames
If you go Nose on Nose, your a tard. If you go 12 to 12 with 50 feet lateral clearance off the wing tips, and use rudder to pull a shot, you are doing a "REAL LIFE HEAD ON PASS".
If you are hoping that 50 feet of vertical clearance while you are still nose to nose is going to work out... your high.
Tards and adrenaline will always force a shot.
The best have lobbed their effort at 1K and are already pulling off, the rest force it.
Always break RIGHT. And the man with Altitude pulls up, the low guy stays level or Neg G Dives.
Rules to live by.
Ok now HatTrick you didn't have to go and make this personal. I just happened upon the story while perusing some data regarding another subject...didn't go looking for it. It just struck me as funny after seeing all the nonsense whining on 200 and in these forums about HO shots.
I don't tune out 200 but I do ignore most of the pitiful juvenile bs on it, sometimes it's funny. I really truly do not give a flip whose definition of head on is whatever. Whether it's real life drama and consequences or not is as relevant as a virtual fart. I've seen enough pilot AAR's to know whatever target of opportunity was presented was taken. Someone wants to whine about whatever happens to them I'll give them a tissue and the phone number to someone who might care.
Posting that little quip from a well known highly decorated WWII pilot got the exact responses I thought it would...like dropping a plastic turd into a crowded swimming pool.
-
Look what you have started. :lol
-
Most people that HO, miss 99% of the time, they just keep going, avoiding the "fight" at all costs. For many of us, it is a waste of time to try and play against them, as they want to get kills without fighting, and we wouldnt want a kill without fighting.... :aok
:aok
key phrase being (IMHO).......
"it is a waste of time to try and play against them, as they want to get kills without fighting, and we wouldnt want a kill without fighting.... :aok"
-
Ok now HatTrick you didn't have to go and make this personal. I just happened upon the story while perusing some data regarding another subject...didn't go looking for it. It just struck me as funny after seeing all the nonsense whining on 200 and in these forums about HO shots.
I don't tune out 200 but I do ignore most of the pitiful juvenile bs on it, sometimes it's funny. I really truly do not give a flip whose definition of head on is whatever. Whether it's real life drama and consequences or not is as relevant as a virtual fart. I've seen enough pilot AAR's to know whatever target of opportunity was presented was taken. Someone wants to whine about whatever happens to them I'll give them a tissue and the phone number to someone who might care.
Posting that little quip from a well known highly decorated WWII pilot got the exact responses I thought it would...like dropping a plastic turd into a crowded swimming pool.
you started a thread about HO's, and summarized your arguement with the words :
:rofl Just using the pointy stick to stir some natives... :D
Excerpt from the last interview with Lufwaffe ace pilot Eric Hartmann:
Someone here said it was never done in real life...maybe Hartmann lied.
And when you get what ya wanted....................
-
fail
I was thinking he would've made a good Flying tiger . Also to live that long with that many victories he had to be good.
SO Go :noid yourself! ohh derrr Fail!
-
Now that's a reasonable thought - you have your opinion and as long as you are NOT telling others they have to play your way then go right ahead. It's a BIG playgound - go play however you want - no one is gonna stop you. I have no problem with the likes of you.
Too many players take part in the HO and then complain about it - go figure. You obvisously will refuse the HO and fly on (having lost no game time) looking for "the good fight". It's your style of play and you have every right to play that way. Won't find any objection from here.
My annoyance is those who insist you have to play their way (whatever their flavour of the game is) and if you don't then you are ruining the game. LOL
"Tuff titty said da kitty as he passed da uder udder to da uder brudder, but da milks run dry!"
Maybe their mothers never give em nuff milk eh! :D
No one is insisting that you play their way. I don't expect that folks won't HO. When I run into someone who doesn't, I figure I'm in for a fight. When someone comes in blazing head on, I figure it's going to be an easy kill if, and it's a big if, they attempt to stick around and fight after they miss the HO shot.
As I said, using history as your justification for something in a cartoon game, doesn't work for me. That's not how I want to play. But I can't dictate anyone elses style either, nor do I have to be impressed by something I think is silly in our cartoon game.
-
The way I look at it,
Real life was "Kill the enemy" sometimes at all costs.
In the game, there is no kill the enemy, because no one dies. In the game its suppose to be about the "combat" and a ho/joust isn't combat, it's just a waste of time and electronic pixels.
How is it not "combat" (in the game sense you're using)? You're shooting each other until one or both are "destroyed". Sounds like combat to me.
What you mean is it isn't courtly, honorable dueling. That's all nice I guess, but I would say less than 10% of the encounters I have in this game take the form of dueling. Take the exceptions WMLute listed and add a few others (vulched on takeoff, jumped by a picker from 5k+ up while you were fighting someone else, jumped by a faster plane when you're already past bingo fuel and just trying to get home, attacking or defending a base, or in the middle of a furball with 8 or 10 or more planes on each side), and you no longer have exceptions, you have the rule. Co-alt, co-e merges into 1-1 duels are the rare exception.
That doesn't make HOing a good move in every one of those situations, but it means most of the analysis here, which is based on those mythical 1-1 honorable duels, is BS. And the "bad habit" is expecting and acting like the other 90% of the game is one of those mythical courtly duels and whining when it doesn't turn out that way.
For example: if I'm 10' off the runway taking off and barely have enough speed to maneuver or zoom at all, and you come screaming in to vulch me and are dumb enough to do it from an angle where I can possibly get guns on you for half a second, damned straight I'm gonna HO yer schnoz and laugh hard if I succeed. That's all your fault for turning a situation where you have every possible advantage into one where you have the same chances I have, and taking the best shot I'm likely to get is the smart move for me. There's no magical ACM or "pile-it stuff" that I'm neglecting that's going to give me an advantage after that "merge," and there's no duel for me to engage in or avoid.
And that goes double, or maybe triple, if I'm defending a base so I know that if I get shot down I can just up again in 10 seconds while if you die you've got a 10-minute flight to return. In that situation a success rate of 1 in 10 is still a win in strategic terms no matter how disastrous it is to my score, because I've accomplished my objective and you have failed at yours. Is that logic like real life where you only get one life? Of course not, but then we've already agreed that this game isn't real life, haven't we?
The situation in a big, messy furball is different but similar logic applies. If we're both maneuvering with other planes and all of a sudden I see you about to go nose to nose for a split second and give me a snap shot, I'm not going to pass it up because it isn't "honorable," especially if I think you're target fixated and won't see it coming. And chances are my maneuvering after the shot will have nothing to do with you whether I succeed in killing you or not anyway, I'll be more concerned with whoever I was engaged with before we stumbled into each other. This has nothing to do with wanting to avoid a "fair fight" in the sense of an even duel since nobody involved is going to get one regardless. It's just a reflection of the fact that in a big, complicated fight ACM takes a back seat to SA and gunnery.
Of course those calculations have nothing to do with courtly duels, but then if you're only interested in fighting courtly duels then you won't be over my field trying to vulch people taking off or in the middle of a 20-plane furball, so you don't have to worry about it.
-
Just another "I'm justifying my lameness thread." :aok Not neccessarily by the OP. He left enough leeway to skip away from the fire like Richard Simmons from an estrogen zapper.
Ho's happen, but relying on them is a crutch.
(http://i411.photobucket.com/albums/pp193/dmbear/simmonsrp44ks.jpg)
-
"It takes two, baby.
It takes two, baby.,
just me and you.
You know it takes two.
It takes two, baby.
It takes two, baby,
just me and you."
(http://www.merryswankster.com/images/take%20two%20plus.jpg)
-
I personally avoid the HO at all costs and fully expect the opponent to try it.
My goal is to beat the opponent with finess. So I just play the game my way and
don't care what the other guy thinks.
my two canadian cents
-
Slightly off topic:
Hartmann was clearly an exceptional fighter pilot, but let’s can the hero worship. Life in the Luftwaffe in WWII was markedly different from the USAF. German pilots were basically flown until they died. Hartmann’s survival in this meat grinder is remarkable. But, it also greatly increases the number of sorties and kills. The USAF flew tours. After so many missions, a pilot was reassigned. And, it would appear, Americans flew less often. Chuck Yeager flew 61 missions in 14 months. Hartmann flew 1,404 missions in 32 months.
Hartmann claimed 352 aerial victories (of which 345 were won against the Soviet Air Force, and 260 of which were fighters). The early war Soviets were hand drawing sights on their windscreens, per Hartmann himself. Guys like Yeager had to down guys like Hartmann.
There's no denying Hartmann’s skill. Let’s just get some perspective.
Footnote: Karaya was Hartmann’s call sign. :salute Salute to AHII Karaya for the historical reference.
-
It is not a HO it is the John Wayne merge face to face guns blazing. sounds fair to me.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_26bRLSbCB4I/SgNhTLHsjdI/AAAAAAAAAUU/1eq8vJ64cVw/s400/no+skill,+no+respect,+no+brain.jpg)
-
Hartmann claimed 352 aerial victories (of which 345 were won against the Soviet Air Force, and 260 of which were fighters). The early war Soviets were hand drawing sights on their windscreens, per Hartmann himself.
Remember that Hartmann was a late starter. He got his first kill on Nov 5th, 1942. In July 1943, he scored only his 18th. At that point Soviets already owned the airspace, but then again, Hartmann got a target rich environment.
-
I met „Bubi“ Hartmann 1961 during a drinking party at Ahlhorn Airbase, Germany, where he, as Lt.Col. was commanding the 71 German Air Force Fighter Wing (on F86s), which later was renamed JG 71 “Richthoven” (on F104Gs).
He was a close friend of my later father in law, German Army Major, Karl Waller. They both had spent serveral years in Russian POW camps until 1956. Bubi personally introduced me to my later wife, the daughter of ther beforementioned friend Karl Waller. I am still married to this girl, since 46 years now, have 2 children and 4 grandchildren.
Bubi Hartmann has always been a close friend of the family and many a story of old, former and modern ace-pilotage was exchanged.
When I was serving as an instructor pilot in the German Air Force Fighter Weapons School on F104Gs, Bubi was about to take a conversion course onto the F104G system, when he simply quit and said, “….that aircraft does not have my kind of turning capability…”. He never finished the course and stuck to his beloved F86.
Bubi made full (bird-) Colonel in the post war German Airforce and was retired as such, he never managed to become a General.
May be, he had to many envious adversaries in the post war GAF, who never matched the war time success of Bubi´s.
I am prowd to have known him, his grave is located in the vicinity of his hometown Stuttgart, Germany.
:rock
-
I met „Bubi“ Hartmann 1961 during a drinking party at Ahlhorn Airbase, Germany, where he, as Lt.Col. was commanding the 71 German Air Force Fighter Wing (on F86s), which later was renamed JG 71 “Richthoven” (on F104Gs).
He was a close friend of my later father in law, German Army Major, Karl Waller. They both had spent serveral years in Russian POW camps until 1956. Bubi personally introduced me to my later wife, the daughter of ther beforementioned friend Karl Waller. I am still married to this girl, since 46 years now, have 2 children and 4 grandchildren.
Bubi Hartmann has always been a close friend of the family and many a story of old, former and modern ace-pilotage was exchanged.
When I was serving as an instructor pilot in the German Air Force Fighter Weapons School on F104Gs, Bubi was about to take a conversion course onto the F104G system, when he simply quit and said, “….that aircraft does not have my kind of turning capability…”. He never finished the course and stuck to his beloved F86.
Bubi made full (bird-) Colonel in the post war German Airforce and was retired as such, he never managed to become a General.
May be, he had to many envious adversaries in the post war GAF, who never matched the war time success of Bubi´s.
I am prowd to have known him, his grave is located in the vicinity of his hometown Stuttgart, Germany.
:rock
:rock
-
Interesting story, Wizkid. Thanks for sharing it :salute
-
Ho's happen, but relying on them is a crutch.
Who said anything about relying on them?
-
How is it not "combat" (in the game sense you're using)? You're shooting each other until one or both are "destroyed". Sounds like combat to me.
What you mean is it isn't courtly, honorable dueling. That's all nice I guess, but I would say less than 10% of the encounters I have in this game take the form of dueling. Take the exceptions WMLute listed and add a few others (vulched on takeoff, jumped by a picker from 5k+ up while you were fighting someone else, jumped by a faster plane when you're already past bingo fuel and just trying to get home, attacking or defending a base, or in the middle of a furball with 8 or 10 or more planes on each side), and you no longer have exceptions, you have the rule. Co-alt, co-e merges into 1-1 duels are the rare exception.
That doesn't make HOing a good move in every one of those situations, but it means most of the analysis here, which is based on those mythical 1-1 honorable duels, is BS. And the "bad habit" is expecting and acting like the other 90% of the game is one of those mythical courtly duels and whining when it doesn't turn out that way.
For example: if I'm 10' off the runway taking off and barely have enough speed to maneuver or zoom at all, and you come screaming in to vulch me and are dumb enough to do it from an angle where I can possibly get guns on you for half a second, damned straight I'm gonna HO yer schnoz and laugh hard if I succeed. That's all your fault for turning a situation where you have every possible advantage into one where you have the same chances I have, and taking the best shot I'm likely to get is the smart move for me. There's no magical ACM or "pile-it stuff" that I'm neglecting that's going to give me an advantage after that "merge," and there's no duel for me to engage in or avoid.
And that goes double, or maybe triple, if I'm defending a base so I know that if I get shot down I can just up again in 10 seconds while if you die you've got a 10-minute flight to return. In that situation a success rate of 1 in 10 is still a win in strategic terms no matter how disastrous it is to my score, because I've accomplished my objective and you have failed at yours. Is that logic like real life where you only get one life? Of course not, but then we've already agreed that this game isn't real life, haven't we?
The situation in a big, messy furball is different but similar logic applies. If we're both maneuvering with other planes and all of a sudden I see you about to go nose to nose for a split second and give me a snap shot, I'm not going to pass it up because it isn't "honorable," especially if I think you're target fixated and won't see it coming. And chances are my maneuvering after the shot will have nothing to do with you whether I succeed in killing you or not anyway, I'll be more concerned with whoever I was engaged with before we stumbled into each other. This has nothing to do with wanting to avoid a "fair fight" in the sense of an even duel since nobody involved is going to get one regardless. It's just a reflection of the fact that in a big, complicated fight ACM takes a back seat to SA and gunnery.
Of course those calculations have nothing to do with courtly duels, but then if you're only interested in fighting courtly duels then you won't be over my field trying to vulch people taking off or in the middle of a 20-plane furball, so you don't have to worry about it.
LOL!!! Have you got that backwards !!!
A strait up HO is exactly like a dual... you both turn and face each other and shoot !! Luckiest aim wins !
Combat is more along he line of chess. Your skill level is to just use blunt force and try to smash your way to the win... you can "up again in 10 seconds while if you die you've got a 10-minute flight to return" is what you said. On the other hand there are many of us who don't care who wins the war, how high our scores are, what rank we are. To us the game is all about that "chess match" against one or more bad guys. "If I go this way, and he goes that way, will I have a shot?".
While honor and class would be a nice thing to have in our game it just isn't going to happen. Far to many adolescents of varying ages haven't a clue what "honor" or "class" is. However, seeing as we are playing a combat type game, would it be a too much to ask for some "combat" instead of the usual HO 90% or the time?
-
I thought eric cartman was that fat kid on southpark??
(http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd45/smokey23_photos/1a.jpg)
-
LOL!!! Have you got that backwards !!!
A strait up HO is exactly like a dual... you both turn and face each other and shoot !! Luckiest aim wins !
Combat is more along he line of chess. Your skill level is to just use blunt force and try to smash your way to the win... you can "up again in 10 seconds while if you die you've got a 10-minute flight to return" is what you said. On the other hand there are many of us who don't care who wins the war, how high our scores are, what rank we are. To us the game is all about that "chess match" against one or more bad guys. "If I go this way, and he goes that way, will I have a shot?".
While honor and class would be a nice thing to have in our game it just isn't going to happen. Far to many adolescents of varying ages haven't a clue what "honor" or "class" is. However, seeing as we are playing a combat type game, would it be a too much to ask for some "combat" instead of the usual HO 90% or the time?
Coming from a Nose Cannon P38 Lemming of course..................... sorry couldnt resist. :x
-
I thought eric cartman was that fat kid on southpark??
(http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd45/smokey23_photos/1a.jpg)
I knew it...I just knew it!!! I was going to put a disclaimer in my original post just in case but thought I'd wait and see... :rofl
-
LOL!!! Have you got that backwards !!!
A strait up HO is exactly like a duel... you both turn and face each other and shoot !! Luckiest aim wins !
Incorrect. A pistol duel carries the possibility of it NOT ending with one man dead and one man fatally injured.
-
While honor and class would be a nice thing to have in our game it just isn't going to happen. Far to many adolescents of varying ages haven't a clue what "honor" or "class" is.
The fact that you think "honor" refers to a preferred style of AH2 play speaks volumes about your lack of it.
You also don't know a thing about duels, or jousting. You're just spewing ignorance, but what else is new?
-
:salute
-
I've researched alot about Erich Hartmann and as far as I've read alot of his kills were in a downward dive using the sun as cover. I also read somewhere that he was in a fight with 8 P-51's and killed several before the others fled. 352 kills reguardless one amazing pilot.
-
I met „Bubi“ Hartmann 1961 during a drinking party at Ahlhorn Airbase, Germany, where he, as Lt.Col. was commanding the 71 German Air Force Fighter Wing (on F86s), which later was renamed JG 71 “Richthoven” (on F104Gs).
He was a close friend of my later father in law, German Army Major, Karl Waller. They both had spent serveral years in Russian POW camps until 1956. Bubi personally introduced me to my later wife, the daughter of ther beforementioned friend Karl Waller. I am still married to this girl, since 46 years now, have 2 children and 4 grandchildren.
Bubi Hartmann has always been a close friend of the family and many a story of old, former and modern ace-pilotage was exchanged.
When I was serving as an instructor pilot in the German Air Force Fighter Weapons School on F104Gs, Bubi was about to take a conversion course onto the F104G system, when he simply quit and said, “….that aircraft does not have my kind of turning capability…”. He never finished the course and stuck to his beloved F86.
Bubi made full (bird-) Colonel in the post war German Airforce and was retired as such, he never managed to become a General.
May be, he had to many envious adversaries in the post war GAF, who never matched the war time success of Bubi´s.
I am prowd to have known him, his grave is located in the vicinity of his hometown Stuttgart, Germany.
:rock
You are one lucky son of a gun and I say that with the utmost respect. I wish I could meet just one Ace before I leave this Earth and simply ask a couple questions and shake a hand. But Hartmann has always been my favorite. Growing up, my oldest brother had a painting of his G-6 in our room. My mother gave it to me to hang in my home, but I gave it back to my brother to hang in his home. His eyes lit up at the sight of it and that meant more to me than anything, as he thought it was lost.
:salute Air!
Rufus. TY :salute
-
"It takes two, baby.
It takes two, baby.,
just me and you.
You know it takes two.
It takes two, baby.
It takes two, baby,
just me and you."
(http://www.merryswankster.com/images/take%20two%20plus.jpg)
COMPLETELY FALSE!!! this is where many people in game are wrong, alot of my deaths come from people getting a lucky should when i am avioding the HO
-
I thought eric cartman was that fat kid on southpark??
(http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd45/smokey23_photos/1a.jpg)
You guys got no respect!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_air_aces
take a look at the list, lot of aces fallen during ww2. All HOers? Man, we are playing a game guys, these guys take off each time never knowing if they will make it back, if they would survive.
-
COMPLETELY FALSE!!! this is where many people in game are wrong, alot of my deaths come from people getting a lucky should when i am avioding the HO
Then it is not a HO :p, it is just a frontal hemisphere deflection shot. In a HO, both sides have a shooting solution.
-
Then it is not a HO :p, it is just a frontal hemisphere deflection shot. In a HO, both sides have a shooting solution.
OK maybe it is not a head on which you are correct but it is a HOT Merge and should be highly frowned upon, like North Koreans.............. :O
-
And so continues the most epic of word battles about the HO!
Dweebs HO. :aok
-
Dweebs HO. :aok
Among others :)
-
Then it is not a HO :p, it is just a frontal hemisphere deflection shot. In a HO, both sides have a shooting solution.
It is a HO up until one person decides to make a break turn and gives up his gun solution in favor of a clean merge, attempting to claim the advantage post-merge. The other flier then takes advantage with a lucky shot front quarter. Was it a HO? Technically, no. Was it a clean merge? No, and close enough to a HO to be frowned upon IMHO.
HO'er generally are pretty lame. That being said, have I HO'ed? Yep. If I am in a situation where I feel I don't have any choice but a nose-to-nose merge, and I see the other guys guns go hot, you can guarantee I'm gonna be sending 20mm back to him as a "thank you for being a pr!cK" greeting. I won't initiate a HO, but I'll do my best to finish one. :)
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm134/waystin2/AnotherUglyHOthread.jpg)
-
HO can mean and means so many different things to many people. For some it is talking about merge, to others it is about flying about nose to nose in any situation, to some it is a shot in any situation and maybe in about any frontal angle. :)
I personally understand it as a head on pass (not related only to initial merge) where both planes can shoot at eachother at the same time, and as a shot where one or both shoot at eachother during that previously mentione head on pass.
Maybe there may even be a head on approach in a situation before the shots can be taken. However, if this approach is broken prematurely, there will be no head on pass or head on shot(s).
Also in my view there are always 2 planes in a head on approach and in head on pass. There may also be 2 head on shooters, but sometimes there is only one. In such case, if no prior rules were set, I'll just call the other one naive or adventurous. There is no point flying a head on pass if one has no intent on shooting... because that is the signal he is giving.
Like I've written before, I dont believe that anyone who is the 1st to point his plane at the enemy ever wants or wishes to "HO" the enemy. That option is left to the defending guy. He can choose to "HO" his attacker. Still it is most often these defenders who have then been shot down, who call their opponents "HOers"... go figure :rolleyes:
Last but not least, "HO HO" said Santa Claus :furious
-
It is a HO up until one person decides to make a break turn and gives up his gun solution in favor of a clean merge, attempting to claim the advantage post-merge. The other flier then takes advantage with a lucky shot front quarter. Was it a HO? Technically, no.
Wrong, it's still a HO. If one person is shot attempting to avoid the HO and the bullets don't happen to hit him in the face, it's still a HO.
-
The problem with having a reliance on the head on attack is that the head on attack is self defeating in the long run. If every engagement in the cartoon skies is a chance to learn and improve then relying on a tactic that carries such a relatively high chance of ending the engagement before it starts robs the player of the chance to learn something. It's ultimately self defeating.
That being said, I think I should mention that there are times when I've taken the head on shot (which I do consider different than a front quarter shot). But players that go to the head on attack as first choice rather than as a last choice are doing themselves a disservice over the course of time.
-
Yup I Duck a head on as much as I can but if they keep only trying a head on at some point I Quack and shoot back.
-
To ho is to ho........................... ............
Bottom line is, if you're flying level 12 at somebody, doesn't matter if you're one of the AH aces, who do not ho..... All that matters is your there, right there. Do you expect the other not to fire? Then you're just silly.... Perhaps stupid......
I've merged with some of the good guys in this game. At 2k we are dead 12, at 1.5 he teeters left, so i teeter right...... AT 1k now it is clear that we will pass, and we do. But if you lack ACM and remain head-on and not fire..... There is no excuse for that, that's just you living in a fantasy world other then this fantasy world.
That's the way I see.
And yes, I'll ho you every time. Learn how to merge. ANd for goodness sake, don't complain about your lack of ability.
-
Wrong, it's still a HO. If one person is shot attempting to avoid the HO and the bullets don't happen to hit him in the face, it's still a HO.
Well, here we have one more definition for HO... "it is still a HO"... and what exactly does the HO stand for in that sentence? Head On ...what? Even if a person turns his butt to your guns you are a HOer, because you approached the person from his frontal hemisphere? Or where exactly does the line go?
I do not happen to agree with this one, but it only shows that HO can mean just about anything to different people. That makes arguing and whining about HO and HOers quite useless, doesn't it? :devil
-
That makes arguing and whining about HO and HOers quite useless, doesn't it?
The people who HO are immediately putting themselves at a disadvantage in the fight and they are most often easy victims Look at LLogan, he HO's every time he gets the chance(his words). 1V1, I'd bet money he's an easy kill. While LLogan's looking for a HO gun solution, an experienced stick will avoid the HO and already be working on his first post merge move.
Sure LLogan will "win" a fight now and then with a HO, but have him run into an experienced stick and he'll be defensive then quickly killed, post merge.
-
I think WMLute said it best...
You can be halfway into your intial move before the other pilot has finished firing.
-
Steve, I dont understand what you are trying to say, because I dont know what HO means to you. To me some of those sentences do not make sense, like "loooking for a HO gun solution". IMO no-one does that. Everyone is looking for a gun solution, but they do not wish the opponent to have one, do they? :confused:
-
LLogann doesn't "look for a ho" But if Steve wants to approach that close, Steve will be dead. Bet on it. Afterall Mr. Only Fly Fighters, my K/D isn't all that far from yours. But thanks for the trash talk nonetheless........ :D
The people who HO are immediately putting themselves at a disadvantage in the fight and they are most often easy victims Look at LLogan, he HO's every time he gets the chance(his words). 1V1, I'd bet money he's an easy kill. While LLogan's looking for a HO gun solution, an experienced stick will avoid the HO and already be working on his first post merge move.
Sure LLogan will "win" a fight now and then with a HO, but have him run into an experienced stick and he'll be defensive then quickly killed, post merge.
With all of that said........ If you only fly fighters, you miss out on the rest of the game. Those of us multi mode players whine less about ho'ing.... AT the same time..... <RESPECT> Steve.... I appreciate why it bothers you so much since you only fly fighters.
Maybe the answer is a Fighter arena. 1 type of flight only, tied into Late War. That way people can brush up on fighter skill and maybe even be a little more mindful that the ho is no good for anybody.
-
MAs are fighter arenas. All the rest is just fill. :D
Not sure what that has to do with someone HOing though.
-
Wrong, it's still a HO. If one person is shot attempting to avoid the HO and the bullets don't happen to hit him in the face, it's still a HO.
Technically, no, if the HOed pilot gave up his gun solution without firing in order to initiate a maneuver. At that point it is a very high angle deflection shot, but one that the shooter is a dirty maggot for taking in my opinion. :) It may not be a HO since only one pilot still had a gun solution when the first rounds were fired, but that doesn't make it any better or "OK" than a standard face shot HO.
-
Bottom line is, if you're flying level 12 at somebody, doesn't matter if you're one of the AH aces, who do not ho..... All that matters is your there, right there. Do you expect the other not to fire? Then you're just silly.... Perhaps stupid......
Perhaps.
I've merged with some of the good guys in this game. At 2k we are dead 12, at 1.5 he teeters left, so i teeter right...... AT 1k now it is clear that we will pass, and we do. But if you lack ACM and remain head-on and not fire..... There is no excuse for that, that's just you living in a fantasy world other then this fantasy world.
So you're relying on the other guy to "teeter" first? Then you make a matching move indicating you want a clean fight?
What is he doesn't move? What if he's waiting on you to make the first move, and when you don't he's thinking exactly what you're thinking, and you both end up trying to give each other a face full of lead?
See why I said "perhaps" above? 'Cause that might not be it every time, that the person is silly or stupid to expect to not get HOed, he maybe just doesn't want to be the first one to give up the gun solution knowing that there's a chance that he's opening the door for the other guy to take a lucky shot that he may or may not make it though alive.
I've been killed a few times by very good sticks who HOed, ahem high angle front quarter shot me after I made a move to avoid the HO. Instead of making a matching move, they kicked the rudder and sprayed me as we merged. I would have been better suited to keep my nose on them and dared them to do it as I'd surely be sending 20mm back.
Truth is, I've had a lot of luck in the N1K2J with HOers... it amazes me that people want to joust against that thing. I just wait til I see rounds coming from their guns, and BAM, let loose.
-
Technically, no,
wrong
-
I find the Shuffler's of the world will make their intentions known, albeit, very subtle. And that's what you need to look for. And no not always, I make the same sway move to see if I get a reaction. Despite what Steve may think..... Aside from Newbs, who only have the ho as their ACM, NOBODY enjoys ho'ing. Even if you win, odds are your shot up pretty good. So where do you go from there?
Perhaps.
So you're relying on the other guy to "teeter" first? Then you make a matching move indicating you want a clean fight?
What is he doesn't move? What if he's waiting on you to make the first move, and when you don't he's thinking exactly what you're thinking, and you both end up trying to give each other a face full of lead?
-
wrong
So if only one guy has a gun solution, Steve, where you you draw the line on separation? Is it still a HO if one guy turned his nose away at 200? 600? 1000? 1.5K?
-
Just thought of Dicta Boelcke... sections 2 and especially 6 :lol
Many might call Boelcke "HOer" as well...
-
LLogann doesn't "look for a ho" But if Steve wants to approach that close, Steve will be dead. Bet on it. Afterall Mr. Only Fly Fighters, my K/D isn't all that far from yours. But thanks for the trash talk nonetheless........ :D
With all of that said........ If you only fly fighters, you miss out on the rest of the game. Those of us multi mode players whine less about ho'ing.... AT the same time..... <RESPECT> Steve.... I appreciate why it bothers you so much since you only fly fighters.
Maybe the answer is a Fighter arena. 1 type of flight only, tied into Late War. That way people can brush up on fighter skill and maybe even be a little more mindful that the ho is no good for anybody.
Well K/D isn't necessarily a reflection of skill and I'm not claiming to be particularly skilled myself. I don't know what your K/D is as I don't know what your CPID is.
I may indeed be missing out on the rest of the game, but I'm having fun. I don't begrudge bombers and ground pounders, if that's fun for them... :rock
Ho'ing only bothers me now and then. Usually when I'm 1v1 and the guy hits me. A good 1v1 is pretty rare in the MA and I'd rather the opponent try to outfly me than simply joust with me. I don't know how to quantify it but I'm certain in my mind that those who are willing to maneuver for the HO at the merge are less of a killer than a comparably skilled guy who is thinking merge/post merge moves.
-
So if only one guy has a gun solution, Steve, where you you draw the line on separation? Is it still a HO if one guy turned his nose away at 200? 600? 1000? 1.5K?
Ahhh excellent point here. It's tough to draw a definitive line, I think, don't you? I think there is a difference between turning away and avoiding a HO/collision.
-
Despite what Steve may think..... NOBODY enjoys ho'ing.
Then why do around 90+% of the people I merge with in the MA try to HO?
Even if you win, odds are your shot up pretty good. So where do you go from there?
This is my point exactly! Sadly, a significant portion of the community would be happy with killing one guy and dying themselves it seems.
-
Ahhh excellent point here. It's tought to draw a definitive line, I think, don't you? I think there is a difference between turning away and avoiding a HO/collision.
Exactly.
-
I find the Shuffler's of the world will make their intentions known, albeit, very subtle. And that's what you need to look for. And no not always, I make the same sway move to see if I get a reaction. Despite what Steve may think..... Aside from Newbs, who only have the ho as their ACM, NOBODY enjoys ho'ing. Even if you win, odds are your shot up pretty good. So where do you go from there?
:huh
:rofl :aok
-
Then why do around 90+% of the people I merge with in the MA try to HO?
IMHO, because 90+ percent fall into one of 3 categories, or a combination thereof:
a) they have little to no skill or ability and need a quick hit to kill or wound
b) they think they'll be HOed and will come out on the "short end of the stick" if they don't shoot first
or c) they just don't care.
This is my point exactly! Sadly, a significant portion of the community would be happy with killing one guy and dying themselves, it seems.
I don't disagree, and it is sad.
-
I don't understand why anyone who's confident in their ability to engage their opponent with success would trade that chance for what is essentially a 50/50 proposition by allowing the other plane a gun solution as well.
-
I don't understand why anyone who's confident in their ability to engage their opponent with success would trade that chance for what is essentially a 50/50 proposition by allowing the other plane a gun solution as well.
Exactly.
If I am going to spend 5-10 minutes getting to a fight, why would I let the outcome of my time investment be decided by chance. I might as well go play online blackjack.
-
How bout this? Carrying a lot of speed a Corsair is dead 6 and 2K back of a Spit5. Spit5 turns left, and chops throttle to swing his nose back on the Corsair. Corsair fires at 600 as the Spit's nose is swinging back around but before the Spit can get get guns on him. Then the Corsair goes up to avoid the HO from the Spit5.
I see variations of this from time to time, substituting a Zeke, FM2, etc for the Spit5. And every once in a while the other pilot will claim to have been HOed. I think not, because if the other plane had gotten his nose around earlier - outside of gun range that is- I would be dodging, not shooting as we closed. But since the nose was still turning inside guns range and the other pilot doesn't have a solution yet, I'm firing.
I may just be a HO-er though.
-
The fact that you think "honor" refers to a preferred style of AH2 play speaks volumes about your lack of it.
What the heck are you talking about? I never said anything about ""honor" refers to a preferred style of AH2" I did mention that having people "with honor or class" in the game would be nice but it isn't going to happen. Having people with honor and class would tend to cut back on the garbage you see on 200, as well as how people play the game... kinda like honest people don't "bend the rules".
You also don't know a thing about duels, or jousting. You're just spewing ignorance, but what else is new?
What am I mistaken about in duels and jousts?
A duel was most often set up to solve a dispute of "honor". In my mind I was thinking of pistols so take 10 paces "turn and fire! one with the luckiest aim wins" (luckiest because the black powder guns most often used were notoriously in accurate.)
And Jousts where two "knights" on horseback running full speed head on, trying to unhorse his opponent.
So where did I have this info wrong? Maybe you need to improve on your reading skills.
-
Well K/D isn't necessarily a reflection of skill and I'm not claiming to be particularly skilled myself. No, but I did sir. <S>
I don't know what your K/D is as I don't know what your CPID is. I don't know what a CPID is....... (K/D-4.0)
Ho'ing only bothers me now and then. Usually when I'm 1v1 and the guy hits me. I actually agree with you wholeheartedly... In a 1v1, ho's should be seen far less, and most player's should agree... Unless I'm already pw'd, leaking bad, out of gas, I'll do everything I can to stay clear of even coming near a head-on merge.
With that said........ SA..... It's a 12 vs 5, Bish being 5..... t1 is a level 12 head-on, t2 is high 3, t3 is 3k back low 6........... t1 is getting ho'd heck yeah because I'm not even paying attention to him. t2 is all in my view. Gotta look back forward and fast, look away, look back, 1k.........800....... Open fire as I look away towards t2 and pull up and right.
Sure that is an extreme example that just about every last one of you will say is clearly a ho situation. But it validates the idea that a ho needs to happen from time to time.
And I just thought of this....... Base Cap......... How many people complain about getting ho'd on 200 while they are over an enemy base?
-
Whoever said it wasn't done in real life, didn't have a clue.
That being said, using it as an excuse for doing it in a cartoon game doesn't work either, as we don't risk dying. We have nothing to lose by actually engaging in air combat. No country will be destroyed, no civillians killed etc.
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
Til then, it doesn't work for me :)
complaining about a ho in this game is the biggest joke in game. Just Cause you don't want to ho and is your way to play. doesn't mean others less of a person or less of a player. Because he or she decided to ho. 200 and all channel would be cleaner and polite if HTC mutes players text or vox for saying or typeing HO.
Everyone pays same amount to play and is entitle to play thier way without some idiot complaining they ho them. If you get ho'ed You were at fault 99% of time. not person your complaing about. Even if you get ho'ed while on enemy's 6. should salute guy for saving countryman.
75% don;'t even know dif between a Real nose to nose Joust and snap shots or lead shots. and Ho Was taught in manuals of USnavy and army airforce. not just a few pilots. even chuck yeager lost a ho with a 190.
So if some kid or adult wants to HO and you fly nose to nose with him even for a second and give him a chance to HO you shoul;d complain about your bad habits not on how he wants to play the GAME.
Seeing guys complain about ho on 200 or all channel I know 99% its guy complainings fault for getting ho'ed not the guy winning the joust. Don't want to Joust don't point nose at enemy's nose.
unless your paying said players account for him. let him play his way and say Salute good shot wtg and continue.
Just like when i play poker i know the guy complainin gabout a guy being a donkey or river rat is the A$% hole not the so called donkey. You never want a donkey to leave the game. or here in ace's high If guys first move is a HO and you can't beat him or lose to A Ho your the one that needs lessons not him.
-
If you are arguing that HOs are ok......your wrong.... :aok
-
Just thought of Dicta Boelcke... sections 2 and especially 6 :lol
Many might call Boelcke "HOer" as well...
How does either of these apply to a head on attack?????
2: Allways carry through an attack when you started it.
6: If your opponent dives on you, do not try to evade his onslaught but fly to meet him.
#2 is just stating it is better to stay and fight than it is to break off and give your opponent your six. Sticking with the fight and hoping the guy you are fighting screws up is much better than giving up your six and surrendering all advantage to your opponent.
#6 has to do w/ noobs having a tendency to turn and run when they see an opponent, especially one diving on them. You have more options if you turn to face the nme than if you run and give up your six (see #2 above). It is about overcoming the desire to run and face your attacker but it does NOT say you should go nose on guns blazing. (which, as I allready have shown, is a poor move and one that should only be used in limited situations or complete desperation)
There is nothing in the Dicta Boelcke that inferrs one should HO the nme. I am agast you would even suggest that it does.
-
WMLute,
I did not say Boelcke would encourage anyone to go HO, I said many might interpret it that way. That is because HO seems to mean so many differetn things ;)
Still those 2 rules can often/sometimes lead to possible HO situations, can't they? The first to attack follows no 2 and the one being attacked follows no 6.
I personally dont follow no 2 to the letter. I often fake attacks and break the attack if the situation does not seem favorable, but there is a certain point, beyond which no 2 should be followed, even if it becomes a HO. By trying to evade I have often lost in such situation.
More often I follow no 6. That may cause an HO and it leaves the decision to the attackers hands.
I suppose many parts of Dicta Boelcke can also be interpreted in various ways... as more general or as exact tactical moves. Is "attack" an engagement or a pass? "Turning into the enemy" is not same as going nose on with him, but only means what... hanging around instead of runing? :)
-
A duel was most often set up to solve a dispute of "honor". In my mind I was thinking of pistols so take 10 paces "turn and fire! one with the luckiest aim wins" (luckiest because the black powder guns most often used were notoriously in accurate.)
If by "notoriously inaccurate" you mean capable of hitting a dinner-plate sized target at 25 yards every time, then you are correct. Not up to today's handgun standards, but still a lethal weapon. Some men were far more feared as duelists than others. Not luck.
-
"Head-on attack, however, exposed one directly to the enemy's guns. " Actually he does make many mentions concerning the reasoning behind head-on's but also takes the time to point out the danger in it.
There is nothing in the Dicta Boelcke that inferrs one should HO the nme. I am agast you would even suggest that it does.
-
(whew)
Ya' had me worried there for a min BlauK.
<Salute>
"Head-on attack, however, exposed one directly to the enemy's guns. " Actually he does make many mentions concerning the reasoning behind head-on's but also takes the time to point out the danger in it.
Finish the quote.
Head-on attacks or head-to-tail attacks required little or no calculated deflection in aim. Head-on attack, however, exposed one directly to the enemy's guns. Far safer and more effective to have one's target and bullet stream all traveling in more or less the same direction. This required little or no 'leading,' and exposed the target to a greater concentration of fire.
He is saying that while a head-on attack was easy to aim, it put you infront of the nme guns and was not "safe" and you should instead attack from behind.
Which for me is the MAIN reason a HO is a horrible idea. Why would anybody put themself infront of the bad guys guns on purpose? It just isn't safe (or smart, or put your plane in good position for the rest of the fight).
-
And yet still......... You haven't mentioned Rule 5.......... That's why you still have agast......... :x
Finish the quote.
He is saying that while a head-on attack was easy to aim, it put you infront of the nme guns and was not "safe" and you should instead attack from behind.
(LLogann I want to take this time to say that I respect you and your flying with the highest regard!!!)
At the same time, you are trying to cloud the actual words said in the dicta. :salute
Turn and run, or ho? Answer that!!!
And thanks for the compliment Lute!!! :lol
-
Anecdotal references of pilots I've seen over the years have also indicated that; besides the guns issue; there was a great fear about collisions to the point that they even discussed it amongst themselves and concluded the disadvantages of HO's far out wieghed any perceived advantage. They flew so as to not allowing themselves to be put in that situation.
Once again the feeling from them I got was that if you are in a HO situation it is of your doing.
....takes 2 ta HO eh!
-
What am I mistaken about in duels and jousts?
A duel was most often set up to solve a dispute of "honor". In my mind I was thinking of pistols so take 10 paces "turn and fire! one with the luckiest aim wins" (luckiest because the black powder guns most often used were notoriously in accurate.)
And Jousts where two "knights" on horseback running full speed head on, trying to unhorse his opponent.
Neither is a matter of luck. Jousting took a tremendous amount of skill; a skilled jouster would beat an unskilled one every time. Nothing random about it at all.
Black powder is not that inaccurate at short ranges. At ten paces any half-decent and half-clean gun will have a group well smaller than a human torso. What made people miss was either (a) they meant to or (b) nerves (or possibly improper loading, but IIRC the seconds usually did the loading). Andrew Jackson killed a man in a duel (AFAIK the only President ever to have done so) after the other guy had already shot him in the chest and broken two of his ribs. That ain't luck. Incidentally, duels were as likely to be "shoot one after another, challenged first" as "both shoot as fast as you can when the signal is given."
What makes HOing more random than dueling or jousting is (a) starting from a range where few people if any can hit reliably and (b) automatic weapons with which you can spray until you hit something. It's more like a duel running at each other with Glocks starting at 200 yards.
But you missed the whole point of my post. HOing is only like jousting if what you're doing is like jousting to begin with - two guys lining up looking straight at each other from out of effective range and then galloping/flying toward each other at the same time. In that situation, what everyone says about HOing is correct, it's stupid and obnoxious and indicates a lack of skill or class.
But there's nothing joust-like or duel-like about it if you barely manage to get guns on and kill a guy who was vulching you on your takeoff but stupid enough to come in low in your front quarter, or a guy who jumps you from 10k up when you're limping home with your engine oil nearly gone, or one of five enemies ganging you or capping your field, or a jabo 5 seconds from dropping on your CV. And I find myself in situations like those, or others that are not remotely duel-like, a lot more often than 1v1 co-alt merges.
Now, as to having honor, perhaps if you don't like people making unflattering assumptions about you without knowing what they're talking about, you should avoid making unflattering assumptions about others without having any idea what you're talking about. You might even find people are more receptive to your ideas if you don't claim that anyone who disagrees with you is skilless, clueless, and classless.
(You should also quit with the "Kids today!" crap. It just makes you sound like a cranky old curmudgeon, and you have no idea how old the people you're talking about are anyway and are wrong in many of your assumptions on that point.)
-
....takes 2 ta HO eh!
Uhhh no. Two to merge, one to HO
-
And yet still......... You haven't mentioned Rule 5.......... That's why you still have agast......... :x
At the same time, you are trying to cloud the actual words said in the dicta. :salute
Turn and run, or ho? Answer that!!!
And thanks for the compliment Lute!!! :lol
Not at all.
The thinking behind # 6 was to turn towards your nme because, even climbing and having less energy, you had vastly more options than giving them your tail. I use #6 in most every fight.
-
You didn't answer though my respected enemy....... If there are only 2 choices......... Which would it be?
Not at all.
The thinking behind # 6 was to turn towards your nme because, even climbing and having less energy, you had vastly more options than giving them your tail. I use #6 in most every fight.
-
Uhhh no. Two to merge, one to HO
Well I guess in your book perhaps there is only 1 type of merge - in mine many : ANY meeting of craft is a merge no matter what the orientation. High 6 merge / Front 1/4 merge / etc etc.
Two that fly face to face at each other when merging is a "HO merge" in my books. Doesn't matter if either of them fire. ***NOTE it's called a "HEAD ON" for that very reason. A "HO merge" has nothing to do with whether they fire or not. If one moves off line it's not a ho in my opinion.
..and there we have it in a nut shell - everyone has a different definition for HO. heheh
I'll just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.
HO is a HO is a HO.....under any other name too eh! :D
-
Shooting people with thier backs to you is for sissies and cowards!
-
<snip>
But you missed the whole point of my post. HOing is only like jousting if what you're doing is like jousting to begin with - two guys lining up looking straight at each other from out of effective range and then galloping/flying toward each other at the same time. In that situation, what everyone says about HOing is correct, it's stupid and obnoxious and indicates a lack of skill or class.
</snip>
So basically we agree. For the most part most fights start this way "galloping/flying toward each other". I would like to see more combat where each plane maneuvers for the merge. Yes there are snap shots, deflection shots, bounces, vulches, even "spraying and praying" but for those "moves" your still trying to get yourself into a shooting position, hence the combat, trying to out maneuver the other guy. Thats all I'm really asking for, try something other than a HO, and I don't mean "you" personally.
As for sounding like "a cranky old curmudgeon", I guess I am :P Maybe instead of "these kids today" I'll use "these newbs today". Will that make me sound less grouchy?
-
Well I guess in your book perhaps there is only 1 type of merge - in mine many : ANY meeting of craft is a merge no matter what the orientation. High 6 merge / Front 1/4 merge / etc etc.
Two that fly face to face at each other when merging is a "HO merge" in my books. Doesn't matter if either of them fire. ***NOTE it's called a "HEAD ON" for that very reason. A "HO merge" has nothing to do with whether they fire or not. If one moves off line it's not a ho in my opinion.
..and there we have it in a nut shell - everyone has a different definition for HO. heheh
I'll just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.
HO is a HO is a HO.....under any other name too eh! :D
There aren't two definitions of a HO shot. Yours is simply wrong.
-
There aren't two definitions of a HO shot. Yours is simply wrong.
LOL
riigghhhtttttt.....and next will you be telling us all that your way is the right and only way to play the game...have it your way - I'm not particularily concerned about your miopic opinion friend....and if you've bothered to follow the conversations here you'll see there are WAY more than 2 definations of HO.
.... but once again proves my point about narrow minded people who see only their point of view <shrug>
...and fer the rest of you reasonable folks...interesting views - keep em coming.
...cheers eh! :D
-
I read some of this thread. Couldn't bear to read all of it.....same ole crap.
Eric Hartman did not think the Head On shot was a good thing to do. He did not value it as a tactic at all. It is not at "tactic". It is a desperate move when you have no other options.
Dicta Boelcke did not think head on attacks were valuable either...read his rules how you want but there is nothing there suggesting head on was a tactic.
Further firing at the merge or before DOES WORK. It is not only possible but quite easy to fire on the merge and still make a lead turn...still make a tactical move giving you the advantage.
The idea that firing on the merge makes you loose advantage is not true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If anyone doubts this I will be glad to show you in the DA how this works.
Even if you have huge smash with no intention of turning you can still Head on fire, blow through, climb above and do it again with impunity. The pilot who dodges the HO will be at a disadvantage.
If you take two relatively equal pilots and they both fire on the merge during their merge pass or thereafter on each merge pass they will both be hit and both will crash 9 out of 10 times. OR one will miss and one will hit damaging the others plane with oil, radiator, pilot wound or collision. The round is over at that point.
So we continue to do this over and over and over...in the end neither pilot has any fun...it now becomes a "dualist" or "jousting" contest...nothing more...there is no "maneuvering combat"...only head on guns blazing.
There are two schools of thought in AH2 about this.
#1 - its a valid thing to do....typically "I had guns and you didn't..you died..I lived..end of story"
#2 - it's a sign of total newbness, lame and skilless game play. A sign of a player who cares nothing about combat maneuver and counter maneuver. A player who considers ANY kind of kill no matter how it is achieved a good kill.
Although a head on firing pass can be made without loosing positional advantage that does not mean that it should be done.
Can you imagine if every player in AH2 made it a point to head on fire on every pass....what a joke this game would be.
Just for the record, I think Ho shots are lame in the context of fighting 1v1 in any arena. There are times like cherry picking vulcher who I will ho at the first opportunity and others that have been listed.
But as a general rule, the HO is something that shows poor game play, no respect for your enemy, and generally results in your status being referred to in very nasty terms. Hoing gets you nothing but contempt by your piers and colleges. It gains you absolutely nothing.
-
If you take two relatively equal pilots and they both fire on the merge during their merge pass or thereafter on each merge pass they will both be hit and both will crash 9 out of 10 times. OR one will miss and one will hit damaging the others plane with oil, radiator, pilot wound or collision. The round is over at that point.
So we continue to do this over and over and over...in the end neither pilot has any fun...it now becomes a "dualist" or "jousting" contest...nothing more...there is no "maneuvering combat"...only head on guns blazing.
I get the impression that in real air combat for whatever reason this was NOT the case and HOs were considered a shot you are unlikely to score on, as opposed to sims. Shaw's words are something to the effect of "firing on the merge can put you at a psychological advantage and you may even score some lucky hits". Maybe its the icons?
-
LOL
riigghhhtttttt.....and next will you be telling us all that your way is the right and only way to play the game...have it your way - I'm not particularily concerned about your miopic opinion friend....and if you've bothered to follow the conversations here you'll see there are WAY more than 2 definations of HO.
.... but once again proves my point about narrow minded people who see only their point of view <shrug>
...and fer the rest of you reasonable folks...interesting views - keep em coming.
...cheers eh! :D
I'm not giving you my opinion. I'm telling you how it has been defined in the community for years. There is only one correct definition of a HO shot. Your horrible spelling aside, feel free continue to try to be condescending. If it makes you feel superior, great, but you're still wrong.
-
Ive stopped worrying about stuff like this. The MA is a madhouse. Nobody will cut ya slack because you didnt HO em. And you know you are gonna get HO'd. Dueling is one thing, but in a place where they are lined up to gang,pick,HO,etc, stop worrying about it. In the words of Obiwan, "Let go!"
-
Anecdotal references of pilots I've seen over the years have also indicated that; besides the guns issue; there was a great fear about collisions to the point that they even discussed it amongst themselves and concluded the disadvantages of HO's far out wieghed any perceived advantage. They flew so as to not allowing themselves to be put in that situation.
Once again the feeling from them I got was that if you are in a HO situation it is of your doing.
....takes 2 ta HO eh!
dont be a ritard...does not take 2 to HO, Ill even give a situation. Im getting by 4 people like normal and I dont have much E left to manuever, a 5th guy comes in at me and pulls nose to nose...I can easily fire but I dont,he does..I go down and of course call him a noob on 200. Now in this situation where Im already slow and almost stall speed with flaps out its hard to do anytihng to avoid it would you agree?
-
I'm not giving you my opinion. I'm telling you how it has been defined in the community for years. There is only one correct definition of a HO shot. Your horrible spelling aside, feel free continue to try to be condescending. If it makes you feel superior, great, but you're still wrong.
:O :rofl :rofl :rofl
Nice to meet you Mr Community :devil
-
Nicely summed up, Agent :aok
But as a general rule, the HO is something that shows poor game play, no respect for your enemy, and generally results in your status being referred to in very nasty terms. Hoing gets you nothing but contempt by your piers and colleges. It gains you absolutely nothing.
Still I disagree in some tiny bits. I still argue that in some desperate or otherwise suitable situations, there is nothing wrong with a HO shot. If the underdog can deliver one more shot with it, instead of laying low to die, it is perfect. If one has all the advantages and fails utilize them.. getting a shot to his face from the underdog, it is completely his own fault.
Thus, instead of gaining you nothin, HO can gain you the last kill, even a salvation and escape from a desperate situation ;)
However, when one has all the other options available, HO is simply foolhardy, regardless of pilot's skill level or experience.
-
"But as a general rule, the HO is something that shows poor game play, no respect for your enemy, and generally
results in your status being referred to in very nasty terms. Hoing gets you nothing but contempt by your piers
and colleges. It gains you absolutely nothing."
True.
However IMO the same goes for those who whine on web boards and on game channels about
being the victim of one. As well as anyone who feels the need to try and get the system changed
because they cannot adapt and master the very simple skills needed to avoid the HO as well as
the collision.
-
"But as a general rule, the HO is something that shows poor game play, no respect for your enemy, and generally
results in your status being referred to in very nasty terms. Hoing gets you nothing but contempt by your piers
and colleges. It gains you absolutely nothing."
True.
However IMO the same goes for those who whine on web boards and on game channels about
being the victim of one. As well as anyone who feels the need to try and get the system changed
because they cannot adapt and master the very simple skills needed to avoid the HO as well as
the collision.
:aok
-
Also true, Westy :aok
But it is also quite a natural reaction to get angry, to victimize oneself and to accuse the enemy as unfair when one loses a winning match because of own impatience or lack of experience, is it not. Many would accuse themselves, but some perfect ones can rarely see anything wrong in their own actions :devil ... "I got HOed... poor helpless me" :rofl
-
hi steve,
definition of HO:
a HO is only a HO if BOTH have the ability of a firering solution at the same time.
most people didnt understand it, if you are in a turn fight, and you turn into the con, lets say you are able to make a deflection schot from 30deg from high 2 oclock, and the opponent have no chance to get a fireing solution, it isn't a HO
i say HO are a life lottery
Lets say RL pilots cant avoid all time
-
Well thank you for your kind and respectful words of wisdom steve - I'd feel insulted by them until I consider the source - go figure <shrug>
My position is that there are many sides to this HO question and all have validity depending on your view of history and the game. I've put up with this and many similar arguements for over 20+ years in the air sim game and the fact is it will never be resolved - live with it.
...ya can lead donkeys to a fact...getting em to understand it is another matter!! (...and if the donkey ears fit then....)
...cheers eh! :D
-
Well thank you for your kind and respectful words of wisdom steve - I'd feel insulted by them until I consider the source - go figure <shrug>
My position is that there are many sides to this HO question and all have validity depending on your view of history and the game. I've put up with this and many similar arguements for over 20+ years in the air sim game and the fact is it will never be resolved - live with it.
...ya can lead donkeys to a fact...getting em to understand it is another matter!! (...and if the donkey ears fit then....)
...cheers eh! :D
Blah blah blah. Ho question? Dhyran gave the basic definition of the HO. There's no question about the definition. A HO is a merge where both parties have the opportunity for a gun solution. That's the definition, there isn't another.
Return to your sophomoric insults, it won't change the definition though.
-
Blah blah blah. Ho question? Dhyran gave the basic definition of the HO. There's no question about the definition. A HO is a merge where both parties have the opportunity for a gun solution. That's the definition, there isn't another.
Return to your sophomoric insults, it won't change the definition though.
I"M going to quote back to YOU my very words that YOU actually quoted back to me :
"Two that fly face to face at each other when merging is a "HO merge" in my books."
There are just a multitude of different opinion regarding this - except for those who say "I"M right and the rest of you are wrong!"
...like I said : "...ya kin lead a donk....." <sigh eh!>
-
I"M going to quote back to YOU my very words that YOU actually quoted back to me :
"Two that fly face to face at each other when merging is a "HO merge" in my books."
There are just a multitude of different opinion regarding this - except for those who say "I"M right and the rest of you are wrong!"
...like I said : "...ya kin lead a donk....." <sigh eh!>
Only my opinion counts..... most know this already.... get on the band wagon :P
-
I"M going to quote back to YOU my very words that YOU actually quoted back to me :
"Two that fly face to face at each other when merging is a "HO merge" in my books."
There are just a multitude of different opinion regarding this - except for those who say "I"M right and the rest of you are wrong!"
...like I said : "...ya kin lead a donk....." <sigh eh!>
You keep trying to change the subject... fail. Time to grow up, tinkerbell.
. It's not that I'm right. I'm just repeating the definition that has been long standing. It's not my definition. You are trying to say it's something else. You are such a child that you are incapable of acknowledging that you made a mistake. I run into people like this in the business world now and then. They are always abject failures; insulting other people in an effort to try to argue an untenable position. Keep at it if you like, it may actually work in the 8th grade social circles.
-
You keep trying to change the subject... fail. Time to grow up, tinkerbell.
. It's not that I'm right. I'm just repeating the definition that has been long standing. It's not my definition. You are trying to say it's something else. You are such a child that you are incapable of acknowledging that you made a mistake. I run into people like this in the business world now and then. They are always abject failures; insulting other people in an effort to try to argue an untenable position. Keep at it if you like, it may actually work in the 8th grade social circles.
Well if you think your childish insults are a benifit to your position....knock yourself out.
Yours is usually the reply from those who are unable to accept that people may not agree with them - attack the messanger. Fortunatley in my business world the likes of that soon disappear.
...like I said - "...if the donkey ears fit..." - keep it up...I'm not the one looking progressively desperate.
...and for you others...cheers eh! :D
-
..and GYRENE you offspring from a *&*X#@!* mongrel - SEE what you've started?? LOL
KEEP IT UP EH! :D
-
Well if you think your childish insults are a benifit to your position....knock yourself out.
Yours is usually the reply from those who are unable to accept that people may not agree with them - attack the messanger. Fortunatley in my business world the likes of that soon disappear.
...like I said - "...if the donkey ears fit..." - keep it up...I'm not the one looking progressively desperate.
...and for you others...cheers eh! :D
Obviously you don't know how you look. Your poor education aside, let's stay on topic. Here's the definition of a Head On shot: A merge where both aircraft have the opportunity for a gun solution.
Now, this isn't my definition, the head on was around before I was. You can argue that there's several definitions but there simply isn't. :aok
-
Obviously you don't know how you look. Your poor education aside, let's stay on topic.
<sigh> and I give up with the likes of you sir! LOL
....to the rest of ya :D eh!!
-
<sigh> and I give up with the likes of you sir! LOL
....to the rest of ya :D eh!!
I'm thankful.
-
If you are argueing with Steve right now your wrong :rock
-
If you are argueing with Steve right now your wrong :rock
Ya - i know - had a girlfriend with an attitude like him once! For a very short time thank god. If you were right you were still wrong - no discussion. LOL
I'll just go with Dick Bong and Hartmann and the rest of the RL pilots and let this cartoon guy play in his own lil 'ol sandbox. Hope he remembers to keep it clean and leave the rest of us alone.
These guys haven't changed in 23+ years about the HO..Their way is the only way. Had my fill with em! <shrug>
...cheers eh! :D
-
These guys haven't changed in 23+ years about the HO..Their way is the only way. Had my fill with em! <shrug>
People have been telling him the same thing for 23 years and he still doesn't get it. :lol
Wreked, you take the cake in self-embarrassment. I remember killing your BnZ'ing a8 a couple times a few days ago. Killing tards is more pleasurable than killing your average MA stick. The fact that you're an easy kill makes your ignorance a little more palatable. :aok
-
Ya - i know - had a girlfriend with an attitude like him once! For a very short time thank god. If you were right you were still wrong - no discussion. LOL
I'll just go with Dick Bong and Hartmann and the rest of the RL pilots and let this cartoon guy play in his own lil 'ol sandbox. Hope he remembers to keep it clean and leave the rest of us alone.
These guys haven't changed in 23+ years about the HO..Their way is the only way. Had my fill with em! <shrug>
...cheers eh! :D
Frown.........
-
Here's the definition of a Head On shot: A merge where both aircraft have the opportunity for a gun solution.
Shot is not a merge and merge is not a shot ;).
HO shots can happen in a merge, HO merge can happen without shots, HO shots can happen also happen much later in the engagement, not only in the merge, or the planes can fly that later HO pass without any shots fired.
So, even though the above "community truth" is on the right track, it seems to be a bit faulty and also kinda narrow definition of "HO", doesn't it.
-
I dont agree, I consider planes on my six to be merging in alot of cases since I know Im not in any danger and actually pulling them in to get a shot.
-
Junky, how does that relate to this discussion? I thought this was about HO, HO shots, HO merges, HO passes.... not about merging or engaging from behind.
-
Stevie - I'll be the 1st to say I'm the worlds worst shot and my plane keeps falling out of the air reguarily - AND I keep finding it fun - unlike you who seems to get a kick out of insulting people and "my way is the only way" attitude. <shrug> That's your style and you're welcome to it sir. What ever rocks your boat Jack - I guess you have to ask me if I really give 2 flying futons about anything you think. Heard it all before.
As anyone with 2 ounces of brain power can see there are a multitude of opinions right here and in other threads regarding HO's - what they consist of and what is proper/improper about them.
So knowing that you will always attempt to have the last word; this will be my last address to you regarding your attitude.
Like I said....leading donkeys....! <sigh>
...and to everyone else..
...cheers eh! :D
-
Shot is not a merge and merge is not a shot ;).
HO shots can happen in a merge, HO merge can happen without shots, HO shots can happen also happen much later in the engagement, not only in the merge,
There can be mre than one merge in an engagement. any time you are nose to nose where both parties can have a gun solution, you have the possibility of a HO shot. pick nits if you wish.
-
- AND I keep finding it fun - unlike you who seems to get a kick out of insulting people ... a bunch of mindless drivel
Actually, you started with the insults. 23 ye4ars and you still don't get it. :lol
You gave up on me, remember. You can't help but keep coming back for more.
-
So, even though the above "community truth" is on the right track, it seems to be a bit faulty and also kinda narrow definition of "HO", doesn't it.
It is somewhat of a narrow definition but I think it is narrow by necessity. If you think about it how else can a head on attack by accurately defined? And a definition is at times necessary, consider duels for example where Head-Ons are part of the rules. A narrow definition like "both planes must be able to take the shot" is far easier to go by to determine if someone committed a head on attack than anything else. Consider the alternatives, a head on is ten degrees off the nose, fifteen? That is much more subjective and harder to classify.
-
The more exact a definition is the better it is. I was referring to how Steve defined "HO" without having words like "shot", "pass", "merge" or like you are using "attack" attached to it. IMO, those add some variety to the definition. What does "attack" mean to you in regard to HO? Does it always include shots fired or is it more like engaging with an intent to shoot?
To Steve,
If you say there can be several merges in an engagement, then you have to define what you consider an engagement ;)
IMO, one needs to disengage to be able to re-enagage with a new merge. I would call that another engagement. Number of engagements does not depend on number of HO possibilities. It is pretty much semiotics, but how can we argue about anythig if words have a different meaning to different people, or if some want to twist the meaning to serve their agendas.
-
So....
If I'm understanding all of you guys right......
Eric was only a ho'er when he had to ho? :huh
quote author=Wreked
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/argue.gif)
quote author=Steve
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/argue.gif)
quote author=JunkyII
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/givemebeer.gif)
quote author=Steve
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/pfff.gif)
quote author=Wreked
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/import/sign0099.gif)
quote author=BlauK
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/wall.gif)
quote author=Soulyss
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/import/boink.gif)
quote author=Wreked
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/argue.gif)
quote author=Steve
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/argue.gif)
quote author=LLogann
(http://www.candidz.com/forum/images/smilies/import/bananalama.gif)
-
Junky, how does that relate to this discussion? I thought this was about HO, HO shots, HO merges, HO passes.... not about merging or engaging from behind.
Im saying what I think a "Merge" can be :aok
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl LLogan
That just about concludes it all. :aok
-
The second we only get one life and we're done playing AH afterwards forever, then you can use real life HO'ing as your justification.
From a logical approach this doesnt make sense. If 'one life' were the reality then why throw away your life in a head on pass? It seems the opposite would be true.
-
It seems that the "accepted" definition of a HO is changing in the arena. I took a two year break from AH after 13 yrs of playing (AW to CK to WB to AH). At that time, an HO was considered firing on the initial merge and requiring that at least one of the involved parties take evasive action to avoid a collision, provided no one was destroyed.
I recently returned to AH and had an encounter with a Hurri while flying my Zeke. On the initial merge the Hurri began firing. I held my fire and ducked underneath. We then proceeded with a turn fight. After several turns I got the angle to get a shot off at the Hurri's left front (required full rudder deflection to do it) and got the kill. I got the front quarter shot due to using a "nose to nose turn" (basic ACM) and the Zero's better turn rate (the Hurri did not have the angle for a return shot when I fired). Next thing I know there is a whine from the opponent claiming I HO'd him. I explained to him he was not "HO'd", but simply out turned by a Zero.
Bottom line is that it takes two to HO and can be easily sidestepped either party. After the first turn in an engagement it is now an angles shot and not an "HO" (that includes B&Z fighting). :cool:
TShark
"If you're alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell you're outnumbered!" - Joe Foss, USMC
-
I'm not giving you my opinion. I'm telling you how it has been defined in the community for years. There is only one correct definition of a HO shot.
Never realized this community was the ultimate authority in the definition of head on. I'm guessing ole Steve here is the chairman of the board for the head on definition committee? Might want to find another expert...Steve is failing.
Aside from the obvious fact that it was a very risky maneuver in aerial combat, head on in aerial combat terms has always meant 2 or more aircraft moving toward each other at any angle in which if that angle of travel (12, 11, 1 o'clock high or low) was maintained to the point of impact, it would result in the aircraft colliding with each other along the frontal section of the airplane...and that could be anywhere between the propeller to the front of the cockpit.
It does take at least 2 aircraft to HO or merge head on...regardless of whether or not shots are fired or who has a firing solution. What is and has been considered a HO here in toonville pile-it world is one or both persons firing in a 12 o'clock level merge...everything else is considered a deflection shot.
-
Never realized this community was the ultimate authority in the definition of head on.
outside of the community, how the headon shot is defined is completely moot, considering we are only discussing how it is defined here in our community. So yes, for the sake of our discussion the community is the ultimate authority. Define it however you want outside the game. You chafe my ankle noob.
-
outside of the community, how the headon shot is defined is completely moot, considering we are only discussing how it is defined here in our community. So yes, for the sake of our discussion the community is the ultimate authority. Define it however you want outside the game. You chafe my ankle noob.
It's defined the same way everywhere there is an IQ level above shoe sizes. When you become an "expert authority" in anything besides toon pile-it wannabe ace...then you can offer something besides a humble opinion...until then, keep it humble.
-
This is getting good :)
-
Uhhh no. Two to merge, one to HO
Amen.
Takes 2 to merge, but only 1 to fire.
-
23 years of history make the AW/AH community the ultimate authority within these servers.
Steve happens to be the one trying to help clue you in.
-
It's defined the same way everywhere there is an IQ level above shoe sizes. When you become an "expert authority" in anything besides toon pile-it wannabe ace...then you can offer something besides a humble opinion...until then, keep it humble.
You're making the same ignorarant assumptions as another before you. I'm only regurgitating the long standing definition of a Ho shot for the purposes of this game. I'm not taking credit for said definition. At first I was trying to pass on this infomation. Now I'm merely trying to stop morons from changing it because they like to argue and are misinformed.
-
23 years of history make the AW/AH community the ultimate authority within these servers.
Steve happens to be the one trying to help clue you in.
You're making the same ignorarant assumptions as another before you. I'm only regurgitating the long standing definition of a Ho shot for the purposes of this game. I'm not taking credit for said definition. At first I was trying to pass on this infomation. Now I'm merely trying to stop morons from changing it because they like to argue and are misinformed.
Really, and I'm betting you still think Columbus was the first European to step foot on the North American continent, and there are Martians on Mars.
23 years of error do not make it correct...regardless of what you might want reality to be...fact is the current way of thinking is the reason all the whining goes on.
-
Really, and I'm betting you still think Columbus was the first European to step foot on the North American continent, and there are Martians on Mars.
23 years of error do not make it correct...regardless of what you might want reality to be...fact is the current way of thinking is the reason all the whining goes on.
So people have been wrong for 23 years, because some noob comes on the scene and says so? :rofl
I guess it wouldn't matter how many people told you the same definition. You'd just tell them all that they are wrong and you are right. :aok
.
Your head is in the sand right next to your squaddie. Birds of a feather suck at this game and are stupid together.
-
I love it when the "new guys" show up and tell us "old guys" how we have been wrong for all of these years. LOL!!!
-
Gyrene:
Most of the "vets" you are arguing with are good marksmen who could "HO" anyone to death on virtually every merge if they so desired, and the only thing you could do about would be to HO back, buying *at best* a chance their wreckage would hit the earth before yours did.
The simple realization that this game would be a rather boring waste of time if everyone did it is the REAL reason the HO is frowned upon.
-
So people have been wrong for 23 years, because some noob comes on the scene and says so? :rofl
I guess it wouldn't matter how many people told you the same definition. You'd just tell them all that they are wrong and you are right. :aok
.
Your head is in the sand right next to your squaddie. Birds of a feather suck at this game and are stupid together.
Uh huh...and you're an ace toon pile-it since what, 2002? Oooooh...I'm so enthralled by your genius in a video game. You should get out of the house once in a while and let real life bring you back to reality.
Gyrene:
Most of the "vets" you are arguing with are good marksmen who could "HO" anyone to death on virtually every merge if they so desired, and the only thing you could do about would be to HO back, buying *at best* a chance their wreckage would hit the earth before yours did.
The simple realization that this game would be a rather boring waste of time if everyone did it is the REAL reason the HO is frowned upon.
No offense man but I can't believe you used the words "good marksmen" to identify some skill by video gamers flying virtual airplanes with simulated machine guns and cannons. But I do agree the game would be a severe bore if everyone did it...happens enough as it is, even by the "vets".
-
No offense man but I can't believe you used the words "good marksmen" to identify some skill by video gamers flying virtual airplanes with simulated machine guns and cannons. But I do agree the game would be a severe bore if everyone did it...happens enough as it is, even by the "vets".
Ummm...I could have said "good shot" and had exactly the same meaning, what words would you SUGGEST I use? Geez...
And if you agree that that the game would be mostly boring and pointless if everyone simply decided to HO all the time, then why the devil are you arguing with people because they frown on the HO? I repeat: If someone who shoots as well as Steve decided to fly a heavily armed bird and HO, he'd end your sortie on every fair merge just about each every time. You MIGHT get lucky and ruin his day also if you HOed back. If you tried to duck/avoid the HO you'd get tagged with a "Front quarter snapshot" most of the time and thus learn why the old "It takes two to HO" saw is asinine. The general concensus that HOing with the attendant M.A.D. is bad mmmkaaaay? is what allows us to have an enjoyable flight game.
-
Blah blah blah attempt to avoid the subject blah blaha
Lol
-
I suppose this discussion will go nowhere, because of existing threat on some pilots' contitutional right to whine.
I am so sorry that I challenged that earned right. Carry on, whine on and be very scared of "getting HOed" (what ever it might mean in one's book) by "no-skill newbies" and "lametards". After all, these "vets" know how this game should be played. :rolleyes: