Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: Noah17 on September 15, 2009, 02:31:58 PM
-
I've been on AH for a few months now and my ACM has improved dramatically but I can't hit a thing.
I find that I'm able to get the nose/sight of my plane at the target maybe 3 times before the fight goes against me. If I could land a hit I'd live longer.
Often my sight seems "very jumpy" when trying to get it on my target. I can't hold it straight while I'm firing. As a result I'm moving the stick around just trying to get it settled on the amount of lead I think I need. But I can't really get it to move to and stay where I want it. Even when the target is not really maneuvering against me.
Any thoughts would really be appreciated.
Thanks
-
You could try to adjust your dampening on the x/y axis (for the bouncing)...as for gunnery...well, I have been here for a little while now and still have bad guns...I have read and read but putting it to practice is another thing......I believe it is the one thing that cannot be taught. It is just a time and zen thing.
I used to be totally shocking at gunnery and so spent time on how to how to effectively evade.
Try not to go for the quick kill but sit on the tail of a con till you are basically at the same state and then concentrate your fire in small bursts at lower G's....a hard thing to do in a furball but to help this sit more just outside of the main furball and pick on stragglers. Another thing I found was to use a spit... these are a good stable platform to use for gunnery practice. I myself used the spit 9 and 5 the 5 was good to teach me conservation of ammo.
Well enough gobble de goop from me.. the more informative crowd will be along shortly...thank you for your time....hahaha
-
I would try some stick scaling on the Y axis before I would consider dampening. Make it look like like this:
-
-
-
-
-
etc.
-
For me, it's almost instinctive when I need to shoot - the "killer's instinct." This has developed over many years of flying various sims from flight sims to space sims all of which require lead gunnery. My gunnery is currently not great, but I land some shots which surprise myself (e.g., a deflection shot from 600 out). There's a lot of theoretical discussion in the 109 thread on this forum towards the end. That will help.
I agree with SPKmes's advice about dampening but I prefer the "dead zone". My stick is slightly unstable around its center, so having a bit more dead zone than normal helps keep me flying straight.
Personally, I disagree with Anaxagoras, I don't like stick scaling. It's just preference, it feels awkward to me.
My advice is to practice with the lead computing sight for a while (which I'm sure the trainers will be glad to help you to set up). That will help give you the "sense" for where to shoot. After getting used to it, turn it off. Same thing with tracers. You will want to work the four combinations:
1) Tracers, lead computing sight
2) No tracers, lead computing sight
3) No tracers, no lead computing sight
4) Tracers, no lead computing sight
Each will give you a different sense of gunnery. Of course once you get the instinct, you will want to turn off the lead computing sight permanently. Tracers/no tracers is debatable.
-
If you haven't already tried it, try using the Lead Computing Gunsight as boomerlu mentioned. It only works in the TA, and only works on "friendly" planes, so head on in there, make sure you're Bishop, and work on it. To turn it on, the command is <Ctrl>-<Tab>. You'll see a message stating "Friendly Lock Enabled". Now, find someone to fight, get them in view, and hit the <Tab> key until you see their name get bracketed. You'll now notice a little green "+", or two, if you have both cannons and MG's on your plane. In theory, if you aim at the green "+" and shoot, you'll hit the plane you're fighting.
So, start chasing the guy around, aim at the "+" and fire. The important thing to do though is to pay attention to were the "+" is in relation to the enemy plane, at different speeds and angles. This tool is just that, a tool to teach you where to aim. Don't get too used to it, because it won't work anywhere else in the game.
As a side-note, this tool works on any weapon you have armed, so is also useful for learning where to aim while firing rockets, dropping bombs, etc...
I'm one of those that doesn't like scaling. I choose to leave my set-up as sensitive as possible, and just use fine controls to direct my flight.
I also don't like the no-tracers idea. I've tried it several times, and my gunnery is better with tracers. I've had several people tell me to turn them off to get better, but their gunnery wasn't as good as mine...
Another obvious improvement method is to get closer. I recommend waiting to fire until the icon counter says D200. Targets get bigger when you get closer. You also don't need to lead as much, regardless of the speed/angle of the shot. You may find that it's difficult at first to get that close. That goes away. The improvement on your aim does not.
-
I also don't like the no-tracers idea. I've tried it several times, and my gunnery is better with tracers. I've had several people tell me to turn them off to get better, but their gunnery wasn't as good as mine...
Re:tracers, I find that in the long run I'm better WITH tracers. However, I found that I improved faster by turning them off briefly. It really helped on that "instinct" and forced me to pick my aim points better. Now that I kind of have it, I turned tracers back on and my gunnery improved because now I had "instinct" as well as a real visual indicator.
Again, very debatable and very personal, but I think trying to "use the force" on and off by turning tracers off every once in a while is beneficial.
-
Re:tracers, I find that in the long run I'm better WITH tracers. However, I found that I improved faster by turning them off briefly. It really helped on that "instinct" and forced me to pick my aim points better. Now that I kind of have it, I turned tracers back on and my gunnery improved because now I had "instinct" as well as a real visual indicator.
Again, very debatable and very personal, but I think trying to "use the force" on and off by turning tracers off every once in a while is beneficial.
Not at you boomerlu, just some speculative questions...
When you fire without tracers, and miss (I'm fairly certain this happens, at least occasionally), how do you correct? How do you know if your lead was excessive, or not enough? How about whether your aim was too high or low, but your lead was perfect?
How do you "fix the miss"? Is there any information related to you that allows you to make an accurate assessment of your aim, and how to improve it (ie, I KNOW I missed because my lead was off, and I can to correct it by...). Or, do you just randomly decide to point somewhere else next time, and maybe you'll be lucky enough to hit? Without tracers, is it possible to lead too much, but decide to try leading MORE? Or lead perfectly, but miss high, and decide you've over-led the target?
When teaching kids to shoot rifles, review of the shooter's performance (by looking at the target) allows a realistic interpretation and the ability intelligently set a goal on how to improve (ie, you're shooting high, see? Try aiming at the bottom of the bulls-eye..."). Or "You're shooting all over the place! Settle down, and try to shoot consistently, and THEN we'll work on where your group placement is".
The closest thing we have in-game to the paper target is the tracers. If they go behind the target, you shot behind the target. If they go high, you shot high. The tracers give you feedback on your aim (good, or bad) where no-tracers only give feedback on good shots, and a big, empty "huh?" on the misses, which is vitally more important feedback to work with than the hits...
If I gave you a rifle, and you were missing the deer you tried to hit, would you fix the problem by shooting at a target that gives you feedback (a paper target, dirt on a hillside, or whatever) or fix the problem by shooting at something that gives no feedback, and adjust that way (how about a cloud, or a bird flying over, or a piece of cottonwood fluff gently floating on the breeze)? If you miss the bulls-eye the paper target or hillside gives feedback that you can use to improve. The others won't, so improvement is going to rely on luck rather than informed judgment.
If you take a quiz in school, would you like to know the results so you can improve for the test? Or would it be more helpful to keep the results unknown?
-
MtnMan,
I agree 100%. This is why I advocate switching between the two. The feedback from tracers is good, it allows you to slowly fine tune your sense of aim.
The problem is that when you get too used to tracers, you almost fire off a few rounds first to see if you should draw more lead. When you turn them off, it forces you to pick a better initial aim point (which you learned INITIALLY from the visual feedback from using tracers).
Flying tracers off for me kind of ingrained this sense of lead/initial aim point. There are times where I fired maybe a 0.1 second burst on a deflection shot and had virtually all my rounds land because I had picked my aim point so well.
Once you have that sense, then there is no longer any need to artificially handicap yourself. Now that I fly tracers on, I can tell (on eg a snapshot) if I should keep shooting and let the enemy fly through my rounds or if I am already short on lead and should stop. I also get further feedback to fine tune my aim.
It's like theory vs practice - use both, but for different purposes.
-
I've tried w/ tracers on and off. With them on I found that if i missed the Con would be alerted and take off or ....Kill me because I couldn't kill him quickly enough. I turned them off so that if I missed he wouldn't see them and I might have longer to shoot.
So.... There's the issue. I haven't been able to figure out what was best.
I'd definitely like to try the lead sight though so, thanks!
-
In the tracers on and off scenarios above: In the first one you die but come away with a closer idea of where bullets fly. In the second you survive with a kill, but don't get as good an idea of where and how bullets are flying. From a perspective of strictly gunnery progress, tracers on are probably better.
-
You'll be amazed how much a difference it makes. Turning
on the lead gunsite. Also ease a liitle on yer stick, let them fly into it.
Also I thought the elevator scale was to be in a J shape?
that's how mine is. Maybe a natter of preference? Either
way I wouldn't leave it flat.
Hit the TA plenty of help there.
Tokenjo
-
In the tracers on and off scenarios above: In the first one you die but come away with a closer idea of where bullets fly. In the second you survive with a kill, but don't get as good an idea of where and how bullets are flying. From a perspective of strictly gunnery progress, tracers on are probably better.
I agree with moot on this one. While I did suggest tracers off, it is NOT to "sneak up" on somebody. In fact a lot of the times I wish I'd had tracers on to spook the other guy into turning and leaving my teammate alone.
I only suggest tracers off to force yourself to pick better aim points.
-
Noah,
while reading our post I see you have a "nose bounce" problem,that it's hard to steady your gunsite.
That is usually caused by your JS,the 2 main axises{axii} that cause the problem are the pitch and yaw.You may want to try some different settings on these 2 and experiment to find the sweet spot on your joystick.
You may even be having some problems with your stick that you're unaware of,goto map controls,select the axis and check advanced box.You will see the adjustment there,also check the "raw" and"scaled" windows and move the axis to make sure it's responding properly.
:salute
-
With them on I found that if i missed the Con would be alerted and take off or ....Kill me because I couldn't kill him quickly enough.
The tracers don't get you killed. Missing the guy you're shooting at gets you killed (unless you can afford to miss, and still out fly your opponent without giving HIM a shot).
-
MtnMan,
I agree 100%. This is why I advocate switching between the two. The feedback from tracers is good, it allows you to slowly fine tune your sense of aim.
The problem is that when you get too used to tracers, you almost fire off a few rounds first to see if you should draw more lead. When you turn them off, it forces you to pick a better initial aim point (which you learned INITIALLY from the visual feedback from using tracers).
Flying tracers off for me kind of ingrained this sense of lead/initial aim point. There are times where I fired maybe a 0.1 second burst on a deflection shot and had virtually all my rounds land because I had picked my aim point so well.
Once you have that sense, then there is no longer any need to artificially handicap yourself. Now that I fly tracers on, I can tell (on eg a snapshot) if I should keep shooting and let the enemy fly through my rounds or if I am already short on lead and should stop. I also get further feedback to fine tune my aim.
It's like theory vs practice - use both, but for different purposes.
I don't agree for a minute that you can get "too used to tracers". Or that turning them off forces you to do anything but a whole lot of guessing, and then more guessing when the initial guess doesn't pan out, followed by more guessing when you miss again...
I don't understand your reference to tracers being an "artificial handicap". How so? A handicap that hurts you, by telling you how your aim needs to be corrected? Or a handicap that helps too much, making gunnery too easy?
I hit on that tiny little burst most of the time. Would that improve if I stopped having a clue where my "misses" were going?
Is guessing going to help me improve (and I'd still like to improve, I won't be happy until my hit% is better than 50%, and I'm a long way from there...) more quickly than knowing?
How much did shooting tracers off improve your gunnery? How accurate did it make you overall?
-
I don't agree for a minute that you can get "too used to tracers". Or that turning them off forces you to do anything but a whole lot of guessing, and then more guessing when the initial guess doesn't pan out, followed by more guessing when you miss again...
Thinking about this, I see your point. I'm having to re-evaluate my experience and how this relates. Since addressing your words directly would probably muddle the point, let me restate completely:
After thinking about it, I have to conclude it's purely psychological. When I originally had tracers on I thought to myself "Oh, if I miss this, I will get great feedback on where I missed whether high, low, forward or behind. Then I can adjust my aim and take a better shot next time." It's almost lazy thought, it also disengages me from using my instinct to pick my aim point.
Upon turning tracers off, I thought to myself "I can't afford to miss this. I have no feedback so I have to rely purely on instinct." As it turns out, relying purely on instinct was better.
No doubt I developed the instinct/feel for lead by flying with tracers on to begin with. No debate. Developing the feel without visual feedback can only be a long and frustrating process. If you remember, I wanted to get a precise visual representation of vertical bullet trajectory and you (I think it was you) showed me how in the 109 thread. Again, no debate that tracers are useful.
Once I learned the visual and developed my feel, turning tracers off forced me to engage the instinct. I regarded each firing situation as a "must hit" rather than an "experiment" (experiment as in let's fire a shot and see where it goes then adjust).
Purely personal, you may not have had this experience. This may even be completely unnecessary. It certainly isn't true that you MUST have tracers off to engage instinct.
So I guess I will no longer "advocate" tracers off but merely suggest it as something to try.
I don't understand your reference to tracers being an "artificial handicap".
You have my meaning backwards. I meant no tracers as the "artificial handicap".
I hit on that tiny little burst most of the time. Would that improve if I stopped having a clue where my "misses" were going?
Is guessing going to help me improve (and I'd still like to improve, I won't be happy until my hit% is better than 50%, and I'm a long way from there...) more quickly than knowing?
Here's the thing - it doesn't matter whether you guess or know where your rounds are going because that feedback happens after the fact. Your initial aim point is only a guess anyways even if your skill at making guesses is so good that you "hit on that tiny little burst most of the time". Having tracers on cannot help you make a better guess "now", only in future situations.
Tracers can help you learn gunnery but they cannot make you a better shooter during your burst except to tell you "I should keep on shooting because the enemy will fly through my stream" or "I should stop shooting because I'm clearly already missing".
Again it's purely psychological and personal, but turning tracers off made me turn off "learning mode" in my head and turn on "shooting mode". I used to waste time actually firing test bursts and then picking a new aim point (note this can still be useful in some situations, but not in the middle of a knife fight while you're trying to take a deflection shot).
Now that I've tasted "shooting mode" and have tried tracers on again, I can say that I am now in both "learning mode" and "shooting mode" at the same time. Once more, purely personal, others may start off in both "modes" at the same time.
To kind of answer your question (which is half meant to provoke a response and half actually curious), no. From what you've told me, you're a good enough shooter already that you clearly do not need to turn tracers off.
That advice is for guys like my past self who actually test their bullet paths while in the middle of a fight.
How much did shooting tracers off improve your gunnery? How accurate did it make you overall?
Ok, if you would like something scientific, I of course can't provide hard evidence for my my claims. I have not kept track.
Subjectively: could I be much better? Yes of course, my percentage is nowhere near "good". Did turning tracers off make me shoot better? Yes. Did turning tracers back on make me a worse shot? No. Will I continue to fly with tracers? Probably. Do I feel that briefly going no tracers made me "turn on" my instinct? Yes. Is going no tracers absolutely necessary to "turn on" that instinct? It probably isn't, but nonetheless it did work for me.
-
Re: Gunnery....listen to Mtnman.
A former Squaddie of mine was once an instructor at the Naval Fighter Weapons School (Top Gun) and I asked him about whether I should shoot with tracers on, or tracers off. His answer was, "Out fly your opponent and it doesn't matter whether you have tracers on, or off."
Of course my next question was, "What convergence do you use?". His answer, "250".
My next question was, "How far away do you shoot?". His answer, "Nothing over 350 and that's a long shot."
Well, there it was, all spelled out for me. I left tracers on, had a groovy gunsite, changed my convergence, and didn't shoot at anything over 350...and was still missing like a champ...for MONTHS! I was mortified! Eventually, I figured out where I was making my mistake and my gunnery immediately improved!
The answer to my gunnery problem lay in his reply to my first question.
So, concentrate on your flying, not on your gun site, and then you will begin to see the shot opportunities arise. Gunnery is all about flying first, and shooting second.
DISCLAIMER: My gunnery is only as good as my flying, and my flying is only as good as the number of beers I haven't
consumed before flying.
-
How much did shooting tracers off improve your gunnery? How accurate did it make you overall?
I've always recommened flying with tracers off to force you to learn how to lead with your gunsights instead of with your tracers. A lot of the problems I see with players and their gunnery is that they tend to lead with their tracers, result is a lot of spraying and praying and not very many rounds on the target. Of course, it all boils down to personal preference and what feels best for you.
I can say though that turning them off did work for me when working to improve my gunnery skills and that's been reflected in the increase of my hit percentage. My hit percentage now stays within the 15% to 20% range (though it will decrease due to strafing ground targets) but turning off the tracers isn't the only reason for my improved hit percentage. I also tend to take only high probability shots, fire in short controlled bursts, aim for certain areas of the plane where I have an increased chance of scoring an immediate kill or causing catastrophic damage to the bandit, and fire at close ranges (400 yds or closer) and will only take shots at long range if there is a high probability of my rounds hitting the bandit.
An added benefit to good gunnery also shows in other areas like assists. With good gunnery skills, the chances of scoring an out right kill or causing catastrophic damage increases and the likelyhood of someone coming in and trying to take the kill and you end up with an assist decreases. I average a few hundred kills per campaign and only get a dozen or so assists, which I attribute to in great part to my gunnery.
ack-ack
-
Just my personal experience:
Tunring of tracers kills my ability to hit.
I tried this three times during my AH career, once as a n00b and the last time as a "vet" with an average hit% of >12
Each time I was fine for the first few hours, but then my ability to hit declined... slowly at first, then massively accelerating. After a week I was almost unable to hit anything anymore. I couldn't even figure out if I did lead too far, not enough, if my bullets went over or under my enemy...
It seems as I do need the tracers to keep my mental image.
-
His answer was, "Out fly your opponent and it doesn't matter whether you have tracers on, or off."
This is slightly related to "tracers off". When I had tracers on, I did not fly as well because when I got on a target, I would not line up the best possible shot immediately. Instead I would do as Ack-Ack described and "lead with my tracers", spraying a bit, adjusting my lead, spraying some more, etc.
I knew I wasn't just imagining the improvement. Again, it'll only help those of us who "lead with our tracers" in the first place and again it's purely a psychological thing. :salute
-
well after reading this, I decided to turn my tracers back on, I have the absolutely the worst gunnery in game, for the last month I have been flying with them off, my hit % is about the same 4%,
heck I just looked its gone up to 5.99%, i have never gotten it up that high(high :rofl) before, so forget that I am keeping them off.
-
Lol, you guys talk about leading with your tracers as if that's a bad thing! It's what you should be doing.
That's exactly how people learn... Trial and error, and insight gained through that trial and error. The tracers give you feedback on your attempt (trial) and give you a basis for correcting the perceived error. Without that feedback, learning is still possible, but will take longer, probably lead to more frustration, probable formation of bad habits, and probable "superstitious" belief.
When you fly level, and at 1G, your gun sight is accurate. When you deviate from that condition, it no longer is. It no longer gives you a reference to where your bullets are going. Depending on the situation, it may be off slightly, or off drastically.
Turning off your tracers not only takes away feedback on where you're missing, it also takes away feedback on where your bullets go in relation to the gun sight. It's a double-whammy.
Instinct- you have none when it comes to shooting. Instinct is an inherited behavior, and can not be turned/forced on/off at will. Instincts are most valuable for situations that occur few times in an organisms life, and need to be done correctly the first time. Classic examples are courtship behavior, nesting/incubation/offspring rearing, etc. An instinct is also often valuable for a situation where an immediate response is needed without the benefit of prior learning or experience in that matter. An organism doesn't need to learn these things, and if it did, it could have drastic negative effects. A bird doesn't need to learn how to build a nest, or incubate its eggs. That doesn't mean that some learning can't be associated with these behaviors (you could learn to improve how you feed your kids, for example), but for the most part, first-timers will have about as good a chance of success as more experienced individuals...
Your shooting skill is a voluntary learned behavior. It's a skill produced by conscious, voluntary responses, which are not automatic, and not necessarily immediate. Insight learning and experience are huge driving factors.
You could argue that people have an instinct to use tools, I suppose. That's probably true to some extent. But the actual technique for using a particular tool isn't instinctive, it's learned. The gun is an extension of your hand, the bullet is an extension of the gun, which again, is an extension of the hand. Using the hand extension may be instinctual, but getting accurate with it is learned.
Hitting a moving target, from a moving vehicle, is actually a pretty complex problem to solve.
"Instinctive" shooters don't shoot instinctively. They make (often very fast) judgments based on past experience. They've "seen this situation before" (or at least one similar) and memory drives the decision on how to aim.
Imagine a quarterback throwing to a running receiver, surrounded by defenders, while being charged by big scary guys. His accuracy is based on his ability to "remember" similar scenarios, and adjust if needed to hit his target. He's thrown behind his target before, and "remembers" what that felt/looked like. He's also been successful before, and has learned how hard to throw, at what angle, and how far in front of his target he needs to throw to "hit" it. His future throws are based on past experience. If you only let him see his "hits" while he was learning, and didn't allow him to see where his misses went, he'd have no basis (except luck and guesses) for insightful learning (which is a key aspect of learned behavior) His learning would still be possible, but would likely be at a drastically slower pace...
Can you learn to shoot without tracers? Sure... But, why? There would have to be a serious "up" side to it, to make it worth all the extra time, effort, and frustration...
-
well after reading this, I decided to turn my tracers back on, I have the absolutely the worst gunnery in game, for the last month I have been flying with them off, my hit % is about the same 4%,
heck I just looked its gone up to 5.99%, i have never gotten it up that high(high :rofl) before, so forget that I am keeping them off.
From my experience, hitting/maintaining the 10% mark was the most difficult. Once I reached that, I found I can pretty much raise it at will. It took a while (and some thought) to hit that benchmark, but once I hit it a 12-15% doesn't require any real effort. It stays there pretty much regardless of whether I'm strafing, spraying at someone I want to scare into turning, or even if I have a "bad" spell.
-
Mtnman, sorry if my wording is throwing you. By "instinct" I mean "intuitive learned behavior accessed very quickly." I'm not trying to touch off this debate about courtship behavior and specific definition of "instinct". I simply mean that when I first turned tracers off (yes, after learning where my bullets go with tracers on), I stopped testing my bullets and started relying on my learned intuition - using a very fast snap decision based on what I've seen before.
And by "leading with the tracers" - you're going to have to be more specific as to what that means. To me it means I am firing a test burst to see where my shots are going. Instead of flying to a proper aim point, I was usually flying pipper on or only with slight lead and firing tests bursts to see if they would land (which inevitably they wouldn't). Again, I was in "learning mode" as if I was still firing against offline drones, inching my gunsight forward to see the precise point where I need to shoot to get a hit.
I didn't know it at the time, but turning tracers off gave me the psychological switch to use my learned intuition. I think this is what everybody else is saying.
Now that we've had this discussion and I've realized it was purely a psychological switch, I don't see any reason it couldn't have been done with tracers on the whole time. Nonetheless, turning tracers off did work for me. It's something I tried on a whim, without any sound reasoning, but doing so and now talking to you mtnman me realize what turning tracers off did.
Again your points resound. Maybe it suffices to simply say to the student "stop testing your rounds, pick a proper aim point and go for it". The trainers (being a group that sees a lot of students) will have to the last word on what works better, I only know what worked for me (I have no clue whether or not things would be different whether better or worse had I always kept tracers on).
-
Tracers on/off... My gunnery is a shocker...I was trying to get across in my earlier post something that was touched on by...I think mountain man earlier.....having the ability to saddle up on your opponent is where the focus needs to be in this particular OP's case as he finds that his initial hits are not closing the deal and then the requirement to duel is necessary and from what I read into it is, his shortfall...yes getting guns right is important but being able to hold the advantage to kill is also...not all planes have killer cannon rounds to administer immediate destruction.
As I have said my gunnery is shocking(yes ink ....worse than yours) however a good percentage of my shots are D600 deflection shots...I get the odd snap shot. What I have found is that unless I can fight and get the situation under my control through maneuvering I am not about to win the fight, and when I do push the shot and try too hard I put myself at the disadvantage. Working on this I still have a bad hit percentage but it is getting better (except the last three tours where nearly all has gone to the pack). I have had to revert back to what I am saying here...fight the fight and out fly your opponent first.... gunnery is something that comes along with it, I believe, and sometimes ..for me that is, it's on and others it's not..... still waiting for the Zen.
This is different I suppose for BnZ style attack...but I suck at that so until my gunnery improves I will always end up dancing.
This is my findings and how I have had to counter my shortfalls...I still have many and constantly try to improve my abilities, it is long and hard I have found but also find I am evolving even though I feel at times that there is no improvement.
-
"Leading with your tracers" is a term I borrowed from Ack-Ack's post, and then saw in yours as well. In my mind, it isn't an accurate statement, but I just "went with the flow".
In my mind, what should be happening is that a shot solution should be achieved, and a shot fired. If it hits, great. If not, you should use the information gained by the miss, shown to you by the tracers, and adjust for the next shot.
If your goal in shooting is to hit your target (which, for me at least, isn't always the case) each attempt should be your "best" effort.
You're not actually using tracers to "lead" your target.
You're using them to have factual knowledge of where your miss went, so that on your next attempt you can correct any perceived error. In that respect, information gained by missing is actually valuable, if not immediately useful.
boomerlu, not to nit-pick, and no offense meant, but what is your experience level in the aerial gunnery/flight sim "world". I see only two months worth of stats, and from what I'm seeing your gun accuracy hasn't reached the "done learning, time to use what I've learned" level (neither has mine, btw). A lot can skew those numbers though, so I don't want to attach more weight to them than they deserve... As a comparison, the OP has a hit% only about 1% lower than yours...
Either way, it's a great discussion! I'm not trying to discredit or argue with you- it's great to share the information we can, and keep a stimulating discussion going...
The "instinct" information wasn't meant to debate courtship behavior, but rather to point out an inaccurate use of terms/concepts. Fortunately, our shooting isn't instinctive. Because it's learned, it can be improved with a concerted effort. If we'd inherited faulty instincts, things would be much more difficult...
-
Tracers on/off... My gunnery is a shocker...I was trying to get across in my earlier post something that was touched on by...I think mountain man earlier.....having the ability to saddle up on your opponent is where the focus needs to be in this particular OP's case as he finds that his initial hits are not closing the deal and then the requirement to duel is necessary and from what I read into it is, his shortfall...yes getting guns right is important but being able to hold the advantage to kill is also...not all planes have killer cannon rounds to administer immediate destruction.
As I have said my gunnery is shocking(yes ink ....worse than yours) however a good percentage of my shots are D600 deflection shots...I get the odd snap shot. What I have found is that unless I can fight and get the situation under my control through maneuvering I am not about to win the fight, and when I do push the shot and try too hard I put myself at the disadvantage. Working on this I still have a bad hit percentage but it is getting better (except the last three tours where nearly all has gone to the pack). I have had to revert back to what I am saying here...fight the fight and out fly your opponent first.... gunnery is something that comes along with it, I believe, and sometimes ..for me that is, it's on and others it's not..... still waiting for the Zen.
This is different I suppose for BnZ style attack...but I suck at that so until my gunnery improves I will always end up dancing.
This is my findings and how I have had to counter my shortfalls...I still have many and constantly try to improve my abilities, it is long and hard I have found but also find I am evolving even though I feel at times that there is no improvement.
That's true, for the most part. But in the end, to "seal the deal" you need to be able to hit what you're shooting at... Jumping from 3% to 12% means it takes 1/4 the time to deliver a killing amount of damage. That's more significant than it sounds. It means fights end quicker, and aren't as SA expensive. It means more missed snapshot opportunities result in hits, and kills. In the often-times several-on-one world of the MA's, it means you can rapidly improve the odds. It means hits, where misses would result in unnecessary E-expense.
I credit my improved gunnery to a huge portion of my improved survivability in the game...
-
believe me, I want to end things quicker...i often find I get out numbered purely due to the fact that I can't close the deal fast enough. I have now learnt to deal with that by out maneuvering and taking it to the ground to get some proxies hahaha... Who needs guns anyway
-
"Leading with your tracers" is a term I borrowed from Ack-Ack's post, and then saw in yours as well. In my mind, it isn't an accurate statement, but I just "went with the flow".
In my mind, what should be happening is that a shot solution should be achieved, and a shot fired. If it hits, great. If not, you should use the information gained by the miss, shown to you by the tracers, and adjust for the next shot.
If your goal in shooting is to hit your target (which, for me at least, isn't always the case) each attempt should be your "best" effort.
Right, purely psychological again. When I had tracers on I was not putting in my "best effort" on each attempt.
boomerlu, not to nit-pick, and no offense meant, but what is your experience level in the aerial gunnery/flight sim "world". I see only two months worth of stats, and from what I'm seeing your gun accuracy hasn't reached the "done learning, time to use what I've learned" level (neither has mine, btw).
It depends. I've only flown AH for two months. I'm 22, I took a VERY long hiatus from flight/space sims (roughly from the ages of 12-22). Before then I had plenty of experience. Sure I was a kid, but the concept of lead gunnery is something that's been ingrained in my mind from an early age. Only the particulars change (especially bullet drop - this is something that's relatively new to me as it wasn't modeled as well in the olden sims and not modeled at all in space sims).
My stats: sure they suck. I'm not done learning. But you should have seen me BEFORE I had tracers off. Again, I did not put my "best" into each attempt. That's the critical thing, and that's what I think is meant by "leading with your tracers" - not flying the best pass possible because you know you'll get feedback and adjust from there.
The two-three weeks of learning I had before I turned tracers off was not enough to justify having them permanently off, as I'm finding now. But it was enough to force me to do my best on each firing pass, a behavior that I'll carry with me going forward and continuing to learn.
The "instinct" information wasn't meant to debate courtship behavior, but rather to point out an inaccurate use of terms/concepts. Fortunately, our shooting isn't instinctive. Because it's learned, it can be improved with a concerted effort. If we'd inherited faulty instincts, things would be much more difficult...
No offense either, but I find it strange you corrected my use of "instinct" but went with the flow on "leading with your tracers." It would have made more sense the other way around.
Either way, it's a great discussion! I'm not trying to discredit or argue with you- it's great to share the information we can, and keep a stimulating discussion going...
It's why I enjoy talking to you and the other trainers I've been in contact with so far. Even though our debates may look heated from the outside, we know we're just presenting a point and that either side can come around if it's convincing.
-
That's true, for the most part. But in the end, to "seal the deal" you need to be able to hit what you're shooting at... Jumping from 3% to 12% means it takes 1/4 the time to deliver a killing amount of damage. That's more significant than it sounds. It means fights end quicker, and aren't as SA expensive. It means more missed snapshot opportunities result in hits, and kills. In the often-times several-on-one world of the MA's, it means you can rapidly improve the odds. It means hits, where misses would result in unnecessary E-expense.
Could not agree more. Because I fly mostly BnZ fighters, I often find that I only get a few snapshot opportunities before I'm forced to break off lest I lose my energy advantage and fall prey to a better turner.
-
"Leading with your tracers" is a term I borrowed from Ack-Ack's post, and then saw in yours as well. In my mind, it isn't an accurate statement, but I just "went with the flow".
Speaking for me, leading with my tracers caused me to learn bad habit, namely not using my gunsight to aim. Try hitting a moving object with a water hose and you can see what I mean by leading with tracers.
By turning off my tracers, I was forced to use the gunsight to gauge proper lead on the target. The result was that I was now aiming properly and my aim improved dramatically as a result.
Here is an excellent article written by a former USAAF combat F4 Phantom II pilot and flight instructor (and former AH player) at SimHQ that goes into great detail on A2A gunnery.
Air To Air Gunnery Revisited - Guns, Gunsights, and Convergence (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_031a.html)
Highly recommend reading it for new and veteran players alike.
ack-ack
-
Speaking for me, leading with my tracers caused me to learn bad habit, namely not using my gunsight to aim.
ack-ack
I wonder if part of our disparity is the nose-mounted guns vs the wing-mounts. I generally ignore my gunsight, since it's only accurate if I'm level. That effect would be more prevalent with wing-mounts than with nose-mounts. It doesn't look like the article you linked to covers that aspect, but it looks like a great read otherwise.
The article seemed to be very useful for shots where the guy in front of you is flying a fairly predictable, fairly constant path. And in all honesty, I'm using my sights on those shots...
But, I almost never fire my guns while flying level, so my gunsight is almost never really "spot-on". I've actually used the little red dot sight for the last few years, since I generally ignore it anyway. All of my attention is on the enemy plane; the tracers are on, but only come into play when I miss, and want to know why. In snapshot shooting, at odd angles (sometimes even inverted) with rapid crossing shots, the gunsight is worthless. In those type of shots, the bullets do not go where my gunsight would lead me to believe.
Part of that "ignoring my gunsight" also comes from the shotgun shooting I do. Aiming with the sights is a great way to miss a moving target.
Judging by the guys I run into in the MA who have tracers OFF, the spray/pray thing isn't linked to having the tracers on. The guys with the tracers off seem just as likely to do it, they just can't see where the bullets are going.
Actually, maybe there is something to that idea after all. A guy with tracers off is actually limited to "spray and pray", where with tracers you could "spray and adjust".
-
But, I almost never fire my guns while flying level, so my gunsight is almost never really "spot-on". I've actually used the little red dot sight for the last few years, since I generally ignore it anyway. All of my attention is on the enemy plane; the tracers are on, but only come into play when I miss, and want to know why. In snapshot shooting, at odd angles (sometimes even inverted) with rapid crossing shots, the gunsight is worthless. In those type of shots, the bullets do not go where my gunsight would lead me to believe.
In most situations the gunsight is never spot on. In fact (and I believe you know this already) it's only spot on while flying straight and level and your target is precisely at convergence.
Still it's a good guideline to approximately where your bullets should fly. It doesn't really lie, it tells a half-truth.
If you generally ignore your sight, how do you know where you should be shooting? I don't take my sight as "gospel" but at least I know within a few degrees where my bullets will fly. When you shoot, you must have your front view down solid with no side to side movement (ie from TrackIR or mouse look)?
I'm actually curious. I haven't checked your stats, but I trust what you say about your percentage. How exactly do you achieve those stats essentially ignoring the sight? Is this something I should try myself? I personally find it hard to judge lead on "under the nose shots", should I now be able to set my forward view so the "pilot's seat" is as high as possible so the sight isn't anywhere to be seen?
-
A little update:
Been flying tracers on again for about a week. Sometimes I catch myself slipping into old habits and firing "test bursts". However, if I simply force myself to, I "give my best" on each firing opportunity. What flying tracers off and subsequently discussing it here has done is made me recognize that I have these two different mindsets and allowed me to "pick" which one to use.
Also, I had a terrible slump the last two days. I've been trying out a new view system (mouse look, mouse in the left hand, mouse wheel for throttle, standard aircraft functions on joystick) and I finally figured out that the problem was I wasn't zooming (view zoom) properly. This made it so I couldn't accurately assess the enemy plane's attitude and intention before moving in for the shot. Once I corrected this, I found my rounds landing true more often.
Lessons learned:
1) It's possible to slip into old habits but once you know how to spot it, you can correct it.
2) Accurately assessing and predicting your opponent's actions are key components of effective gunnery.
Edit: one more note about something I just noticed:
Mtnman, since you like visual feedback so much, why not turn on some type more comprehensive gunsight? Experimenting in the offline practice, I've found that the amount your gunsight "lies" under G is pretty consistent, consistent enough that you can correlate the feel of your joystick with certain regions on your gunsight. Thus, you could essentially say to yourself "If I am pulling back this far on my joystick, my bullets will actually fly to the first circle on my gunsight (or the 5th marking on a LW revi style sight for example).
-
Gentleman,
This is all great information and, thanks for the article Ack Ack.
I've turned my tracers back on and eliminated the damping and dead zone on my CH Combat Stick. It was set on the default levels that look like it had.....Maybe a 10% damp & 10% dead zone (that's a guess). It has reduced (not eliminated) the "nose bounce" when I'm trying to correct my aim.... Now I have the opportunity to improve my aim! I also found that the throttle and rudder pedals had the same dead/damp zones. The aircraft is more responsive now (I fly mostly the F4U-1A).
Although my ACM has improved greatly; from reading the posts I realize I really have to get better and get in close. My hit % is only in the 2% range. I do actually like using the "zoom" feature but, I try not to use it unless I'm "saddled up."
I've heard conflicting views on the "zoom view" so not sure what to think there either but when I am in that situation it does seem to help.
I really didn't think that >10% hit's was possible............ Now I really have something to shoot for! LOL
Thanks again,
Noah17
-
I've heard conflicting views on the "zoom view" so not sure what to think there either but when I am in that situation it does seem to help.
It's simply a tradeoff. Worse area-wide SA for better information on whatever you're zoomed in on (target SA). I check six before my approach and check it again about 600-800 out. Then I zoom in. Yes it can mess with you, but personally I find the fact that I know in detail what my opponent is doing to be more than worth it.
So basically you use zoom when appropriate. I do NOT find it to be exclusively zoom or exclusively no zoom. I use zoom to:
1) Assess the situation from afar - is the bandit approaching me or is he flying right angles at me or something in between? I quickly zoom out after each assessment to regain area SA.
2) Assess the situation on my opponent in close while gunning for the shot. Again I zoom out for area SA before the pass and after the pass.
Anyways, I'm glad this helped. I find it odd though that eliminating the damping/dead zone reduced the bounce. I thought it'd be the other way around?
-
On zoom: I use zoom quite a lot when shooting.
Howver, I would recommend using "standard" zoom until you think you have achieved some sort of "mastery". Frequent change of zoom level can make aiming more difficult, as your "mental image" has to adjust for the different levels of magnification on your screen (=having to lead seemingly more or less)
And to put things a bit into proportion: 2% hit percentage is by no way a good value, but a very common one, while only few players ever get to the pont when they are able to get consistently hit percentages >10%. And, as already mentioned, it doesn't necessarily tells us much about efficiency. Alot depends on plane, armament, playing style. Taking a lot of long range high deflection shots in a typhoon may result in a much lower hit % than saddling up in a Hurricane I, while producing the same # of kills (You simply don't need that much hits when firing 20mm rounds instead of 303's)
(http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/1496/grafasr8.gif)
-
I like it when lusche pulls out his graphs.......he's like batman with all his little gadgets :D
-
In most situations the gunsight is never spot on. In fact (and I believe you know this already) it's only spot on while flying straight and level and your target is precisely at convergence.
Still it's a good guideline to approximately where your bullets should fly. It doesn't really lie, it tells a half-truth.
If you generally ignore your sight, how do you know where you should be shooting? I don't take my sight as "gospel" but at least I know within a few degrees where my bullets will fly. When you shoot, you must have your front view down solid with no side to side movement (ie from TrackIR or mouse look)?
I'm actually curious. I haven't checked your stats, but I trust what you say about your percentage. How exactly do you achieve those stats essentially ignoring the sight? Is this something I should try myself? I personally find it hard to judge lead on "under the nose shots", should I now be able to set my forward view so the "pilot's seat" is as high as possible so the sight isn't anywhere to be seen?
I don't pay much attention to the sight, except on the "easy" shots- going away in a slight bank, "hanging" in front of me, etc. Even then, I generally don't actively aim much with the sight, I just realize that the sight is actually happens to be lined up "for this shot, this time". On many shots I may not even be able to see the target when I fire (he's under my nose), or I'll fire before he's even in my forward view enough to use the sight (crossing fast from the side, or overshooting me with a lot of speed). Lots of shots are taken before he even enters my bulletproof glass although he's in my forward view. He’s headed toward my sight, but not in it yet…
To say I essentially ignore the sight doesn't mean it isn't lined up correctly with the target- it has to be, or I'd miss. It's a very similar feeling to when I shoot shotgun. The gun is up to my shoulder, and the barrel is lined up with my eye, which means the bead is as well. But I don't focus on the bead when I fire, my attention is riveted on the bird or clay target.
The vast majority of my shooting in AH is what I consider "shotgun style", with just a bit of "rifle style" thrown in here and there. Those tracking shots where the enemy is flying a predictable path long enough for me to carefully line up my sights, decide the proper lead, and execute the shot are "rifle style" in my mind. Other examples are the previously mentioned "hanging" shots. On rifle-type shots, I look at the sight, and line it up with my target. These type of shots occur probably 1 or 2 fights in 10 for me.
Most of my aerial gunnery has more in common with shotgunning (and in particular, skeet shooting and pass shooting), than it does with rifle shooting. When using a shotgun correctly, the target is in crisp, attentive focus, and the gun (including the sights) is an indistinct blur. Becoming distracted by the sights causes you to miss, because it draws your attention to the gun, and away from the target. The gun should be a "vaguely outlined pointer", and all attention should be on the target, calculating its speed, angle, and the required lead. In shotgunning, you make a conscious effort NOT to look at or focus on the sights, but instead, concentrate so hard on the target that you try to “read the writing” on it. I use the same technique when I shoot aerial or running targets with a bow or rifle.
In shotgunning, ignoring the sights is, in essence, vital to a good score.
Care is taken to ensure that mounting the gun is done properly, without canting it, and so your eye lines up with the barrel. I can close my eyes, mount my gun, and open my eyes, and it's mounted correctly every time. That's the tough part in shotgunning. Not having that "down pat" will cause serious issues. That part is already taken care of in AH.
I transition that idea right into my shooting in AH. Focus HARD on the target, and just try to forget about the sights at all. Of course they're lined up with my eye, and will be lined up with the target, I just don’t actively pay attention to it. If I give it a conscious thought, it’s to tell myself not to look at it. Flying the plane just takes the place of swinging the shotgun.
I think this answers your question about the "more comprehensive gunsight" boomerlu? The last thing I want is a sight that distracts me enough that I look at it!
Visual feedback by itself isn’t what I want/need. I want the feedback of the tracers, but that doesn’t mean I want feedback from a more elaborate sight. What could it possibly tell me that I don’t already know? Range? I have the icon counter, and fire on targets when they’re big enough to hit. Bank angle? I can see that… And if the ground isn’t level (mountains…) or if no ground (or only ground) is visible, it won’t be accurate anyway. Calculate lead? LOL, nope! Calculate angle-off? I can already see that… The tracers tell me RIGHT NOW where my judgment erred, and therefore gives me the answer I need to correct. The sight doesn’t. Even if it’s fancy. If I aim high and miss, what does the sight tell me that I don’t already know. Nothing… I aimed high, and missed. Conversely, if I aim high and miss, the tracers tell me where my judgment was off… And it’s not like I have to go out and watch my tracers actively either. I only pay attention to them when I need a question answered.
And again, using a sight like that would distract me and force me to switch my attention between the sight and the plane, comparing the relationship. In my case, it would hurt me more than help me. I know, because I went through the “looking for the best sight” phase in my early experience too. I always ignored the one I think is best, because it wasn’t fancy enough.
Given the choice, if I had to use only one I'd keep the tracers and get rid of the sight. For some reason, the 109K4 didn’t have a sight when I used it for training in the TA. Not having the sight didn’t cause me any problems, even though I don’t think I’ve ever flown that plane in the MA.
Back in the days when I did ground attack, I did like some of the sights that supposedly helped with rockets, even though I never really felt they helped that much.
Zoom? I seldom use it for shooting, but I often flicker it on/off when I want a better look at my opponent. One time I'll use if for firing is on an opponent at D600, and running. I don't like it on for shooting because it messes up my mental image of the correct lead for the shot. With zoom on, I feel like I have enough lead, but I don't. I might also use it on those "hanging" shots, where my opponent is against a background that makes it tough for me to see him. He isn't moving much relative to me, so doesn't require much lead. One of those "rifle-type" shots again...
-
Most of my shots are either deflection shots or snap shots, very rarely do I see my target or if my hits land, I only know hes down when I either get the kill message or I change view and see him failing to the ground. However, when I do get get to see my target, I like to see my tracers so I can adjust my aim if I need any more lead..and I dont fire test shots. I find the tracers have really helped me with my deflection shots and will continue to use them, I have tried to switch them off but did not like it very much...They are very usefull especialy for the Luftwaffe planes as they planes have the worse balistics in the game.
-
I don't pay much attention to the sight, except on the "easy" shots- going away in a slight bank, "hanging" in front of me, etc. Even then, I generally don't actively aim much with the sight, I just realize that the sight is actually happens to be lined up "for this shot, this time". On many shots I may not even be able to see the target when I fire (he's under my nose), or I'll fire before he's even in my forward view enough to use the sight (crossing fast from the side, or overshooting me with a lot of speed). Lots of shots are taken before he even enters my bulletproof glass although he's in my forward view. He’s headed toward my sight, but not in it yet…
These tend to be my best shots as well. They are coming toward my sight from some angle and I just have a feeling that they will cross it. I do look at my sight to judge whether he will cross it though.
Care is taken to ensure that mounting the gun is done properly, without canting it, and so your eye lines up with the barrel. I can close my eyes, mount my gun, and open my eyes, and it's mounted correctly every time. That's the tough part in shotgunning. Not having that "down pat" will cause serious issues. That part is already taken care of in AH.
This is what I'd like you to elaborate on a little bit more. What view system do you use?
I ask because I recently have tried out using mouse view because that allows me to focus on my target better. However, doing so disrupts the feeling of having the "plane = shotgun perfectly lined up with your eye level". If I completely ignore my gunsight, this becomes even worse.
I'm using a compromise between pure mouse look and snap views because of this problem. Typically I track the target until he will be completely in my forward view then engage forward view without mouse look for the shot.
I think this answers your question about the "more comprehensive gunsight" boomerlu? The last thing I want is a sight that distracts me enough that I look at it!
Sure thing, you are good enough that something elaborate is just a distraction. But what if you were starting out and you wanted to have some relatively systematic way to keep track of how AoA affects the gunsight? How about then?
What could it possibly tell me that I don’t already know?
Where your rounds go at AoA, whether it's vertical AoA due to elevator input or horizontal AoA due to rudder yaw. That's the reason I mentioned it. Everything else you're absolutely right about - it's stuff you can get just by looking at your target and the lead you calculate "in your head" using what you've learned from practice.
-
First rule is there is no hard and fast rule, everyone is different.
Second rule is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But if it is broke, why not try something different.
Personally, for some shots they are a lot easier to make with tracers on.
However they do get between you and the target.
For myself, fancy gunsights, or anything between my eyeball and the enemy is a distraction.
So I use a very simple dot sight. I've tweaked it over the years, made it bigger as my eyesight and reflex's deteriorate.
One way or another its your eyeball and brain that you train either way.
Either system can work with equal results. Leaving the choice down to personal preference.
When in doubt, go back to basics and rebuild. However if you've never really connected the dots, you really need to pick 1 system, 1 plane, 1 set of guns, and stick with it till you master it.
-
Sorry, my falconry season has started, and I've been busy looking for a new "hunting partner" for this year. It's been taking a lot of my time, so I haven't been checking in as often, or taken much time to respond.
Anyway... my view system-
I use an 8-way HAT switch for my views, with a separate button mapped for "Look Up". The controller I use is a Saitek X52. The HAT switch is mapped so pushing it forward gives me the "Look Up Front" view. The rest are pretty self-explanatory. I use the pinky (Shift) button as my Look Up button. Pushing the HAT to the right looks right. Squeezing the pinky switch allows me to look straight up. Doing both at the same time allows me to look up and to the left at a 45 degree angle, etc... All of these views are done with my right hand.
In addition to that, I have a 4-way rocker switch on my throttle mapped to "Move Head L/R" just like the arrow keys do on the keyboard. This is extremely handy for checking my six. For my six-view, I adjust my head as far back away from the seat as possible, and as high up as possible, but I leave it centered. When I check my six, I just hold the HAT switch back, and use the rocker to slide my head left or right as desired to see around the headrest/armor. This rocker switch is on my throttle, and pulling it up or pushing it down also raises/lowers flaps. My left index finger ALWAYS sits on this button. I'm paranoid, and check my six every few seconds.
I use the "Snap Mode" View change mode (F7).
I have a key mapped to look down. I sometimes use this to check oil level, etc, if needed. Rarely used...
I have a button activated by my left thumb (on the throttle) to toggle zoom on/off. I have a second HAT switch on the stick (activated with my left thumb) that zooms in/out, depending on whether I push it or pull it.
That's pretty much it as far as views go, at least for me.
I basically only fly fighters, and only shoot other planes. Due to that, my system is geared for that. My goal is to have every function I need available at my fingertips, in an intuitive location, so I never need to look away from the screen while fighting or let go of the stick or throttle to push a key or press a button.
There are other strategies for mapping views. This is just how I like it set up.
-
Sure thing, you are good enough that something elaborate is just a distraction. But what if you were starting out and you wanted to have some relatively systematic way to keep track of how AoA affects the gunsight? How about then?
Where your rounds go at AoA, whether it's vertical AoA due to elevator input or horizontal AoA due to rudder yaw. That's the reason I mentioned it. Everything else you're absolutely right about - it's stuff you can get just by looking at your target and the lead you calculate "in your head" using what you've learned from practice.
What I did, and still do once in a while, is just go shoot some stuff in the TA (the dot target) and see how things are effected. Do it level, baked 45, banked 90, inverted, etc. Shoot some drones with tracers on, and watch how things work. Not just from the back, but from the front, top, bottom, sides, etc. Film it, and watch the film.
There's no substitute for practice, and paying attention to what's going on.
Sorry, I have no recommendations for sights that will help you learn what you're asking. Shooting at a target while banked 45 degrees isn't going to give the same results at 200yds as at 400... Even if it did, the 400yd target might be going faster or slower, or climbing, or diving, or curving, or...
Or, you might be pulling 1.5G's, or 2G's or 0G's...
No matter what, you'll never have every scenario figured out, and automatically succeed. That's where tracers are nice...
Some people will do things differently, and find other things work well for them. Ack Ack obviously likes the sights, and no tracers, and it works for him...
-
Re: views thanks for the information. The main thing I'm curious about is how to achieve what you describe as "plane as gun" feeling where you know where it will shoot without looking at the sight. That's what you mean by "AH takes care of that" - with snap views, you have something consistent to work with.
Practicing, I'm finding I can kind of get that feeling, but I don't completely ignore my sight. I have a vague idea of where it is while focusing on the target. I'm aware of the sight enough that I'll know if the target will cross near it. Is this consistent with what you find?
After flying a bit, I find my observation of bullet path based on AoA to be overrated :frown:. When I'm flying in a combat situation, there's no way I'm going to be thinking about the AoA effect consciously enough to judge it from a gunsight.
-
I'm basically thinking along the lines of "towards the middle". On a simple sight like we have in AH, the pilots eye (the virtual pilots eye, not really yours) becomes the rear sight, if he sits too tall, your guns appear to shoot high. Sit to the right, they'll appear to shoot right. The same thing happens with a shotgun, if you cant (tilt) it to the left (your eye is too far right), or lift your cheek off the stock (eye is too high). I cheat my head up slightly from the default position, but not much. In reality you don’t need to sit in the same place all the time, the virtual pilot does that for you, so your don’t need to worry about not having the “gun” mounted the same each time. I’m not sure about the mouse and TrackIR options.
At least with the HAT/snap view system, my eye (rear sight) returns to the same place each time, automatically. Since my eye and the sight are in the same place each time, my guns are shooting consistently to the same spot (but that falls apart under G-load, while tilted, inverted, etc, but not always to hugely noticeable extremes). My gunsight is basically in the middle of the screen, always. That means, when I'm looking at a target, if he's headed toward a point that will put him "in the middle" of my forward view when he gets there, he's headed toward my impact point.
Basically, even though I'm looking up, or sideways, or wherever, I still have a sense of where my nose is pointed, and therefore where my guns are pointed. For me, it's like watching the clay pigeon, and ignoring the shotgun, but still knowing where the shotgun is pointed.
I can judge that even if I'm not in the forward view (anyone can, with some thought and experience). The easy ones (for me) are when I'm able to spot the enemy plane straight above me (or below, if I'm inverted), moving rapidly toward the bottom of my screen, which will cause him to eventually fly in front of me. I “think ahead” while viewing him in my up view (or whichever view I’m in) so that I can roll or pitch my plane so that as he exits my current view, he’s headed toward the center of my forward view. In a sense, I’m already lining up my shot, even though he’s not in front of me yet… From there, it’s just a matter of timing when to pull the trigger.
You can practice that offline, or against another player. Just practice rolling, looping, or anything else, always keeping your target in sight, or “knowing” where he’ll come back into sight as he moves behind a part of your plane (so temporarily out of your sight). In particular, if your looking at using overshoots, practice having someone higher/faster attack you, and as you roll to avoid his shot, practice watching him and lining up your plane in relation to him, so as he passes you, he’ll be at a point about 100-200 yards right in front of you, and you’ll have a shot on his tail as he goes by.
I hope that makes sense- I’m back to 12hr shifts again, and I’m tuckered out…
-
This is an old film, I don't have time to go through my current ones and find a more recent example.
It still works in my filmviewer, hopefully it works for you too.
Watch this film with "saved views" enabled. I also check the trails and icons box, because I like that info too.
Adjust your views in the filmviewer the same way you do in the game. Use the keypad to look, left, or wherever, and move your head using the page up/page down keys, and arrow keys, and then save the view when it's optimal using F10. Don't forget the "Up" view (key 5), and the combination up/"normal" views.
I saw this guy above me, already coming in on me before I had a chance to start the film, so you actually miss the first second or two. But, watch how I get him in my views, and maneuver so as he "wraps around" me he's headed toward the center of my forward view. I'm already working on lining up my shot several seconds before I fire, but notice how little time he's in my forward view, and how little time I have to actually use the sight... No, this isn't something I can do every time, but I can do it pretty often. This is an example of an ideal situation, where everything works as planned...
I know where the sight is, and where I'm pointing, so it's more a matter of timing and aligning myself so he'll pass in front of my guns than actual "aiming". I guarantee that in this fim, I was focused entirely on my target, and not on my sight... Yes, the sight was alingned correctly, hence the hits. But I wasn't looking at the sight. I was looking at the point where his canopy meets his nose.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/rgzvmwoifiz/MtnF4UvsF4U1D.ahf
Note that my tracers are on, but I don't "walk" them onto my target. I mentally think of my shots like a single-shot weapon, and fire a small burst and then watch for the effect. If I miss, my tracers will tell me where (hopefully) and I'll remember next time this shot presents itself that historically, I have a tendency to fire early, or late, or whatever...
Now, this is a C-Hog, so the guns are very potent. It doesn't take much to knock a part off. However, even with the .50's I normally use, this is an effective shot. I actually focus on the point where the front of the targets canopy meets his nose, and strive to hit that point. I don't just focus on/try to hit the plane, but try to hit a particular point of that plane. No, I don't always hit it! But I try! If I'm forward a bit, I hit the engine (oil leak), hit a bit back, and I hit the pilot, a little to the side, and I hit a wing... Or if I'm way off I miss entirely (obviously).
I shoot competitively and hunt with single-shot muzzle loading flintlock rifles, muskets, and pistols. I'm used to having one try to succeed, or fail. I learned a long time ago the simple little phrase "aim big, miss big/aim little, miss little". The idea being that if I aim at a deer, and miss, I miss the whole thing. But if I aim at a hair on that deers ribcage, and miss the hair, I still hit the deers ribcage... You don't aim for the bulls-eye. You aim for the center of the center of the bulls-eye... It sounds nuts I suppose, but it works. It's about the concentration level you're striving for, and the focus "strength" I'm looking for.
-
Ultimately, tracers cannot guide your aim. They're only a back-up to double check your aim against. All roads lead to Rome and.. The best thing you can strive for is to make each gun's ballistics an intuitive integration, a sixth sense of sorts. Tracers are, ultimately, only an after-the-fact artifice.
-
Just get rly rly close xD
-
Ultimately, tracers cannot guide your aim. They're only a back-up to double check your aim against. All roads lead to Rome and.. The best thing you can strive for is to make each gun's ballistics an intuitive integration, a sixth sense of sorts. Tracers are, ultimately, only an after-the-fact artifice.
It's funny how that works, but most if not all of the skills we learn we learn "after the fact". You don't learn to ride a bike, until after you've tried riding the bike, made a few mistakes, and improved your technique.
You may learn "facts" without actually experiencing them yourself, but "skills" are learned from experience, which is always "after the fact". Even if the first attempt is successful, the act has to be accomplished before we know that.
This game is a perfect example of that. How many "experts" have logged into the arena the first time, only to learn that they were far from "expert". They may know the "facts" about the planes, and how they were used in combat, but they don't actually learn the "skills" in advance. They try it, mentally review/contemplate the attempt and result, and try again.
-
Yep. After the fact is only a conventional idiom to express what I meant :)
-
(http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/1496/grafasr8.gif)
wow, I pretty much considered myself an average shot.
-
Mtnman,
Thanks again for the info. The process you describe is typically how I take my crossing shots. I'm just not as good at it as you are :lol. I may differ slightly in that I may take a split second to refer to my sight to see if the opponent will actually cross the center. Other than that, I do what you do - I track my target and my mind is calculating if he will cross through my sights given my current turn rate, his movement, etc.
Also, your "aim big/miss big, aim little/miss little" is interesting and I do see the value in it, I may try putting myself into that mindset.
:salute
Edit: Trying out "aim little/miss little" and have to say, my behavior aiming that way closely matches my behavior flying tracers off. Props, good advice.
-
Its a knack really.
Practice with guns makes a world of difference. But If you have the knack and put practice in you can hit anything.
I have the knack, DrDeath has the knack and Grizz certainly does. You just practice alot and one day it will go "click" and you can hit targets from R -1.0
But all that techno babble is good, its down to science in the theoretical. But you have got to go by instinct. Soon you will KNOW when to fire and you will usually score hits.
But Yenny speaks truth, GET CLOSE so you dont waste ammo
-
I've been on AH for a few months now and my ACM has improved dramatically but I can't hit a thing.
I find that I'm able to get the nose/sight of my plane at the target maybe 3 times before the fight goes against me. If I could land a hit I'd live longer.
Often my sight seems "very jumpy" when trying to get it on my target. I can't hold it straight while I'm firing. As a result I'm moving the stick around just trying to get it settled on the amount of lead I think I need. But I can't really get it to move to and stay where I want it. Even when the target is not really maneuvering against me.
Any thoughts would really be appreciated.
Thanks
It's a instinctive thing.
Find the speed of the aircraft, the distance, make a quick fire solution in ur hed, then go for the angle u want. as for the jumping, COMMIT TO YOUR LEAD. don't just spray in one direction, just pull up and dont change your angle, so that its a smooth turn, no jolting aroun. k?
-
(http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm155/jasonthehunted/k14_alpha.jpg)
try this site, it has really helped improving my shooting. you can focus on the aimpoint with out all the other stuff.
-
I won't lie to you, I suck. But there's one thing I learned gunning, you can't rely on the tracers. You have to 'know' or 'feel' where the bullets are going to go, before you shoot. Practice and sticking to one convergence helps too, but turn off your tracers for a month and turn them back on after to see if you have improved. Helped me a lot.
-
Just wait until you're close. At 200 or closer it's hard to miss.
-
Pffft I can miss at 200, easy
-
Pffft I can miss at 200, easy
Same here :P
-
Same here :P
lol ya me to, heck if the counter is at zero I miss :cry
-
concerning stick-settings, this thread might help as well, ´cause I also had the same problem that I couldn´t keep gunsight steady. After the new stick settings things improved very much.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,218269.msg2623654/topicseen.html#msg2623654
SF
-
here is a film for another ww2 sim i fly go here:
http://www.darts-page.com/
then click on files,movie files,instructional videos then on the film
Using the gunsite to determine range
i took a break for 11 months and my gun's were way off i just
watched this film and went into the training arena
and used the lead site thing (control+tab) while
looking at a plane then hit tab again and it will
pop up on a plane and show ya how far to lead
spend a hour or so and it should help.
good luck
Kat