Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: stephen on December 17, 2009, 02:26:39 AM
-
I've notice in the dueling arena that alot of good pilots frequent there..., somtimes it seems they LIVE there.
After a couple years playing, an odd set of manuevers has surfaced in my mind. Alot of guys are pressing for a HO with the express purpose of making slower turning aircraft decide if they are going to HO and be called out on 200, or let the other plane pass, and perhaps give up most of thier advantage by having to haul the likes of the P-47/P38 around in a turn when they obviously dont have the E to meet the othr plane at the top of a loop...
Of that tactic im positive... and I have stopped thinking about it, and now I HO if im pressed, are barring that extend away and set it up all over again...
However a couple of very good pilots out there seem to be able to pull sharp 90 degree + turns into a diving/approaching plane (almost fienting that the HO is coming, or at the very least throwing off my aim), then righting themselves, and pulling off un godly shots at d600 plus at the boom and zoomer as he's climbing out for another pass, (and alot of the time its Niki's). I know im not giving a good account of the manuever.., but thats how odd it seems to be at the other end of it.
Is so freekish when it happens that im totaly flabergasted at how some guys can do it over and over again..., (now get this straight, im not calling ANYONE a cheat)
I can give a fair account of myself, but I really have to take my hat off to these guys..., I have seen alot of DA cartoon pilots pull off ALOT of very good manuevers, but only a special few come to mind when mentioning the above manuever. Ive been here for 5 to 6 years now, and I cut my teeth in a couple of very decent squads, but im still looking for the leader that can show me how in the hell to turn them niki's like that... :aok
-
Sounds like your falling for a reversal. Search the help threads for reversals to get a picture of what's going on. If you can see the reversal coming its easy to counter.
-
You're falling for a lead turn on the merge, as you go up in the vertical on the merge, the other guy will be on your six. I explained this to you awhile back after beating you a few times but you were so insistant that I was cheating that you ignored how it's done. Basically, you're being out flown by someone with a better grasp of ACM, merge tactics and just a better over all grasp of what the planes can do.
ack-ack
-
This was a big problem with me. What I thought was going on and what WAS going on. Start filming your sorties view them in fixed postion with trails on. view it ten times in a row that way then view it from the cockpit of your plane then click on the opponent name and view it from his plane. This will help alot.
I have dueled alot of guys in the DA and few will help you learn. Take it when you can get it. Or get a trainer.
LOL i finially figured out how to do a low yoyo. Sounds stupid. but ive been doing them for years not knowing what "that" move was. I kept thinking wow that guys messed up. Now i know what it looks like from the cockpit and when to do it.
-
Sounds like the defender is turning into the attacker to defeat the shot - throwing off your aim as you put it - and then rolling back in the opposite direction for a snapshot as the attacker overshoots the defender's flight path.
In this situation there's no real HO feint - the object is to make the attacker miss his initial shot by giving him a difficult angle. Then as the attacker misses his shot and flies behind and under (this is the flight path overshoot) the defender rolls back into him for a snapshot as the attacker flies up and out.
Depending on the attacker's E the shot window is usually pretty small but cannons make it a little easier. (Some guys even make it even easier on you by panicking when they see the tracers and maneuvering instead of keeping on going.)
The DA is a great place to practice it. Just wait for a higher faster con to dive on you. I like to set it up with a gentle flat turn and then tighten it as the con gets closer for his shot. Depending on when I start the turn, this could end up almost nose to nose, as in the "HO feint" you describe. But all you're doing is making him miss his initial shot and overshoot your flight path. As soon as you see the tracers going behind your tail then pull up and roll back at him. The tricky part is reacquiring the con in your views and setting up for the shot.
-
However a couple of very good pilots out there seem to be able to pull sharp 90 degree + turns into a diving/approaching plane (almost fienting that the HO is coming, or at the very least throwing off my aim), then righting themselves, and pulling off un godly shots at d600 plus at the boom and zoomer as he's climbing out for another pass, (and alot of the time its Niki's).
You are falling for a "lead turn" merge ... usually done by a plane that is probably slower than yours and isn't intent on an opening HO ... that is why they can pull into you, and by the time you pass them (on the merge) they are most likely more than half way thru their reversal turn.
Also, it sounds like you are just doing a simple "pull up" to vertical (what the other guy is counting on) and making a very good target for someone who has very good gunnery skills.
Another thing, from your description, is that you are "locked" into an "HO" mindset at the merge when you should be thinking 2 or more move ahead.
-
Anytime you have "to decide if they are going to HO" you were toast when you put the wheels up. Further no "good" dueler is ever remotely interested in a HO, thats a 50/50 bet and he knows that much worse then his chances in the fight. Now a very good stick can combine a FQ one timer with a lead turn...hence the normal guns cold merge rules. I'm sure lots of folks would be willing to work with you (and it sure sounds like akak did), but if your closed to the realities then you can just keep on dying. BTW you can always just buy the official Aces High book of cheat codes...just google Robert Shaw for 411 :airplane:
-
Ack Ack your so keen on looking over my posts, you show me where I called your manuvers a cheat and ill eat crow,...
I pull reversals on guys alot, slowly turning into them and looking for the snapshot, you guys are right, i need to roll film..., who knows.
And as for a a HO mindset, I think your a bit off base there, but I explaind under what condition I use it..., the validity of it as a tactic has been debated so much that im not intrested in continueing it here.
Thanx guys for the input, Ill be spending more time in the DA TODAY, Later <S>
-
You sir are obviously a bit slow on the uptake. there is no such thing as "slowly" and a reversal for one. There is no validity to a HO beyond the fact that it offers some statistical chance of damaging the other guy. As a general rule it was encouraged by the Russians early in the war when they felt that given the inferiority in both pilot and plane it was often the best odds they would get and by the Americans in the pacific where many Japanese planes had inferior armor (if any) and no self sealing fuel tanks. Within the context of a 1 on 1 fight in AH there is no statistical argument for a HO unless you feel you are completely outclassed by your opponent. From the tone of your posts here I'd say your time would be better spent in the TA then the DA...
-
Now I chose my words very carefuly so you wouldnt continue berating me on the point of HO's, yet you seem to concentrate on them as if its my only manuever..., and you had to add that "slow on the uptake" remark to add validity to your off comment, and get by the censor on this bbs, and "cut me down" at the same time, its childish, and obviouse.
Look here buddy (and ill write it carefuly so you might understand, since you obviously cant comprehend it)..., I "HO" when im out numberd, and I "HO" when the other pilot is depending on me to honor the no ho merge rule when he has obviously lost the advantage in E, and/or position within a dogfight, yet points his nose in my general direction in order to force me to honor what is an obviouse attempt at fienting a "HO" when he indeed HAS NO SHOT, and his tail is waggling because he has blown all of his E...
ALOT of guys try to start turning within the merge a bit too early, and when its obviouse that they are nose up, and trying to get the better start on the 1st turn I HOSE THEM! If you dont like it, I DONT CARE!!!
This thread was started with the intention of furthering the knowledge of all pilots unfamilier with overshoot tactics, yet the flamers will take thier own stance, and forward thier own dogma in the hopes that the pilots that frequent here will buy into thier B.S., thus losing advantage when they might actualy prevail in a fight...
IN FACT..., the pilots im refering to have a distinct appreciation for "HONOR" mostly when it favors them, and would have the rest of us pass on any shot that might be mis-construde as a HO, simply because thier nose was pointed in our general direction, when in fact they are barely in the air, and hoping we might not fire because they where JUST barely able to haul thier terribly positiond plane into a nose up attitude.
Heck, I bet your ready to stop all rope a doping because the guy being shot has his nose pointed upward while windmilling uncontrolably when he gets blasted out of the sky by the higher aircraft!!!
(Honor is one thing..., but blind obedience without real world knowledge is another thing completly.)
And as for "slowly" on a reversal... If the other pilot is 3.0 out (and rapidly approaching at hi speed), and you want to drag him into losing his E, then you dont suddenly Pull 9 G's and break into him, THATS A HO!!!, you "slowly" increase your turn baiting him into losing energy, THEN break into him just as he fly's by, spoiling his shot, and hopfully taking him as he's overshooting you in his turn...
Seriously you guys have taken me completly out of context, and im starting to think you individualy have a vendeta against me, or any other pilot that doesnt have your hi post count..., because as much as you accuse me of making no sense, your arguments are equaly as frail.
Im totaly sick of this attitude in the BBS. It's as if some of you believe that no one but the plutonium few has anything worthy to add, and im making it my duty to be well informed and confront you when you berate other members that have valid comments, and/or suggestions.
Your time is over..., and honestly if this is the best you have to offer, then mabey you guys should re-evaluate just why it is you are here?
To add negative comments, or to HELP THE COMMUNITY? :aok
(REPOST... my comments DO NOT refer to every poster within this thread, only those with alterior motives, or personal remarks reflecting on my inteligence and/or choice of tactics)
-
And you wonder why no one bothers to lift a finger to assist you.
ack-ack
-
Im sorry..., egsactly WHAT did I say that didnt make sense Ack-Ack?
Im a big boy, and I can take it if im proven wrong..., and I WILL appologise if I am out of context...
-
Everything your saying points to a fundamental misunderstanding of ACM concepts. The simple truth is that none of it "makes sense" to anyone with significant experience in the game. your also mixing "DA"/merge tactics with MA -E defensive flying...totally apples and oranges. I'm not berating you on HO's, simply pointing out the logic and the lack of efficiency of the tactic in anything other then a true fly by joust where you have no intention of actually enaging beyond the face shot. Everything in your initial post is contradictory in nature. You talk about the faster plane "forcing" the slower plane to decide about a HO and then about just extending, a total contradiction. Later you post about a slow reversal and looking for a snapshot. Absolutely the worst combination possible since it forces the con into the correct ACM (out of plane +E) vs encouraging a poor shot and subsequent overshoot.
I'll right this slowly and carefully for you in the hopes that you take the time to read and comprehend. You are laboring under significant misconceptions that are negatively impacting both your enjoyment and ability to compete vs even an average stick (based on your actual comments here). In then end ACM falls into two broad catagories "angles" & "E" fighting. Both can be used successfully and good sticks often flop back and forth in the same sortie or even the same fight based on relative circumstance. Much of what your describing falls into what I'd label a "tweener"...which is a fight were you mix a combination of E fighting and angle fighting concepts in a way that work against each other...this normally gets you killed.
While I can't speak for anyone else I certainly encourage any and all participation. The posts above (and this one) are actually an attempt to help you. However it appears you feel your adding something of value so this puts others in a position of correcting some misconceptions that might harm the development of others. Many of us (myself included) have been "called out" with regard to various postings. To me this is a very healthy aspect of the board since it enables discourse that either corrects or expands on the topic at hand. I'll attach a clip that touches on a bit of everything you seem to be discussing from +E tactics to neg E angles fighting in a multicon environment. I've always felt that this is a good basic example of reasonably appropriate ACM vs relying on superior performance.
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/A-20/prowling%20A-20.ahf (http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/A-20/prowling%20A-20.ahf)
-
No.. I am refering to the SLOWER plane (defensive) forcing the FASTER plane (offensive) into a "head on" situation, by suddenly breaking INTO the faster aircraft, OR the slower aircraft FIENTING a ho, when its intention is to force the FASTER plane to either speed past (gaining seperation), "thus exposing its rear upper quarter to a Hi angle snapshot", or climbing out after having lost a significant ammount of "E" due to the slowly accentuated turn of the defensive plane, allowing the once defending aircraft to gain an equaly devistating shot, but without the split second timing of the encounter within the vertical plane...
i.e. (within the parameters of the second encounter, the "once" defencive pilot has more time to line up a shot, even though his drasticly deminishing "E" state allows the range to open while the initialy offensive aircraft attempts to escape by climbing.)
The initial post was not written within the context of one static E state for the defender, and another for the offensive pilot (or plain of manuver/climb)..., instead the discription was simplified to cover as broad a base as one might expect to cover under said conditions..., i.e. Ho'ing in defensive, fienting a head on in order to force the other combatant into an un-favorable position, or breaking in an ever decreasing turn radius INTO the FASTER apponent in order to force an accompanying over shoot.
Unfortunatly, I believe your miss representing the actual co-dependance that Angles/E fighting actualy share, for example: If the fight suddenly changes from the horozontal to the vertical plain (though to concentrate on either one is surely folly, as no pilot flys souly within either the vertical or horizontal) or the relative speeds/positions of either aircraft change dynamicly from thier beginning states( i.e. the Faster attacker suddenly becomes the SLOWER attacker/SLOWER defender etc.) then it is obviouse that within SOME point the dynamics of the fight MUST incorperate both doctrines.
Application of flaps is one way to suddenly slow ones energy state, and drop from and "angles" type engagment to an "E" state engagment, (though I truthfully believe there is hardly any diffrence bettween the two as you explain them).
In other words..., those of us that are "in the know" have an individualy arranged base line of possible manuevers based on past experience, that either ourselves, or our apponents are capable of at any one possible moment/energy state/position "within" a dynamic encounter (dogfight).
When one or the other pilots aircraft diverge from that base line, a "WTF?" moment occurs..., (usualy followed by alot of whining on 200)
Ummm, im just a friggin Hischool Grad here, perhaps you could drop the collegiate stuff and just fly the G.D. plane?
-
Heya Stephen.........
shoot me a pm, if you want to work on anything in particular........ and post the times you are available.....
sidenote: are ya gonna get a chance to see ya Mom & Max up in Vermont over the Holidays?
one slight correction: ;)
Application of flaps is one way to suddenly slow ones energy state, and drop from an "E" state engagment, to an "angles" type engagment
-
This is your original post...
...Alot of guys are pressing for a HO with the express purpose of making slower turning aircraft decide if they are going to HO...
This certainly reads as the faster plane "forcing" a HO to me.
I'm not going to spend anymore time on this one since you obviously consider yourself to be "in the know" after 2 years while guys like me have achieved "slightly above clueless" after a decade or more. However I will point out a couple of misconceptions in your last post. All of your comments point to the lowest common denominator of pilot. An experienced +E pilot will expect a defensive bogey to break back into him at multiple times since this is actually a widely accepted tactic. These defensive moves bleed additional E and actually help the aggressor move from the mid game to the end portion of the fight and are generally inferior to the defender attempting to offer a scissors engagement. As a general rule the aggressor maintains or expands his E advantage during this phase of the fight.
E state is never static but always relative, but a pilot is either co-E or in a +/- position. Correctly gauging relative E state is a bit of an art and goes along way to determining the outcome of the fight IF the correct tactics are chosen. Your broad based descriptions are either completely invalid or misleading.
1) Defensive HO is 100% incorrect unless you no longer have minimum vertical maneuvering speed and the guy is dumb enough to give you a joust. The logic here is simple, the "defensive" (neg E) plane has by definition an angular advantage. Freezing the nose for a HO causes two negative results a) loss of angular advantage b) loss of E due to control inputs to arrest the nose travel. This leaves the defender in a worse position then he started. This is not to be confused with manipulating the lift vector in an attempt to manufacture a front quarter shot at flight path intersection.
2) A defender can not "force an overshoot" since the aggressor can defend against crossing the 3/9 line. The entire goal of this move is not to "force" an overshoot but to entice a shot that will result in a flight path overshoot.
I'm not going to even try to address your comments on angles & E fighting beyond a few simple comments. 1st you've got (IMO) some major misconceptions. In a "MA" environment fights are rarely initiated from a truly co-e posture and "same on same" fights are relatively uncommon. So tactics are driven by starting position and plane combination. Going to the Hog vs pony fight elsewhere here as an example the Pony has to rely entirely on E fighting concepts even if defensive while the F4U needs to push its angular advantage when possible. Obviously either pilot can elect to commit to the unexpected tactic however as Steve noted he was unable to force an end game on Mtnman. Within reason relative pilot skill decides a fight, however when two excellent pilots meet relative plane strength determines proper tactics for each.
In the artificial structure of a duel pilots either fly a "read and react" or push for either an angular or energy advantage...hence the terms "angles fight" and "E fight" which are really tactical dueling doctrines based on the perception of an even start. An angles flyer will look to trade relative E state for angular gain while an E fighter will attempt to maximize relative E state at the expense of angular loss of position. A "read and react" flyer feels comfortable in gauging the opponent and seizing on his technical deficiencies to exploit an advantage based on how he flies.
Scrolling back up akak's comments read exactly like an experienced pilot flying read and react merges and then trying to help the other guy (you) to understand what they did wrong. From the tone of your posts it sounds like you feel you have all the answers so i'll refrain from any further comments or observations...
-
Stephan,
I think your taking comments meant to help and interrupting them as hostile (which is certainly not my intent). We have a number of folks with an exceptional depth of knowledge who can help/teach/explain in almost any aspect of ACM either specific to 1 on 1/dueling/"MA" game play. Beneath that elite level are many guys like me with a more limited command of the game but reasonable "expertise" is some aspects of ACM/game play. A lot of what your actually discussing happens to fall in an area I feel I have reasonable command of (although certainly not at WW or some others level). That is the role of lift vector management within the overlapping doghouse charts during 1 on 1 combat maneuvering. Basically this is the management of relative E state and position during the part of the fight where the respective flight envelopes are "even" in the sense that neither plane is operating beyond the limit of the others flight envelope.
Basically this all boils down to why an A-20 can fly like a fighter and seem uber yet be dead meat to a seasoned stick like akak. The ability to separate out "pilot stuff" from the limits of the actual flight envelope comes from a recognition of both tactics, relative position and the underlying limitations of the adversaries flight envelope. So the superior pilot looks to move the fight into an area where he can exploit a flight envelope advantage (Steve vs Mtnman) or to seize on mistakes in plane handling. What your attempting to describe all falls into this area of the game. You perceive a tactic to be good since you are successful a % of the time but appear to struggle when the same tactic fails. This is simply a reflection of the differing skill level of your opponent. Very few fights actually reach a point where one player is forced beyond the limits of the plane...90%+ are decided within the overlapping flight envelope. Even pilots at my level are routinely exploited by those with an exceptional grasp of this type of ACM. There is always something new to learn when it comes to the subtleties of this type of ACM.
-
SLower turning was a reference to a plane that takes more space to complete a 180 degree turn, so a slow turning plane would ba lets say..., a B-24, and a faster turning plane would be a Zero.
Ill be more clear in the future sir!
I reading through a manuever is like discribing an orgasm...you cant really sum it up unless you have done it.
Ty for the help, im over it...., and i've found a trainer...Toodles :aok
-
You're falling for a lead turn on the merge, as you go up in the vertical on the merge, the other guy will be on your six. I explained this to you awhile back after beating you a few times but you were so insistant that I was cheating that you ignored how it's done. Basically, you're being out flown by someone with a better grasp of ACM, merge tactics and just a better over all grasp of what the planes can do.
ack-ack
:headscratch: