Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Skyguns MKII on August 28, 2011, 07:09:01 PM
-
For any plane from 110 to sbd that has gunner positions yet no drones, I wish for AI gunners to occupy the positions unless occupied by pilot or join. I’m sure accuracy and burst can be adjusted and programmed as needed. The reason for my wish is because you just cant pilot the plane the same in the gunners position as you can in the cockpit and be as maneuverable as you should be, Yet when your in such a plane and position where you need to maneuver for your life you just cant operate the gunners position and at the time where its needed the most. Having people join is ok, but is not always reliable specially when internet connection and maneuvering doesn’t go hand and hand and you end up getting mad lag as a gunner. You might be saying, "well what about Gs affecting the gunner?" Well that depends on speed and surely it would at least affect the AI gunners accuracy.
Flame suite on
:uhoh
-
+1
-
-1
-
-1
your reasoning?
the way it is now its as if i were the only person in the aircraft controlling it as if it were a puppet in the gunner positions. Why must i be the only person in the aircraft?
-
Because it allows people to up auto ack. A group of A-20's would be pretty damn hard to kill if the guns will fire at anything within 1.5k with the accuracy of auto-ack.
Granted I would use this to defend a field, I can still see how it could be detrimental to game-play.
And how would the kills be scored? Do the kills count as proxy's? Do you get perks for them? Do you just not get a kill?
-
Because it allows people to up auto ack. A group of A-20's would be pretty damn hard to kill if the guns will fire at anything within 1.5k with the accuracy of auto-ack.
Granted I would use this to defend a field, I can still see how it could be detrimental to game-play.
And how would the kills be scored? Do the kills count as proxy's? Do you get perks for them? Do you just not get a kill?
it would not be 1.5 k range. HTC has the option to Nerf or boost its effectiveness as needed. it would not be enabled on ground either. you must be in flight.
-
So you're suggesting that HTC give you an unrealistic, AI-controlled turret on the back of your aircraft incase you're not skilled enough to win a fight :rofl?
-
So you're suggesting that HTC give you an unrealistic, Controlled turret on the back of your aircraft incase you're not skilled enough to win a fight :rofl?
of course not, I'm asking for a realistic AI gunner to be in my plane, are you telling me its realistic jumping from one position to the next with a singe pilot? Be more realistic being a single pilot and having a crew, that crew (unless with given drones) can think for itself. common give me a better debate tank ace. :cheers: if you were a 110 gunner surely all you would worry about and excel at it gunning having not to worry about piloting. Or if your the 110 pilot all you would have to worry about is piloting and flying and excel at that, not gunning.
-
So you're suggesting that HTC give you an unrealistic, AI-controlled turret on the back of your aircraft incase you're not skilled enough to win a fight :rofl?
actually what he is asking is pretty ok... if you have played offline missions that you have to face AI gunners its pretty ok and not unrealistic. what IS unrealistic is that you have to completly make a dull flying to use the gunner. now if there was something like what happens in Il2 sturmovik 1946 (the ai gunner has a bad aim but is there to help you and also you can controll your plane with the stick while you are on the gunner seat) it would help a lot the concept of a aircraft with a gunner seat.
It is always better when there is a human overthere but not always people want to join a Il-2 that goes on tank busting mission
-
+1 I also wouldn't mind having AI gunners in the offline drones, just for target pratice. :D
-
of course not, I'm asking for a realistic AI gunner to be in my plane, are you telling me its realistic jumping from one position to the next with a singe pilot? Be more realistic being a single pilot and having a crew, that crew (unless with given drones) can think for itself. common give me a better debate tank ace. :cheers: if you were a 110 gunner surely all you would worry about and excel at it gunning having not to worry about piloting. Or if your the 110 pilot all you would have to worry about is piloting and flying and excel at that, not gunning.
You don't move. You never have moved. All that the different possitions do is let you 'take control' of a different person, so to speak. Your pilot never climbs into the gunner's seat of a 110, you just switch to the gunner's perspective and shoot his gun.
Alright, if the AI gun has toejam accuracy, limited ammo (auto ack clearly doesn't) fine, and it can't fire below the ground, it would probably be fine. But, I still don't see much of a point. If you're to the point that your manuvers are to give the gun a shot, rather than to get your guns a shot, then you're screwed either way.
But personally, I see it as no different than hiding in auto ack. If this is added, I'll have to empty the tail guns on my 110 during climb-out. Wouldn't be fair if someone's sortie ended sooner than it might have because I was a wuss and didn't empty my auto-ack.
-
You don't move. You never have moved. All that the different possitions do is let you 'take control' of a different person, so to speak. Your pilot never climbs into the gunner's seat of a 110, you just switch to the gunner's perspective and shoot his gun.
Alright, if the AI gun has toejam accuracy, limited ammo (auto ack clearly doesn't) fine, and it can't fire below the ground, it would probably be fine. But, I still don't see much of a point. If you're to the point that your manuvers are to give the gun a shot, rather than to get your guns a shot, then you're screwed either way.
But personally, I see it as no different than hiding in auto ack. If this is added, I'll have to empty the tail guns on my 110 during climb-out. Wouldn't be fair if someone's sortie ended sooner than it might have because I was a wuss and didn't empty my auto-ack.
i know we don't climb back and forth but the whole perspective thing doesn't work well in smaller bombers and the 110. but see historically those guns in the 110 served a purpose, perhaps not a big purpose. But still a threat. There not ever used because we find it impossible to both pilot and gun at the same time in the game. Its self evident. People wouldn't just dump 110 ammo if they knew it actually served somewhat of a purpose.
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
Actually skyguns, most don't use the tail guns in a 110 or a stuka for the simple reason that they're ineffective, not that they can't manuver and shoot at the same time.
In a 110 you would do infinitly better to manuver with the goal of getting a shot at your opponent yourself, rather than manuvering with the goal to give your gunner a shot. Any 1 round you land on him is at least 12 times (roughly) more effective than any 1 round your gunner lands.
-
Actually skyguns, most don't use the tail guns in a 110 or a stuka for the simple reason that they're ineffective, not that they can't manuver and shoot at the same time.
In a 110 you would do infinitly better to manuver with the goal of getting a shot at your opponent yourself, rather than manuvering with the goal to give your gunner a shot. Any 1 round you land on him is at least 12 times (roughly) more effective than any 1 round your gunner lands.
Nope, it is because they can't manuever, I am sure that if at least they give is the option of using the stick to completly controll the A/C while you use the mouse control the gunner, you would see a lot more people using the gunner position for defence as well as manuevering. ever played in some of those big servers of Il-2 1946?
EDIT: of course that you are talking about the 110, but think about the stuka, that japanese attacker and the Il2
-
What you suggest is not an option. Most people are flying HOTAS or using keyboard. You cannot shift the stick to left hand (most don't even allow left-hand use) and then switch to gun using mouse for your right hand.
Conversely you couldn't move the keyboard out of the way and move your mouse to your left hand while continuing to fly with your stick. Not to mention all your controls are reversed when you face backwards, but you couldn't hit crap with a left-handed mouse.
The problem is not that you cannot manuver. It is the weakness of the guns. Many planes with tail guns are in fact quite manuverable compared to the average MA attackers they will encounter. I have flown many scenarios and FSOs with another player as my tail gunner. That is the best setup, really. Having the ability to manuver is far better than relying on the gun. The gun is a last-ditch defense mechanism simply due to the way AH handles hits and bullet damage. Sometimes a "golden BB" could kill off an agressor. Or sometimes real pilots shirk tracer fire and break off. In AH that just isn't the case and pilots press for the kill with suicidal tendencies.
-
Hell, I can't even move my keyboard or joystick without getting out a screwdriver. I have my rig setup like a cocpit with the joystick in the middle and the keyboard mounted infront of me like a control pannel.
-
What you suggest is not an option. Most people are flying HOTAS or using keyboard. You cannot shift the stick to left hand (most don't even allow left-hand use) and then switch to gun using mouse for your right hand.
Conversely you couldn't move the keyboard out of the way and move your mouse to your left hand while continuing to fly with your stick. Not to mention all your controls are reversed when you face backwards, but you couldn't hit crap with a left-handed mouse.
The problem is not that you cannot maneuver. It is the weakness of the guns. Many planes with tail guns are in fact quite maneuverable compared to the average MA attackers they will encounter. I have flown many scenarios and FSOs with another player as my tail gunner. That is the best setup, really. Having the ability to manuver is far better than relying on the gun. The gun is a last-ditch defense mechanism simply due to the way AH handles hits and bullet damage. Sometimes a "golden BB" could kill off an agressor. Or sometimes real pilots shirk tracer fire and break off. In AH that just isn't the case and pilots press for the kill with suicidal tendencies.
I'm not saying they are not effective though. Truly the were BB guns but served at least some what of a purpose. The gunner would probably be firing for his life and to simulate that is what this wish is for do to the fact that its not always easy to get a gunner when everybody is occupied and to the fact that its nearly impossible to do both. As i said, theres a pilot and a gunners position. So why do I have to be the only man in the plane simulating for all?
-
I'm there. The trick is adjusting is such that it's realistic. Right now, just about anything with a tail gun usually doesn't, by dint of the pilot's preoccupation. Putting an AI gunner in there with deadly 1.5k accuracy is an unreasonable advantage to hand the 110 or SBD or 17 pilot. Still, I think it'd be pretty neat-o.
-
Following that logic, why shouldn't I get an AI gunner for my Tiger II? Why should I have to gun for my B-29's?
Theres no difference between the one and the other, yet you have drawn a line between them. If one isn't ok, doesn't that mean that the other isn't either?
-
Actually skyguns, most don't use the tail guns in a 110 or a stuka for the simple reason that they're ineffective, not that they can't manuver and shoot at the same time.
In a 110 you would do infinitly better to manuver with the goal of getting a shot at your opponent yourself, rather than manuvering with the goal to give your gunner a shot. Any 1 round you land on him is at least 12 times (roughly) more effective than any 1 round your gunner lands.
i understand that being a low caliber gun that they are nearly ineffective. But if I'm maneuvering and making a slow bank with a stuka for example and theres a plane on my six attempting to turn with me to focus his sights less than 300 out than that "BB gun" would be a prime defence but the problem is you cant maneuver just the same from your gunners position. So with putting a AI gunner in that seat you may maneuver easier. The BB gun may not kill him. But a hit in the oil is all i need to buy time to live and escape.
-
it is possible tho, to set up so you can control at the same time you use the mouse for the case no one joins your plane, I still don't see why not have this option that you could just not use if... well if you don't want to use (mouse and joystick stuff)
What you suggest is not an option. Most people are flying HOTAS or using keyboard. You cannot shift the stick to left hand (most don't even allow left-hand use) and then switch to gun using mouse for your right hand.
-
Following that logic, why shouldn't I get an AI gunner for my Tiger II? Why should I have to gun for my B-29's?
Theres no difference between the one and the other, yet you have drawn a line between them. If one isn't ok, doesn't that mean that the other isn't either?
well you have complete control over your GV while you are gunning
EDIT: and control of the situation aswell
EDIT EDIT (lol): wait a sec! thinking about it... why not make it a option that you can unselect if you want. you could or not use the ai gunner as if the tank had actually more then one person but that could make you get exposed so it could be your choice on the hangar to disable it! it would be usefull for the gunner that is watching for AC but could expose you in some situations where the stupid AI could just fire at a target you are trying to stealth kill
-
i understand that being a low caliber gun that they are nearly ineffective. But if I'm maneuvering and making a slow bank with a stuka for example and theres a plane on my six attempting to turn with me to focus his sights less than 300 out than that "BB gun" would be a prime defence but the problem is you cant maneuver just the same from your gunners position. So with putting a AI gunner in that seat you may maneuver easier. The BB gun may not kill him. But a hit in the oil is all i need to buy time to live and escape.
Even if your guns were automated you would still do better dogfighting them with the goal of getting behind them. You get the same firepower down range as with your tail gunner, and if you're behind them, they physicly can't get a shot on you.
-
well you have complete control over your GV while you are gunning
EDIT: and control of the situation aswell
adding on to this, B29s are level bombers and much easier to gun for being at a constant speed and staying level. A tiger being a gv does not need the option because gameplay is MUCH different on the ground than the air.
-
of course it would'nt apply for freakin Flaks lol
-
You have no more controll of a tank while gunning than you do with a plane. You can turn the tank in either direction and speed up/slow down. You can do all this in a plane, AND you can turn on WEP while gunning too.
Like I said, no difference at all between the LOGIC. None, zero, zip. Some would just use it more than others, and thats true even between the planes you've listed.
If one is harmful to gameplay, and there is no difference in reasoning behind the two, why is the other OK?
-
Even if your guns were automated you would still do better dogfighting them with the goal of getting behind them. You get the same firepower down range as with your tail gunner, and if you're behind them, they physicly can't get a shot on you.
then there is no reason why to -1 this wish! :x
-
Even if your guns were automated you would still do better dogfighting them with the goal of getting behind them. You get the same firepower down range as with your tail gunner, and if you're behind them, they physically can't get a shot on you.
yes but your missing the point. Its a defence and of course will never be as deadly or accurate as your forward fixed guns. But i have a gunners position that deserves a gunner. I'm too preoccupied maneuvering and staying alive.
-
personally after all this debate I am +1 to this wish if you had the option to turn it on/off in the hangar before your sortie, counting for anyhting that has gunner seats except for flak
-
You have no more controll of a tank while gunning than you do with a plane. You can turn the tank in either direction and speed up/slow down. You can do all this in a plane, AND you can turn on WEP while gunning too.
Like I said, no difference at all between the LOGIC. None, zero, zip. Some would just use it more than others, and that's true even between the planes you've listed.
If one is harmful to gameplay, and there is no difference in reasoning behind the two, why is the other OK?
Its not the same... similar may be but not the same. A tank your going 35-20 mph. A aircraft your going 200, 300, 400 mph. It does not make any sense applying this to gvs. You have a tank commander and can maneuver your tank just fine being at your speed and not having to worry about climb and decent and firing the main gun and BB guns just fine.
-
yes but your missing the point. Its a defence and of course will never be as deadly or accurate as your forward fixed guns. But i have a gunners position that deserves a gunner. I'm too preoccupied maneuvering and staying alive.
If I can do it, so can you. I've had a good fight with an A6M and an F4U-D before in my Ju-87. I've even shot down a typhoon and a spitfire in a fight with a P-51, spit 9, and typhoon. Manuver to defeat his guns solution, jump to the gunner, and fire at him as he tries to salvage his shot.
It would be more usefull to a plane true, but the logic and reasoning behind it (I can't fly/drive and shoot at the same time) is the same.
And you still haven't answered my earlier question of how the planes the auto-ack shoots down would be treated.
-
If I can do it, so can you. I've had a good fight with an A6M and an F4U-D before in my Ju-87. I've even shot down a typhoon and a spitfire in a fight with a P-51, spit 9, and typhoon. Manuver to defeat his guns solution, jump to the gunner, and fire at him as he tries to salvage his shot.
It would be more usefull to a plane true, but the logic and reasoning behind it (I can't fly/drive and shoot at the same time) is the same.
And you still haven't answered my earlier question of how the planes the auto-ack shoots down would be treated.
logic also says that another body in the plane even if its AI is better than one live body trying to operate all.
plane auto ack would never be as effective as a live person being there but will still serve its perpose. HTC and aces high community can decide the overall efficiency of the guns and surely can be nerfed or boosted as needed.
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
Seriously. Would You gun for a Stuka? Would you (almost) waste your time?
He wasnt asking for an über autoack. I bet it would be inferior to an average gunner. If you gun in your d3a, stuka, b5n, tbm, 110c, boston sbd etc. youre dead in 5 seconds. The only exception is the a20g what has a bit more firepower in its back turret.
I give it a +1. Thos planes are already hangar queens, i would give them a chance, if they are already carrying that weight.
This is dead on.
The OP is right and almost everyone else is wrong. His idea has been suggested before I believe and is the best way to model it for all the reasons he stated.
-lag issues with joins
-flying (and maneuvering) while trying to gun is cumbersome, illogical, and unrealistic. And gunning in a vehicle is NOT the same thing. vehicles can only go left or right, aircraft MUST use climbs and dives also to successfully evade the enemy and they dont have trees to hide behind.
-It doesnt have to be programmed as a highly accurate gun, just enough to be a deterrence.
-gunning heavy bombers is not the same either, heavies have a dozen guns for defense.
+1
-
This is dead on.
The OP is right and almost everyone else is wrong. His idea has been suggested before I believe and is the best way to model it for all the reasons he stated.
-gunning heavy bombers is not the same either, heavies have a dozen guns for defense.
+1
and drones
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rules #4, #6
-
See Rules #4, #6
-
It will be a near non-issue for anything without a .50 (only 3 airplanes in this category actually have one). People will just ignore the 7.92's tickling their plane for the 3 second it requires to knock his wing off.
-
It will be a near non-issue for anything without a .50 (only 3 airplanes in this category actually have one). People will just ignore the 7.92's tickling their plane for the 3 second it requires to knock his wing off.
Yes, but, the pilot gets to fly and maneuver with focus as well. I think it'll make the entire equation a lot more interesting, even if the outcome is generally the same. As someone else pointed out, you still want to save your radiator and engine oil. There is also the annoying possibility of the pw.
-
If PW's and engine kills are too prevelant (because the AI gunner will always aim for the center of your plane and is more consistant than an actual person in the gun) then we'll have to either turn down the damage the guns do or just completly nerf the accuracy, since it could provide these planes with better protection to the upper 6 o'clock (the most common area of attack) than they should.
-
Muzik is correct, along with the OP. In my eyes, anyways.
They aren't asking for a wicked accurate gunner in the back/turret of the plane. They would like for there to be, in effect, an actual crew member INSIDE the plane with them.
In my opinion, it would give some of the real hangar queens (87, SBD, things like that) a chance to be more widely used in-game.
I would like for this to be put into effect, especially as I can only fly offline, and sitting on the drones' six gets REALLY boring after a while. I want some action with drones, as well as in my plane. I want to be able to drive my B-29 right up beside that Ki-67, and let loose with all guns, while still keeping even with the drone.
Or something.
-
.otto AC=8 RG=d8 RT=0.5 B+=2-4 B++=4 B-=0.5
-
.otto AC=8 RG=d8 RT=0.5 B+=2-4 B++=4 B-=0.5
:confused:
-
:lol
-
- 1 + - 100 + -200 = ?
-
I would like for this to be put into effect, especially as I can only fly offline, and sitting on the drones' six gets REALLY boring after a while. I want some action with drones, as well as in my plane. I want to be able to drive my B-29 right up beside that Ki-67, and let loose with all guns, while still keeping even with the drone.
Or something.
have you tried any offline missions? you can have some action with those, you can make your mission too!
-
Some will recognize this.
OTTO_ACCURACY (1 - 10) - A general accuracy setting, this affects the otto's accuracy, reaction time and tracking rates.
OTTO_RANGE (1 - 12 (x 100yds)) - Determines the range at which the otto will commence firing. As different weapons have different exit velocities, this range is adjusted slightly per weapon. Note that although otto range can be extended to D12, the chances for even the highest accuracy level otto of achieving hits are significant only for ranges D8 and under.
OTTO_BURSTON_BASE (0.5 - 4.0 (secs)) - This parameter helps determine the length of a burst. It is divided by the target distance so the burst length will increase as the target gets nearer. Increasing this value increases the volume of fire put out by the otto, at the cost of more ammunition expended.
OTTO_BURSTON_MAX (0.5 - 4.0 (secs)) - This works with the parameter above in determining burst length. It is multiplied by a hit ratio, so the effect is that the otto will increase burst time as more hits are achieved. Increasing this value increases the chances of inflicting damage on targets, again at the cost of more ammunition expended.
OTTO_BURSTOFF_BASE (0.5 - 4.0 (secs)) - This determines the length of time the otto pauses in between bursts. It is proportional to the target distance, so that the pause in between bursts will decrease as the target gets nearer. Increasing this value will produce longer pauses between bursts.
OTTO_RETARGET_TIME (0.0 - 10.0 (secs)) - This determines the frequency at which the otto will look for new targets. The value is the time in between new target evaluation, so, for example, setting this value to 5.0 will mean the otto will wait 5 seconds between each search for targets.
-
Warbirds used an "Otto" that was deadly accurate.
-
:aok
-
- 1 + - 100 + -200 = ?
That would be -301, if my pathetic math skills are correct.
-
nope
-
nope
k now your just being silly
-
LAst night I killed a couple of low 88's on a nice straight dead six approach. I cut throttle on the second one and got in nice and close just so I wouldn't waste much ammo. 7.92's were passing over my head. He could've pooped down to the ventral gun but he didn't. It was a no-talent kill - which I'll take. However, loser birds like 88's, Stukas, 110s, B5n, Dauntless, Betty, etc, could really use the help and it'd make for better realism.
-
You don't move. You never have moved. All that the different possitions do is let you 'take control' of a different person, so to speak. Your pilot never climbs into the gunner's seat of a 110, you just switch to the gunner's perspective and shoot his gun.
Alright, if the AI gun has toejam accuracy, limited ammo (auto ack clearly doesn't) fine, and it can't fire below the ground, it would probably be fine. But, I still don't see much of a point. If you're to the point that your manuvers are to give the gun a shot, rather than to get your guns a shot, then you're screwed either way.
But personally, I see it as no different than hiding in auto ack. If this is added, I'll have to empty the tail guns on my 110 during climb-out. Wouldn't be fair if someone's sortie ended sooner than it might have because I was a wuss and didn't empty my auto-ack.
You totally missed the point...it went over your head, took a dump and you went, "huh?"
The point of his request is that when your maneuvering to avoid being blown out of the sky, an AI gunner will shoot your tail gun for you...like said in the last few pages it wont be accurate, but it will have a chance to damage the attacking plane.
Your plane has more than one crew member, so why should you have to act as all of them? I mean if my 110 has a crew of two and I am in the pilot seat, isn't it unrealistic that my gunner is not firing back? I mean is my partner asleep?
-
There are no distractions if there is more than a single crew member flying, controlling throttles, and such at the same time.
Random question, but why isn't it possible for heavies/planes with gun positions to shoot positions on the ground? And can it be turned off offline?
-
I think there should be "auto gunners" in planes that carry a gunner, maybe not the heavies...but for a kate, sbd, stuka, bf110 etc. I am not talking about laser accurate, or, whatever the guy who said you get more engine and cockpit shots because it shoots at the center of the airplane (HUH?) But the point is that there was some sort of risk involved attacking a plane with a gunner, I'd like to see that here.
-
The point of his request is that when your maneuvering to avoid being blown out of the sky, an AI gunner will shoot your tail gun for you...like said in the last few pages it wont be accurate, but it will have a chance to damage the attacking plane.
Your plane has more than one crew member, so why should you have to act as all of them? I mean if my 110 has a crew of two and I am in the pilot seat, isn't it unrealistic that my gunner is not firing back? I mean is my partner asleep?
You can gun and maneuver at the same time now. You probably cannot maneuver like you want to maneuver but you can maneuver.
You need to manipulate your rudder to turn and your throttle and auto-climb or dive, auto-speed, to go up and down.
Have you ever had a gunner on board while maneuvering? Hear the whines from the back seat that he can't hit anything because you keep moving around?
If you can't get a gunner, do your own shooting. What you want is something that will hit your attacker while you do loops and rolls.
wrongway
-
You can gun and maneuver at the same time now. You probably cannot maneuver like you want to maneuver but you can maneuver.
What you want is something that will hit your attacker while you do loops and rolls.
wrongway
yup, because you cant do both and still do well.
-
yup, because you cant do both and still do well.
So, to be specific, you wouldn't be happy with a player as a gunner either. You want an "AI, won't miss" gunner.
wrongway
-
So, to be specific, you wouldn't be happy with a player as a gunner either. You want an "AI, won't miss" gunner.
wrongway
Never said that, and a AI gunner if you had been reading the previous post on this thread, would never be as good as a joined gunner.
-
Wrongway,
he meant when you manipulate with the rudder, that only makes you an even easyer kill due to the larger area the opponent can see from you.
-
+1,000,000 to this.
I love my SBD. But it seems like whenever I get off the CV, every red dot starts gunning for me. :joystick:
-
then don't fly where there are red dots. don't mean to be capt obvious but hey :devil
-
then don't fly where there are red dots. don't mean to be capt obvious but hey :devil
Well that's not always a option Buddy :rolleyes: defending a base, saving a CV...
-
then don't fly where there are red dots. don't mean to be capt obvious but hey :devil
Not to be Captain Obvious but, doing this would negate the entire purpose of the game... " A War rages online" is how the commercial goes, not, "a bunch of guys maneuver away from each other online" ...
I and a countryman saw an F4u come in the other day. He came in overhead and dove on me. His pass was fairly easily dodged. We had a few seconds of maneuvering for advantage. He then quit the field, more or less. Mind, he wasn't 1:2. My countryman was in range for radio only. I was in a G-14 and, imj, most Corsair pilots ought to be able to hack that 1:1. Hell, I've seen Pony and Dora drivers furball - and they don't have combat uberflaps like the Hawg. If I used my subscription thus, I'd be tempted to throw it away. A little later, a lone C-47 came by. As I closed on it's six and cut throttle so that I could six-camp and save ammo, I though, "bet he'd really appreciate an F4u escort right about now" <boom>.
-
Not to be Captain Obvious but, doing this would negate the entire purpose of the game... " A War rages online" is how the commercial goes, not, "a bunch of guys maneuver away from each other online" ...
I and a countryman saw an F4u come in the other day. He came in overhead and dove on me. His pass was fairly easily dodged. We had a few seconds of maneuvering for advantage. He then quit the field, more or less. Mind, he wasn't 1:2. My countryman was in range for radio only. I was in a G-14 and, imj, most Corsair pilots ought to be able to hack that 1:1. Hell, I've seen Pony and Dora drivers furball - and they don't have combat uberflaps like the Hawg. If I used my subscription thus, I'd be tempted to throw it away. A little later, a lone C-47 came by. As I closed on it's six and cut throttle so that I could six-camp and save ammo, I though, "bet he'd really appreciate an F4u escort right about now" <boom>.
This has little to do with anything... the point is, until a position is occupied by a actually joined player, it will be occupied by and AI gunner. It can be placed on or off and only fires short burst. This is NOT some aimbot. The chances of the AI killing anything is slim but will serve as some sort of defence...
-
Warbirds used an "Otto" that was deadly accurate.
And Otto didn't make it to the AH line up...the OP should ask himself why HiTech didn't put a feature in his first game in his second.
ack-ack
-
And Otto didn't make it to the AH line up...the OP should ask himself why HiTech didn't put a feature in his first game in his second.
ack-ack
well its obvious if it was deadly accurate. But I'm not asking for that. All i want is the rear gun to shoot short, inaccurate burst. You would imagine if the pilot was maneuvering for his life with and enemy on his six in a SBD for argument sake, that the rear gunner would at least attempt to fire at the bogey though very inaccurately do to Gs.. Don't expect it to be better than a Joined gunner, expect it to be better to nothing though.
-
+1 I also wouldn't mind having AI gunners in the offline drones, just for target pratice. :D
xmas is coming i'll contribute to your comeback account as a gesture of good will. not as funny anymore to make fun of your non-member status :).
semp
-
hitech has answered this question many times with the same answer as the multiple gunners.
NO!!! and he even spelled it correctly for a change :furious.
semp
-
hitech has answered this question many times with the same answer as the multiple gunners.
NO!!! and he even spelled it correctly for a change :furious.
semp
Its not like I'm asking for Uber gunners in all bombers. You try gunning and flying at the same time in a SBD or getting somebody to join you. Its just a placetaker until you can get a join.
-
Its not like I'm asking for Uber gunners in all bombers. You try gunning and flying at the same time in a SBD or getting somebody to join you. Its just a placetaker until you can get a join.
dude not my decision to make but i believe it was how the game was coded. it was the same reason for not adding mutiple gunners. we had the choice of only one. ai gunners, 1 gunner or mutiple gunners with unslaved guns.
semp
-
dude not my decision to make but i believe it was how the game was coded. it was the same reason for not adding multiple gunners. we had the choice of only one. AI gunners, 1 gunner or multiple gunners with enslaved guns.
semp
interesting, wish i could get specifics on why from hitech...
-
Just say NO to Otto!
-
interesting, wish i could get specifics on why from hitech...
because that's how the game is coded. he has mentioned several times to choose one way or the other. and to be honest with you changing the code to not allow 999 to gun would be a great idea but we would lose one of the most respected guys in ah.
so -1
semp