Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Xavier on April 28, 2014, 03:23:12 PM
-
Short version: I think the GV/AC play is not balanced, and would be much more fun for both ground vehicles and aircraft if some steps were taken :cheers:.
Long version: the above plus some argumentation and personal opinions.
I play both GVs and aircraft, anti-tank aircraft too. Exploring both worlds let see some things that I consider to be damaging the gameplay.
1. Indestructible trees. You have a tank on your sights, he's moving, you try a tracking shot. Too bad, the shell touches the edge of a nearby tree and explodes. Personally, I think that only the tree trunk should stop your shells.
2. GV icon range. I see this as completely unfair, seeing how GVs have a commander view and can see an aircraft's range up to 6K. It really does become an issue when both AA platforms (wirbel and osti) have 1.5K+ range.
3. Commander position. I have no problem with this position as it is, but I don't think a player should be able to shoot from it. It's gamey enough that you can both aim and drive from this position, simultaneously and instantaneously. Also, most maingunned aircraft are shot from this position.
4. Lack of F3 view on Il-2 and Ju-87G2. I can understand it in the Hurri IID, but on those? They can only be used on tankbusting and little else, so why shouldn't they have it?
5. Lack of tank-busting aircraft. We have a huge variety of fighters and bombers, while the tank busting airplanes are only represented by 3 examples. Why? The Hs-129 would be a nice addition, but it'd be even easier to give our Bf-110G2 the Bk 3.7 pack.
Right now we have tank-busting aircraft that are absolutely unable to perform their historical roles and attack approaches. That is caused by a 1K icon range for GVs, a commander position making maingunning easier and AA platforms unidentified until you're well within gun range. Until some things change, those three aircraft will remain hangar queens and we'll keep seeing Lancstukas :old: .
Let the games begin! :rofl
-
Il-2s don't seem to actually be hangar queens....
-
Short version: I think the GV/AC play is not balanced, and would be much more fun for both ground vehicles and aircraft if some steps were taken :cheers:.
Long version: the above plus some argumentation and personal opinions.
I play both GVs and aircraft, anti-tank aircraft too. Exploring both worlds let see some things that I consider to be damaging the gameplay.
1. Indestructible trees. You have a tank on your sights, he's moving, you try a tracking shot. Too bad, the shell touches the edge of a nearby tree and explodes. Personally, I think that only the tree trunk should stop your shells.
2. GV icon range. I see this as completely unfair, seeing how GVs have a commander view and can see an aircraft's range up to 6K. It really does become an issue when both AA platforms (wirbel and osti) have 1.5K+ range.
3. Commander position. I have no problem with this position as it is, but I don't think a player should be able to shoot from it. It's gamey enough that you can both aim and drive from this position, simultaneously and instantaneously. Also, most maingunned aircraft are shot from this position.
4. Lack of F3 view on Il-2 and Ju-87G2. I can understand it in the Hurri IID, but on those? They can only be used on tankbusting and little else, so why shouldn't they have it?
5. Lack of tank-busting aircraft. We have a huge variety of fighters and bombers, while the tank busting airplanes are only represented by 3 examples. Why? The Hs-129 would be a nice addition, but it'd be even easier to give our Bf-110G2 the Bk 3.7 pack.
Right now we have tank-busting aircraft that are absolutely unable to perform their historical roles and attack approaches. That is caused by a 1K icon range for GVs, a commander position making maingunning easier and AA platforms unidentified until you're well within gun range. Until some things change, those three aircraft will remain hangar queens and we'll keep seeing Lancstukas :old: .
Let the games begin! :rofl
#1 Skuzzy already said that it would be too much information for everyone to process for that to happen. I was one of the ones who requested the same thing, and while I still support it, I understand the current limitations as to why it isn't here.
#2 My solution for this was 3k icon range (while in GV) for planes.
#3 Debatable.
#4 They are only used as tankbusting (for the most part) BECAUSE they don't have those F3 views.
#5 Wouldn't mind seeing that, but have patience.. they are workin on something big :aok
-
i've erased message--your wish have at
-
#4 They are only used as tankbusting (for the most part) BECAUSE they don't have those F3 views.
This is what I don't get. Why? How else would they be used if they had F3?
planes that carry bombs are tank busting aircraft.
And all planes with machine guns are fighters?
don't hit the trees
:uhoh
wirbs-osti's-m16's still have to hit the plane
The point stands. You don't know it's an AA platform until you're 1K out, within guns range. He saw you at 6K.
who else is gonna fire the guns
What about having only the gunner do it? You know, like they used to.
most tanks have a top turret machine gun for shootin troops and tanks and aircraft
And I think that should be the only one the commander could use.
il2 used to have f3 mode-they took it away--to me f3 mode makes it to gamey-they should take it off the a-20 as well
The F3 is gamey, but a commander view that lets you aim and shoot the main gun isn't? :confused:
they changed the gv icon range because it was too easy to drop bombs on gv's
Bombing GVs will always be easy.
i think you comment's is without merit.--but my opinion only
I also think that yours has no merit. But, of course, it's just my opinion.
-
1. Indestructible trees. You have a tank on your sights, he's moving, you try a tracking shot. Too bad, the shell touches the edge of a nearby tree and explodes. Personally, I think that only the tree trunk should stop your shells.
agreed
2. GV icon range. I see this as completely unfair, seeing how GVs have a commander view and can see an aircraft's range up to 6K. It really does become an issue when both AA platforms (wirbel and osti) have 1.5K+ range.
I like the AC to Gv icon range. I wish it were also applied to freindly AC to Gv icons
3. Commander position. I have no problem with this position as it is, but I don't think a player should be able to shoot from it. It's gamey enough that you can both aim and drive from this position, simultaneously and instantaneously. Also, most maingunned aircraft are shot from this position.
disagree
4. Lack of F3 view on Il-2 and Ju-87G2. I can understand it in the Hurri IID, but on those? They can only be used on tankbusting and little else, so why shouldn't they have it?
disagree both are effective although the IL2 should be made uber with the PTAB
5. Lack of tank-busting aircraft. We have a huge variety of fighters and bombers, while the tank busting airplanes are only represented by 3 examples. Why? The Hs-129 would be a nice addition, but it'd be even easier to give our Bf-110G2 the Bk 3.7 pack.
disagree we have the key tank busters
Until some things change, those three aircraft will remain hangar queens
disagree they are not hanger queens and indeed if the PTAB was added they would all perform well in their historical roles.
-
disagree both are effective although the IL2 should be made uber with the PTAB
disagree they are not hanger queens and indeed if the PTAB was added they would all perform well in their historical roles.
In an Il-2 you'll need several passes and firing under 200 yards to stand a chance. In the Stuka you can one-shot some tanks if you come very, very low, hit the armor at a 90º angle and again under 200 yards. Meanwhile you're a slow target, moving straight towards the tank at low level. Knowing that you need several passes for every single tank, the chances of being maingunned are quite big.
Can you dive on a tank to hit the top armor? Yes, but then again it's a very dangerous manouver in those aircraft and as historically accurate as the lancstukas.
-
In an Il-2 you'll need several passes and firing under 200 yards to stand a chance. In the Stuka you can one-shot some tanks if you come very, very low, hit the armor at a 90º angle and again under 200 yards. Meanwhile you're a slow target, moving straight towards the tank at low level. Knowing that you need several passes for every single tank, the chances of being maingunned are quite big.
Can you dive on a tank to hit the top armor? Yes, but then again it's a very dangerous manouver in those aircraft and as historically accurate as the lancstukas.
erased message--your wish have at it
-
there are players who can and do kill gv's in 1 pass in a il2-just becasue you can't doesent mean it can't be done.
p-51d is a fighter it has six .50cal machine guns--it also can carry 2 1000 pound bombs and 6 rockets..if a plane can't carry bombs than its usally considered a fighter only
And not all planes that carry bombs are tankbusters. I won't even discuss this.
Yes, some GVs can be killed with a single pass in a Il-2. But in most cases (moving vehicle turning, tracking you with the turret) you can't make a shot square enough and close enough. Try one-passing a T-34, for example.
-
i use a p-51d to kill gv's-like you said nuff said
-
In an Il-2 you'll need several passes and firing under 200 yards to stand a chance. In the Stuka you can one-shot some tanks if you come very, very low, hit the armor at a 90º angle and again under 200 yards. Meanwhile you're a slow target, moving straight towards the tank at low level. Knowing that you need several passes for every single tank, the chances of being maingunned are quite big.
Can you dive on a tank to hit the top armor? Yes, but then again it's a very dangerous manouver in those aircraft and as historically accurate as the lancstukas.
Coming in from above is exceptionally easy, and has proven to be one of the easiest ways to knock out a tank for me, even in the B-25H. This is with targets in trees or beside hills. Also, you are hitting the wrong parts of the tank if it takes you several passes to knock out anything in the Il-2, exception being the Tiger and King Tiger with toughness factors for the T-34's. The most ideal for me is from ABOVE and BEHIND.
When it comes to "main gunning" AC from a tank, I actually have most of my kills of AC from the gun site, not the commander view. If I spot an AC coming for me soon enough, I'll bring the gun to bare then use the gun site to take my shot. Though I have taken out AC from the commander view more than a couple of times, it's usually against ones that have closed to point blank range.
-
+1 x 5 for Xavier's wishes
-
Coming in from above is exceptionally easy, and has proven to be one of the easiest ways to knock out a tank for me, even in the B-25H. This is with targets in trees or beside hills. Also, you are hitting the wrong parts of the tank if it takes you several passes to knock out anything in the Il-2, exception being the Tiger and King Tiger with toughness factors for the T-34's. The most ideal for me is from ABOVE and BEHIND.
When it comes to "main gunning" AC from a tank, I actually have most of my kills of AC from the gun site, not the commander view. If I spot an AC coming for me soon enough, I'll bring the gun to bare then use the gun site to take my shot. Though I have taken out AC from the commander view more than a couple of times, it's usually against ones that have closed to point blank range.
Yes, hitting from above is better, but I wouldn't call it exceptionally easy against moving targets. And, as I said, it's absolutely historically inaccurate. Like dive bombing in a lancaster. In the Il-2 I don't bother shooting the sides unless it's a panzer, I always go for the rear. It's given me the best results.
I believe that the majority of players who main gun AC do it from the commander position, as it makes the job easier for a lot of people, specially tracking the target.
i use a p-51d to kill gv's-like you said nuff said
Using a very low level approach and shooting under 200 yards, just with guns? I'm sorry but I doubt you'll kill much GVs using that approach in a mustang.
-
i was gonna let this go----no man i drop bombs on gv's--although some playes have killed tanks with machine guns--diving down and hitting the hatch
-
You said you kill GVs like I said...so I guessed you did it the way I mentioned, not by dive-bombing. My bad. Still doesn't make the P-51D a tank buster.
-
Yes, hitting from above is better, but I wouldn't call it exceptionally easy against moving targets. And, as I said, it's absolutely historically inaccurate. Like dive bombing in a lancaster. In the Il-2 I don't bother shooting the sides unless it's a panzer, I always go for the rear. It's given me the best results.
I haven't been able to find a single example of a lone Il-2 killing even one actual tank with guns alone, yet alone multiple tanks.
I believe that the majority of players who main gun AC do it from the commander position, as it makes the job easier for a lot of people, specially tracking the target.[/quote[ You would be incorrect. This has been happening for as long as idiots have been using stupid attack profiles. It is in no way a new thing with the commander position.
Using a very low level approach and shooting under 200 yards, just with guns? I'm sorry but I doubt you'll kill much GVs using that approach in a mustang.
It didn't happen in Il-2's either, from what I can find. And the .50's are capable of penetrating the rear armor of a Panzer. Theoretically, its possible.
-
You said you kill GVs like I said...so I guessed you did it the way I mentioned, not by dive-bombing. My bad. Still doesn't make the P-51D a tank buster.
:furious well what the heck is your idea of a tank buster
-
Tank busting only works for the HurriD and StukaG, otherwise the low and slow approach of IL-2s and HS-129 simply will be shot down by tank cannons all day long.
I'd rather stick to flying an A-20 and dive bombing, although its far more fun to annoy tankers by flying an Il-2 around, when they track you - simply let the country men know and they can sneak up on the tanks, turret turns away - blast them.
Can be rewarding either way.
-
Tank busting only works for the HurriD and StukaG, otherwise the low and slow approach of IL-2s (...) simply will be shot down by tank cannons all day long.
:headscratch:
The Il-2 kills more tanks than both the Hurri D and the Ju-87G combined...
Why would you think the il-2 has to use the low&slow approach while the 87G does not?
-
4. Lack of F3 view on Il-2 .
They can only be used on tankbusting and little else, so why shouldn't they have it?
When the F3 mode was taken away I was not that thrilled it made hunting GV's harder & very hard to dogfight in them. I cant hit squat in F3 mode bombing or shooting. With practice & time I have become somewhat proficient in this aircraft & enjoy flying it now without F3 mode. Now trying to see enemy aircraft without an actual tail gunner in that tub of armour now that is another matter. :aok
Hence why the single seat version would help the pilot less armour plate blocking his views.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,321945.0.html
-
Also, you are hitting the wrong parts of the tank if it takes you several passes to knock out anything in the Il-2, exception being the Tiger and King Tiger with toughness factors for the T-34's. The most ideal for me is from ABOVE and BEHIND.
Well I went back several years and you have hardly killed anything with an IL2. My guess is like most everyone else when they took F3 away you stopped flying it.
When the F3 mode was taken away I was not that thrilled it made hunting GV's harder & very hard to dogfight in them. I cant hit squat in F3 mode bombing or shooting. With practice & time I have become somewhat proficient in this aircraft & enjoy flying it now without F3 mode. Now trying to see enemy aircraft without an actual tail gunner in that tub of armour now that is another matter. Thumbs UP!
Hence why the single seat version would help the pilot less armour plate blocking his views.
Im not getting into this again but its a laugh to think F3 was taken away due to the IL2 being so good at "dog fighting" in F3. :lol The game has turned into a GV game and it hasnt help its overall health.
-
Im not getting into this again but its a laugh to think F3 was taken away due to the IL2 being so good at "dog fighting" in F3. :lol The game has turned into a GV game and it hasnt help its overall health.
F3 mode was removed due to a select few on the BBS crying about losing 262's to GHI in overshoots that he pulled off in F3 mode. Take GV's away from the game now & watch it end in short order.
-
The game has turned into a GV game and it hasnt help its overall health.
One would expect the majority of players being in GV in a "GV game", and not in planes...
-
. My guess is like most everyone else when they took F3 away you stopped flying it.
for me, it wasn't the removal of F3, it was the reduction of icon range.
-
:furious well what the heck is your idea of a tank buster
A plane designed to bust tanks. Ju-87G2, Il-2, Hurricane MKIID. The P-51D is not a tank buster.
As I keep flying tank busters I see complaining on 200 about planes "ruining GV fights". I will never understand this mindset in a game centered on aviation. In a tank you can turn from the commander position to face an attacker in every pass, while also shooting him with turret and MG. Oh, and the plane won't see you until he's 1K out. If you still get killed by airplanes while enjoying those advantages, well, I'd strongly suggest other games like WoT. Air-to-ground action is expected in Aces High II, but it's being hindered more and more with every new version.
And remember that the wirbel and osti are unperked and extremely effective :old:
-
I would like to see tank rounds go through a tree leaf at least without exploding. :aok
-
I would like to add another point:
Let tank busters take off from GV bases. In small maps it's not a lot of trouble flying from a base to the nearest GV base, but in the big maps it's quite a hassle to fly for 15 minutes at ground level just to be maingunned in your first pass.
-
I would like to see tank rounds go through a tree leaf at least without exploding. :aok
Some can apparently manage it, usually you they combine it with being parked 1/2 mile from the spawn :bhead
-
but in the big maps it's quite a hassle to fly for 15 minutes at ground level just to be maingunned in your first pass.
Work on your attack profile.
-
Work on your attack profile.
Not easy when the tank just keeps turning to face you in every pass, tracking you from the commander position. Getting maingunned is just a matter of time, the Ju-87G2 isn't the quickest of rides.
-
Not easy when the tank just keeps turning to face you in every pass, tracking you from the commander position.
Vertical traverse is limited. Attack from above and use zoom to determine turret position. If he's trying to aim at you but you are outside of his max elevation, you are also save from being shot in the butt as you egress (unless you insist on flying straight & level after that). Of course that takes a tad more time to set up in the Il-2 and Ju-87G, but it's absolutely worth it. Of course, if it's indeed a remote location you did bring your tank buster to, you already will have some alt/E to work with.
It very much simliar to NOT attacking a bomber from the 6 o clock position in a fighter, but taking a few moments more time to setup a proper attack.
-
Vertical traverse is limited. Attack from above and use zoom to determine turret position. If he's trying to aim at you but you are outside of his max elevation, you are also save from being shot in the butt as you egress (unless you insist on flying straight & level after that). Of course that takes a tad more time to set up in the Il-2 and Ju-87G, but it's absolutely worth it. Of course, if it's indeed a remote location you did bring your tank buster to, you already will have some alt/E to work with.
It very much simliar to NOT attacking a bomber from the 6 o clock position in a fighter, but taking a few moments more time to setup a proper attack.
Not as easy as it sounds on a moving target. Yes, you can attack from the top to defeat the turret's maximum elevation, but then again both the Ju-87G2 and Il-2 aren't made for steep dives and quick recoveries. When a tanker can't hit you because you're coming from the top he'll usually turn the turret around to shoot you as you're recovering from the dive, or just fire a HE shell at the ground as you pass over him. I've been killed many times that way.
what I'm trying to say is that while a GV has plenty of options to evade an attack, a tank buster is made to be effective in a low, stable flight path and firing very close.
And I still can't see why the Il-2 and Ju-87G2 lack a F3 view. Or the 1K icon range, for that matter...
-
Not as easy as it sounds on a moving target. Yes, you can attack from the top to defeat the turret's maximum elevation, but then again both the Ju-87G2 and Il-2 aren't made for steep dives and quick recoveries. When a tanker can't hit you because you're coming from the top he'll usually turn the turret around to shoot you as you're recovering from the dive, or just fire a HE shell at the ground as you pass over him. I've been killed many times that way.
Only very few, very good tankers anticipate this and start moving their turret to the opposing side early enough. And even for those you can make things more difficult by immediately pulling up and turning (don't start too late doing this).
That way, I'm almost never killed by any tank gun. Being killed by a blast of a HE round in the ground is such a freak accident that I can't even remember the last time it happened (unlike kissing a tree on my way out... :uhoh). I had that happening maybe like 4-5 times in the Il-2 in total (untill I finally learned to adjust for it).
-
To put it simply Xavier, and this isn't meant as an attack or jab, you lack experience. Attacking using the historical profile WILL work, but it's WHEN to do it that you are missing on. Too soon and you will get main gunned, too late and your attack won't be any where near as effective. Coming in from above and behind has a more solid chance of either knocking out his turret and/or engine, if you don't end up knocking him out completely. Your egress is also as important as your setup. There will always be a chance that you'll get hit on the way out, but knowing when to turn off for egress will help your survival by a lot. Doing it too late leaves the tank time to try for a shot on you, and of course turning too soon spoils your chance in knocking out the tank.
You simply need more experience in attacking tanks. The argument you keep putting forth of, "not as easy as it sounds on a moving target", isn't going to cut it. Take notice of the terrain; trees, hills, etc. Then predict where he is going to go. I find that most tankers will turn down a hill vs turning up one because it gives em a bit more speed, which translates to being able to turn quicker. They will almost always go towards trees and buildings as well vs turning out into the open as well. Paying attention to the tanks movements will also tell you if an historical attack profile is going to be doable or not. When I first encounter the tank, I take notice of what he's doing and how he is doing it. My first attack run will be more of a test of the tanks skill rather than an actual attack. If he's oblivious or slow, it's all I usually need to knock him out in that first pass. If he's aware, he's going to show me how he will react when I make the next pass, which is my kill attempt. It's not always going to take just one pass. Sometimes, against someone who's fully aware and knows which side of his tank he needs to keep towards me, it will take me 2 or 3 passes before I finally have a shot. If he's giving me enough trouble, then I will track him so I have a kill shot on the next pass.
You just need to keep at it and you will eventually pick up on it. :aok
-
You're both right, and I'll keep trying to improve my approaches. I'm starting to like more the Hurri IID, as it's harder to get maingunned.
-
You're both right, and I'll keep trying to improve my approaches. I'm starting to like more the Hurri IID, as it's harder to get maingunned.
I remember when I switched from the Il-2 (with only 23mm) to the Hurri D, back then in 2007 ... I found it so much more difficult because of the increased precision required... and I augered a lot next to enemy tanks.
A habit that i didn't get rid of completely to this day :uhoh
-
F3 mode was removed due to a select few on the BBS crying about losing 262's to GHI in overshoots that he pulled off in F3 mode. Take GV's away from the game now & watch it end in short order.
Well whatever the reason to remove the F3 from the plane due to ONE person shooting down a "few" 262 persons in F3 is ridiculous. Anyone flying a 262 who gets shoot down by an IL2, in whatever mode and for whatever reason, deserves to lose their perks. The IL2 sucks as a dog fighter in F3 or F1 mode, and believe me I killed tanks by the score in them and was always dealing with fighters. Whatever "He whom we wont name's" trick was he'll take it with him to his grave. I saw his scores too and I never figured out how he did it.
Silly to change the game over one person. I suspect far more was behind it. Nowdays I dont much mess with tanks. I have no interest in dropping bombs on them.
-
The Hurri 2D is a very nice AC to start in. While limited in ammo, she will teach you how and where to place your shots as well as ammo conservation. She is a Saturn 5 when compared to the other TB's, so getting up and over your target will be easy. :aok
-
She is a Saturn 5 when compared to the other TB's, so getting up and over your target will be easy. :aok
I did a quick test: From takeoff to 3K with 50% fuel:
Hurricane D (16 minutes, using WEP) 1:21
Il-2 (17 minutes, no ords) 2:05
Ju-87G (24 minutes) 2:12
While the Hurri D is substantially quicker to altitude (no surprise), it still doesn't take that long for the two other tankbusters to get to a reasonable altitude to make it impractical. Like i said before, it's often the same lack of patience that makes fighters attacking bombers from 6 o clock for the most part.
Don't rush it! Take your time and kill! :old:
-
The Hurri 2D will build it's speed up quicker once to alt vs the other 2. :) And Lusche is right, don't rush it. As I mentioned before, it may take 2 or more passes before you finally get a good shot. :aok
-
Well whatever the reason to remove the F3 from the plane due to ONE person shooting down a "few" 262 persons in F3 is ridiculous. Anyone flying a 262 who gets shoot down by an IL2, in whatever mode and for whatever reason, deserves to lose their perks. The IL2 sucks as a dog fighter in F3 or F1 mode, and believe me I killed tanks by the score in them and was always dealing with fighters. Whatever "He whom we wont name's" trick was he'll take it with him to his grave. I saw his scores too and I never figured out how he did it.
Silly to change the game over one person. I suspect far more was behind it. Nowdays I dont much mess with tanks. I have no interest in dropping bombs on them.
F3 was not removed because of one player shot down a ME 262, it was removed because it was being used more as a point defense fighter than as an attack plane. Before the removal of F3, it was far more common to see an Il2 flying low DEFCAP over their base than being used in the ground support role shooting up tanks. Now that F3 has been removed from the IL2, it's being used more in its traditional role than it was before.
ack-ack
-
F3 was not removed because of one player shot down a ME 262, it was removed because it was being used more as a point defense fighter than as an attack plane. Before the removal of F3, it was far more common to see an Il2 flying low DEFCAP over their base than being used in the ground support role shooting up tanks. Now that F3 has been removed from the IL2, it's being used more in its traditional role than it was before.
ack-ack
I would like to know who lost a 262 to an IL-2 which would of started this rumor, so I can ask just how he lost a 262 to an Il-2 if it wasn't a Ho shot.
Sounds like a really good story that probably got twisted 15 times but never the less, funny.
-
To put it simply Xavier, and this isn't meant as an attack or jab, you lack experience. Attacking using the historical profile WILL work, but it's WHEN to do it that you are missing on. Too soon and you will get main gunned, too late and your attack won't be any where near as effective. Coming in from above and behind has a more solid chance of either knocking out his turret and/or engine, if you don't end up knocking him out completely. Your egress is also as important as your setup. There will always be a chance that you'll get hit on the way out, but knowing when to turn off for egress will help your survival by a lot. Doing it too late leaves the tank time to try for a shot on you, and of course turning too soon spoils your chance in knocking out the tank.
You simply need more experience in attacking tanks. The argument you keep putting forth of, "not as easy as it sounds on a moving target", isn't going to cut it. Take notice of the terrain; trees, hills, etc. Then predict where he is going to go. I find that most tankers will turn down a hill vs turning up one because it gives em a bit more speed, which translates to being able to turn quicker. They will almost always go towards trees and buildings as well vs turning out into the open as well. Paying attention to the tanks movements will also tell you if an historical attack profile is going to be doable or not. When I first encounter the tank, I take notice of what he's doing and how he is doing it. My first attack run will be more of a test of the tanks skill rather than an actual attack. If he's oblivious or slow, it's all I usually need to knock him out in that first pass. If he's aware, he's going to show me how he will react when I make the next pass, which is my kill attempt. It's not always going to take just one pass. Sometimes, against someone who's fully aware and knows which side of his tank he needs to keep towards me, it will take me 2 or 3 passes before I finally have a shot. If he's giving me enough trouble, then I will track him so I have a kill shot on the next pass.
You just need to keep at it and you will eventually pick up on it. :aok
This is great advice on how to do it in ah, but they didn't have to do it like that in ww2 because the tankers were looking through a scope when they fired (at ground targets) not "commander view."
Tank busters like those in this discussion did not need that diving tactic in ww2.
The ability to fire from commander view should be removed.
-
I think that shooting planes from the commander view is a myth. I am fairly sure most players shoot from the sight. People were dying from the main gun long before the commanders position
-
I think that shooting planes from the commander view is a myth. I am fairly sure most players shoot from the sight. People were dying from the main gun long before the commanders position
All I know is that back when I tanked on a regular basis, I couldn't reliably hit a tank at anything beyond point blank range from the commanders view. The idea that some are consistently tracking an aircraft going 250mph at 600yds from the commander position is frankly just laughable, sir.
-
I would like to know who lost a 262 to an IL-2 which would of started this rumor, so I can ask just how he lost a 262 to an Il-2 if it wasn't a Ho shot.
Sounds like a really good story that probably got twisted 15 times but never the less, funny.
This is the thread that started it.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,302259.0.html
-
All I know is that back when I tanked on a regular basis, I couldn't reliably hit a tank at anything beyond point blank range from the commanders view. The idea that some are consistently tracking an aircraft going 250mph at 600yds from the commander position is frankly just laughable, sir.
And yet it's reasonable to believe they are able to track the same aircraft from the sight? :confused:
-
my best anti aircraft from T34/85 was 18 kills I think mostly B25's. well before the commander view existed.
*whenever that might have been
-
And yet it's reasonable to believe they are able to track the same aircraft from the sight? :confused:
Let me rephrase, I spoke poorly. Its unreasonable to believe they are accurately aiming from the commanders position. Commanders position is most likely used for simple tracking of the target, while the gunner position is used for firing.
-
I killed a Stuka today from the main gun, not before he turreted me, must have just got the round off as he fired, I was in the commander position :old:
-
I killed a Stuka today from the main gun, not before he turreted me, must have just got the round off as he fired, I was in the commander position :old:
Two questions. How close was he, and can you reliably repeat the process? Because that is what is at issue here.
Its not at all unrealistic to fire from the commanders position, since all you have to do is tell the gunner to fire. Its not at all unrealistic to rough aim from the commanders position, since you can tell the gunner to slew the turret left and right, and elevate or depress the gun.
Hell, Erwin hit my storch with the M3 75mm GMC from about 3k out according to him "half aimed". I guarantee the odds of that shot happening again exceed 1,000,000:1, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, or will never happen again. I've done the same thing before myself, although it was on a B-17.
-
Two questions. How close was he, and can you reliably repeat the process? Because that is what is at issue here.
Its not at all unrealistic to fire from the commanders position, since all you have to do is tell the gunner to fire. Its not at all unrealistic to rough aim from the commanders position, since you can tell the gunner to slew the turret left and right, and elevate or depress the gun.
Hell, Erwin hit my storch with the M3 75mm GMC from about 3k out according to him "half aimed". I guarantee the odds of that shot happening again exceed 1,000,000:1, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, or will never happen again. I've done the same thing before myself, although it was on a B-17.
I once hit an il2 that was 800-1000 ft in the air, 4k away going full speed in my m4. He was at my 9 0 clock, never been able to do that again :lol I wonder if I have the film.
-
I once climbed a hill on an angle with an M4, while a Jug at 10k tried to dive straight down on me, when he was around 3k I fired and blew him up.
Can't remember if it was Tull or Hooter that was there that day, but there is a reason I always tanked on hills - for one its a hull down position and two, if idiots want to bomb me, I simply back down the hill so my barrel can elevate higher.
Unfortunately I've never been lucky as that, partially due to the P-47 trying to dive straight down helped me.
-
With the NS-37 set to 650, I have snap shot everything from 262 to Storch 800-1000. Mostly luck, but you need to know the drop and estimate your 100mph radiis correctly. Otherwise even the Storch fly's through the dispersion field.
-
Two questions. How close was he, and can you reliably repeat the process? Because that is what is at issue here.
Its not at all unrealistic to fire from the commanders position, since all you have to do is tell the gunner to fire. Its not at all unrealistic to rough aim from the commanders position, since you can tell the gunner to slew the turret left and right, and elevate or depress the gun.
Hell, Erwin hit my storch with the M3 75mm GMC from about 3k out according to him "half aimed". I guarantee the odds of that shot happening again exceed 1,000,000:1, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, or will never happen again. I've done the same thing before myself, although it was on a B-17.
He was close, 2-400m off flying directly down the barrel, that is not an unrealistic shot, tankers tracking fast moving aircraft and hitting them from a kilometre or more is simply unrealistic, although not impossible.The simple fact that as with every other aspect of the game in comparison with real life, we get to practice each move ad infinitum if we so choose :old:
-
Every main gun kill on plane I have had I did from the sight. Only crossing shots were slow storches. Everything else was coming basically straight at or away from me. Its gamey for sure, but upping a formation of B-17s and dropping multiple tons of bombs from 1000' to kill one or two GVs probably wasn't that common in WWII either. :D
-
The very first kill I had on a plane in a tank was many years ago on the old AK Pizza map when I used my main gun looking through the sights and shot down VOSS' IL2 coming straight the barrel of my gun.
ack-ack
-
I think that shooting planes from the commander view is a myth. I am fairly sure most players shoot from the sight. People were dying from the main gun long before the commanders position
Thats funny I used nothing but the commanders View to shoot down aircrafts. Granted it takes far more skill to learn to use, but it can be accomplished and once you learn the ballistic drop - you can pick a plane out a good 2-3k away without a problem.
-
I think that shooting planes from the commander view is a myth. I am fairly sure most players shoot from the sight. People were dying from the main gun long before the commanders position
^^^ this... Every time I've main gunned an aircraft it's been from the sight. With the fact that you only get 1 shot per run on your tank, it's imperative to make that shot count. Personally don't think it's wise to potentially waste that one shot from the commanders position.
:salute Nishizawa
-
2 things, Xavier, you come in way to low of an attack, I've watched you all day today at TT. and as for mainguning, I've killed so many aircraft from the gunsight I've long since stopped counting, i think anyone who was around before the command position probably does it this way, we have been doing it since we have had GV's in the game I'm guessing. now with that said, i think it sucks. its unrealistic and way to damned easy to do. and if aircraft cant see AA, why does AA see the aircraft with a big red neon sign?
-
2 things, Xavier, you come in way to low of an attack, I've watched you all day today at TT. and as for mainguning, I've killed so many aircraft from the gunsight I've long since stopped counting, i think anyone who was around before the command position probably does it this way, we have been doing it since we have had GV's in the game I'm guessing. now with that said, i think it sucks. its unrealistic and way to damned easy to do. and if aircraft cant see AA, why does AA see the aircraft with a big red neon sign?
Yes, I munched a few trees because of that. At first there weren't so many tanks at TT, so I dived from 1-2K to hit the top armor. But as more tanks came and some people upped AA, I had to fly really low during my passes to come undetected. I've Been trying at TT all the TB aircraft and the 410 with BK5, now I'm only taking the Il-2.
The Hurri is the fastest and turns quite well, I even got a P-39 kill on it at TT. But it doesn't have much ammo and you can only one-pass tanks hitting from the top or really close from the side/rear, at least that's what I've experienced. The Ju-87 takes forever to climb to TT, but has the best penetration and can one-shot many tanks. What I don't like is the ammo count and that you're a slow, lumbering target. The 410 can one-shot most tanks with ease, but the turn radius is quite big and the slats open at the most unfortunate times and mess up the shots!
The Il-2 with the NS37 has great ballistics, and can kill the most common tanks in one pass shooting to the side, rear or top. The ammo count is great, in a sortie I killed 7 tanks and I still had ammo left! It climbs like a pregnant whale, but with a little use of flaps the instantaneous turn isn't really bad. So far it's my TB of choice :x .
Approaching the target with care I'm avoiding getting maingunned more and more. Yesterday I destroyed 29 tanks and 2 aircraft at TT while being maingunned about 3 or 4 times. I'll try to reduce it even more, what I've seen to work best is passing over the target at low level to see where the turret's pointing, turn at 1K and verify at full zoom that the turret isn't tracking me. If it isn't, I continue the pass and open fire at 400 yards.
What I can't avoid is flack. When I'm passing over them and see the icon they're already firing at me, and the Il-2 isn't the quickest ride out there, so you'll stay within range for some good seconds.
Playing extensively on TT yesterday I saw quite a number of players complaining about "planes on TT". Am I missing something here? It seems like some players don't want aircraft at all in here, I could understand it in other games but not in a flight simulator. Is this the reason the icon range was changed? To get into TT you have to climb a minimum of 12K, yet some players were asking for taller mountains so planes couldn't get in. Why?
-
Playing extensively on TT yesterday I saw quite a number of players complaining about "planes on TT". Am I missing something here? It seems like some players don't want aircraft at all in here, I could understand it in other games but not in a flight simulator. Is this the reason the icon range was changed? To get into TT you have to climb a minimum of 12K, yet some players were asking for taller mountains so planes couldn't get in. Why?
Some people tank, some people want to Fly. After all Aces High is classed as a Simulator. Some tankers don't like being bombed, driving for 20-25 minutes only to get blown apart by someone that comes over with a few eggs or rockets. At least when you are at 15k you have plenty of ways to escape another enemy fighter, in a ground vehicle you can only "Ditch". It gets frustrating and annoying to kill one person and have them so mad 10 minutes later they come back with bombs.
Icon Range was changed because ground vehicles could have Icons while the pilot was 4-5k up, big fat icons on a ground vehicle thats trying to hide under trees is a little "gamey".
People are idiots "taller mountains!! I want to camp my spawn without being egged!" They want the game easier to fill their needs. Don't like planes in Tank town ask a squad mate to fly CAP over it, Bombs don't help with ACM to well, problem solved.
-
People are idiots "shortermountains!! I want my easy kills on defenseless targets sitting still distracted by a spawn battle!" They want the game easier to fill their needs. Don't like having to work for your kills? Don't care to put in the time to learn ACM? Bomb tanks,, problem solved.
Fixed
:salute Nishizawa
-
Fixed
:salute Nishizawa
LOL Nish +1
-
tanks are targets for airplanes.
that's just the way it is.