Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Widewing on January 14, 2002, 02:18:36 PM
-
Over the weekend, I ventured into that maniacal place called the Main Arena for the first time.;)
I discovered a few things that struck me as, well, wierd.
Flying an N1K2, I made a head-on run at an La-7. We both opened fire at about 1k and neither of us flinched. My last view was of the Lavochkin's engine just feet ahead, when there was the expected explosion, followed by the message, "you have been killed" (no toejam Sherlock). This is where it gets wierd. It appears that the La-7 survived and the pilot got credit for a victory. Now, it's possible to have blown up my aircraft, but at a distance of just a few feet, it is not possible to avoid the wreckage, especially when the closing speed was near 700 mph.
My opinion is that the wreckage should not vaporize, and should still be modeled as a solid mass. Without a doubt, that big engine is still intact and it will do major damage should you run into it. Anyone experience this before?
Second wierdness:
What is that Death Ray installed in the tail of the B-26? There is one hell of a lot more power in those two .50s than would be found in the real world. Compare the AH modeling with that in EAW.
Another suggestion: Padlock, I never liked it in other sims and I don't like it here. I think it odd that you can find yourself looking at the cockpit floor, should the padlocked enemy end up below your belly. Again, EAW has a padlock feature, but they also provide a far more useful (and in my opinion, accurate) method. Once you select a target, and it moves from you forward field of view, an icon in the form of a X is placed on the edge of the viewing screen, which shows you the relative relationship of the enemy to your plane. For me ( and many others I've spoken with) it provides a really useful aid to situational awareness. Essentially, it returns to you the peripheral vison that you would otherwise have lost because the forward view is much like wearing blinders. That X tells if the enemy is to the right or left, above or below or even behind you. This requires only a quick peek to determine its orientation relative to you. Because this works so well, I never bother padlocking. Perhaps, HTC might want to look at how this works in EAW and consider employing a similar method.
One last point: It was rare that an aircraft simply exploded when hit in the fuel tanks, even for aircraft without self-sealing fuel tanks. AH does not model fire, and far, far too many aircraft are exploding into fairy dust. Sure, an explosion leaves no doubt as to the destruction of an aircraft. However, so would a fire. Moreover, the burning aircraft would still be a hazard to be avoided. As it stands now, you can fly right through the blast of an exploding aircraft with no ill effect. Well, I have personally seen what a Seagull can do to an aircraft, yet flying through wreckage in AH does nothing. That's a point of realism that needs attention.
My regards,
Widewing
-
1. you probably died from collision on your FE.
2. the buff guns, according to HTC, are no more or less powerful than
a 'usual' .50... But.. all guns within firing angle shoot at a single
point with accuracy that makes laser-guided rifles pale. In the worst
case scenario, u face 5x .50 guns when approaching a buff.. more
powerful than a P-51B. That's the secret of the 'Ackstar'
3. I dunno about this one. It's more of a preference issue.. I think the
icons already are crutches enough. And I'm not sure how good
human peripheral vision is.. yes I can notice even the slightest
move when someone is near my periphery - maybe if he's in my
room... but I'm not sure if I can notice a 300mph plane at the
peripheral boundary of my vision at 2000~3000 yard distance,
when I am concentrating on a single plane in front of me.. 700 yards
4. There is fire in AH. It's just rare to see a plane hit so bad as to
catch fire and still fly on. I'm not sure how AH fires are started,
but experience suggests damage near fuel tanks are connected
with fires - as it would in real life. There were a number of occasions
- not often, though - where I was hit, checked damage and saw
damage to fuel tanks only.. but when I looked around, smoke and
fire was eating away my fuselage.
This also is more of a damage model issue. In IL-2, most of the times
you see a plane going down you see him smoking bad, and going
down in a shallow -but-ever-steepening , irecoverable fall. The way
AH models the damage is 'all or nothing'. When many areas reach full
damage, the plane just explodes before falling. Yes, to a certain point
I agree we see too many explosions. Perhaps this would be changed
when AH delivers more sophisticated damage modelling.. where you'd
be able to shoot down something without breaking the wing ot explodin
g it.
-
Point the first: Lag, and differences create all sorts of wierdness like this. There are many threads discussing lag and its effects and how it should be dealt with in the Gameplay forum.
Point the second: EAW had all of the American bombers equipped with 30 cal machine guns that had extremely low rates of fire. I used editors on that game to try to make it more realistic and if I set it to have .50 cals with the correct rate of fire, it would simply annilate the German aircraft.
There have been many discussion on how bomber guns are modeled in AH, and how best to destroy bombers. One thing that is in complete agreement is that attacking from dead 6 is a great way to get back to the tower. I prefer nearly vertical dives from 5,000-6,000ft above the bomber, focusing my fire on one wing.
Point the third: I, and many others, find that padlock hinders SA. I reccomend that you use snap views.
Point the fourth: When an enemy aircraft explodes it is not indicative of a fuel explosion, but rather a pilot kill. AH does not track wreckage after the pilot is gone. That is why the plane disappears when a pilot bails out. When you get a pilot kill there is no pilot to generate a chute icon and the plane is simply removed in an explosion animation.
-
Welcome to the WILD WACKY WEIRD world we call Aces High, Widewing! :D
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Point the first: Lag, and differences create all sorts of wierdness like this. There are many threads discussing lag and its effects and how it should be dealt with in the Gameplay forum.
Thanks, I'll have a look.
Point the second: EAW had all of the American bombers equipped with 30 cal machine guns that had extremely low rates of fire. I used editors on that game to try to make it more realistic and if I set it to have .50 cals with the correct rate of fire, it would simply annilate the German aircraft.
Okay, but there is that ever present caveat; real world occurance.
Despite the huge claims of German fighters shot down by the gunners of heavy bombers, seldom did actual kills ever approach 10% of claims. Aside from the obvious problem of every gunner who hammered away at the German, claiming the kill, those gunners sprayed most of their ammunition into empty space. In simple terms, innaccuracy was the rule rather than the exception. Typically, gunners had to deal with the physics of hitting one moving object while in another. Adding to their problem was the constant movement of the platform. Only by shear weight of numbers did the gunners kill as many German fighters as they did. My limited experience with AH indicates far greater lethality than actually existed.
There have been many discussion on how bomber guns are modeled in AH, and how best to destroy bombers. One thing that is in complete agreement is that attacking from dead 6 is a great way to get back to the tower. I prefer nearly vertical dives from 5,000-6,000ft above the bomber, focusing my fire on one wing.
Point the third: I, and many others, find that padlock hinders SA. I reccomend that you use snap views.
Point the fourth: When an enemy aircraft explodes it is not indicative of a fuel explosion, but rather a pilot kill. AH does not track wreckage after the pilot is gone. That is why the plane disappears when a pilot bails out. When you get a pilot kill there is no pilot to generate a chute icon and the plane is simply removed in an explosion animation.
I have found the underside of the Lanc to be especially vunerable.
As to wreckage from blow-ups: I understand the logic of doing it the way it's being done now. However, the simple fact that an aircraft may detonate does not eliminate the fact that there is still several tons of metal out there, and flying through the wreckage should result in damage.
By the way, does a disco result in the loss of all data related to the sortie?
My regards,
Widewing
-
Widewing quote:
Okay, but there is that ever present caveat; real world occurance.
Despite the huge claims of German fighters shot down by the gunners of heavy bombers, seldom did actual
kills ever approach 10% of claims. Aside from the obvious problem of every gunner who hammered away at
the German, claiming the kill, those gunners sprayed most of their ammunition into empty space. In simple
terms, innaccuracy was the rule rather than the exception. Typically, gunners had to deal with the physics
of hitting one moving object while in another. Adding to their problem was the constant movement of the
platform. Only by shear weight of numbers did the gunners kill as many German fighters as they did. My
limited experience with AH indicates far greater lethality than actually existed.
Welcome to the land of "Gameplay Concessions" where real life physics are nonexistant :mad:
I'd like to just once see a gunner getting tossed out of a maneuvering B17....some G forces on the gunners of a dogbuff is what is needed. IMO as always :D
-
What is that Death Ray installed in the tail of the B-26? There is one hell of a lot more power in those two .50s than would be found in the real world. Compare the AH modeling with that in EAW.
Widewing : I have enjoyed your posts .
I am rereading "The Cactus Air Force" by Thomas G. Miller Jr. in paper back , Bantam editon / June 1981 .
Look to page 75 , were it tells about John Smith's tatic's "overhead run" .
I learned this in AH "first" before rereading it here in this book .
Works in AH , worked WW2 .
-
Widewing! Its great to see you play AH ... bite the hook, bite the hook!! :) :)
1) Lag definetely. I have in many, many occassions gotten killed because I hit part of my victim's airframe. Try flying a 262, its especially true in that plane. I think the issue here is your connect vs the other guy's connect. If both are good, you will ram into his parts. If your FE says that you miss the wreckage because his FE didnt tell your FE that his wing just flew through your plane then your FE wont realize you hit his wreckage. Thus, no damage.
I hate temporal mechanics!
2) Buff guns in AH are "beefed up" in range because of lag issues.. Before a fighter could close in to d500 and blast a buff down because the buff might see the con at d900 and not fire. Giving the buffs range up to d1.8 gives the buff gunner a better chance at not being killed by lagged fighters.
HOWEVER, I think HTC also gave those bullets increased kinetic punch . A d1.2 hit will hurt you as much as a fighter's d400 shot will. Something I consider VERY unfair. Especially when the buff guy has good connect, and you have good connect and you find yourself torn apart by someone firing from extreme range.
Also, all possible guns in the buff are firing at you. So the tail gun's 2 .50's are actually the tail, ball and top turret and quiete possible the waist gunners too (search the pictures forum, the bug was posted showing the ball and top turret guns firing through the fuselage). This issue is being addressed with the new buff things HTC is doing next version. I can only hope.
"By the way, does a disco result in the loss of all data related to the sortie?"
I think the server keeps tracks of the kills u had before you discoed.. it will track your disco ..as a disco. You will not get any perk points from a sortie that you discoe'd. Perk planes that have not been pinged, and you disco, means you lose only half the perks of the plane's cost instead of the full price. (aka, disco in 262 =100 perks lost. 262 costs 200 perks to get).
Come fly knits! Let usknow your arena handle :)
-
Originally posted by Tac
Widewing! Its great to see you play AH ... bite the hook, bite the hook!! :) :)
(snip)
Come fly knits! Let usknow your arena handle :)
Well, I'll tell you, the first few times I logged on in the Main Arena, I found myself getting the hook plenty. First off, my main purpose was to try to stay out of trouble while getting a little experience in that environment. As I'm sure you know, trouble has a way of finding you no matter how careful you are to stay out of the way.
I was staying high, flying fast and avoiding crowds. However, it never fails, no matter how high you climb, there's always some other genius to be found above you. Worse, a long climbout means that you're flying damn slow for a long time. A perfect bounce for pony drivers. All you can do is turn into the attacks while trying to trade altitude for airspeed. This is usually successful if you have only one guy after your ass. However, if there's two or more.... Well, then you're in "deep bandini". :eek:
My first 18 or so sorties showed a net gain of two assists, at the cost of 7 deaths.:mad:
I found out some interesting things, such as the La-7 cannot out-turn a C.202. I reefed into a tight lufberry, with the stall horn making a bloody racket, and that damn Macchi still turned a smaller circle. As he began to pull lead, I had to bust out and try to evade. Nope, no such luck, he was too close and the Lavochkin didn't have the suds to pull away.
I now understand why I had so much trouble during my first two days of flying. The reason was simple: I kept switching planes, trying to pick the best one for the anticipated fight. Yet, it always seemed that when I got to the fight, things were not as I expected. Just like the idiot who always shows up at the dinner wearing the wrong suit.:confused:
So, I switched sides from Bishops to Rooks, and tried out the Spitfire Mk.IX. It took a few sorties to learn the strengths and weaknesses, during the course of which I was whacked once more (for my 7th trip to the morgue). However, tonight I stayed with the Spit and began to get confortable, managing 7 kills and 5 assists for just 4 deaths, two of those coming right after pulling up the gear and on final approach, all but out of gas (both to Typhoons stooging around the airfield). It's like operating out of a hot LZ. The other two were the result of trying to defend against what seemed like every fighter the Knights had. No chance to get away, so all one can do is make them work real hard for the eventual victory, and do as much damage as possible.
Anyway, I use Widewing as my handle. I saw Ammo tonight, I pulled up off of his left wing in a combat spread formation. We ran across a lone Fw 190, which passed by nose to nose slightly below and to our left. Ammo broke down to the left, and I broke up to the left. The 190 headed down, so Ammo got to him before I could try a deflection shot from above. That guy never had a chance, Ammo was on him in an instant. I expected that he would break up and into us, which is why I went high. However, he tried to run from Ammo's Jug which had the advantage of height, and Ammo split-essed right onto his backside.
I believe that this is gonna be a lot of fun. I'll keep an eye out for you (and the others who frequent this BBS).
My regards,
Widewing
-
Widewing
You seem to have disabled both Email and private messaging in your profile. How about turning one or the other back on?
-
Originally posted by Seeker
Widewing
You seem to have disabled both Email and private messaging in your profile. How about turning one or the other back on?
Private messaging was/is turned on. However, when I try to read a message, I get a note saying that "your administrator has disabled private messages." So, until I figure out what the heck is going on, I turned on e-mail.
My regards,
Widewing
-
You attacked a buff from dead 6 O'clk? (Snork!) :)
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Private messaging was/is turned on. However, when I try to read a message, I get a note saying that "your administrator has disabled private messages." So, until I figure out what the heck is going on, I turned on e-mail.
My regards,
Widewing
Okay, here's what's happening: HTC has disabled the private messages for a short time. Here's there e-mail response:
"Since we have updated to the new board this feature has been disabled altogether for everyone on a temporary basis. When this feature becomes avalable we will let you know."
So, should anyone wish to contact me, use e-mail.
My best,
Widewing
-
Anyway, I use Widewing as my handle. I saw Ammo tonight, I pulled up off of his left wing in a combat spread formation. We ran across a lone Fw 190, which passed by nose to nose slightly below and to our left. Ammo broke down to the left, and I broke up to the left. The 190 headed down, so Ammo got to him before I could try a deflection shot from above. That guy never had a chance, Ammo was on him in an instant. I expected that he would break up and into us, which is why I went high. However, he tried to run from Ammo's Jug which had the advantage of height, and Ammo split-essed right onto his backside.
Yeah! That AMMO guy always was a kill stealer. Best bet is to give him a good does of 'check 6!' warnings. ;)
I believe that this is gonna be a lot of fun. I'll keep an eye out for you (and the others who frequent this BBS). My regards, Widewing
That's wonderful! If I can ever be of any help please let me know!
Westy
-
My experience regarding this is that AH buff guns and GV 50cals work much different than the "same" caliber/type weapons in fighters. HTC can say that arent "modeled" any different but all of us know they work different in the game. Ive been killed in one instant by ONLY 2 TOP TURRET GUNS of a B17 while making a high angle veritcal pass from above way too many times from very far away for those to be just regular fighter type guns. They arent, they are are made to work different. If HTC hasnt programmed them different then its a bug they should fix.
When HTC introduces the new 4 ship buff formation I think it will be clear that our old bomber guns were overdone. If HTC doesnt change it when we have 4 buff formations, then with all due respect, they will have lost their mind.
-
I don't think it is exactly fair to say the buff guns are "overmodeled". I don't think that they are any more, I have used that .target function EXHAUSTIVELY to prove to myself that they are the same as the 'fighter' .50s.
I did the following-
Took a B-17, put the .target at various ranges out to max range (which was 1400 yards and some change), and fired ONLY the nose guns (which are the two cheek guns and the nose turret). Now, this is a tad a-historical, because the navigator could only man one cheek gun at a time, but this is a minor point. I took some screenies (which are deleted now, but it is an easily reproducable test). I then took a P-38, and used the 4 guns in the nose on the .target at various ranges, out to max range (which was, coincidentally, ALSO 1400 yards and some change). The dispersion patterns looked identical in all cases except for VERY short range (where each gun actually leaves its own seperate pattern, under 100 yards). Now, correct me if I am wrong, but a bullet will have a 'set' kinetic energy when it leaves the barrel of a gun, right? And it uses that energy up to fly through the air and punch through some thin metal called an enemy plane. If both the fighter AND the bomber .50s had the SAME max range (1400-odd yards to the front), AND the same dispersal pattern- then they are identical AND would hit at the same power, right?
Now, I also did this test with the rear guns of a B-17 (which are the same as on the B-26). The Max range was 1800 yards and change. Now, it may seem that HTC has artificially extended the range of the guns- BUT... I will try to explain this as I see it.
The reason that the forward firing guns can only travel 1400 yards and change (to hit a target that is moving away from you at the same speed you are moving), is because they are actually travelling the same distance that the rear guns bullets are travelling to hit a target that is 1800 yards away but moving towards you at the same speed you are moving. The rear guns also probably hit harder since you are travelling INTO them, thus allowing them to keep more of their energy for going through you, rather than going through the air trying to get to you.
Now, this doesn't mean that there is NOTHING wrong with buff guns. I believe that the firing arcs need to be revamped, and that either the gunners should be able to shoot off parts of their own plane or not be able to shoot through their plane to hit you. I also think that .50s in general hit a bit to hard, but that may be because of HTC's 'all or nothing' damage model, where each round that hits you appears to take away a certain number of 'hit points', and when that total is exhausted you are dead.
-
Grun, vehicles have a different kind of .50 cal MG, it has faster muzzle velocity but a tad slower refire rate. They hit, they hurt more than a fiter's .50's.
I still cling that the buffs range extension also included the kinetic punch increase. Theres no way for a fighter's .50's caressing an enemy fighter at d900 and doing no damage vs a buff .50 cal hitting you at d1.4 and breaking your wing off with a few pings.
Oh, and btw, I bet that the "top turret" also had the nose turret and tail turret shooting at you through the fuselage.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
I don't think it is exactly fair to say the buff guns are "overmodeled". I don't think that they are any more, I have used that .target function EXHAUSTIVELY to prove to myself that they are the same as the 'fighter' .50s.
I did the following-
Took a B-17, put the .target at various ranges out to max range (which was 1400 yards and some change), and fired ONLY the nose guns (which are the two cheek guns and the nose turret). Now, this is a tad a-historical, because the navigator could only man one cheek gun at a time, but this is a minor point. I took some screenies (which are deleted now, but it is an easily reproducable test). I then took a P-38, and used the 4 guns in the nose on the .target at various ranges, out to max range (which was, coincidentally, ALSO 1400 yards and some change). The dispersion patterns looked identical in all cases except for VERY short range (where each gun actually leaves its own seperate pattern, under 100 yards). Now, correct me if I am wrong, but a bullet will have a 'set' kinetic energy when it leaves the barrel of a gun, right? And it uses that energy up to fly through the air and punch through some thin metal called an enemy plane. If both the fighter AND the bomber .50s had the SAME max range (1400-odd yards to the front), AND the same dispersal pattern- then they are identical AND would hit at the same power, right?
Now, I also did this test with the rear guns of a B-17 (which are the same as on the B-26). The Max range was 1800 yards and change. Now, it may seem that HTC has artificially extended the range of the guns- BUT... I will try to explain this as I see it.
The reason that the forward firing guns can only travel 1400 yards and change (to hit a target that is moving away from you at the same speed you are moving), is because they are actually travelling the same distance that the rear guns bullets are travelling to hit a target that is 1800 yards away but moving towards you at the same speed you are moving. The rear guns also probably hit harder since you are travelling INTO them, thus allowing them to keep more of their energy for going through you, rather than going through the air trying to get to you.
Now, this doesn't mean that there is NOTHING wrong with buff guns. I believe that the firing arcs need to be revamped, and that either the gunners should be able to shoot off parts of their own plane or not be able to shoot through their plane to hit you. I also think that .50s in general hit a bit to hard, but that may be because of HTC's 'all or nothing' damage model, where each round that hits you appears to take away a certain number of 'hit points', and when that total is exhausted you are dead.
WHOS ON FIRST?
-
Welcome to the mad, bad world of the MA!
remember the inmates run the asylum in there :)
Chris
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Well, I'll tell you, the first few times I logged on in the Main Arena, I found myself getting the hook plenty. First off, my main purpose was to try to stay out of trouble while getting a little experience in that environment. As I'm sure you know, trouble has a way of finding you no matter how careful you are to stay out of the way.
I was staying high, flying fast and avoiding crowds. However, it never fails, no matter how high you climb, there's always some other genius to be found above you. Worse, a long climbout means that you're flying damn slow for a long time. A perfect bounce for pony drivers. All you can do is turn into the attacks while trying to trade altitude for airspeed. This is usually successful if you have only one guy after your ass. However, if there's two or more.... Well, then you're in "deep bandini". :eek:
My first 18 or so sorties showed a net gain of two assists, at the cost of 7 deaths.:mad:
I found out some interesting things, such as the La-7 cannot out-turn a C.202. I reefed into a tight lufberry, with the stall horn making a bloody racket, and that damn Macchi still turned a smaller circle. As he began to pull lead, I had to bust out and try to evade. Nope, no such luck, he was too close and the Lavochkin didn't have the suds to pull away.
I now understand why I had so much trouble during my first two days of flying. The reason was simple: I kept switching planes, trying to pick the best one for the anticipated fight. Yet, it always seemed that when I got to the fight, things were not as I expected. Just like the idiot who always shows up at the dinner wearing the wrong suit.:confused:
So, I switched sides from Bishops to Rooks, and tried out the Spitfire Mk.IX. It took a few sorties to learn the strengths and weaknesses, during the course of which I was whacked once more (for my 7th trip to the morgue). However, tonight I stayed with the Spit and began to get confortable, managing 7 kills and 5 assists for just 4 deaths, two of those coming right after pulling up the gear and on final approach, all but out of gas (both to Typhoons stooging around the airfield). It's like operating out of a hot LZ. The other two were the result of trying to defend against what seemed like every fighter the Knights had. No chance to get away, so all one can do is make them work real hard for the eventual victory, and do as much damage as possible.
Anyway, I use Widewing as my handle. I saw Ammo tonight, I pulled up off of his left wing in a combat spread formation. We ran across a lone Fw 190, which passed by nose to nose slightly below and to our left. Ammo broke down to the left, and I broke up to the left. The 190 headed down, so Ammo got to him before I could try a deflection shot from above. That guy never had a chance, Ammo was on him in an instant. I expected that he would break up and into us, which is why I went high. However, he tried to run from Ammo's Jug which had the advantage of height, and Ammo split-essed right onto his backside.
I believe that this is gonna be a lot of fun. I'll keep an eye out for you (and the others who frequent this BBS).
My regards,
Widewing
Ahh that was you:) I wondered if it was the "widewing". Good to see you in the arena's. If you want to, and see me in any of the arena's, I would be happy to wing up with you. It makes survivability must easier. Also if you like, come join as a guest in a Fri night or Saturday afternoon TOD event. It is a historical based event with an axis and allied sides. It is objective based with limited or no radar. Its a blast widewing. The 56th FG or any of the participating squads would be glad to have you.
ammo
-
Widewing:
1: Each player's FE decides if that person's plane is involved in a collision and then the a/c receives damage. The reason for this setup is that no two player sees the sittuation exactly the same. As for your sittuation the enemy probably had already pulled to avoid collision, but the enemy's movements were yet relayed to you due yours and his ping to the server combined and dislayed him flying straight into you on your FE.
--- Tac: ---
I think the issue here is your connect vs the other guy's connect. If both are good, you will ram into his parts. If your FE says that you miss the wreckage because his FE didnt tell your FE that his wing just flew through your plane then your FE wont realize you hit his wreckage. Thus, no damage.
--- end ---
In short - wrong. The enemie's FE doesn't ever tell your FE anything about collisions nor does yours tell the others' FEs. Detecting wether _you_ are involved in a collision is all done by your FE, with sorts of messages sent to the server after the fact ( collision detected ). Then server sends the other players a packet that tells the others' FEs to display a ball of fire instead of a plane, indistinguishable from the effect of MG/cannon fire.
The combined ping is the reason why the person who did not collide, sees the enemy suddenly explode in his six view. Which also makes people think: "Wow! I got in some really good strikes, must have hit the fuel tank or sn1p3r3d th3 pil0t." They never realize their cannon fire was meaningless, and that the other guy dweebed it.
HTC should make distinct kill messages to lessen the grief some people flying the game seem to suffer over collisions. Flag planes that get their parts shed by the collision detection algorithm. Once it is determined the plane to be dead display "XXXX collided" instead of "victory #1 by such pilot" ( haven't played in a while so no idea what the messages look like these days ), perhaps keep damage totals on a plane caused by MG/cannon and collision and use that to determine the message to display. This in turn should lessen the complaints of "I never win a HO , I always get rammed and the other guy never dies in a collision." People would be able to see for them selves that others collide as well.
WB used to have a similar problem with the message: "You collided" when one's FE detected a collision. The game directly blamed the player for colliding.
// fats
-
really? thats interesting.
i only die from hitting plane parts when i kill at very close range anyway, thats why the 262 for me is the king of wreck deaths.
-
book url at amazon (http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/ts/exchange-glance/Y02Y3222321Y3282499/qid=1011216174/sr=1-1/102-8846178-1584132)
I find rereading my books that I read in my youth , "before" I started flying online start to make a lot more sense .
And to all of you that think that htc has modeled the guns diferant , EVEN after they have said they have NOt .
START READING , AND LEARN
-
Tac:
I don't know wether AH includes plane parts that have been shed into the list of itemts to test for collision. WB didn't, but a lot has improved since. Even if AH did include the debrii, collision detection against them would still be performed by your FE solely and only the results ( you in turn ripping a wing off for example ) would be relayed to others.
// fats
-
Just a note on bullet travel:
If you fire a bullet forward, it's speed through the air is the speed of the bullet coming out of the barrel PLUS the speed of your plane.
If you fire a bullet backwards, it's speed through the air is the speed of the bullet coming out of the barrel MINUS the speed of your plane.
Thus a bullet fired backwards is travelling at a lower speed through the air. It thus has a lower drag and will not lose as much kinetic energy as a bullet fired forwards. Also, if you fire at a target approaching you the impact velocity is the speed of te bullet PLUS the speed of the plane approaching.
-
The reason that the forward firing guns can only travel 1400 yards and change (to hit a target that is moving away from you at the same speed you are moving), is because they are actually travelling the same distance that the rear guns bullets are travelling to hit a target that is 1800 yards away but moving towards you at the same speed you are moving. The rear guns also probably hit harder since you are travelling INTO them, thus allowing them to keep more of their energy for going through you, rather than going through the air trying to get to you.
Urchin - check your calcs, they don't hold water. Since speed is squared in the calc of kinetic energy (hitting power), a forward firing MG of a B17 travelling at, say, 250kts will hit ~30% harder than the very same MG fired from the tail and will travel further too.
In any case, hitting anything manoeuvring at 1,000+ yards from a moving plane buff is plain sci-fi. HT knows that, Pyro knows that. But since lone buff didn't stand a chance against a fighter in WW2 no one would fly them if everything was "realistic" hence "gaming concessions" which are very difficult to get "right";)
-
mako, a buffs foward firing guns have the same punch as its rear guns, get a b26 and shoot the nose turret at a fighter thats d1.3 away, flying AWAY from the buff. Your pings will still kill him just as if he was d1.3 behind your buff.
Now try that with a fighter.. you can put 600 rnds in hits on a plane at d1.1 and barely damage it.
-
Tac, that is horseshit and you know it. Hell, you killed me from 850+ yards a couple weeks ago, firing 4 .50 calibers. I'm not sure how many rounds landed, but it couldn't have been a whole helluva lot at 850+ yards. Is it really possible that it takes 10 or so .50 rounds to blow off someones wing at 850 yards, yet 600 to do the same thing at 1100?
Also, I didn't DO any calculations as far as range and damage and stuff. I'm not a math major, I'm as far from mathematically inclined as you can be. It just seemed to be common sense that if something is moving at the same speed you are (like the bullseye does in .target mode) then you will be able to hit it from farther away if it is behind you than if it is in front of you.
Oh, and Lynx, check the post above yours if you'd like to argue about the range and hitting power. Blue Mako's arguments mean as much to me as your average conversation in Mandarin, but they seem to disagree with yours.
-
Urchin that ta152 you were in was pulling away fast, and I fired almost all of my ammo at you at that range. 2000 rnds, of which I bet 800 or so mustve hit. You were a bright glowing planeform for quite a while until I saw smoke and you tumbling down. After you went down I was with less 50 cal than cannon. And just so you know, that was a very rare kill for me. I usually hit stuff and dont even damage it beyond d700.
A buff needs only to hit with 10 or 20 rnds at that range to smack you.
Fiter 50 cals do kill at long range, but you need a toejamload of hits for that.