Tracers Off = More damage?

[Furious]

If you have tracers turned off in a GV or the ships guns, others will still see tracers.

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by OIO
in my p38, tracers on, I jump someone from low left 6 (blind spot). Lets say rubber bullets make my first hits not damage anything.

That's a pretty specific exception you've made there.  In reality, one can expect that sneaking up in someone's blind spot with or without tracers on should result in high probability kills with little enemy manuevering.

In all other circumstances, such as in an actual scissoring fight, I doubt that turning tracers off provides a major advantage beyond improving firing discipline and overall aim.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Kweassa]

In a very hot chase where two planes are mid-ranges apart(400~600 yards), and the chased plane is slowly extending away, whether the guy behind you is using tracers on or off, makes a lot of difference.

 If the guy behind me is not shooting, I try to extend away as far and as fast as I could - since he ain't shooting, I'd like max acceleration without any movements.

 If he is shooting, then I'll have to extend, trying to jink at the same time. Which, puts me into the risk of being caught up.

 Now, if the guy behind me has tracers off, and spewing bullets like raindrops in Florida squall, then things become ugly. It's a good trick no doubt, but personally, I hate that one. (which probably means, it's effective)

 Not to mention the fact, that I hate being shot at over 500 yards distance, in the first place, and I also hate that there's a very high possibility of being shot down from such mid/long range spraying, in the second place(I just hope AH2 will bring some difference in mid/long range gunnery - in other words, I hope ppl can't hit jackshi* over 400 yards)

 Luckily, recent AH1 changes where we can see the gun flashing, helped a lot. If indeed, engaged in a hot chase with the distances as such, the gun flashes are visible to the eye, which really helps spoil the "come on, I have no tracers, so straighten out thinking that I'm not shooting, while I spray these dweebey allied weapons at you" tactic.

[OIO]

Not really. Ive been jumped by a plane and been less than d100 and ive been able to react instantly and correctly by seeing the tracers fly by me. Usually the con jumping me has a lot more speed and cant really manouver fast enough to properly aim..but the pilot squeezed the trigger anyway.

What kweassa said is another great example. Heck,  a few tours ago I got into a pissing match with Urchin because my 38 pinged his 152 to higher hell from d800...and because I had no tracers, he didnt see me spray almost all my ammo .. resulting in a helluva lot of hits scored (but distance meant little damage) and no matter if he jinked up/down/left/right I had already filled the sky with lead and he was receiving 3 to 5 hits per any jink he made (dispersion and 38's 2000 rnds of 50 cal ) . Then golden bb took off his tail.

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by OIO
Not really. Ive been jumped by a plane and been less than d100 and ive been able to react instantly and correctly by seeing the tracers fly by me. Usually the con jumping me has a lot more speed and cant really manouver fast enough to properly aim..but the pilot squeezed the trigger anyway.

[/b]

Again, the situation you're describing still occurs against a relatively unmoving target regardless of whether or not tracers are used, so aim would appear more important than tracer preference.  I agree, however, that if the opponent fails to hear the sound of your engine or the bullets firing in the absence of tracers, it improves the odds of killing him quite a bit.

What kweassa said is another great example. Heck,  a few tours ago I got into a pissing match with Urchin because my 38 pinged his 152 to higher hell from d800...and because I had no tracers, he didnt see me spray almost all my ammo .. resulting in a helluva lot of hits scored (but distance meant little damage) and no matter if he jinked up/down/left/right I had already filled the sky with lead and he was receiving 3 to 5 hits per any jink he made (dispersion and 38's 2000 rnds of 50 cal ) . Then golden bb took off his tail.

You do realize that you just admitted that flying straight or manuevering would not have changed the outcome for Urchin in that situation.  How would turning tracers on have changed that?  Whether flying straight or manuevering, Urchin would have been killed because you filled the sky with lead.  He might have seen tracers had you enabled them, but he wouldn't have been able to avoid them according to this scenario.

I do like the "Oh crap" factor of killing someone at long distance without tracers though.  Very satisfying.  

-- Todd/Leviathn

[OIO]

"so aim would appear more important than tracer preference."

i think were not thinking the same thing here. Im saying that tracers on provides the victim (in that case, me) with a 'warning shot' of sorts. Even the best of shots cannot put every single round in target.. and most commonly the first rounds squeezed off miss...but I get to see them tracers.

Of course, aiming would be the defining factor in any situation, tracers or no tracers.


"How would turning tracers on have changed that? Whether flying straight or manuevering, Urchin would have been killed because you filled the sky with lead. He might have seen tracers had you enabled them, but he wouldn't have been able to avoid them according to this scenario. "

In the scenario i had with urchin, he wouldve easily avoided getting hit because he wouldve seen my plane suddenly spit out massive amounts of tracers..and reacted before the first rounds reached his plane (hard jink or dive). He was trying to get away so he did not jink very hard, so my fire not only reached his plane without him having a warning of it, but also scored sporadic hits on him which, i assume, when he looked to his 6, saw none and he had no way of knowing if it was ME shooting or if he had been jumped by someone else.. and with me doing slight rudder and nose up movements while spraying with no tracers, ,he had no way of knowing where to jink safely.


Its just like when you attack a flight of buffs.. you see the sudden spam of tracers coming from different planes, you can avoid them.. because you can see their distance and know the 'eta' of each salvo... same with the ack, even if there are several dozen of them shooting at you.

[GODO]

Originally posted by fuze
In real life if you didn't have tracers the spots they would take would be filled with real bullets so technically no tracers would do more damage because you have more real bullets to shoot.

This is the point. Do we have tracers replaced by deadly ammo when turned off ? But, if so, will the extra ammo be mostly lost in the sky, as most of the normal ammo, trying to get a single kill?

[Soda]

The only thing I notice is that people are less likely to maneuver, even when they hear a ping or two, if they don't see tracers flying by them.  For some reason if they don't see tracers they think that the pings they are getting are "flukes" or something.  If you hear a ping, tracers or not, you should always be avoiding the possibility that someone is shooting if they are behind you and within D1.0 (outside that range hits are unlikely but still possible).

I tend to wish I could load tracers on my small calibre weapons (if I have them) or on one bank of guns so I can still "Scare" people with them when I need to.  A tracer across the nose, even if I have little hope of hitting someone, can be enough to turn someone so I can close in.  Also, if you are getting in close for kills, tracers probably mean very little.  You can put so much damage into someone so quickly at short range that by the time they react to your tracers it's already over.

GODO, tracers are not that much different from actual bullets.  They simply put a small amount of burning material in the rear at the expense of a little bit of other material (AP or HE).  Hitting someone with a tracer is still going to do the same damage as a non-tracer (in AH).

[BigMax]

There is no discernable difference in the damage model IMHO.  The only time I turn them on at all is when my timing is a little off and I need a sortie or two to calibrate my eyeball...

I prefer off for stealth reasons... But even when you are being shot at with tracers off, you still see the muzzle flashes on the other guy's planes... which usually is a bad thing:( .

[Murdr]

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
That's a pretty specific exception you've made there.  In reality, one can expect that sneaking up in someone's blind spot with or without tracers on should result in high probability kills with little enemy manuevering.

In all other circumstances, such as in an actual scissoring fight, I doubt that turning tracers off provides a major advantage beyond improving firing discipline and overall aim.

-- Todd/Leviathn

Here's another circumstance,  in situations similar to kweassa example, I regularly make micro adjustments in my course to evade tracers.  In other words, flying in the rear view, I can actually see where the shots are going, and just sidestep the better shots.  Cant sidestep bullets if I cant see them.

[TweetyBird]

I think tracers flying by creates a tremendous motivation to keep your wings out of phase with the enema No tracers, and I guess people get lazy.