HTC's random damage method is part of the problem. How else does one explain hits on the engine cowling knocking off the elevators, or HOs shooting off tail wheels. I have taken do-or-die shots that clobbered aircraft, hit sprites all over it, only to do no damage. That's a serious weakness in AH's combat modeling. Actual gun modeling is highly questionable too.
I have discussed gun modeling with HTC several times over the past two years to no avail. As much as they deny it, I'm convinced that bomber gun effectiveness is artificially raised, likely due to a lack of understanding of what determines accuracy. Unlike computer programmers, I have fired tens of thousands of rounds through M2HB MGs. Bullet dispersement at 1,500 yards is huge, due to the weapon vibration, mount motion, muzzle flip and the relative motion of two moving platforms. Add to that, these guns were aimed via a ring and bead sight! Typically, from a gun test mount on a test range, only about 60% of the rounds will hit the sand trap (1,000 square feet of area) at 1,000 yards, and will be scattered throughout the large trap (the balance will strike the ground or the berm behind the trap). Neither the trap nor the gun mount is moving. At 1,500 yards, the frontal area of a fighter (as little as 20 square feet) is about 2% that of the trap. Statistically, a single hit would be unlikely. Yet, wings get chopped off....
As an experiment, we have flown an A-20G to 1,000 yards dead astern of a B-17. The A-20's gun conversion was set at 500 yards (meaning that the cross-over point was 500 yards, and in a perfect universe, with no other undermining factors, the guns should have the same concentration at 1,000 yards as at a range of 1 foot. All guns in top and ball turrets were emptied prior to the test. When in position, both fired on each other. The A-20 was obliterated, the B-17 suffered only a few hits. We did this 3 times. Considering that the A-20 had 3 times the number of guns (the same guns too) and all were concentrated in the nose, it proved to my satisfaction that the bomber guns are deliberately or mistakenly over-modeled. We repeated the test with the P-38 replacing the A-20. Results were the same.
Finally, I have discussed this on usenet and e-mail with several veterans who flew as gunners on bombers. Two were tail gunners (B-17 and B-24). Each agreed that hitting any fighter at ranges beyond 600 yards was more luck than anything. Actually shooting off wings, well, not one of them ever saw that happen.
As long as the simple and random damage model exists, as long as bullet dispersion physics is modeled as it is, players will be forced to deal with wildly unrealistic results.
My regards,
Widewing
