Author Topic: Reviewing the "HO"  (Read 10374 times)

Offline Infidelz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 449
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2010, 07:22:50 PM »
Seems kind of like a trolling exercise this HO maneuver here in the forum. Believe first move in an aircraft with 4 cannon or 8 fifties is to assume the target is heading away. Superior firepower don't you know. If it's not, my ordinance just gets there quicker. Not my problem opponent was impolitic and didn't turn and present the appropriate aspect. Is this anymore impolitic than sneaking up on the unwary and blowing them up from behind? Why is that not a bad thing? LOL. 

Infidelz.

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2010, 07:40:13 PM »
I don't see any where it isn't a valid option though.

Option where you significantly reduce your odds isn't a "valid option", it's a stupid decision. Arguing anything else is just semantics.

Yes, it's a matter of choice, kinda like shooting yourself in the foot, just because you can, doesn't mean you should, nor you should call it a "valid option".



Anyway, being rabidly pro or against HO shots brings us nowhere. Lots of threads on this topic, all failed.







 

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #47 on: May 23, 2010, 07:47:55 PM »
When you are defending a base against insurmountable odds, the HOing Hurricane all of a sudden become the most viable option.

Yes, like in one vs many. taking all the shots, including HO shots, increases your survival chances.

Offline grizz441

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7000
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2010, 08:03:39 PM »
Yes, like in one vs many. taking all the shots, including HO shots, increases your survival chances.

Yea.  Are you arguing about 1v1s with mtnman?

Offline Baumer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
      • 332nd Flying Mongrels
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #49 on: May 23, 2010, 10:16:03 PM »
Grizz I assumed that some difference of nose to nose was expected to avoid the collision. However there's a difference between maneuvering to avoid a collision (but keeping the turns close) and easing into a maneuver trying to "hide e".  Most middle of the road players, like my self, have difficulty with the little nuances, that top flight sticks like yourself (and most everyone in this thread except me) can use in a duel. The exception I was describing is more for the benefit of an average pilot rather than the top sticks anyways.

Mtnman, going back to my analogy of the pickup basketball game, sure it's a valid shot. Just the same as fouling someone at the end of a close game is valid, but it sure doesn't make the game any "better". And unlike basketball, there's no penalty or getting benched if you do it repeatedly. Since there's no game clock it's really better for the game if we can avoid it.

To the Fugatives point, it's in all of our best interest's to teach as many players as possible about how to get into better positions (when they can, given extenuating circumstances) and not just default to the simple turn and HO. But it's also important to teach the community when NOT to complain about the HO.

HTC Please show the blue planes some love!
F4F-4, FM2, SBD-5, TBM-3

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #50 on: May 23, 2010, 11:27:07 PM »
Yea.  Are you arguing about 1v1s with mtnman?

aye, well, not anymore  :devil

Offline mtnman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #51 on: May 24, 2010, 06:04:16 AM »
aye, well, not anymore  :devil
Don't worry, I wouldn't let you HO me, even if you wanted to.  You'd just have to land a FQ shot.  :D
MtnMan

"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not". Thomas Jefferson

Offline Vudak

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4819
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #52 on: May 24, 2010, 08:28:45 AM »

And (not pointing fingers at anyone), I can't help but see the irony in this discussion.  "Experienced", skilled pilots, concerned about a choice that's seen as showing inexperience, or lack of skill?


I'm not sure what's so ironic.  Experienced sticks routinely try to help people overcome inexperienced/low skill tactics.

Putting yourself in a position where both you and your opponent can fire at the exact same time is a bad choice, period.  Granted, sometimes it may be your only choice, but it's still a bad one to have to make.

The interesting thing is that this is also many people's primary choice, so much so that every month there is another thread about it somewhere, but as of yet, there is no document on the major help websites that deals specifically with it.  To me, that would be like seeing many people routinely bail out over a friendly field, and having no document showing them how to land.
Vudak
352nd Fighter Group

Offline humble

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6434
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #53 on: May 24, 2010, 11:34:29 AM »
My thought in posting this is to take away the negative connotations and place the topic in a knowledge/training environment instead.

From the broad range of comments I think a few things can be sifted out...

1) all "experienced" sticks here tend to agree that by and large its not viewed as an optimum choice of tactic under all but the worst circumstances

2) Most good sticks see a HO attempt by an opponent as an opportunity to apply "ACM Kung Fu" more then a credible threat

3) The difference comes in how the "Mexican standoff" is treated. Good pilots tend to expect other good pilots to recognize when both sides have an opportunity vs those when one has a clear advantage. In the event that a position is considered neutral then the potential shot is considered "cheap". Obviously this applies to more of a 1 on 1 vs a melee...

So we have the following...

a) proactively flying for the "face shot" limits development of more advanced skills since those more advanced pilots tend to be able to easily counter such a move. This leads to a cycle of less experienced pilots trading faceshots with each other and dying in a repeated and frustrating manner vs higher caliber opponents.

b) More experienced sticks are well aware of the opportunities but view it as a tactic of last resort

c) Seasoned 1 on 1 duelers are more prone to recognize if a fight is neutral and have an expectation that both parties will refrain from taking a "cheap" shot under such conditions. However this is grey area since the opposing school of thought is once the initial merge is over then guns are hot and either you get around 1st or you get out of the way....both positions have some merit.

So from what I see here the consensus seems to be that relying on the "HO" as a tactic creates more opportunities to die then to win under most circumstances and leads to a cycle of rising futility and frustration. However there is significant importance in distinguishing between a true "HO" and a valid front quarter aspect shot arrived at via proper ACM taken in the course of building a superior position...that type of shot not only can end a fight but pressure the opponent to evade and further degrade his position.

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."-Pres. Thomas Jefferson

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #54 on: May 24, 2010, 12:00:23 PM »
^ good summary of a worthy topic :aok


fwiw I understand exactly what you're saying mtnman, and agree. for me the DA guns cold merge rule is ahistorical, contrived and pointless. worse, it leaves you unprepared for the reality of MA fighting. I cant help thinking that the zero-separation DA first merge is more likely to lead to another HO opportunity within 1 or 2 turns than a merge which doesnt just require a kick of rudder to unload into the enemy cockpit, especially flying identical aircraft.
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #55 on: May 24, 2010, 12:57:19 PM »
fwiw I understand exactly what you're saying mtnman, and agree. for me the DA guns cold merge rule is ahistorical, contrived and pointless. worse, it leaves you unprepared for the reality of MA fighting. I cant help thinking that the zero-separation DA first merge is more likely to lead to another HO opportunity within 1 or 2 turns than a merge which doesnt just require a kick of rudder to unload into the enemy cockpit, especially flying identical aircraft.

Dear RTHolmes, just for you I'll go off topic (AH Gods, forgive me)

In a duel, cold gun merge makes perfect sense.
Why?
Well, what is the purpose of a duel? Oh that's right. You remember now...
You see, everything should be about as equal as possible, bar the pilot.
Hot merge would put one of the duelists into unfavorable position even before duel would start, unless there would be third party giving either audible or visual duel start sign (or in that case, sign when you can fire).
That's right, due to the lag (which isn't the same for all) that's not possible. So duel starts when duelists pass 3-9 line. Not perfect, but you don't need third party, makes hot merge rather difficult though.
Anyway, you can play by other rules (any kind) as long as both duelists agree to.


Wait, there's more.
You've mention reality of MA fighting (is there fighting in MA?)...
Does boxing match prepare you for the bar brawl?



ahistorical, contrived and pointless   


So why people duel regardless of duels being ahistorical, contrived and pointless? Oh, that's right, it's FUN! Yes, it's a GAME! WWII ended 65 years ago.

Offline Tordon22

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #56 on: May 24, 2010, 03:01:31 PM »
And I happen to agree fully with Bighorn, so far anyway ;) . The duels more about the flying for me, rather than trying to end it before the first merge/first nose to nose turn.

There's a skill or art to dueling in AH and it's the only thing that keeps me coming back (MA sure doesn't).

Offline grizz441

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7000
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #57 on: May 24, 2010, 04:10:34 PM »
Grizz I assumed that some difference of nose to nose was expected to avoid the collision. However there's a difference between maneuvering to avoid a collision (but keeping the turns close) and easing into a maneuver trying to "hide e".  Most middle of the road players, like my self, have difficulty with the little nuances, that top flight sticks like yourself (and most everyone in this thread except me) can use in a duel. The exception I was describing is more for the benefit of an average pilot rather than the top sticks anyways.

Baumer you made some great points, I was playing Devil's Advocate, but was just trying to illustrate the gray area that is the "fair shot".  I think I did so.  Imo, any shot aside from a pure HO is fair game, it is nice though when regular duelers take that a step further and show some additional respect for one another and be careful they only take shots they 'earned'.  It makes it more fun for both involved.

Offline FireDrgn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #58 on: May 24, 2010, 04:58:16 PM »

Is this the accepted definition  of Ho... ?   "When  both pilots have a gunsolution at the same time."

I did not get hoed one time last night  by players that I saw ho other players.  How is this possible?
 I never went for a gunsolution at the same time as the other player.   Its really  very simple.


The real deal is some players have not figured out how to minimize the front quarter shot to the point where that is a better option for them. :airplane: 

A Ho is a bad idea, in context of cartoon survivability, i dont care how many merges you make.   If anyone disagrees  just PM me  ill be happy to oblige.

The only good time to HO is when teaching How hoeing is a bad idea.



<S>
"When the student is ready the teacher will appear."   I am not a teacher.

Offline Baumer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
      • 332nd Flying Mongrels
Re: Reviewing the "HO"
« Reply #59 on: May 24, 2010, 05:51:04 PM »
Thanks Grizz I agree btw about the fun of a duel. Bighorn, Batfinkv, and Lengro beat me more often with the terrain (i.e. I hit a tree or the ground) than bullets.

Personally the best duel I've ever been part of was Lengro and Bighorn flying B5N's with Batfink and I gunning for them. To see how well Lengro and Bighorn worked to stay in front of the target was an amazing experience (and one that showed me how much I still need to learn). 
HTC Please show the blue planes some love!
F4F-4, FM2, SBD-5, TBM-3