Tracers

[dedalos]

Nothing the human eye can pick up.And besides turn tracers off and on and check FR i just did (no difference) So tracers on or off vs FR dont matter.

Maybe to you.  Not everyone has the same system.  Not to mention that what your eye sees is irrelevant to what the game is seeing or doing in the background.  Remeber, I was seeing planes going through tracers.  If the game saw the same thing that plane would be hit.

[Vinkman]

Yes, simply because they provide feedback when you miss.  Hit sprites are only good when you hit.  Without tracers, how would you know if you are firing long or short, up or down?

Ded, the rest of my post explains why tracers don't provide the feedback you suggest they do. 

[Sunka]

Maybe to you.  Not everyone has the same system.  Not to mention that what your eye sees is irrelevant to what the game is seeing or doing in the background.  Remeber, I was seeing planes going through tracers.  If the game saw the same thing that plane would be hit.

Well your right that what your eye is seeing dose not matter in real time,but as i said my PC FR dont change and i don't have a high end PC.
No matter though what works for one person dose not work for others and their have been many opinions shard ,which I'm sure has been a help to the owner of this thread.

[Oldman731]

A frequent reply is "go closer then"... but I'm happy being able to do off-angle killshots at D600 with tracers on

Another good point.  Disabling tracers generally makes you hold your fire until you're at more historic ranges and angles.

- oldman

[Sunka]

Another good point.  Disabling tracers generally makes you hold your fire until you're at more historic ranges and angles.

- oldman

Yea but i DO use tracers and NEVER fire till im 200 off...so its all in the player and them (wanting) to have i good hit%.

[STEELE]

I'd like the option to load tracers into mg belts only, leave them out of cannon belts.

[321BAR]

I'd like the option to load tracers into mg belts only, leave them out of cannon belts.

what would this accomplish?

[Krusty]

It would let him game the game by "making runners turn" without wasting cannon ammo which he would only use in actual "kill shots" in close.

[321BAR]

It would let him game the game by "making runners turn" without wasting cannon ammo which he would only use in actual "kill shots" in close.

then he can just shoot the damn MG and save the cannon by primary secondary function

[GNucks]

then he can just shoot the damn MG and save the cannon by primary secondary function

That's what I was thinking. Fire primary to make 'em turn and fire all when it's time to kill. And in my opinion not loading tracers on the cannons wouldn't make a difference because I never fire them unless I'm so close there's nothing he can do about it.

[Krusty]

then he can just shoot the damn MG and save the cannon by primary secondary function

I meant he doesn't want to have tracers normally when he's in getting killshots (where he uses the cannons only).

[321BAR]

I meant he doesn't want to have tracers normally when he's in getting killshots (where he uses the cannons only).

still confused... what difference... augh brain melting... i give up

[Krusty]

Exactly, IMO. Not much difference. Pointless request IMO.

I'm in the camp that turning tracers off forces you to do the mental computation to get the right lead. The positive reinforcement when you land hits (i.e. sprites) rewards that and you learn better. I also think that tracers simply "clutter" the screen, and if you rely on them like a crutch you're not doing the mental math. It's a shame they're almost useless (I totally agree with the description that you can't tell if they're in front of or behind the target, just judging distance is hopeless) because they look cool. They just screw up my shots far too much to use regularly. Also they are negative reinforcement, only showing that you've missed.


It's better to learn what to DO, rather than what NOT to do. Tracers "off" shows you what to do.

[bustr]

By 1945 tracers were being used in many U.S. ETO fighters as the first few in the last 50 rounds in the belt to allow the pilot to know he was about to be out.

8th Airforce bomber command found that tracers were good for waking up bomber gunners dozing at alt when the few and last flights of the Luft came through in 45. Or, german pilots admitted seeing tracers coming at them caused them to flinch attacking from the tail or nose against those bombers.

During WW2 the american .50cal tracer round was not the same as an API round. It did not have the armor peircing ability or incedinary quality of the standard API. American fighter pilots loaded up the belt except for at the end with API to get more bang for the buck so to say.

The 8th Airforce through testing found that the tracer created an optical illusion and caused pilots and gunners to forget to focuse on their sight picture and rely on the tracer light. Relying on the tracer ment you were focused on rounds that were every other 5th or so which ment your lead was that much behind the curve at combat speeds. The tracer ball of fire was also behind the round visualy and in timing not in the same physical space as the round itself. So you were tracking late on target opposed to relying on your training, gunsight and knowing how to lead shoot.

The Luft discontiued tracer rounds for the same reasons. They did not use tracer rounds during pilot training becasue they wanted their pilots to rely on knowing their graticule sight picture. Their convergences for cannon and MG had been standardised along with knowing where the round streams should impact related to the standarised Revi graticules.

I'm sure some of you have a copy of or can find the following for free on the Internet:

(Schiessfibel.pdf) Illustrates the Luft's focus on precision aiming via the sight picture. Or the British (Bag the Hun.pdf) which relys on learning your sight picture relative to the angle of travers of your con.

By 1945 the 8th Airforce had determined that loading your belt with a single type of ammo was more productive due to the low number of rounds that actualy struck the target opposed to the luft practice earlier in the war of mixed round types in their belts. If you are not hitting fuel lines and/or tanks and only hit the fusualge with incedinary went the logic. American belts on fighters were filled with API and tracers had almost been totaly discontiued as a standared by 45 in the allied and german airforces.

U.S. Navy and AAF had similare thoughts on this in the PTO concerning tracer ammo and it signaling the enemy pilot. Hit percentages increased as tracer ammo was discontinued.

If you can find a free download some of this comes from an 8th Airforce report.

United States Strategic Bombing Survey
Report On
Armament In The Air War
1939-1945
Published at London, 1945

If Hitech would give us a check mark in the hanger to pick and choose tracers on/off for each aircraft or manable gun I would leave tracers on for wirbel and manned ack. But, in the heat of the moment drilling down through the menus is often a pain in the pooty just to enable and disable one check box all night long.

[mtnman]

i can tell certain things are slightly over your head...

Lol, over?  Nah, but my chin isn't tilted so high I can't see it down there either...

I understand perfectly well what you're saying, I just consider it bad advice and even superstitious.  So far, every bit of "evidence" (I've seen) listed to support the argument to turn off tracers is circumstantial, with zero/zippo/zilch data to say otherwise.

yes i have taught marksmanship...as a civilian and in the military.

Your military service keeps me from dismissing you off-hand (normally I just take it as a sign of intellectual defeat when the person I'm conversing with gives up and resorts to what amounts to name-calling).  Whether you deserve it or not is up to you to decide.  It's neither here there to me.  I'm not trying to "win" an "argument".  I'm merely refuting what I see as bad advice which (IMO) will serve to discourage (or handicap) the players who need good advice the most.

now i'm sure you are a good instructor and above average marksman, but i have to ask...when was the last time you used tracers to teach someone how to shoot a rifle or pistol, in real life?

Never.  And I don't intend to.  I've generally used paper to teach the basics.  The nice thing about paper is that it gives feedback for all but the worst misses.  If the student is aiming at the ten-ring, a hit in the nine (or worse) is a miss.  Not a "bad" miss necessarily, but they certainly didn't hit what they intended to, either.  Those misses give feedback, and aids the instructor in teaching better marksmanship.  Without the feedback, there's no point in an instructor, is there?  Once the basics are learned, one can move on to more challenging aspects, but when problems arise, it's back to paper and the feedback it gives...

In AH, there's no paper.  Tracers make up for that, and give some semblance of the feedback paper gives (although, like paper, it's open to the interpretation of the user, and admittedly not all are equally skilled nor observant in that regard).  Filming (of course), adds to the ability to interpret what's happening in the game.

if you have ever fired an automatic weapon with tracers you would know that real life tracers don't have the same visual effect as they do in this game...

Not the same situation as in-game though.

...and that is simply because my stats in this game have exactly zero influence on my life.

Not supported by your posts...  It looks like you strive to improve, , seek out advice in order to improve, make changes in an effort to improve, and then attempt to measure the improvement.  That's what I get out of this anyway- is it not what you meant?

i actually listened to some advice another player far above my cartoon skill level and turned off tracers for a bit then went into the dueling arena to practice...it helped bring my focus to the sight picture, not take low percentage shots, not fire beyond 500 yards and use shorter bursts...as you can see by other responses, i'm not the only one who has done the no tracers and found some measure of improved gunnery.

I'd also argue that what helped you was mental discipline, not lack of tracers.  You tried harder, and focused on the task at hand.  None of what you learned couldn't have been learned with tracers on.  Turning tracers off was essentially a "superstitious gimmick" that you attached more credit to than it deserved.  Not a bad thing necessarily.  Some people wear "lucky socks", or religious medals, etc, for the same reason.  You proved that you could improve with dedicated practice, not that tracers were hindering you.