Gunner for planes that can not fly in formations

[lyric1]

It's not a bad idea. 

[icepac]

.otto b- 0.5 b+ 4 b++ 4 rt 0 rg D9

[Bino]

Back in WarBirds, the topic of "Otto" robot gunners was hotly debated during the entire time I played the game.  Bomber pilots wanted laser-beam perfect accuracy, fighter pilots wanted something more like Real Life.  It was always a very divisive topic.

[Condor11]

Have to say i love the idea of an AI gunner with a realistic level of accuracy.
It would allow planes such as the 410, 110, stukas, tbm, BSD (insert many many more here) to actually have some chance at survival. Especially since currently non formation planes ( attackers like the 410 and il2) have that extra weight yet are virtually dead if the pilot jumps into the gun position. Adding AI would make these much more realistic targets, even if they only could cause minor damage, simply because now a pilot can attempt to maneuver away from potential attacks and still Harv a chance to score a kill with a very lucky ping. Survivability in non formation attack planes is very low because usually the options are incredibly limited on the defensive, usually coming down to "Can i avoid his guns long enough that a friendly might happen to come help, or he runs outta ammo.

Might even pull some planes away from the hangar queen stigma if pilots felt slightly more assured that they could stand a chance given a ftr interception

[-aper-]

Back in WarBirds, the topic of "Otto" robot gunners was hotly debated during the entire time I played the game.  Bomber pilots wanted laser-beam perfect accuracy, fighter pilots wanted something more like Real Life.  It was always a very divisive topic.

AH current man-gunning system works perfect for heavy bombers flying in formations. Unfortunately it doesn't work well for light bombers, attack planes and heavy fighters with gunner positions. For these planes it would be better and more realistic to have "ottos" (AI gunners) modeled.

[Citabria]

when you ad ai to an online game you remove the player element. you are no longer fighting one of several players flying the plane you are fighting the programmer that coded the ai.

I would prefer full control of the plane from gun positions before diminishing the variety of human interaction by having ai do all the work. I know this would work because of how hated ar234 rear guns are. (I hate them)

the human gunners are somthing treasured and respected when skilled in this game.

I ended up trying to shoot 999000 the other day and was vaporized at long range trying to setup a 50mm shot in my 410 hizookamobile. I thought to myself... damn I wish I was that good at defensive fire gunnery.

add in the reviled otto and you have essentially removed one of the few elements of bombers that is actually envied and enjoyable for many people.

[-aper-]

when you ad ai to an online game you remove the player element. you are no longer fighting one of several players flying the plane you are fighting the programmer that coded the ai.

I would prefer full control of the plane from gun positions before diminishing the variety of human interaction by having ai do all the work. I know this would work because of how hated ar234 rear guns are. (I hate them)

the human gunners are somthing treasured and respected when skilled in this game.

I ended up trying to shoot 999000 the other day and was vaporized at long range trying to setup a 50mm shot in my 410 hizookamobile. I thought to myself... damn I wish I was that good at defensive fire gunnery.

add in the reviled otto and you have essentially removed one of the few elements of bombers that is actually envied and enjoyable for many people.

It is pretty obvious that there are some planes that do not need ai gunners (heavy bombers flying in formations). And there are some planes that need ai gunners (Light bombers, attack planes and heavy fighters). Nothing wrong to get AH system implemented for heavy bombers and WB system implemented to other planes with gunners.

[save]

Back in WarBirds, the topic of "Otto" robot gunners was hotly debated during the entire time I played the game.  Bomber pilots wanted laser-beam perfect accuracy, fighter pilots wanted something more like Real Life.  It was always a very divisive topic.

A AH defensive formation of 3 B17s are more accurate and deadly that a whole section of 18 where IRL.

[Greebo]

The OP was only wanting otto gunners for heavy fighters and attack planes, not for large level bombers. This does beg the question of where you draw the line however. Should an attack plane like the B-25H have otto gunners for instance?

[Butcher]

The OP was only wanting otto gunners for heavy fighters and attack planes, not for large level bombers. This does beg the question of where you draw the line however. Should an attack plane like the B-25H have otto gunners for instance?

I see no reason it shouldn't, it doesn't fly in formation - same as Il-2 and A-20.

[Citabria]

I don't want to fight AI.

find a way to make rear gunning in weak defense attack aircraft if you want (normal controls from gunenr position and mouse controlling gun movement)

but be honest about what your asking for.

you can currently gun and do limited turns and climb or dive on autopilot while manning your own gun. you cant gun and do offensive dogfighting at the same time.


you can have a gunner join you but then you have to fly level for them to have any chance of landing a shot because they cant anticipate your movements which are made worse by netlag.


id propose making the attack aircraft flyable from gunner positions because they have such weak defensive fire that flying level with them like a heavy bomber ends in death almost every time.

the real reason people dont use the rear guns as much is because the destructive power of the defensive fire is inferior to the fighters attacking resulting in the defenders death.

[999000]

Cobia38 I wish i was 1/2 as good as you in my B17 as you are in the A20!!!!
999000 <S>

[StabOps]

I could use someone to sight and pull the trigger in MY light bomber. My gunnery sux

Stab

[-aper-]

I don't want to fight AI.

Most of the field guns are ai-operated. Is it a big deal?

id propose making the attack aircraft flyable from gunner positions because they have such weak defensive fire that flying level with them like a heavy bomber ends in death almost every time.

I have no idea how are you going to control a plane while operating the turret and MG. Flying forward, sitting backward controlling plane with joystick & pedals plus MG with a mouse at the same time. If you master it I vote for Defiant 

the real reason people don't use the rear guns as much is because the destructive power of the defensive fire is inferior to the fighters attacking resulting in the defenders death.

So, what is your point? The defensive fire is inferior to that of the fighters and ai gunner will not ruin the gameplay and will not create a problem here. Right?
The real reason people do not use rear gunners is because when you jump into the gunner position you plane instantly becomes a very easy target. Is it realistic? No
Is is good to gameplay? No. Does it make sense? No. So why not try to fix this problem by adding an ai gunner ?

[danny76]

+1

Otherwise every such A/C might as well just empty the rear gun ammo and sling the weapon and mount over the side before upping. Is the raer crewmember's weight modelled as well. If so he can get out too. if not it should be if/when ai is included