PDA

View Full Version : Attacking bombers which tactic to you use.



rfxcasey
05-21-2010, 09:47 AM
When attacking bombers I like to use 1 of 3 tactics. First I like head on attacks, secondly boom and zoom from the side, lastly sometimes I will sit as far back as I can at their 6 o'clock and stick and move repeatedly to avoid return fire. What's your favorite or most successful tactic?

rfxcasey
05-21-2010, 09:47 AM
When attacking bombers I like to use 1 of 3 tactics. First I like head on attacks, secondly boom and zoom from the side, lastly sometimes I will sit as far back as I can at their 6 o'clock and stick and move repeatedly to avoid return fire. What's your favorite or most successful tactic?

TinyTim
05-21-2010, 10:06 AM
That completely depends on what aircraft am I flying, the type of the bombers, the presence of escorts, the general positional situation - sometimes bombers are too close to the target so you need to act quickly and do not have time to climb above them or run infront to attack headon, if you want to get them before they unleash hell.

However, given I'm flying heavily armed plane, and neglecting situational limitations (I can position myself freely wherever I want and I have enough time to do so) then I attack from bomber's 12 oclock low in a very shallow climb, so it's nearly a headon. I find this position to be very hard for the gunners to hit me, while I can hit the bomber very easily, with high chances of either killing the crew or the engines. It's very hard to get the crew or engines from rear hemisphere on the other hand.

Drawback of this tactics is that it takes a lot of time to position yourself for another similar attack, so usually after the initial attack I described above, I climb above bomber(s) and BnZ them from side to side (from their 4 oclock high to 8 high and back).

BillSwagger
05-21-2010, 10:10 AM
I use all of the tactics you mentioned, but i also like to zoom from the underside and do a vertical attack. If i have the energy, then i'll repeat with a strike from above.

Ideally, i try to BnZ from the sides as you mentioned.


Bill

Ba5tard5word
05-21-2010, 10:12 AM
Head on is best because you'll face the least fire but you will probably only be able to do it once on one plane unless you're in a really fast plane. From the side is ok but is the trickiest to get hits in because you'll usually have to do good deflection shooting. From above and behind is also good but requires a long time spent flying up with enough altitude to scream down on the target, and as you're moving up the bombers are moving forward and away from you, but if you keep your speed up you can make repeated dives. Dead six is usually how I end up doing it just out of necessity especially if the bombers are fairly fast (like say over 350kph) and especially if they are moving quickly to the target. Technically it's a bad idea but most of the time I get lucky and don't get hit by the bombers so long as they're at average or rookie AI.

Something I like to try from dead six is to line my sights up on the furthest left or right bomber then bank to the side so I make a pass across all four bombers while firing. Seems like I can do this easier with my CH flight stick which gives me good precise control. If I have strong cannon weaponry this is usually a good way to heavily damage all the bombers while moving quickly enough to avoid getting hit by the bombers. Il-2 rather stupidly forces all AI bombers to fly in the same four-across flight formations so they are easy to hit this way. Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe let you specify formations (diamonds, echelons etc) and that came out almost 20 years ago, it would be nice if Il-2 let us do the same!

JtD
05-21-2010, 10:20 AM
Normally I go for high side attacks, because I'm usually in planes that can't kill the bomber in the first pass. Maneuvering for another head on takes too much time.

na85
05-21-2010, 11:43 AM
Head ons are by far the best tactic. Inside the cockpit are soft, unarmored humans without whom the aircraft cannot operate. Failing that I've found lately that diving for speed and pulling up so that you come straight up vertically at the bomber from below works really well.

The AI gunners seem to have trouble hitting you and a human gunner might not even notice you, assuming their gun can even traverse to the angle required to hit you (B-17)

R_Target
05-21-2010, 02:39 PM
High-side, overhead, and head-on; in that order. With a properly executed high-side, you can't be hit for most or all of your gunnery run.

ROXunreal
05-21-2010, 02:51 PM
Head on works the best but it takes luck and/or time to get in position for it. High speed bnz from 4-5-6-7-8 o clock is what I usually use.

For american bombers, especially b-29, I aim for the cockpit even if diving from high 6. Even a cockpit hit from high and behind can sever controls and/or kill/injure the pilot. DO NOT shoot the fuselage itself because you are just wasting ammo, US heavies can take insane amounts of fuselage hits and be practically unaffected. If not for the cockpit, aim for the wing root and outer wing fuel tanks, though this part is also very tough on a B-29. Usually with those I go for cockpit hits or disengage before its inhuman gunners kill MY pilot http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Don't try to "kill" the tail gunner in the 29 or 17, you won't.

Other bombers are much easier kills. An A-20 you can engage from dead 6 if you can shoot good and fast, a few 20mm hits on the engines or wings stand a good chance of dewinging, has a pretty weak wing root that plane. B-25 is TOUGH for its size, use bnz and shoot the wing roots as they frequently catch fire. Fuselage hits also work more on this one, probably severing controls.

German bombers are a piece of cake if you have 20mm's. The Heinkels are slow and you can do repeated bnz attacks, Ju-88's are fast but very weak, even with only MG fire you stand a good chance of killing everything in the cockpit if you place your shots right, its wings are also easy to break with cannons. The Russian Pe-8 is slow and weak but its ShKAS gunners are deadly. Bnz-ing the cockpit and wings will work though, maybe even in a first pass. With a 190 A4 I usually dewing the thing on first pass. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Dive bombers with only one gunner you can approach from dead 6 low where their gunners can't shoot and kill them easily. The ones that have a top and bottom gunner I would recommend bnz-ing also.

The german Ar-234 jet bomber is way too fast to even think of engaging at co-alt, but if you have one far below you and are in a fast plane, shut your radiators and dive at full speed. if you're above 700km/h you can have enough time to shoot it down, aim for the engines, only a few hits required to bring it down.

One more thing, the japanese Betty, can be very tough for MG-only planes. I emptied my entire 303 load off a Hurricane into a Betty from dead 6 and did nothing to it, and many many of those hits were aimed at the engines, only light smoke...and it also has a 20mm tail gunner which WILL shoot you down if you stay on its 6 for too long.

TinyTim
05-21-2010, 02:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
Head ons are by far the best tactic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you look only at a single pass - sure. But during the time required to turn around, overtake the bombers and go for another headon attack, you can do at least 10 BnZ passes from side to side, assuming you are not flying insanely fast fighter versus absurdly slow bombers.

TinyTim
05-21-2010, 03:41 PM
My fav method:

http://www.shrani.si/f/2A/np/3Ufi7Z4Y/bullseye.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

my "other" fav method:

http://www.shrani.si/f/19/7o/4184h3n9/bullseye1.jpg

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

na85
05-21-2010, 04:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
Head ons are by far the best tactic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you look only at a single pass - sure. But during the time required to turn around, overtake the bombers and go for another headon attack, you can do at least 10 BnZ passes from side to side, assuming you are not flying insanely fast fighter versus absurdly slow bombers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was thinking more along the lines of "most effective attack per pass"

Assuming your shots hit, you're going to do serious damage almost every time you spray rounds into the canopy from head on.

Ba5tard5word
05-21-2010, 04:38 PM
W...wait...is there a Shinden plane for UP???? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif


Also if you are up against a plane with a rear gunner that is up top like an Il-2 or Ju-87, you can generally pretty safely cruise behind and below it and fire at it for as long as you want, at least until the pilot starts jerking it around and pointing its gun down at you......

TinyTim
05-21-2010, 05:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
W...wait...is there a Shinden plane for UP???? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not in a UP (yet), I added it manually. I found it over at AAA.

WTE_Galway
05-21-2010, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
W...wait...is there a Shinden plane for UP???? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif


Also if you are up against a plane with a rear gunner that is up top like an Il-2 or Ju-87, you can generally pretty safely cruise behind and below it and fire at it for as long as you want, at least until the pilot starts jerking it around and pointing its gun down at you...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Blenheim is another one.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I use all of the tactics you mentioned, but i also like to zoom from the underside and do a vertical attack. If i have the energy, then i'll repeat with a strike from above. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In IL2 i seem to get best success, especially with rifle calibre guns like the '38 hurri by doing just this. Basically dive under and gain speed, come up vertically fire at about 20-30 metres out, overshoot, do a wingover and come back down and hit again from directly above. Repeat as necessary.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Ideally, i try to BnZ from the sides as you mentioned.

Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Historically this was a common one as many bombers only had a single waste gunner, either by design (he111) or crew shortages (B17/24) who covered both sides. In BoB the RAF commonly arranged someone to feint from one side to draw the gunner to that side of the he111 before initiating the real attack from the opposite side to the gunner.

bracknell1989
05-22-2010, 07:05 AM
oddly enough, I find that the Sturm (is that right word?) tactics work well.

Coming from 6oclock and firing the 13mm mgs will often inflict damage before you're in the gunners accurate range.

Of course this can go wrong and you end up with a a bloody nose.

The most effective however, is the head on attack which can take down a heavy bomber with a half second burst. Especially fun in the 190 with it's battery of weapons!

ROXunreal
05-22-2010, 07:51 AM
or just put 108's in your 190 and shoot anywhere http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AndyJWest
05-22-2010, 08:21 AM
I know which tactics I should use, but far too often I seem to end up pootling up behind on their dead six, with the usual consequences. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Head-on works though. or if you are in a really fast well-armed plane (Me-262), a high slashing pass on a formation from their 11 or 1 o'clock works - even better if you have the air-to-air rockets. I took out two B-17s in one pass like that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TinyTim
05-22-2010, 04:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AndyJWest:
I know which tactics I should use, but far too often I seem to end up pootling up behind on their dead six, with the usual consequences. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, well, it's easy to build a dream house on an unlimited budget. But sometimes you'll have to go with a slovenly and collapsing barn due to lack of funds.

In other words - all this theory about attacking from above and from front etc. includes an inherent asumption you either have a complete freedom to create initial conditions that suite you, either a good deal of luck with initial conditions already being according to your wishes. But usually you simply don't have any of these two, especially since the bomber is an attacker with an initiative, the one that decides where, when, how high, at what wheater, what escorts etc etc, you have to fight in the arena he chose, not vice versa.

For example - you are from behind trying to catch a bomber who is just about to drop its bombload in a fighter not much faster than the bomber - well here you'll just go for a dead 6 attack hoping to prevent the bombing or at least screw up his aim. Or when you scramble and climb up there like the spanked monkey with bombers above you already opening bomb bay doors... Not to even start about a situation where bombers are escorted.

Setting unescorted bombers without a target in QMB and yourself wherever in space you want is one thing. Playing a historical mission where you must scramble and climb to 20k to intercept escorted bomber formation on realistic settings is another entirely. So, absolutely no need for rolleyeing yourself, Andy. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

na85
05-23-2010, 11:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AndyJWest:
I know which tactics I should use, but far too often I seem to end up pootling up behind on their dead six, with the usual consequences. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Head-on works though. or if you are in a really fast well-armed plane (Me-262), a high slashing pass on a formation from their 11 or 1 o'clock works - even better if you have the air-to-air rockets. I took out two B-17s in one pass like that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The WfrGr.21 rockets are awesome. One of the guys in my squad got 2x B-17s in one go during our last USL match. The rockets exploded on the one bomber's wing, and the other bomber was in tight formation and took some of the shrapnel. They both went down.

Christos_swc
05-26-2010, 12:04 AM
I attack from above if possible.
If not I will try to attack from behind coming in slightly higher and from an angle.
This gives you a big target and allows for more destructive hits.
It's much easier to brake up a bomber firing on it's "roof" than on it's tail, same as with fighters.
Deflection shooting works best with bombers also.
I've set my guns at 100m so I always get in close before I open fire.
You really need to come in fast though or you become a good target for the gunners.
That's why you should take the time to get some extra alt if needed before making your pass.

LtLenny
05-26-2010, 08:28 PM
I try to attack from above, but for some reason I always wind up on the bomber's six, with, and AndyJWest puts it, the usual results. By the way, were rear gunners this accurate in real life?

WTE_Galway
05-26-2010, 08:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LtLenny:
I try to attack from above, but for some reason I always wind up on the bomber's six, with, and AndyJWest puts it, the usual results. By the way, were rear gunners this accurate in real life? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It gets argued to death here but my impression is yeah they were were pretty much, if you are parked 100m behind a bomber and not ducking and weaving you present pretty much an unmoving static target to tail gunners.

The complaints about "sniper" AI are more to do with the way the AI can be spinning with one wing shot off 500 meters away and still occasionally get a shot in.

JtD
05-26-2010, 10:30 PM
"this" accurate? Well, I'd say they were as accurate but in a different way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The AI sometimes hits in situations that are completely unrealistic, however, they sometimes suck where a human gunner would very easily pick you apart. It's my impression that all in all, it evens out.

Blue_5
05-27-2010, 08:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"this" accurate? Well, I'd say they were as accurate but in a different way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It’s a long and complex debate but I’d say there is certainly truth in that. An average gunner on an average day would hit a fighter in a no-deflection shot at 200-300 yards. Certainly a formation of 3 or more bombers would be dangerous to approach from the rear without good overtaking speed.

What is less likely is the high deflection shots on fighters with 200 mph plus overtaking speed diving past. This is particularly true of those gunners with handheld / hand-aimed weapons but in game they can sometimes get very ‘lucky’. Also, there seems to be a low rate of gunner death or wounding when shooting at a bomber, maybe this should be a little higher (but I have no statistics to argue this). Finally, it is almost impossible to surprise a gunner and they seem to prioritise human aircraft over AI attackers (or maybe I’m imagining that).

For some reason, I find Stuka and Pe-2/3 gunners the most trying. Not sure why but they seem to manage a propeller governor hit even at the most difficult angles.

rfxcasey
05-27-2010, 09:16 AM
I will have to agree with this argument. Sitting at a bombers 6 o'clock 100 to 200 meters back is asking for trouble in a real life situation. Especially on something like a B-17 with a heavy two barreled electric turret in the hind. I also have to agree with crew death rate seeming a bit low. I can shot the hell out of a tail gunner right in his face with canons and he doesn't die. I find this along with the wast gunner deflection accuracy to need a bit of toning down.

horseback
05-27-2010, 03:31 PM
In real life a bomber by itself was usually an easy kill for a fighter that could approach with a reasonable speed advantage; WWII bombers were not remotely as steady a firing platform as a player or AI gunner on an AI piloted aircraft in-game enjoys.

In-game, the AI gunners on a human piloted bomber are considerably less accurate than those on AI piloted units due to the greater 'wobble' humans put into their flying, but in my experience, the gunners on heavy bombers in massed formations like the ones actually used by USAAF units are pretty comparable to the real thing (the singletons are still a bit too effective, IMHO).

On the other hand, the AI gunners on the medium bombers flown by most other air forces are a bit ridiculous; they are MUCH more effective at greater ranges and angles than the gunners on the American 'heavies' (usually while firing much smaller caliber MGs), and they tend to wander from their formations at the slightest provocation, something that would not be tolerated in a combat unit (never ever leave your wingman/mutual support, don't you know).

This is totally ahistorical. Almost every air force prior to those American lunatics decided to stick to mostly night bombing after taking horrendous losses in attempting massed daylight bombing raids against targets defended by modern fighters. The Americans flew higher, at higher speeds in larger numbers with more gunners in more effective mounts, and they still took a pounding if faced by fighter opposition without their own fighter escort to defend them.

In addition, the ai gunners' aims are unaffected by their own aircraft twisting and bobbing up and down or by being hit by return fire, things that would disrupt the most skilled marksman. When we get to the single engined attack bombers and the two seat fighters like the Il-2 and Me-110, the situation becomes totally unrealistic.

cheers

horseback

rfxcasey
06-07-2010, 05:01 AM
I hate to rehash on this but the other night I was flying Navy ops in my Hellcat and started to realize something while in DCG career mode.

I had just successfully shot down 4 A6M5s one of which turned out to be an ace. While doing one last fighter sweep over enemy territory and providing support for our exiting Avengers and Dauntless, I spotted 4 Vals at about 13k ft.

Engaging the Vals I was able to get one of them separated from the pack. I singled out this lone Val and decided to make a high speed sweeping pass from his 9 o'clock. Landing a few hits on the Val my pilot was promptly killed my the Val's tailgunner with what seemed like a single shot.

Having had this sort of thing happen several times I have since come to the conclusion that a single barreled tailgunner is much more dangerous then the enemy fighters. I have been killed or had my plane severally damaged by Val tailgunners many more times per ca pita then the actual enemy fighters. The only thing that seems to even come close the their level of effectiveness in perhaps AAA and Flak.

I have since stayed completely away from bombers Vals in particular and while averaging 3 to 4 air to air kills per mission have had a incredibly higher survival rate.

Now I just leave the bombers to the AI. Oleg can keep his stinking Vals which by the way are pretty hard to bring down in the first place.

TinyTim
06-07-2010, 05:42 AM
Agreed, Val gunner is very deadly. Appears to be much more so than gunners on many other planes, even US "porcupines" infested by dual .50cals all around the fuselage - if you don't attack from dead 6.

However - even an AI Val gunner is more than a n00b amateur compared to the gunner of Letov Š-328. Try for fun attacking this one, and you'll come screaming back to Val. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

horseback
06-07-2010, 09:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Rfxcasey wrote: I will have to agree with this argument. Sitting at a bomber’s 6 o'clock 100 to 200 meters back is asking for trouble in a real life situation. Especially on something like a B-17 with a heavy two barreled electric turret in the hind. I also have to agree with crew death rate seeming a bit low. I can shot the hell out of a tail gunner right in his face with cannons and he doesn't die. I find this along with the waist gunner deflection accuracy to need a bit of toning down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe attacking at 6 o’clock level at a hundred meters or less would be a Very Bad Idea, but you have to think about how hard it is to aim from a platform even gently moving, bouncing and jerking in three dimensions while in a kneeling position for an hour or two at a time. Let’s not dwell on the fact that the aiming device wasn’t remotely in the class of the reflector sights on most fighters, or that the poor bastage scrunched into that little gunner’s compartment was usually half-frozen for at least the first half of the war…the powered Cheyenne tail turrets for the B-17 tail position came with the late F/early G models in 1944. Earlier E/F Fortress models had tail guns that were moved directly by human muscle and apparently aimed through a crude ring and bead sight.

B-24s had powered tail turrets from the beginning, but the Liberator was a skidding, slipping, bouncing, swaying mess compared to the more stable Fortress; Liberator formations were notoriously loose, and achieved less mutual support as a result. They could fly faster, higher and farther, but they couldn’t fly a tight formation and paid a higher price for that failing.

USAAF heavy bomber formations defended themselves primarily by sheer volume of fire, not individual accuracy; those boxes of bombers were positioned to provide the greatest mutual support, and an approaching fighter faced at least eight or ten gunners firing lots of heavy rounds, not just one or two guys with rifle caliber popguns and magazines that had to be switched every couple of minutes.

As for the crew death rate, from my own studies of hundreds of tracks (“I know I got that guy!”), it looks to me as though the gunners can only be ‘hit’ in their exposed torsos or through (unarmored) windows, and that it takes about three to five hits to ‘kill’ them. You cannot hit them through the skin of the aircraft, and hits on their guns have no effect—no ‘machine gun disabled’ messages for them! Shredding the fuselage around the gunner means absolutely nothing unless you hit him repeatedly through a window or in the parts of his virtual body showing above/outside the cockpit.

One can only hope that this will change when the Battle of Britain sim is released; otherwise, we’ll just be looking at a LW shooting gallery.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Blue_5 wrote: It’s a long and complex debate but I’d say there is certainly truth in that. An average gunner on an average day would hit a fighter in a no-deflection shot at 200-300 yards. Certainly a formation of 3 or more bombers would be dangerous to approach from the rear without good overtaking speed.

What is less likely is the high deflection shots on fighters with 200 mph plus overtaking speed diving past. This is particularly true of those gunners with handheld / hand-aimed weapons but in game they can sometimes get very ‘lucky’. Also, there seems to be a low rate of gunner death or wounding when shooting at a bomber, maybe this should be a little higher (but I have no statistics to argue this). Finally, it is almost impossible to surprise a gunner and they seem to prioritize human aircraft over AI attackers (or maybe I’m imagining that).

For some reason, I find Stuka and Pe-2/3 gunners the most trying. Not sure why but they seem to manage a propeller governor hit even at the most difficult angles. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No question in my mind that the ai gunners are much too accurate, especially when firing at extreme angles. They definitely do prioritize the Player’s aircraft, and considering that it’s probably harder to program an ai gunner routine that doesn’t prioritize the Player’s position, I’m not terribly surprised. It is a lot safer to attack a formation with lots of buddies, though. If you don’t get too far out in front of (or behind) your formation, you’re less likely to get hit, although still more likely than your ai wingmen.

What irks me is getting hit from angles where it is obviously impossible for a real gunner to aim over his sights at me, or in the case of the ‘tunnel’ guns, where he couldn’t see me period, and those situations when the real life gunner would be too busy trying not to be thrown around the inside of the fuselage to be shooting, much less shooting accurately, i.e., when looping, rolling and diving.

That stuff is beyond the pale, and should have been fixed years ago.

cheers

horseback

JtD
06-07-2010, 12:26 PM
Did a similar 9 o'clock quite a few years back in a Ki-61 against a TBF. Zoomed past it at about 700km/h or roughly 200m/s. The AI just waited for me to fly in their field of fire, and opened in the split second I entered it. They didn't train the gun after opening fire. The Ki-61 is 9m long, so the gunner had 0.045s to hit me. The ventral gunner, the guy who shot at me, fires a Browning 0.30. In game, it has a rate of fire of 1000rpm, one round every 0.060s.

He hit me twice. To this day I haven't figured out how.

horseback
06-07-2010, 01:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The Ki-61 is 9m long, so the gunner had 0.045s to hit me. The ventral gunner, the guy who shot at me, fires a Browning 0.30. In game, it has a rate of fire of 1000rpm, one round every 0.060s.

He hit me twice. To this day I haven't figured out how. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I have; there was no 'he', there was a computer program tooling along at a leisurely 2.4-3.2GHz, dividing each second into fractions of nanoseconds. It had plenty of time to plot your path, position the gun barrel's video representation, and 'fire' it at the proper microsecond.

For a human, it would be a brilliant (and unbelievably lucky, once in a lifetime, never to be repeated) shot; for a computer program that doesn't attempt to model the human limitations of the gunners on real warplanes, it was all in a day's work.

Got your engine or prop pitch control, too, didn't he?

cheers

horseback

Ba5tard5word
06-07-2010, 01:10 PM
Seems like lately the AI has taken to killing my pilot with one shot as I dive in at top speed on them..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

JtD
06-07-2010, 01:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:I have; there was no 'he', there was a computer program tooling along at a leisurely 2.4-3.2GHz, dividing each second into fractions of nanoseconds. It had plenty of time to plot your path, position the gun barrel's video representation, and 'fire' it at the proper microsecond. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Horseback, that allows him to hit me _once_. But since he did not train the gun, following my flightpath, he could not have possibly hit me a second time. I had simply flown through his fire by then. (Not that he actually had opened fire before he hit me.)

He hit my engine, setting it on fire, and wounded the pilot heavily.

TheGrunch
06-07-2010, 01:48 PM
Was that on a track, though, JtD? I don't think they're perfect in terms of gun-positions and suchlike.

Heavy_Weather
06-07-2010, 01:53 PM
attacking from above while shooting at the wing tip.

stalkervision
06-07-2010, 02:03 PM
I like to dive VERTICALLY straight through the formation. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

I remember there was one Il-2 training mission where you were suppose attack a very heavily armed four engined Russian bomber loaded with CANNON instead of machine gun blisters I believe. They warned it was a tough assignment.

I was confused what to do with such a behemoth.

Then it hit me. Dive right down vertically on this monster from above.

My first pass took took him right out. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

JtD
06-07-2010, 02:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TheGrunch:
Was that on a track, though, JtD? I don't think they're perfect in terms of gun-positions and suchlike. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, most likely. But AI gunner behaviour as I know it is like that, they don't adjust lead that quickly.
Looking at the track now, I found I was slightly exaggerating, my pilot was only lightly wounded and it wasn't the engine, but the fuel tank that was set on fire.

TinyTim
06-07-2010, 03:28 PM
Do the .303 brownings use HE bullets? I know some light machines do, this might explain it.

Besides - are you absolutely sure there was nothing else around there that could possibly take a shot on you, like a flak (friendly or enemy)?

horseback
06-07-2010, 04:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TheGrunch:
Was that on a track, though, JtD? I don't think they're perfect in terms of gun-positions and suchlike. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, most likely. But AI gunner behaviour as I know it is like that, they don't adjust lead that quickly.
Looking at the track now, I found I was slightly exaggerating, my pilot was only lightly wounded and it wasn't the engine, but the fuel tank that was set on fire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I’m going to assume that Oleg’s team gave the TBF’s stinger gun the listed range of traverse; it’s a ball and socket mount as I recall, and probably was capable of 120° horizontal traverse at the very most (probably much less in practice). Given the speed at which the gun would have had to traverse to hit you twice, it may have been impossible to visually represent the barrel’s movement at less than 60fps, but the program might still have ‘awarded’ two hits based on an assigned rate of traverse.

I’m taking you at your word about two hits. If he hit your fuel tank (is the Tony’s tank located behind & under the pilot as in the 109?), logically he should have gotten the next round into the tail section. The game does plot ricochets and shrapnel damage too, so your pilot might have been wounded by stuff flying around rather than by a discrete bullet of his very own. On the other hand, hits from ai gunners usually seem to come in pairs, in my limited experience.

It has often seemed to me that the game awards ai gunners hits and damage based on your proximity to them rather than on human reaction times or practical considerations; in a real-life situation, the guy manning that stinger position wouldn’t have been able to see you until the last possible second, much less have his gun in the exactly correct alignment and thumb the trigger at the precisely right moment to do you maximum harm.

cheers

horseback

TheGrunch
06-07-2010, 04:27 PM
Does anyone else find the AI gunners in the Stuka and B5N are capable firing WELL below their tails?

TinyTim
06-07-2010, 04:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TheGrunch:
Does anyone else find the AI gunners in the Stuka and B5N are capable firing WELL below their tails? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh yeah. It certainly appears Stuka AI gunner has a larger field of fire than when the gun is controlled by a human, plus it appears some gunners can fire directly behind their tail or through parts of own plane too.

TheGrunch
06-07-2010, 04:36 PM
I'm not sure whether it's just because I'm using UP, though. I'll have a look on stock 4.09m at some point.

horseback
06-07-2010, 04:48 PM
I haven't tried the mods myself, and yes, they do appear to fire through their fuselages at times in vanilla 4.09. Blenheims' gunners do it too.

cheers

horseback

TheGrunch
06-07-2010, 05:00 PM
Hmm...fighting the AI online on UKDed3, at least, it's consistent. I can park myself 50m below and close behind the enemy aircraft at dead six and they can shoot me on target every time.

JtD
06-07-2010, 11:26 PM
I still have the (relevant part of the) track online,

This one. (http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/tracks/pitaai.ntrk)

If you find the exchange of words a bit strange, iIrc I had made a teasing comments about how I was going to shoot them down just prior to the attack.

I know it were two hits because I checked it through the user STAT command at the time. It appears that the track is too short to make it work, too.

Anyway, just take a look and have a laugh. Or cry, if you wish. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Not each and every detail is as I remembered, for instance I didn't remember both gunners firing at me (which would, after years of wondering, explain the two hits!).

Blue_5
06-08-2010, 02:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Does anyone else find the AI gunners in the Stuka and B5N are capable firing WELL below their tails? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not only that, but they have their own version of the fighter AI routine 'commence maneouvre exactly when human player approaches to convergence distance'; they put on a boot-full of rudder and some aileron so your dive and zoom attack from underneath ends up facing the rear gunner.

If they did that occasionally I'd think it were clever flying but it gets somewhat tiring to see virtually every time. Better to attack in a deflection shot as they are turning, if possble.

horseback
06-08-2010, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Not only that, but they have their own version of the fighter AI routine 'commence maneouvre exactly when human player approaches to convergence distance'; they put on a boot-full of rudder and some aileron so your dive and zoom attack from underneath ends up facing the rear gunner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I believe that this particular bit of behavior is range/Ranking based. I've found that AI aircraft rated as Average will start their evasive maneuvers right about 420m, Veterans/Aces start it quite a bit sooner, and you can get around 75-100m closer to Rookies, which are all generally well before my convergence range kicks in. The rules change slightly for bombers in formation, since the leader is usually higher ranked than the wingmen, but you rarely center your sights on the guy farthest away from you.

Just remember that for every evasion maneuver, there is a counter move. (and on the plus side, how soon an opponent starts evading gives you a good clue about his ranking)

With rear gunners, the danger comes with how soon they start hitting you consistantly, and Veterans will reach out and touch you at 700m+, so you have to start bobbing and weaving a bit before that. In my experience, flying in a consistant (predictable) arc is almost as bad as flying in a straight line for more than a couple of seconds while in ai gunner range, even when approaching from a compound (from above and to the side, for example) angle.

cheers

horseback

M2morris
06-08-2010, 09:48 PM
I caught this movie about six months ago on TCM I believe it was. Sandwiched between thin crusts of Forties romance B-movie '2 guys fighting over the same chick' crappola is a lot of interesting training methods used by the US Military for gunners during WW2. From shooting clay pidgeons from the back of a moving truck to moving targets on rails or towed behind airplanes. They cover some good stuff.
One for the collection:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035614/usercomments

thefruitbat
06-10-2010, 09:13 AM
lets just hope that this doesn't continue through to SoW, otherwise Bolton Defiant's will be harder to shoot down than spits and hurris, and be the scurge of the luftwaffe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif