Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD
As to the "regardless of speed or angle, you will be hit, period" - I shot down eight of them one flight without being hit at all, and I did it from close range. Period. It's called "proper tactics", and it works better than whining.
|
I'm not whining about MY tactics. I can engage bombers and do pretty well.
Instead, I'm looking at AI performance overall. I want to be able to set up missions where bombers and fighters behave like they did historically, and where the results of AI combat roughly match expected historical results.
Objectively:
* Fighters, even Ace AI, don't use proper bomber interception tactics.
* Gunners, even Ace AI, start shooting far beyond effective range.
* We still don't have much data on just how good WW2 era flexible gunners were
in the air against maneuvering targets. What data we do have suggests that 2% accuracy against a relatively easy target was the accepted standard for rookie gunners, 600 yards (~550 meters) was the accepted range at which a 0.50 caliber MG had any chance of hitting, and that different gun mounts had different levels of inherent accuracy (ignoring other factors).
Subjectively,
* AI Gunners might still be too effective, particularly for shots made while the aircraft is maneuvering, for larger guns, for manually-turned guns, and for shots made to anything other than the plane's 6 o'clock.
* Gunnery by human players might be unrealistically accurate because the game engine doesn't model things like airframe vibration, turbulence, slipstream effects on guns and bullets, physical requirements of slewing guns around, g-forces, illusory effects of tracer rounds, and so forth.