Quote:
Originally Posted by majorfailure
At least when firing at nearly static targets, e. g. bombers and or ground targets. I've seen it quite often that rookies approach bombers from dead six (okay as rookie doesn't/shouldn't know this is bad), and start firing at 800m out (maybe okay -rookies tend to underestimate distance to big targets), and usually shoot below, but instead of readjusting their aim they fire away till around 300m distance , and most of the times do not hit at all(not okay - at least not for most rokies IMHO).
|
I think you're right. I was only speaking about Rookie gunnery in fighter vs. fighter engagements.
But, AI sucks at all levels against bombers. Even Ace AI attacking from the front will pass up easy head on attacks. Then, they pull up, take their sweet time turning around, and rather than gaining speed and position to make an overhead beam attack or have another try at a head on attack, they go straight for the 6 o'clock level attack that gets them shot to pieces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majorfailure
And non moving ground targets with guns - usually not doable for rookie - and lets not get started about rockets and bombs - but give them torpedoes and the enemy can expect to lose a ship.
|
I think that bombing and rocket accuracy (or lack thereof) is about right for rookies. Certainly, they should be pathetic at high altitude level bombing.
Torpedo accuracy is a problem, though - rookies are still too good at it.
Right now, I'm seeing "Ace" level tactics and gunnery skills for Rookies in fighter vs. fighter engagements, "Rookie" level tactics and gunnery skills for all levels of AI in fighter vs. bomber engagements, Ace level torpedo bombing skills for Rookies, and appropriately lousy skills for bombing, rocket and ground attacks.
Maybe I'm being a bit too hard on Rookie AI here, but historically combat pilots were pretty useless for their first few missions, even if they had pretty good training and prior peacetime flying experience. And, poorly trained "cannon fodder" pilots, like those fielded by the RAF in Autumn of 1940, the VVS from 1941-42, Germany in 1944 or Japan in 1944-45, should be even worse.
For what it's worth, one analysis of pilot performance (for fairly well-trained pilots - JG26 in WW2, Lafayette Escadrille and Jasta 1 in WW1) - showed that a novice pilot had a 50% chance of getting shot down in his first decisive combat engagement, with his chances of getting shot down decreasing 20-fold (about 5%) after his 5th combat mission, and dropping about 50-fold (about a 2% chance) per mission after 10 missions. Stats for gunnery accuracy assumed about 2% hits in training for novices, 3% for successful gunnery school graduates, and 5% for experienced aircrew.
Rookie high level bomber crews could expect to get about 5% of their bombs within 1,000 feet of the target, up to about 50% for very experienced crews (which is why the "lead bomber" and "pathfinder" concepts were introduced.)
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find data for what level of performance was expected from rookies (i.e., training school graduates) for ground attack with rockets or bombs, or attacks against ships with torpedoes. I doubt that even the best trained rookies had much practice, though.