PDA

View Full Version : Head on combat passes and online etiquette



drose01
01-27-2007, 12:51 AM
You are flying at, say 4000 feet and a bogie is rapidly approaching at your same level, straight at you.

Do you continue straight at him and fire cannons when you are in range, continuing to do so until he flinches?

Or do you evade, running the risk that he will continue bearing straight at you and that you will be hit, maybe badly damaged, without having taken your chance?

In game, what is the etiquette here? To do the most damage, you should point your nose at the enemy and fire all the way up to point blank range, jerking away at the last possible minute and hoping that the opponent does too.

Invariably, there will be times when you have a head on collision, won't there? And when it does, is it really anyone's fault particularly?

Couple nights ago, a typical hot headed moron on a multiplayer server and I had a head on just like that, with a collision. Somehow he found it more MY fault than his. Seems to me, if you choose to engage in a head on combat pass, its a risk that you take, right?

Waldo.Pepper
01-27-2007, 12:57 AM
Dude! He's the enemy! Do you think that Bader cares about etiquette if he's got Galland in his gunsight!? Try and kill him, without getting killed. That's it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

msalama
01-27-2007, 12:59 AM
Well neither gets the blame, or both do IMHO.

FritzGryphon
01-27-2007, 01:03 AM
Nothing to do with ettiquette. You should do what helps you win. Headbutting a noob won't do that. Nor will being a stationary target help, either.

Head-ons are for impatient gamblers. It's in your best interest to see these situations develop ahead of time, and avoid them at all cost.

Even if a head-on is inevitable, it's easy enough to avoid getting hit, by doing an unpredictable jink or roll as you enter the 300m range. Think of it like a bullfighter.

I'd only bother shooting if I have a huge advantage, like a FW-190 versus a P-40, or something. But even then, I'd do a jink before the merge to avoid getting rammed. Always assume the enemy will go straight!

Ugly_Kid
01-27-2007, 01:21 AM
Head-on passes are quite valid tactics in some cases. FW 190 with MK108s outguns anything - I would not shy from head on - in fact in 1 vs 1 it is more or less the only angle a more manouverable opponent allows you. I wait till the optimum range (many opponents start too early) and then fire few seconds and immediately dive under him giving full forward stick. It is no use seeing whether you hit him or not you might get hit by dead man and in the case you hit him you could still get hit by the doomed plane or debris. In the case you won't hit him, going below him denies him an easy shot. That someone does not see it as a solution of gallant knight on a white horse is solemnly his problem, he can beat his wife for all I care. If FWs manouverability in game does not allow me merry jousting with gallant knights without a certain defeat then I rather go for a bar brawl and hit them on the face with the bottle.

Xiolablu3
01-27-2007, 01:28 AM
I always avoid head ons if I can - the outcome is just too random.

Dive and spin , he should miss you.

Never climb, this just makes an easy shot for the kamikazee.

leitmotiv
01-27-2007, 01:29 AM
It is too easy to get rammed. Head-on runs are not for me. Even if you blow him to bits you may be smashed by his remains. FritzGryphon is absolutely right---if you see a head-on situation developing, maneuver out of it. I used to love head-ons, but no matter how well you shoot, it is a flip of the coin. Furthermore, he may be a better shot than you, and blow you to pieces. Head-on bombers, not fighters.

Swivet
01-27-2007, 01:31 AM
Full steam ahead,Guns blazin and blow his arse away! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Mr_Nakajima
01-27-2007, 01:45 AM
Head-to-head is merely a tactical choice, etiquette does not come in to it.

If you choose to do this, possibly relying on your aircraft being tougher or better armed, sooner or later you will ram or be rammed by your opponent. Its just going to happen.

So no, your opponent was wrong to blame you for the collision. If he didn't want to run the risk of one he should have taken appropriate avoiding action, such as the dive and turn recommended by Xiolablu3.

To quote one of the last diary entries by Captain Scott: "We took risks. We knew we took them.Things have come out against us. We have no cause to complain" !!

Akronnick
01-27-2007, 02:23 AM
There's no "etiquette", period. While your worrying about etiquette, I'm lining you up in my cross hairs. If your airbase doesn't have AAA, you can bet I'm circling above waiting for you to take off. If I log on to a server and there's a "no Vulching" policy listed in the breifing, I don't hit fly, I hit disconnect. It takes two to collide, sometimes it's one's fault, sometime both, sometimes neither, but most of the time they are preventable. They happen, and whining about it is just that, whining.

If you take off on a dogfight server and are downed by anyone other than a teammate, you've been pwned. The other guy won, he didn't cheat, and he didn't fly an uber plane vs. your porked one, he didn't vulch, and if he lands after you crash, he probably didn't fight "fair". Fighting "fair" gets you killed.
And flying head-on to an enemy will almost certainly get you killed, but it might not, so it shouldn't be ruled out altogether.

KaleunFreddie
01-27-2007, 02:31 AM
The trick with head-on's is if you have time point your a/c about 15-20Deg off to the one side. when the time is right use the rudder to line him up while doing a level side-slip.

You aim off to the left of him, and he more than likely will think you coming right at him and fire directly at you. the frustratiion to see his tracers go off to one side of you, and there most likely be no time to correct. By this time you should have peppered him.

Takes a bit of practice but works nicely. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

x6BL_Brando
01-27-2007, 05:40 AM
As said already - etiquette doesn't come into this situation at all. Your response to the situation depends on several factors - like the energy state of your aircraft; the probable energy state of the enemy and his intentions; the range & closing speed; the positions of any other a/c in the vicinity.... and so on. Personally I wouldn't look to dive unless all other options are closed. Altitude is essential if his attack fails - because it will put you in an advantageous position to make a follow-up attack. If you dive you are giving up a major tactical advantage which a sensible opponent will make use of.

Subject to the conditions being right, I'd look to a slow-rolling climb if I have enough energy. I'd use some rudder to make the roll a mild barreling and make him shift his aim around too, and pass up any firing solution in favour of a flick-out manouevre. The advantage of the roll is that the flick can come at any point in the radius that is most advantageous to you. Also, by rolling, you can keep your eyes on the bandit as you manouevre - essential for timing your aerobatic response. The odds are that you can end up on his tail - whereas the odds of surviving a head-on pass are 50-50 at best.

B.

boxmike
01-27-2007, 05:52 AM
I used to be kinda hothead, continuing to calibrate my sights on him and give him a burst but partly because I simply did not know the correct evasion. I felt everytime I took another course he still managed to hit me whatever I did.
If I ever wander back to online, I will continue politics where I try to ID the plane and decide if my punch is better. Translation: How about playing chicken with P-11 against 110 or P38? I evade against I-153 or I-16, theyre Star Wars stuff with their lasers anyways.

Rgds,
- box

XyZspineZyX
01-27-2007, 06:06 AM
I should think that nothing levels the playing field of aerial combat like agreeing to a head-on pass

It also seems to me that any fighter pilot who willingly allows his targets to have as good a chance of winning as he has should re-think his tactics, because aerial combat has nothing to do with making a level playing field

I think it's rather poor planning to let your enemy have the same advantages as you have, and by choice

XyZspineZyX
01-27-2007, 06:18 AM
Originally posted by drose01:

In game, what is the etiquette here? To do the most damage, you should point your nose at the enemy and fire all the way up to point blank range, jerking away at the last possible minute and hoping that the opponent does too.

I should have quoted this directly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

To do the most damage, you set up a good high probability shot, when the target is unawares, or unable to respond

In your example, the target is neither unawares or unable to respond

Obviously, he has seen you, so that nullifies you being unseen. So you have 'unable to respond' left. Well, his goal is the same as yours now: fire at most advantageous range, then deftly jink out of the way- you and the enemy have the same mindset here, with the same options and the same consequences

First, your goal is not supposed to be fairness. Your goal is to hold a better hand of cards than the enemy, and ruthlessly squash him. Instead, the situation you describe is an aerial coin-toss: Skill plays the same role as luck in your example. Not good if you ask me! It's an aerial coin-toss in my opinion, and the opinion of many others

Maybe someone here can offer a link to a book called "In Pursuit"?


Anyway, in my opinion, there's also no "etiquette". It's 'kill your enemy with as little risk to you as possible', not a 17th Century costume ball http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif if an online opponent complains that you fought "unfairly" because you bother to secure advantages, my advice is to remember that player's callsign as a reminder that this player may not be a good play mate

Bearcat99
01-27-2007, 06:20 AM
In dead is dead servers the head on would be less of an option....

XyZspineZyX
01-27-2007, 06:22 AM
Your sig had exactly rhe link I was looking for Bear!

drose01- read this book- interesting to say the least. It offers a few alternatives to the head-on, and why they are viable:

In Pursuit (http://web.comhem.se/%7Eu85627360/)


Pretty relevant to this sim despite some references to others

Xiolablu3
01-27-2007, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
I should think that nothing levels the playing field of aerial combat like agreeing to a head-on pass

It also seems to me that any fighter pilot who willingly allows his targets to have as good a chance of winning as he has should re-think his tactics, because aerial combat has nothing to do with making a level playing field

I think it's rather poor planning to let your enemy have the same advantages as you have, and by choice

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

Agreed 100%

MEGILE
01-27-2007, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
I should think that nothing levels the playing field of aerial combat like agreeing to a head-on pass

It also seems to me that any fighter pilot who willingly allows his targets to have as good a chance of winning as he has should re-think his tactics, because aerial combat has nothing to do with making a level playing field

I think it's rather poor planning to let your enemy have the same advantages as you have, and by choice


But after all that... it's pretty funny to do.

Widowmaker214
01-27-2007, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
I should think that nothing levels the playing field of aerial combat like agreeing to a head-on pass

It also seems to me that any fighter pilot who willingly allows his targets to have as good a chance of winning as he has should re-think his tactics, because aerial combat has nothing to do with making a level playing field

I think it's rather poor planning to let your enemy have the same advantages as you have, and by choice

Umm yeah, Ok.
Combat is combat. Its not like creating a lesson plan for tomorrows finger painting class. Things hardly ever go to plan. Most of the time you react instinctively to what happens... when it happens. Do you WANT a head on pass.. usually not. You usually try for latteral seperation.. but some times you are just not afforded that.
IF you happend to watch Dogfights on the history channel, you'll recall the SBD pilot that shot down 3 Zeros in one flight. Three zeros attacked him and the way he survived was forcing them into a head on because thats the only way he could keep them from getting on his six. I dont think that was bad planning. This guy was one of the best pilots I've ever seen. Amazing. After that flight they moved him to flying fighters (The F4F-4 I believe).. and he set another record downing 7 enemy aircraft in one mission. Re think his tactics? Um no. He did the only thing he could do to survive.
You also saw those Flying Tiger pilots recounting head on passes they had to make.
Bad planning? No. It was combat. Things do not always go as you planned it on notebook paper.
But there are tactics you can USE to better your odds.
Like the SBD pilot did.. he used a skid on each pass to throw off the zero pilots and then get a shot in himself.

Headons are indeed risky, but sometimes you are not afforded another choice.

domenlovrec
01-27-2007, 08:55 AM
I had big problems with head ons. No matter what i did it come to a point we were wighting head on. However, i don't use "dive under him" method since i was killed few times like that. I make sure i fire first. So at 500m i shoot with mgs (so he gets scared http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) then i go in barel roll. It works but you lose some speed with barell.

rnzoli
01-27-2007, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
In dead is dead servers the head on would be less of an option....
it's not an option in co-operative missions either http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

There is nothing more pitiful than 2 pilots killed in a head-on collision continue to fight their battle in the chat line, thinking that 'they should have won'. No one wins a russion roulette, try enough head-ons and you will be dead for sure, no matter how big expert you think you are. It's true that in certain situations, you can take a calculated risk (e.g., the FW-190 example), but it's always a risk. The FW-190 pilots can't take it granted either, that the burning wreck of their opponent, perhaps with a dead pilot roasting in in its seat, won't slam straight into their own cockpit in the next millisecond.

Online etiquette requires pilots killed in head-ons to shut up and carry on flying.

XyZspineZyX
01-27-2007, 09:08 AM
double post

XyZspineZyX
01-27-2007, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by Widowmaker214:

all quoted points in boldface




You are operating under some misunderstandings

Any tactic you know is known by your enemy in this sim. We are not WWII pilots, we are not afraid of death, and we have no training in tactics forced on us by our respective countries

Let me address this point by point

"Umm yeah, Ok."

Don't know why you want to fight with me, but you are not making sense with your thinking

"Combat is combat."

Disagree. You think any old fight is combat. I think any old fight is SNAFU. In aerial engagements, YOU dictate terms. YOU secure advantage, YOU make things happen. You make your enemy react, you don't let him react at the same time you do. This is not about a fair fight, my friend

"Its not like creating a lesson plan for tomorrows finger painting class. Things hardly ever go to plan."

Where did I outline a plan? You have no point here. I explained why in online fights, a head-on is not a winning percentage move. I could give you a hint or two about how to win this engagement without a head-on, however

" Most of the time you react instinctively to what happens... when it happens"

Disagree 100% in what we are discussing. If you're flying around willy-nilly, trusting your blazing fast reflexes to win the day, then you are not a good fighter pilot- you have no SA and no use for any other move but point and shoot. There are plenty of things that require split-second reflexes, but we aren't even to that point when you accpet the head-on. We are not talking about how to turn your opponent's attack to disadvantage and your advantage, we are talking about your strategy for the fight. If your strategy is "Give him the same shot I have at him", then you deserve to get shot down! What's your strategy here? Scare him? Damage him? What? What strategy are you laying out when you accept the head-on, Widowmaker? It is: "allow my enemy every advantage I have, too", which means: cancel all of your advantages, on purpose. Sounds dumb to me.

Assuming you know what plane you're facing, you conduct a plan based on what you know of your enemy. Every move should be keyed toward stomping him out of the sky while denying him the chance to even give you a dirty look, but you seem to feel that head-on gives you this chance. It doesn't- he's shooting at you!

"Do you WANT a head on pass.. usually not. You usually try for latteral seperation.. but some times you are just not afforded that.
"

Do you want a head-on? No. Never. I can't think of one situation where online, a head-on is a better tactic than anything else, unless you know the bogey is looking behind himself or has his eyes closed!

Lateral seperation..now you make some sense...but this is just repeating tactical teaching it seems to me. Seperation is not the goal unless you are running away- it is step one of shooting down the target! Seperation also doesn't mean "a huge distance" in this case. Just enough distance to get out of his cone of fire because his flight envelope won't let him hit you, enough to 'gain angles'. What happens after the merge is you taking that small angles advantage and building on it to cut his throat. "Feed" him some angles, make him work hard to get into a position he can't 'get' you from, waste his energy, then punch him in the neck when he's at his most defenseless! Easy to explain, hard to do. Timing is key here, but so is recognising your enemy's plane and the enemy's skill. The reversal is much better than the head-on, you force the enemy to scissor uselessly when done right. He's under your thumb, and you unload a ton of bricks into him. Splash one.

"IF you happend to watch Dogfights on the history channel" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

two points here:
1. don't attempt to school me on WWII aerial tactics based on a cable TV program you watched, I won't sit here and get schooled because somebody online sat in front of a TV.

2. Historical context does not translate to the sim here. All your human opponents online know all about all tactics, they were not training to adhere to their country's tactical doctrine, they will not be court-martialed for disobeying orders, and they are not afraid to die. You are not pulling the wool over their eyes with the head-on. We are not flying in WWII here, we all can read the same books and learn the same fighter tactics.

What do you call it when I "know" you will break off the head-on, and you "know" that I will break off the head-on, when we fight?? Your "knowledge" that I will break, fearing the head-on, doe not influence my decision to continue flying (and shooting!) straight at you!

"you'll recall the SBD pilot that shot down 3 Zeros in one flight. Three zeros attacked him and the way he survived was forcing them into a head on because thats the only way he could keep them from getting on his six. I dont think that was bad planning"

I don't think it was wrong either! But he wasn't playing Il2:1946 online in 2007, we has really there in WWII and his opponents really reacted that way. Online, they will just crash into you, or else simply accept that head-on foolishly, and shoot you! You are not facing the Imperial Japanese Naval Aviator online, you're facing a guy flying a virtual Zero. Cannot stress that point enough: <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">your opponents can throw away their lives online and not care</span> !


This guy was one of the best pilots I've ever seen. Amazing. After that flight they moved him to flying fighters (The F4F-4 I believe).. and he set another record downing 7 enemy aircraft in one mission. Re think his tactics?

Should the REAL pilot have done differently? NO!! Should YOU?

Hell YES!! The moment you are sent back in time flying in 1943 against the IJN's finest in your SBD, you fight with the tactics you see on TV. Until then, stick with tactics that will, save your virtual skin online. Nobody in 1943 had a refly button. Divorce every tactic from the sim that relies on national training or self preservation. We are not really risking our lives! Your online opponents will not obligingly fly according to the cubby-holed styles the History Channel teaches

"You also saw those Flying Tiger pilots recounting head on passes they had to make.
Bad planning? No. It was combat. Things do not always go as you planned it on notebook paper."

We've talked about the AVG before...you think they flew seat of their pants. They did on occasion, but the thing you're describing WAS taught to them on notebook paper! <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I</span> did not make this up. Claire Chennault did. he taught the AVG that the Japanese pilots would react certain ways. he taught them to throw the Japanese off their game, screw up their plans. One way was the head-on pass...but you are confusing head-ons against fighters and head-ons against bombers many times. The head-on against the bomber is valid, but usually it's done in the German "roller-coaster" style, adding a difficult vertical element to the bomber crew's shots

In any case, what you are describing for the AVG WAS according to plan. And it worked because it used the Japanese pilot's rigid training against him. The AVG had access to all sorts of Japanese pilot manuals and tactical manuals, and Chennault taught it to his AVG pilots in a schoolroom in Burma

"But there are tactics you can USE to better your odds.
Like the SBD pilot did.. he used a skid on each pass to throw off the zero pilots and then get a shot in himself."

The head-on doesn't help the odds. The smart move is to zoom right past if you're out-numbered. if you attack the first plane head on, both can attack you. Same for attacking the second. Difference here: one of your enemies has a "free" shot. If you try ther reversal on either, the wingman can let the other pilot drag you along or use the seperation you just handed to him to gain an altitude advantage. Not smart!

In situations against bombers, I will not and have not argued against the head-on. We are talking the fighter-vs-fighter head-on here. But still, a level head-on versus an AI or Human gunner in a bomber's nose gun is NOT the best decision in this sim! Add a vertcal element to his firing solution, while you come in straight, which means: you are diving. Chennault taught this, too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The SBD pilot's tactic is well know to all online pilots. This will not surprise them, nor should you be surprised when online it is not the safety net the real pilot enjoyed


"Headons are indeed risky, but sometimes you are not afforded another choice.

Don't put your pipper on the enemy, and you avoid the head-on! You acknowldge the head-on is risky...why are you putting your plane at risk????

You <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">always have the choice to refuse the head-on</span>! Always, always.

Try your ideas online, Widowmaker. Then read "In Pursuit" and become a more successful virtual combat pilot

Philipscdrw
01-27-2007, 09:13 AM
Remember: air law states that in the event of a head-on approach, both aircraft are to turn to the right to avoid collision. (I suspect that the USA, in a spirit of contrariness, has it the other way though...)

It seems to me that there are two ways of playing Il-2 - fighting to the defeat, or fighting to the death. Etiquette only matters for the first kind! "Fighting to the defeat" is where rules like "No shooting aircraft with undercarriage down", "no vulching" etc come from - artificial rules to level the field slightly and prevent people from being frustrated by i.e. being repeatedly strafed on landing. You take the view that you're just trying to demonstrate that your skillz are better than his skillz, and once he's damaged he may as well be allowed to land. It's fun and satisfying to fly this way, you get a sense of comradeship with all the pilots on the server.

"Fighting to the death" on the other hand, is where nothing matters except completing the mission objectives, usually by making the other team's pilots explode as much as possible. It's more realistic, because that's what war is about - you're not there to give your opponent a fun fight, you're there to destroy his team's assets on the ground and in the air. Chute-killing is acceptable, strafing aircraft on the apron is encouraged. Anything short of exploiting the mechanics of the game (i.e. cheating - deliberately causing lag, listening to other side's comms, wearing false markings, using Trim On A Slider before that got fixed [remember RBJ?]) is tolerated. This mode of play is also satisfying, because if you want to get back to the mess-hall this evening in one piece you'll need to fight every inch for that privilege - the enemy think nothing of strafing you as you shut off the engine, just before you hit 'refly'...

JG52Karaya-X
01-27-2007, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Philipscdrw:
"Fighting to the defeat" is where rules like "No shooting aircraft with undercarriage down", "no vulching" etc come from - artificial rules to level the field slightly and prevent people from being frustrated by i.e. being repeatedly strafed on landing. You take the view that you're just trying to demonstrate that your skillz are better than his skillz, and once he's damaged he may as well be allowed to land. It's fun and satisfying to fly this way, you get a sense of comradeship with all the pilots on the server.

"Fighting to the death" on the other hand, is where nothing matters except completing the mission objectives, usually by making the other team's pilots explode as much as possible. It's more realistic, because that's what war is about - you're not there to give your opponent a fun fight, you're there to destroy his team's assets on the ground and in the air. Chute-killing is acceptable, strafing aircraft on the apron is encouraged. Anything short of exploiting the mechanics of the game (i.e. cheating - deliberately causing lag, listening to other side's comms, wearing false markings, using Trim On A Slider before that got fixed [remember RBJ?]) is tolerated. This mode of play is also satisfying, because if you want to get back to the mess-hall this evening in one piece you'll need to fight every inch for that privilege - the enemy think nothing of strafing you as you shut off the engine, just before you hit 'refly'...

Very good and straight to the point!

I personally despise the "fight to the death" mentality, that mostly comes from the same people who state things like "Everythings allowed, this is war!". Not it is not war, we are playing a damn simulation and even in real life there was an unwritten etiquette among fighter pilots at least on the Western Front. Pilots did not shoot at others hanging helplessly in their chutes (except for one nations AF maybe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif), they also often did not give an enemy the "coup the grace" which would ensure total destruction of his aircraft (and the death of its pilot) but instead gave him time and cover to safely bail-out, sometimes they'd even escort their damaged opponents back to their territory (Georg Peter Eder anybody?).

To me it is a question of honour. I am a fighter pilot, not a murderer, I have defeated my opponent by shooting his plane apart / leaving it out of control so why continue to fire (even a question of wasting good ammo)? It is a question of respect for your enemy who fought an equally "fair" fight. I really get upset when I see people chute-killing online and I will do my best to get that pilot and do the same to him, maybe he'll reconsider for the next time. After all:

You get what you deserve!

AKA_TAGERT
01-27-2007, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by drose01:
You are flying at, say 4000 feet and a bogie is rapidly approaching at your same level, straight at you.

Do you continue straight at him and fire cannons when you are in range, continuing to do so until he flinches?

Or do you evade, running the risk that he will continue bearing straight at you and that you will be hit, maybe badly damaged, without having taken your chance?

In game, what is the etiquette here? To do the most damage, you should point your nose at the enemy and fire all the way up to point blank range, jerking away at the last possible minute and hoping that the opponent does too.

Invariably, there will be times when you have a head on collision, won't there? And when it does, is it really anyone's fault particularly?

Couple nights ago, a typical hot headed moron on a multiplayer server and I had a head on just like that, with a collision. Somehow he found it more MY fault than his. Seems to me, if you choose to engage in a head on combat pass, its a risk that you take, right? Don't know and I really don't care! All I do know for sure is that it did happen sometimes during the war! As a mater of fact the first ZERO shot down was by a Buffalo in a head on pass. As for the freqancy of this type of manuver.. Ill bet it was the exception to the rule! But it is the exceptions to the rules that make the press! You hardly ever hear about the day in day out stuff in that it is expected thus boring! True in all walks of life! Problem is folks present the exceptions to the rule as if they were the NORM! Which in turn gives Johnny HISTORY CH the wrong impression of what went on back than.

slipBall
01-27-2007, 10:11 AM
To me it is a question of honour. I am a fighter pilot, not a murderer, I have defeated my opponent by shooting his plane apart / leaving it out of control so why continue to fire (even a question of wasting good ammo)? It is a question of respect for your enemy who fought an equally "fair" fight. I really get upset when I see people chute-killing online and I will do my best to get that pilot and do the same to him, maybe he'll reconsider for the next time. After all:

You get what you deserve!



I agree,...honour.. except for the last two sentence's...2 wrongs, don't make a right http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

RCAF_Irish_403
01-27-2007, 10:18 AM
If i'm flying a cannon armed fighter, i'll go head on against an enemy bomber 24/7....after that it becomes a tool of last resort

JG52Karaya-X
01-27-2007, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:
I agree,...honour.. except for the last two sentence's...2 wrongs, don't make a right http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Thats true for the real life but we are in a virtual world where some of the basic rules of life just dont apply, we dont have to fear death, there's always the refly button at the end, also one reason why people go into headons so often.

And about the retaliation, lets call it educationary measures... some only learn it the hard way http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

R988z
01-27-2007, 10:37 AM
I prefer to break off slightly then come in suddenly again, enough to throw off the targets aim but keep mine in for a quick burst, usually to the side of the engine or cockpit, which can be pretty effective.

Also remember when approaching head on the closing speed between the two aircraft is pretty much doubled, so bullet speed/power is doubled (ok so it's not an exact calculation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif), however this also goes for the other guys guns as well, but the general idea is your bullets will carry more energy into the target and should do more damage if they hit.

P-39s are not bad for head ons, with the huge cannon, and guns in the wings and nose, they can quite effectively fill the whole path with lead. Same for FW190, except with it's big cannons all round it's a fearsome opponent headon.

Yaks on the other hand should generally avoid head ons, they usually only have a single slowish firing cannon and a single mg, so aren't much worry head on unless they get lucky or have the aim of a sniper. Same goes for 109.

FA_Retro-Burn
01-27-2007, 11:43 AM
If you fly full switch, you must identify the bogey before calling bandit.

drose01
01-27-2007, 12:01 PM
Thanks for all the feedback and interesting discussion. I will try to work on that kind of oblique/swooping frontal attack instead of a straight head on when circumstances require it.

And for that moron (from one of the more popular "squadrons" on hyperlobby) who called me a noob and worse for our collision, well I guess he is the one who lacked etiquette.

Xiolablu3
01-28-2007, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Widowmaker214:
IF you happend to watch Dogfights on the history channel, you'll recall the SBD pilot that shot down 3 Zeros in one flight. Three zeros attacked him and the way he survived was forcing them into a head on because thats the only way he could keep them from getting on his six. I dont think that was bad planning. This guy was one of the best pilots I've ever seen. Amazing.


Look mate, you miss the point, Cid was talking about fighter vs fighter.

The guy you are talking about had a LESS than 50/50 chance of winning the fight, so he FORCED a 50/50 with the Zeros and luckily won!

No doubt if we were in the same situation and we could move the odds from about 30/1 survival odds (3 Zeros vs 1 SBD) down to 3 - 50/50 chances, any gambler would take the second odds!

Your example, although interesting, kinda misses CHucks point.

Marcel_Albert
01-28-2007, 03:31 AM
Generally speaking , it's not good to go for the head-on when you have a liquid cooled engine .

What is important to keep in mind is that , in a duel (let's assume there are no other planes around ) , some Fw-190 or P-47 (probably Tempest too ) pilots use the head-ons intensively and very effectively thanks to their great stability and firepower , it's part of their stategy to make up for the lack of slow speed dogfight ability , for instance a Spitfire or Yak-9 pilot have many options to get the victory over them if they lost their speed , but the head-on is not one of them , as it is playing on the opponent's strength .

But there are exceptions and personally , i always go for the head-on with a P-39 , except against the FW-190 .


Otherwise , if it's anything other than FW-190 and 110 , i go for the head-on , in the I-16/153 (very stable platform and good protection in the I-16 wit the engine ) , and the P-47 (great guns accuracy when you have proper convergence ) , i always go for the head-on . I often go for the head-on because i mostly fly Eastern Front , and between 1941 until the Yak-9 (late 42) , we have inferior planes in speed , and any mean to destroy the ennemy is required , when you have a good chance to kill him , you just go for it , because you might not get the chances again in your Lagg-3 or Yak-7A against his speedy and superior climber 109F4 for example , same with Polikarpov , your lack of speed means that you need to train in head-ons and use them every time it is possible , especially when he dives on you .

As i said the only exception is Fw-190 because it's pure suicide to try to contest with him on this , except perhaps with a P-47 or Tempest (or a Sturmovik ) , but it's a lottery because with 6 firing point , an experienced FW-190 pilot almost always hit you .

However , in the Yakovlevs that is my favourite type along MIGs and Airacobras , i always try to avoid it , because i have more chances to down my ennemy using other ways , 2 firing point is not enough , same with Lavochkins , except against the 109 when i really feel it , when i'm faster and above him or if i am hurt , 109 are vulnerable in head-on , the pilot is not well protected and his engine too .

major_setback
01-28-2007, 04:17 AM
There is a bigger picture too,; if you consider the team result. If he is willing to do a head -on with you over your base let him. You will quickly be in the air again and he has lost his positional advantage. It's better for your team.
(I want to stress though that don't initiate head-ons, but if someone is willing to throw his plane away, and lose all the time it took to get to my base, it's fine by me).
They will soon stop doing it if you let the ram happen.

tigertalon
01-28-2007, 05:48 AM
Depends completely on what our rides are. If I'm in a P47 I will not hesitate to take headon on Ki-43, because unless incredible lucky, he won't even scratch paint from my Jug before being blown to heaven. In general, I'll avoid headons by the rule if I fly the inline engined plane (especially against a radial engined one).

It's always the same: don't fight (including headon passes) if odds are against you. Yes, aerial combat is about brutal quick clean assasination rather than a chivalry match.

Marcel_Albert
01-28-2007, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by domenlovrec:
I had big problems with head ons. No matter what i did it come to a point we were wighting head on. However, i don't use "dive under him" method since i was killed few times like that. I make sure i fire first. So at 500m i shoot with mgs (so he gets scared http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) then i go in barel roll. It works but you lose some speed with barell.

the thing i experienced that works best for me for disengaging during a head-on , is to suddenly turn left or right while diving brutally . (it's easier with fast rolling a/c )
It doesn't prevent to be hit , but minimize the chances (to be killed ) and maximise the difficulty for the opponent to hit you as it happens very fast , if you are both at 400 km/h , it means you cross each other at 800 km/h .

When you just dive and not move left or right , it's indeed very dangerous cause all he has to do is to adjust by pushing his stick , same as if you climb or just turn left or right , it makes you lose speed and show more profile to the ennemy .

Ratsack
01-29-2007, 06:22 AM
I don't like head ons unless it's against a bomber, in which case it's a gimmee kill.

Lately, however, I have found that attacks from high angle-off are very effective against a more manoeuverable opponent (Fw190A6 vs Spit IX, for example).

To avoid confusion, an explanation. If you attack from dead six, the angle-off-tail is zero. If you attack from 9 o'clock, the angle-off is 90 degrees. A head on attack is 180 degrees A/O.

When I said 'high angle-off' above, I meant A/O between 120 and 170 degrees (i.e., 120 < A/O < 170). A hit from this aspect is usually a kill. I'm finding that under some circumstances I can get a solution quicker than the tight turner if I'm willing to commit to a long range shot (>450 m)...

...mind you, at that A/O it doesn't stay long range for very long!!

cheers,
Ratsack

TgD Thunderbolt56
01-29-2007, 09:37 AM
Sometimes, I find myself in a situation where I have little choice but to turn into a fight to reduce (not eliminate) my percentage chance of realizing my online mortality.

At these times (which I almost always attempt to avoid) I'll start shooting a little earlier than most of my opponents. I keep my convergence set at 450-500m and find I can frequently get strikes on an enemy when others don't/won't even try. I don't spray&pray...not my style, but can oftentimes get a squirt into the engine or cockpit and end the fight really before it becomes one.

Headons? avoid them if you can. If you can't, shoot him before he shoots you and don't get shot. Whatever aerobatic tactics you employ is another story or another thread.

As far as etiquette is concerned...there is none for headon gunnery passes.


TB