AI Gun fire range?

[Gous 0]

I havent yet completely understood the setting of AI Gun fire range in the workshops. What is the most realistic setting? Easy Normal or Hard? I want the AI to shoot from very close distances (under 150). And sometimes take some shots from longer distances (300 yards) What is the exact mechanism anyway?

 

Cheers :)

Edited May 8, 2009 by Gous

[Fortiesboy 3]

I havent yet completely understood the setting of AI Gun fire range in the workshops. What is the most realistic setting? Easy Normal or Hard? I want the AI to shoot from very close distances (under 150). And sometimes take some shots from longer distances (300 yards) What is the exact mechanism anyway?

 

Cheers :)

 

Nor have I- well, to be more correct, maybe my understanding of it isn't the way it is.

 

So, experts, please correct me if i'm wrong.

 

But, looking at the history of this matter, IIRC a lot of folks, including me, thought that to be shot at, and hit, by the AI from distances of around 1000, wasn't on.

Though the devs did think it was in line with their idea of making the sim "realistic". .

 

Eventually this was made scaleable in workshops and the "Hard " mode was the original one; the "easy" one is where the AI does not fire till "close in "

Exactly how far that is, i don't know, but from my observations they fire about 400 or so according to the labels.

 

There has been some discussion as to whether these distances are in yards/metres or feet. And I having seen any official clarification on this.

 

IMHO, if it is in either of the first or second, then 400 is still too near for WW1 planes to start firing at each other.

Hence I play the "easy" setting.

[+Polovski 460]

So, experts, please correct me if i'm wrong.

 

But, looking at the history of this matter, IIRC a lot of folks, including me, thought that to be shot at, and hit, by the AI from distances of around 1000, wasn't on.

Though the devs did think it was in line with their idea of making the sim "realistic". .

 

Well just for the recorded to correct that we did NOT think it was in line with our idea of making the sim "realistic" Not sure where you got that from FB but it was at 1000 because in P1 and P2 we had NO WAY to stop it. All down to CFS3 nothing what so ever to do with us!

 

Anyway for BH&H we managed to find a way to reduce it. It was reduced to around 400 and it's scalable some now. If you make it much less it's not good at all for some craft, as they are flown by software AI not humans so for example one issue is in a craft that cannot catch you they would end up waiting to fire from 150 forever, and eventually after your nap and reading your newspaper you would turn around and go ah there's an enemy...

Another issue if it's too short they just don't fire when head on or closing.. so decisions are considered and made based on experience of code and sim requirements, and many other reasons believe it or not. It took 5 years for a reason ;)

 

Around 400-450 is OK is a good setting as slower craft can still fire at you and more rounds will miss as there is a cone. Also if you try firing at an enemy you will see that you can hit from 400 too, so the AI should be able to too - and the faster closing craft, or skilled AI will be closing you down anyway so the distance soon closes.

 

The main point is its fairly ineffective "per bullet" as you waste lots more ammo doing it. Also in real life you really really wanted to live ! So you tended not to waste the stuff until you could get really sure of hitting, then keep some to get home with.

[Bullethead 12]

Just to add my $0.02....

 

From what I've read, shooting at 300-400 yards was actually fairly common in WW1. Not, I hasten to add, in dogfights, but in other situations. Such as, sniping at a large, intimidating formation of 2-seaters that outnumbered the attacking scouts. Also, late in the war, when huge formations met, often nobdoy was unwilling to turn it into a brawl, so they circled around making obscene gestures and taking long-range potshots "into the brown".

 

I shoot from 300-400 yards (I guess--no way to tell) but don't expect to hit. I'm shooting for psyche. Sometimes I shotgun a few bullets into somebody that way, and that appears to be what mostly happens to me. Since the last gunnery tweaks, I don't get really drilled from 300-400 yards unless I'm holding still too long.

Edited May 8, 2009 by Bullethead

[tttiger 0]

I think folks still are confused about what the range numbers mean. Feet or yards?

 

Please, Pol, clear that up.

 

Sure seems like feet to me.

 

If the AI are opening fire at 400-450 feet (as they appear to be with labels on) that's 130 to 150 yards and that's quite realistic IMO.

 

Sure wish you had made it yards (or even meters) because gunnery ranges (at least in the US) always are in yards and that's the unit of measure shooters are used to.

 

But I'm pretty sure the ranges are in feet.

 

Right?

 

Thanks.

 

T

Edited May 9, 2009 by tttiger

[von Baur 54]

Label distances-feet/yards/meters?

 

I say meters.

 

Why?

 

One nautical mile=1852 meters=2025.4yards.

 

With the TAC at its smallest setting its range is shown as 2nm, meaning that the rim of the inner circle is 1nm from your position. Targets are at about 1850 when they enter the smaller circle (more accurate measurement might be possible if one were to pause the game as a lone target hit 1850 and then one took the time to examine its position within the TAC, although it would be difficult to be 100% precise because exact position on the TAC will always be at least somewhat open to individual interpretation).

[von Baur 54]

Back to the original topic

 

Firing distances

 

Most aerial gunners preferred to get as close as possible before opening fire. When a raw von Richtofen asked Boelcke at a chance meeting on a train (according to the legend) how he managed to shoot down so many enemy aircraft the master's answer was, "I fly close to my man, aim well, fire and, of course, he falls down." I read somewhere that one ace (I want to say McCudden, but at the same time I don't think that's right) would tell younger pilots to fly until they were just about to collide with their opponent, and then get closer. In von Richotfen's autobiography, when he describes his being shot down I believe he says that the gunner of the English Vickers opened fire at 300 meters or more, which caused him to laugh at the foolish wasting of ammunition...until that magic BB almost removed the controversy of whether he was killed by fire from the air or from the ground.

 

Certainly, the man who nearly killed The Red Baron wasn't the only one to fire from long range. And we'll likely never know if that was a rare action on his part or if he did it regularly to try to discourage enemy aircraft from coming too close to him and his pilot. But given the limited accuracy (yes, I know that machine gunners in the trenches were accurate up to 1000 yards, but those guns were mounted on tripods that were sitting on the ground often with sandbags on their legs to make them even more steady, not on a highly flexible mount that was bolted to an airplane that was jinking around to present a difficult target to the enemies trying to shoot it down) and the adrenaline that would have to be flooding the veins of the gunner, I doubt they were nearly as effective as our AI opponents tend to be at long distances. And with that in mind, I further doubt they would risk the vulnerability of running out of ammo by wasting any firing at unlikely distances.

[Bullethead 12]

Just my $0.02, but IMHO, from comparing label range numbers with tac range circles, and the ranges reported in mission replays, I'm pretty sure label ranges are in yards. Replay ranges are in feet, and they seem to correspond to the yard ranges I see on labels (as in 3x), and the mile ranges on the TAC circles.

 

Certainly, the man who nearly killed The Red Baron wasn't the only one to fire from long range. And we'll likely never know if that was a rare action on his part or if he did it regularly to try to discourage enemy aircraft from coming too close to him and his pilot.

 

Well, you can read Keith Rennles' Independent Force, which gives a day-by-day breakdown of what the IAF was up to in the 2nd 1/2 of 1918. This often includes total ammo expenditure for all the observers on a squadron's mission. They always tried to have 12 planes in a squadron formation, but engine trouble usually limited this to an apparent average of 10 or so crossing the lines. The squadrons frequently encountered 2-4 Huns who stayed at 300-400m range and traded sniping with the observers for long periods of time. During missions like this, the observers usually fired about 2000 rounds between them, so say 200 each. The vast majority appear to have had single Lewis guns, so this appears to represent fairly prolonged periods of long-range fire by both sides.

 

Note, however, that when the IAF encountered whole front-line Jastas instead of scattered Kests, the results were rather different. The Jasta pilots usually pressed the attack to close range and many bombers went down, usually only a few buffs surviving. In these cases, ammo expenditure figures are lacking due to not enough survivors to get a good figure.

[tttiger 0]

Label distances-feet/yards/meters?

 

I say meters.

 

Why?

 

One nautical mile=1852 meters=2025.4yards.

 

With the TAC at its smallest setting its range is shown as 2nm, meaning that the rim of the inner circle is 1nm from your position. Targets are at about 1850 when they enter the smaller circle (more accurate measurement might be possible if one were to pause the game as a lone target hit 1850 and then one took the time to examine its position within the TAC, although it would be difficult to be 100% precise because exact position on the TAC will always be at least somewhat open to individual interpretation).

 

 

von Baur,

 

If you are responding to my comments (your writing is far less than clear, in fact you're just muddying the water with throwing the TAC and MvR into the mix), I was simply asking what the distance shown on the labels IS.

 

The AI enemy opens up on me when the label shows 400 to 450 and my AI gunner in the Biff does the same. 450 feet is 150 yards and that would appear historically accurate for opening fire (closer, obviously, would be more accurate).

 

At 450 yards that would be 1,350 feet or almost a quarter of a mile. That's a pretty absurd range for an MG on a bobbing airplane.

 

I assume that the figure on the labels is in feet. That seems reasonable.

 

I really don't care whether it's in feet or yards or meters. As I said above, I personally would prefer yards because that is how I was trained to estimate range (foot soldier stuff).

 

It appears several posters in this thread think the number is yards, not feet.

 

I just would like to know, officially from a developer, what it is because there seems to be considerable confusion over what that number in the label represents.

 

BTW I'm quite happy with the current range at which the AI opens fire (I just don't think everyone agrees on what it is). This isn't a complaint

 

ttt

Edited May 9, 2009 by tttiger

[von Baur 54]

Label distances-feet/yards/meters?

 

I say meters.

 

Why?

 

One nautical mile=1852 meters=2025.4yards.

 

With the TAC at its smallest setting its range is shown as 2nm, meaning that the rim of the inner circle is 1nm from your position. Targets are at about 1850 when they enter the smaller circle (more accurate measurement might be possible if one were to pause the game as a lone target hit 1850 and then one took the time to examine its position within the TAC, although it would be difficult to be 100% precise because exact position on the TAC will always be at least somewhat open to individual interpretation).

 

 

I posted this after having not flown for a few weeks. I would, and still, swear that the shortest range on the TAC was 2nm and that the labled distance for aircraft entering the inner circle was about 1800, give or take 50 or so.

 

I have since done some flights and my statements in the previous post are incorrect. In fact, the shortest range on the TAC is 1 nautical mile and the labled distance to objects at its limit is about 2000. That would be make it closer to, and within the margin of error for, yards. That is my final answer, Regis. And, tttiger, I would be happy to have a member of the dev team provide us with a definitive answer. Until then I'm going with yards. I'm sorry if I misled anyone.

[+Polovski 460]

It's yards, feels like feet but.. again this is CFS3 that set that not us.

 

Anyway the range now is how it is, and we won't be changing it for all the reasons I explained. In the future if we can make new AI or code or whatever then who knows...

 

Also you have to consider you can fire to distract/panic people as MvR did when enemies like hawker tried to escape. Fire and they have to dodge thus losing speed.

 

I often fire from 400-500 yards at enemies firing at wingmen. Even if one or two tracers fly past your eyes you'll break off.

 

Getting in close is still the advice, more bullets hit, and you will kill faster as it was.

[tttiger 0]

It's yards, feels like feet but.. again this is CFS3 that set that not us.

 

Anyway the range now is how it is, and we won't be changing it for all the reasons I explained. In the future if we can make new AI or code or whatever then who knows...

 

Also you have to consider you can fire to distract/panic people as MvR did when enemies like hawker tried to escape. Fire and they have to dodge thus losing speed.

 

I often fire from 400-500 yards at enemies firing at wingmen. Even if one or two tracers fly past your eyes you'll break off.

 

Getting in close is still the advice, more bullets hit, and you will kill faster as it was.

 

Thanks, Pol.

 

It's fine the way it is I just wasn't sure what the figure represented. It certainly looks and acts like feet.

 

Whatever, I think you guys finally have got it right!

 

Tony

[+Polovski 460]

Thanks Tony, yeah feels like feet to me too so makes it easier to live with.