Pilot kill after pilot kill. How do they do it??

[AbortedMan]

Unfortunately, I do not have proof, and this is speculation.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

As I'm not in the position to take action against said pilots, my producing proof is irrelevant, and a moot point. I'm stating what I believe is true and that the OP is not alone in this matter.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by AbortedMan

...my producing proof is irrelevant, and a moot point...

Far from true.

If you produced convincing proof, you could undoubtedly get these pilots banned on the popular servers.

Otherwise you are just casting doubt on the integrity of the pilots, without providing any facts. Kinda like certain political techniques best not mentioned.

And we don't need politics on this forum...

[ATAG_Colander]

Aborted,

Just to clarify...
Every pilot is in a position to take action on ATAG. All that is needed is to submit proof of any claims and such proof will be evaluated and actions taken if necessary.

In this particular case, I believe no one has any proof of wrongdoing hence no action is taking place.

Above statement aside, I personally think he's a very good shot and doubt there's cheating involved but I have no problem whatsoever of being proven wrong.

[AbortedMan]

Colander,

Of course, if I were to come upon information that could prove that something was being exploited I would make the effort to report through the appropriate channels. I meant I'm not in the position to acquire such information, as in, proof is unattainable to me through conventional (and legal) means.

Please tell me that the people in this thread are not oblivious to the possibility of cheats being used online. I understand that no one wants to slander another or compromise the integrity of another player, but don't let that cloud your vision of the *possibility* of foul play.

[ATAG_Colander]

The possibility exists and that is the reason we are talking about providing proof. If there was no such possibility, this whole thread would be moot

One thing I really regret is that track recording is causing disconnects. Recording the missions on the server would be the ideal way to acquire proof of cheat/no cheat and/or discover others that no one might have noticed.

Sadly, recording in the server will cause every one to get disconnected (I tried it some time ago).

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Colander

Sadly, recording in the server will cause every one to get disconnected (I tried it some time ago).

Actually you can record, I did quite a bit of online testing on your server, during which I recorded, but the times I did so, there were only 10-15 pilots online. Haven't tried when there is the usual high point of 40+ pilots

and as far as the pk after pk after pk it can be done, but in my exp even talking to alot of good flyers only way to get a 95% pk like that is to make the damage area of your bullet larger and you can hit them in the wing and get a pk.

and yes i have flown both blue and red and in 46 and in clod im not bad i can also prove that it is easy to cheat but that backfired on me before and not goin that rout again.

i do know that some of the people mr x fly's with have been kicked and band from servers for cheating in 1946.

i look at it as birds of a feather flock together LOL

[BadAim]

I love all this talk of cheating. I have been flying online for several years and have never seen anything that I consider cheating. Maybe that's because I wouldn't consider cheating? Hmmmmmm.

[AbortedMan]

Same here BadAim, especially in a simulator, but people are strange.

It's be foolish to assume there are no cheats in an online game, in what is essentially an uncontrolled environment (coding-wise) such as Cliffs of Dover.

I've seen cheaters in ArmA2 cooperative missions, even...a game that's about the activity of teamwork, not kills.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

An acknowledged expert on Weapons in general, and Air to Air weapons specifically is Anthony Williams, who has been published multiple times and has a website here:

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/miltech.htm

On the site is an article which deals specifically with the armament of the different sides in the Battle of Britain, and which goes into detail on the effectiveness of these weapons.

There is ZERO mention of tungsten cored 7.92mm ammunition being readily available. The article does mention the 20mm M-Geschoss round.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoB.htm

An analysis of the effectiveness of the British 7.7mm and German 7.92mm rounds shows them as similar in armour penetration.

A British study during the same period found the effectiveness of these light MG rounds in penetrating pilot armour was poor:

From Mr. Williams article:

Tests by the RAF indicated that both the .303 and 7.92mm AP bullets had some problems penetrating the structure of the relatively small and light Blenheim bomber. Both guns were fired at a range of 200 yards (180m) through the rear fuselage at the 4 mm armour plate protecting the rear gunner, which was angled at 60º to the line of fire. The results were poor; only 33% of the .303" rounds reached the armour (the rest being deflected or absorbed by the structure) and 6% penetrated it. In contrast, only 23% of the 7.92 mm bullets reached the armour, and just 1% penetrated.

No mention of tungsten core bullets ripping through pilot armour there.

Wikipedia in reference 7.92mm AP rounds notes:

The most common type of armor-piercing round had a hardened-steel core with plated-steel jacket and weighed 11.5 grams (177 gr). Other types appeared which used tungsten carbide and combinations for cores.

No indication as to when tungsten rounds were available, and clear indication those which may have had tungsten in the core were rare.

For the Germans to have been given unlimited numbers of 'magic bullets' is clearly wrong.

But just another one of the many botched aspects of this Sim.