Author Topic: Opinions On Manned Ack ? (Read 388 times)

SEABASS · « **on:** December 13, 2001, 11:34:00 AM »

I would like to say that I thoroughly enjoy Aces High. I think that one of the reasons that people are drawn to this game is for the person to person interaction that occurs. One aspect of Aces High that some of my peers and myself find rather discouraging at times is when the computer kills us with field ack. A prime example of this is when attempting a base capture all of the men are reaching the map room, the downtime on the ack is over, one ack appears and kills everything with lightning fast speed and accuracy. If this ack was manned I would find this acceptable. I do not like being killed by a computer.
I propose to my fellow Aces High partners that the ground ack is manned. I realize that there would never be enough people to effectively defend a base if each ground ack had to be manned individually.
My idea is to link all the acks on the field to one gun on the base such as the field gunner. An alternate idea would be to have the acks split up and attached to 2 guns on opposite sides of the bases.
I believe that this would bring an extra challenge to the game and would further enhance the person to person competition within the Aces High environment.
This is only an idea, but I would like to see what others in the arena think about this idea and if we have the support maybe we could convince Hitech and his merry band to implement this change.
Happy Hunting and Merry Christmas
Seabass

Tac · « **Reply #1 on:** December 13, 2001, 12:56:00 PM »

No. Just make the ack be .303 (lots of it) and make the manned acks be the supercaliber guns.

What? makes it easy to vulch? Field not protected enough? Gimme a break, the way the AI ack completely misses a 200mph, 4k alt lancaster as it does 5 passes over the field and yet manages to hit a 500mph turning P-51 on its very first pass, CONSTANTLY shows the AI ack has a hotline to Mrs. Cleo and a blind eye to slow speed objects.

Put up a lot of .303's , about 40 of them per field, give it extended range like the b17 turbolaser so they can shoot it up to 6k and we'll see just how many fighters will want to fly into that wall of lead and get parts of their planes drilled out.

And the Ack and flak should hit ANY plane, both friendly and enemy. None of this crap of flying straight to one of your acks and having it firing through your plane to hit the plane behind. Its moronic.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2001, 02:29:00 PM »

Its my experience that manned ack is MUCH more dangerous than the auto-ack if the player has some experience in leading targets (ie, deflection shooting).

Seeker · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2001, 02:52:00 PM »

Manned ack should have tracers.

Am0n · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2001, 03:01:00 PM »

I agree with Seeker, that is very misleading.

They need to be a bit tougher, you can scare them to death half the time. Ive flown over one before with no 12mm or 20mm ammo in my zero and killed one with that weak assed 7mm mg, a single mg at that.

Acks power is not really a issue for me, it should be powerful. Normaly the one who whine about it are just arngy they cant be idiots and vulch, or even more ignorant they chased someone into the field of ack.

but certain AC need to have armor boosted to with-stand a ack hit. for example, a single hit from anything shouldnt kill a jug (just an example)

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Am0n ]

Ripsnort · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2001, 03:07:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Seeker:
Manned ack should have tracers.

Yes, and a different color than auto-AA, which is yellow, make the manned AA red colored or something...

Thrawn · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2001, 04:29:00 PM »

I think it's a great idea BASS.

Maverick · « **Reply #7 on:** December 15, 2001, 12:49:00 PM »

Gee, another ack is no good whine. I suppose being able to take an unmanned field with more than a C47 would be more "realistic".

Fatty · « **Reply #8 on:** December 15, 2001, 01:15:00 PM »

I'd like to keep all current emplacements, but restore AI and strength to Beta levels.

SEABASS · « **Reply #9 on:** December 15, 2001, 01:24:00 PM »

I think you guys are missing my point. The ack is easy to kill right now, but you are still playing against a computer. I think it would be fun to have the ack manned. It would probably be more difficult than right now, but at least you arent playing against a timer and ai.

Fatty · « **Reply #10 on:** December 15, 2001, 01:51:00 PM »

You're looking at about a dozen emplacements per base, about 30 bases per side, not counting cities, factories, shore batteries, etc. What people are talking about saying lack of defense is the fact the arena can't hold enough players to gun even if everyone was on the same side.

Don't mind the ability to replace the ack, or supplement it, but it needs to be there when players are not.

Yeager · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2001, 02:59:00 PM »

HAS ANYONE (besides me) NOTICED THE MANNED ACK BALLISTICS DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE DISPERSION MODELED?

ALSO, THE GUNNERS BALLISTICS ON PLANES DO NOT HAVE DISPERSION MODELED EITHER?

yeager

LePaul · « **Reply #12 on:** December 15, 2001, 04:18:00 PM »

Interesting how the members of the 13th TAS think any reasonable discussion of ANYTHING is a Whine.

I pity them...

Maverick · « **Reply #13 on:** December 15, 2001, 10:00:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by LePaul:
Interesting how the members of the 13th TAS think any reasonable discussion of ANYTHING is a Whine.

I pity them...

Lepaul,
What makes you think you have a clue about anything related to reasonable?

BTW the idea that ack has to be manned in this game is not reasonable. There are also several guns at fields that ARE capable of being manned. The fact that they are not used much is a telling clue about the player feasability of the concept. You may now continue your whine.