Author Topic: Ack (Read 615 times)

mussie · « **on:** April 04, 2005, 11:17:59 AM »

Why are there so few AA guns on the fields

Personally I think the 37mm SUCK their ROF is to low and there are to few of them

I would like to see AA turrets like the quad .50 off the m16 or the 20 mm As below

20 mm Oerlikon AA Gun

Between December 1941 and September 1944, 32% of all Japanese aircraft downed were credited to this weapon, with the high point being 48.3% for the second half of 1942.

Either way a few more (say 2) AA guns would be nice

Morpheus · « **Reply #1 on:** April 04, 2005, 11:51:04 AM »

lol hardly anyone takes ack down as it is now. And you want more...

Howitzer · « **Reply #2 on:** April 04, 2005, 01:06:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Morpheus
lol hardly anyone takes ack down as it is now. And you want more...

We should add more 88mm puffy ack and 5" mannable guns on the airfields too =)

Heck, what it needs is an invisible barrier so that when the enemy crosses it they are immediately vaporized.

I'm just kidding... I just hate the ack.

MOIL · « **Reply #3 on:** April 04, 2005, 02:59:27 PM »

Morph:
"lol hardly anyone takes ack down as it is now. And you want more"

Now no offence, but who's fault is that?

Secondly, the air field ack is AI controlled and is ineffective {excluding Port ACK} There needs to be more AA guns at fields that are manned by players

As it is now two planes can de-ack a field in seconds, the other night a squadie and myself de-acked a field {med size} in no time flat and I'm one of the worst {if not the worst} pilots in the game.

I would think that the "vets" and "better" pilots in the game would like a bit more of a challange in attacking & taking a field.

Right now the biggest complaint I hear pertaining to ACK is the manned 5" guns or "puffy-ack, the rest is merely just a small nuisance.

I'm not saying that every field should have some un-godly amount of AA guns all over the place, but one or two manned guns that are easily disabled and non-repairable coupled with a few inaccurate AI guns is just about useless.

Looking through countless threads from players, they all seem to share the same concern or gripe, "If I wanna play against the computer I'll go play IL2 or the likes" "I pay to play against human players, not AI"
This has been argued up & down for some time, I say let the players do the shooting!!
I would rather get picked off from someone in an AA battery trying to defend his field than some computer generated puff of destruction that takes me out just beacuse I happen to be in the right or wrong spot.

My 2 cents

DaddyAck · « **Reply #4 on:** April 04, 2005, 03:41:47 PM »

Somebody call me ???[/I][/SIZE][/COLOR]

Seriously though, more manable "ACK" would be good.

dedalos · « **Reply #5 on:** April 04, 2005, 03:55:59 PM »

I thought we have that already. Its caled a flack panzer. In a sence, it is a manable gun that can move and it does not die as easy. Ask MOIL. Try geting near a field when the LTARs are there.

I think you should be asking for mo VHs or dif GV spawn points in a field.

Wolfala · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:30:36 PM »

I drove upto an AI battery a few times, and it looks like a QUAD 20 setup. So, you want ANY positions on the field to be mannable or just more spots put on the field?

Wolf

Morpheus · « **Reply #7 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:39:24 PM »

Quote

There needs to be more AA guns at fields that are manned by players

I dont remember saying that I thought we didnt need more manned ack on a field.

But I did say we do NOT need more ack on a field.

Why talk out of your bellybutton just to try and lobby for something no one on this thread was talking about in the first place? Lets stay on topic here for just a few minutes shall we.

Do a search on threads related to this topic.

I've been all for being shot down by a player in a field gun. I'd rather it be a plane, but if its going to be from a field gun... I'd rather it be fired by a player.

But what I absolutly DO NOT think we need is MORE ack.

Hell, Make every single ack on the base mannable for all I care. I'd be all for that.

But MORE ack? Hell no LTAR.

XtrmeJ · « **Reply #8 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:44:00 PM »

AI Ack is almost necessary in this game. I say this because at certain times of the night, there are more fields then there are players to man guns ect. This prevents 1-2 planes and a goon from getting an easy capture.

Morpheus · « **Reply #9 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:51:19 PM »

Quote

Now no offence, but who's fault is that?

I can say for a fact, that its partialy due to the way Hitech's got the ack moddled now. That or the 50cals. Or the hardness of the ack.

As it stands. 2-3 20mm canon rounds at the most landing around but not on a field gun will take it down.

Now, I'd like to think I'm a fairly Ok shot with the U.S. .50cals. I will in on an ack, and starting at about 800d start shooting, landing hits all over the dam thing. Nada.

Alot of the fighters I fly are MG rides. If I'm in one, forget it. I wont in on ack. I wont even go near it. On the same token, if I'm in a Chog, a tiffy, a spit, or any one of the many fighters with canons, I'll be the first to in on ack and start taking it down.

Thats why ack stays up longer now.

Good? Yeah maybe so. But that in itself is enough to tell you we DONT need MORE ack.

LePaul · « **Reply #10 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:59:04 PM »

Im kinda wondering when the ack went from 1-ping-of-death to almost a joke? I'm seeing more 262's used to deack fields now than ever before. I thought ack was deadly the faster you went?

The 262 approach seems novel...since ack isnt a factor, anything upping to defend is no match.

MOIL · « **Reply #11 on:** April 04, 2005, 05:28:58 PM »

Wolfala:
"I drove upto an AI battery a few times, and it looks like a QUAD 20 setup. So, you want ANY positions on the field to be mannable or just more spots put on the field?"

There is no QUAD anything on any airfield. There is only the MGMC M16 which is armed with a Quad .50 cal
Any and all of the "gun positions" should be able to be manned

Morph:
"Why talk out of your bellybutton just to try and lobby for something no one on this thread was talking about in the first place? Lets stay on topic here for just a few minutes shall we"

Excuse me? So now I'm talking out of my ***? It's exactly what the tread is about you dolt. I never stated I wanted to see MORE ack at a field, I said all guns should be able to be manned, when not in AI mode

XtremeJ:
"AI Ack is almost necessary in this game. I say this because at certain times of the night, there are more fields then there are players to man guns ect"

I would agree, we need AI to assist in the defence when players ae not avail. However if there are players avail to do the job they should be able to man ANY gun not destroyed.

CPorky · « **Reply #12 on:** April 04, 2005, 05:36:07 PM »

I fly the P38 exclusively and I would never even bother taking ack down unless I have cannon rounds left.

To sum up, I'd rather strafe the ack with a single 20mm firing than 4 .50 cals.

Quote

Originally posted by Morpheus
I can say for a fact, that its partialy due to the way Hitech's got the ack moddled now. That or the 50cals. Or the hardness of the ack.

somespam · « **Reply #13 on:** April 04, 2005, 10:19:47 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the powers to be have changed it so that .50 cals cannot kill an ack. You MUST use cannons.......

Morpheus · « **Reply #14 on:** April 04, 2005, 10:49:18 PM »

^
!
!
!
!
!
See.