The box flak model is wrong.

[Baumer]

It was my understanding from what HT posted was that it was too expensive to calculate the trajectory to look for object collisions.

Sit in a 5" gun in a CV group and you can see the time delay of your rounds. Compare that to the autoack that's firing as well and it looks pretty good to me (At least from a timing perspective).

I agree the autoack firing through mountains is pretty buggy but, for now I guess were stuck with it.

[AcId]

Well, I gotta admit.....If HT has openly discussed the situation and presented reasons why it is the way it is. I have to assume that HT himself isn't exactly happy with the way it's currently modeled and would improve it if he had a better solution. I can only hope that someday one will present itself.

[moot]

Like I said firing thru mountains isn't a problem. I'm not saying there ought to be collision detection for those or other objects. It's the new lethality and burst radius, combined with instantaneous travel to target, that means you will get hit no matter regardless of how difficult a target you ought to be for the flak guns.

"Sit in a 5" gun in a CV group and you can see the time delay of your rounds. Compare that to the autoack that's firing as well and it looks pretty good to me (At least from a timing perspective)."
There is no timing, besides the ROF pauses.  The box flak just detonates exactly where you are, with no delay.  A real flak battery would be shooting towards the target's estimated position B, X time later, where X is the time it takes for their shells to travel to B.  If a plane changed heading, B would increasingly differ from the plane's actual position, the faster the plane went.

[Puck]

No.  I don't want to sound rude but it's the fourth time I say it.. You can fly around in trajectories that would have real flak crews roll their eyes and look for an easier target, and still flak hits you like you were flying straight and steady.  This is wrong.

It may be wrong, but so is dying and immediately re-upping and flying back out to the same CV from the same base.  For that matter so is putting a fast carrier within sight of an enemy airfield. 

I don't think you're being rude, I just disagree with you.  You're trying to make it easier to dodge flack in an aircraft, I like the idea that aircraft can't dodge flack.  Keeps the CV floating a few minutes longer.  It also reduced the workload when you're flying around an enemy CV. 

[moot]

You like the idea that we've got something that would never have happened in WWII or even today?  That we've got AI controlled guns that ignore the laws of physics?  This is the same as field AAA being made to swivel rather than instantly change targets.

Like I said, and it's the last time I repeat it, the suggestion I made would in fact make things more realistic, by:
Allowing planes to dodge flak if they are far enough and flying fast enough, as they ought to be able to thanks to real world physics,
Still hitting bombers as hard, or hit them harder if need be, because they are predictable targets, as well as nearby fighters (dive bombers).

A fighter that flies around in unpredictable trajectories at over 400 mph while miles away from the flak guns shouldn't have the flak bursts follow him around instantly as though he was flying predictably at a distance short enough for delay in aiming corrections to be negligible.

I don't like the idea that you can't dodge flak because it has no purpose other than to disrupt what you're playing the game for: air combat, not turkey shoot for some AI.

[Puck]

You like the idea that we've got something that would never have happened in WWII or even today? 

Yup!  It's called "Aces High", and is a lovely game for all ages, assuming you can squelch the country channel now and then.

That we've got AI controlled guns that ignore the laws of physics?  This is the same as field AAA being made to swivel rather than instantly change targets.

Not entirely unlike the players, who never seem to STAY DEAD! 

<snip>

I don't like the idea that you can't dodge flak because it has no purpose other than to disrupt what you're playing the game for: air combat, not turkey shoot for some AI.

Moot, I think I see where you're coming from (Thou shalt not be permitted to hide in thine own ack), but here's a nice little bit of still life:



There is some reality for you; really I think that would disrupt air combat in the area (despite being time lapse).  Engage in air combat all you like, but I'd advise staying away from areas with enemy ack, cuz it's mean.

So, one last time, I LIKE the ack the way it is, and I stay out of enemy ack unless I'm feeling really froggy, and that means sometimes red icons get away.

AI Ack: 2,618, Puck: 0

[Overlag]

puck, the point m00t is trying to make is that it seem syou are more likely to get hit TnBing in a fighter than you are in a bomber... this is absolutely the oposite of what should happen.

However, with the new update i have infact last 2 or 3 bombers already to AI ack, so its working a bit better. The Ack model has been spoke about alot since AHII began, it just seems to act a bit wierd these days.

For a start surely AI ack should aim at buffs first, jabo's 2nd, and pure fighters last? The box that the ack fires in should be aimed at where the plane will be in lets say 5 seconds. Not exactly around the target where it is now (constantly updated).

[Rebel]

I'm all for 1/2ing the probability if we can have double the guns.  a REAL flak barrage. 

[Overlag]

I'm all for 1/2ing the probability if we can have double the guns.  a REAL flak barrage. 

yes, for sure. Large groups of buffs should draw alot more attention. (but then the FPS hit?)

[EvlPrsn]

yes, for sure. Large groups of buffs should draw alot more attention. (but then the FPS hit?)

the only FPS hit i eve sustain is when there are liek 20+ ppl within d400 of me, or when a mossie gets with in d800 of me....  for some reason the mossie lags me   

[thrila]

the only FPS hit i eve sustain is when there are liek 20+ ppl within d400 of me, or when a mossie gets with in d800 of me....  for some reason the mossie lags me   

That's your plane pooping it's pants with fear.

I can understand where moot is coming from.  It is very frustrating being shot down by something totally out of your control (other than remaining below 3 to 4k).  I've not played for a couple of weeks so i don't know how the puffy ack has been recoded.  What annoyed me the most was it's targeting me in the middle of furball several miles away whilst completely ignoring the 3 buffs headed directly for it.

[Wingnutt]

Ive been in the middle of a twisting turning fight with a spit over my own base, only to be blotted out of the sky by puffy ack far off the coast that was firing at me continually despite multiple friendlies (cons to me) in the area.

[Tabasco]

That's why I've started calling it Anti-Fight Artillery.  It's used offensively as much as defensively, and always indescriminately.

[Anaxogoras]

Anyone who denies that puffy ack needs a fix belongs in 1984.

[sunfan1121]

I wish there was a way to kill the CV ack, like at a factory.(without sinking all the ships)