CV Ack Lethality

[Jekyll]

Yeah, I know its been posted about time and again.

But this is getting beyond a joke!  Was up in my P51 tonight defending 34.  Flew past the CV group and dived towards the cons low over our field.  Once I was heading away from the CV, the ack opened up, followed me all the way to my hard deck of about 2000 feet.

Here I am, extending away from the CV till I reach a point where it is no longer even visible to me (probably D15 or so), and the ack is still bursting all around me.

It finally removed half my right wing.

Of course, being Aces High, I was able to fly my 1 1/2 wing Mustang safely back to base, at treetop height at a speed of around 390mph.  (Funny, always thought the stang was slower than that on the deck).

So, I suppose there are 3 parts to this 'whine'.

1.  Fleet Ack, currently ridiculous.  If WW2 CV ack had been as deadly as this there would have been no need for CAP's.

2.  Flight model - flying 50 miles on 1 1/2 wings?  'nuff said

3.  Drag Model - since when can an aircraft with 1 1/2 wings fly faster than a complete aircraft?  This needs SERIOUS work.  If the drag model is wrong, what else in this friggin game is stuffed.

I'm convinced that one day, long in the future, someone from HTC is going to take a good look at the FM's and declare, "WTF is this decimal point doing here?"

[Jochen]

 

2. Flight model - flying 50 miles on 1 1/2 wings? 'nuff said

Missing half wing is only an abstraction of damage. It might have been only some hole in the wing but since it cannot be presented by AH graphics engine it shows missing wingtip.

 

3. Drag Model - since when can an aircraft with 1 1/2 wings fly faster than a complete aircraft? This needs SERIOUS work. If the drag model is wrong, what else in this friggin game is stuffed.

I dont know if the plane can go faster with missing parts but something must be done for drag figures of damaged parts!!! Plane with wing full of holes will not go very fast!

WWIIOL models this so why can't we?

------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski

Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.

Sieg oder bolsevismus!

[Specterx]

Jekyll -

There's nothing wrong with the ack, it's just that people seem to think that they can fly a lone fighter against radar guided proximity fused AAA that will kill with one hit. The difference in "deadliness" that you experience is because ships in WWII had hundreds of targets, while in your case there was only one.

A tip for the masses: the worst thing you can do when encountering fleet flak is to manuver. The ack hits everywhere but your plane, so if you manuver you're likely to stumble into a burst and die.

Jochen was right about the FM, the reason planes with wing damage are flyable is because missing wingtips is the AH rendering of extreme wing damage, meaning that the plane is not impossible but more difficult to fly as long as you keep the speed up.

[gatt]

Oh yeah, I've seen several Zekes flying and fighting while on fire, I mean completely on fire, after a burst of my cannons. Does it mean the zeke pilot was only lighting a cigarette?

Jokes apart: please, remove this wingtip/halfwing bug from the DM or make those halfwing fighters unflyable. You know, some of us rely on damages we see on the target.

[Jekyll]

So spectrex, you think its fine that CV ack can track and hit me at ranges where I'm so far from the CV that it is no longer visible?

An 'Essex' class carrier is about 861 feet long.  So when I am at a range where I can no longer see that 861 foot carrier, its ack can still track a 36 foot wingspan aircraft???

At the time, the CV was offshore from A34.  I would guess about 3 miles offshore.  I was flying inland, and was at least 5 miles inland at the time I was hit.  5" ack can track and hit a fighter sized target at minimum 8 mile range?

Jochen, according to HT's P51 chart, it should travel at about 355mph on the deck and 363 mph on the deck with WEP.

My 1 1/2 wing Mustang was doing around 390mph on the deck with NO WEP.  For 50 miles!

It 'seems' that when you lose parts from the airframe, you also lose the drag associated with those parts.

A Mustang with only half a wing on each side would be an absolute rocket!

Personally, I would love to see the FM issues dealt with before we worried about Tempests, Fw190D9's and Blitz Bombers.

But that's just MY opinion  

[Jimdandy]

 

Originally posted by Specterx:
Jekyll -

There's nothing wrong with the ack...

Well I'll tell you one thing wrong. When your in a fur ball over the CV and the ack bursts are going off all around you the GIGANTIC shotgun blasts miraculously only damage the enemy aircraft. Funny how an indiscriminate explosion can do that with an enemy pinned to your butt. Seems to me that both planes would be taking a bit of a beating. Other wise I agree. A lone aircraft over the CV would be vulnerable. A lone aircraft 8.5 miles away from the CV wouldn't be. 8.5 miles is over 3/4 of the max range of the longer range WWII 5in guns (5" C38 18,200yrds= 10.3 miles). Radar guided and all that's a long way to be accurately placing rounds on a 390mph aircraft.
Those guns were still using the human tracking system not a computer. They had the benefit of radar telling them an accurate speed and distance. Reaction time and human error still played a factor. The human still had to place the gun at the proper angle to match the radar data. I think a reduction in accuracy at ranges near max is in order.

Don't get me wrong. On the over all AH is doing great. It's just my pet peeve.

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 02-02-2001).]

[Pepino]

Agree with the friendly fire issue, Jimdandy.

5" should kill anything within its blast radius. And substract perk points if the gunner kills a friendly.

Cheers,

Pepe

[Suave1]

I can't hit any plane with 5" beyond d5.0 . But the AI ack hits 100% way beyond that range, so to me the accuracy of the AI cg ack seems pretty ridiculous .

[LJK Raubvogel]

What Jekyll said, there are some drag and FM issues that need to be looked at. And yes, the CV ack is ridiculous at long range. Of course since we don't have any numbers to prove that wingless planes aren't faster, the cheerleaders will be in here shortly with their pom-poms.

------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

[Suave1]

boiyoiyoing

[This message has been edited by Suave1 (edited 02-05-2001).]

[Torgo]

 

Originally posted by Jochen:

WWIIOL models this so why can't we?

WWIIOL Doesn't model this, because for me it doesn't exist.

When it's in open beta, THEN people can start bragging about crap that WWIIOL has that AH doesn't.

[Dingy]

Dont have much of an issue with CV ack lethality nor with the abstract damage modeling only showing half a wing.

What I do agree with, however, is how planes missing parts actually have LESS drag than they do  with em.  I've been outsped by a F4 on the deck level missing half a wing and I was in a super light P51 (less than 1/4 tank).  Chased him for 1 sector and continued to pull ahead.

Likewise, I've been chased with parts missing and found my plane flew FASTER than without.  Thats screwy and just plain wrong.

-Ding

[Jekyll]

I had the ultimate example of the 'parts/drag missing' problem last night.

Was flying a P47D-30 and attacked a B26 near our port.  I blew the pass and the buff removed BOTH my wingtips, complete with ailerons.

I had to use rudder to return to base and I had that Jug up to 405 mph level on the deck (no wep) on the way back.  Fortunately, the flaps were still functioning, so I used rudder to line up on the runway and made a perfect 3 pointer at about 135 mph.  One of the best Jug landings I've ever done  

405 on the deck for a Jug?

[GRUNHERZ]

I dont mean this a putdown to HTC, but maube this AH FM isnt as high-end and realistic as advertised?

[Specterx]

 

I dont mean this a putdown to HTC, but maube this AH FM isnt as high-end and realistic as advertised?

The engine IS about a year old.
 
I haven't actually noticed a problem here, unless your going over 300 mph (i.e. enough to retain aircraft stability) I quickly loose control of and crash a plane with a missing wing or wingtip.