Puff Ack

[JB11]

Dale,

What is up with the puff ack nailing me within the first three shots continually?  Could we please turn the accuracy down a hair?  I'm all for that if you hang around a little too long, like in earlier versions, you just deserve it.  But it has become ridiculous.  I am interested in others observations.  Is it too accurate?

  11

[AWwrgwy]

Random

Was it cv ack or strat ack?  Manned puffy is much worse than unmanned.  Also, seems fighters take the worse "random" hit than bombers.

I flew over a cv group yesterday in B-17s and didn't take any hits of any significance. I've also flown over strat puffy in a fighter and lost a wing.


wrongway

[NoBaddy]

Dale,

What is up with the puff ack nailing me within the first three shots continually?  Could we please turn the accuracy down a hair?  I'm all for that if you hang around a little too long, like in earlier versions, you just deserve it.  But it has become ridiculous.  I am interested in others observations.  Is it too accurate?

  11

It would appear that you have run afoul of the "kick NB's arse" code that Dale wrote years ago. It's why I don't do near that stuff!!

[Spikes]

Random

Was it cv ack or strat ack?  Manned puffy is much worse than unmanned.  Also, seems fighters take the worse "random" hit than bombers.

I flew over a cv group yesterday in B-17s and didn't take any hits of any significance. I've also flown over strat puffy in a fighter and lost a wing.


wrongway

It's the opposite of what it should be. It SHOULD be taking down bombers, and heavy jabos. But instead, it takes down light patrol and CAP fighters.

[SectorNine50]

I think there is a statistic floating around that it took 40,000 shells to kill 1 bomber.  Puffy isn't technically supposed to accurate... it's kind of a "fill the sky and hope to hit things," spray and pray type of thing.  I really think that the 5" guns shouldn't be able to be manned, or distance icons should be removed... but that's just me, hitting furballing planes is far too easy.

Cool website I found looking this stuff:
http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/flak.htm

I'm still poking around trying to find the sources I got that accuracy ratio from.

Found it!  I was wrong, it was actually 4,000 per one bomber.  Very interesting read:
http://yarchive.net/mil/ww2_flak.html

[grizz441]

I think the accuracy of the puffy is fine, I just think the range needs to be chopped at least in half.

[Spikes]

I think the accuracy of the puffy is fine, I just think the range needs to be chopped at least in half.

When you get shot down in a 262 flying CAP, whilst buffs are flying overhead going for the CV, and you are taking the puffy ack, you might rethink that.

[Anaxogoras]

I've never flown a bomber and been shot down by automated puffy ack.  I've never seen a bomber shot down by automated puffy ack.

I've been shot down by automated puffy ack in a fighter many, many times.

That's what I have observed.

[Lusche]

I've never flown a bomber and been shot down by automated puffy ack. 

I have been. More then once.
I lost more fighters to puffy ack than bombers, but then I have had many, many more fighter than bomber sorties getting me into puffy ack. Also I guess some of the puffy ack "hits" that only damaged my buffs would have killed me had I've been in a fighter plane.

[RipChord929]

Auto ack is irritating!!! But then again its supposed to be, isn't it!!!
Its really easy to dodge, thats what your stick is for...
Don't let the guns track you for too long, change your direction and
altitude.. When it tracks ya for too long, THEN it gets the kill shot..

IMO, its just fine as is..

RC

[Lusche]

IMO, its just fine as is..

Until you notice you just have been hit by puffy ack located at a factory on the other side of that friggin 20k mountain while flying at 10k yourself... 

[druski85]

I think there is a statistic floating around that it took 40,000 shells to kill 1 bomber.  Puffy isn't technically supposed to accurate... it's kind of a "fill the sky and hope to hit things," spray and pray type of thing.  I really think that the 5" guns shouldn't be able to be manned, or distance icons should be removed... but that's just me, hitting furballing planes is far too easy.

They were also slightly higher than 10-15k the vast majority of the time in real life.  Accuracy against a target at 28k isn't gonna be real hot, no matter what it is.  

Still, I agree puffy (automated) ack is far too accurate against fighters in particular. +1

[RipChord929]

Until you notice you just have been hit by puffy ack located at a factory on the other side of that friggin 20k mountain while flying at 10k yourself... 

LOL, yeah you have a point about it shooting thru hillsides, buildings, trees, etc....
But thats not and accuracy issue, its a game mechanics issue...

If I can't shoot thru it, IT shouldn't shoot thru it either...

RC

[SEraider]

I lost a perk plane (wing) because of soft ack last night.  I was at 17k and at least 10 kilomoters away when this happened.

[dkff49]

First of all I have never witnessed the firing through hills, but that does not mean that it does not happen and if it indeed is then that should be fixed.

Now back to the accuracy prtion of our discussion.

I kow someone found that it took 4000 shells to down a plane. This was due to accuracy however that figure was prior to the proximity fuse which helped that number to be reduced to 40 according to this quote from below website (I had also heard this same thing other places as well)

Prior to the war’s outbreak, anti-aircraft fire was incredibly inaccurate:

Typical Rates of accuracy:

1940:       Without Fuze: Thousands of Rounds per airplane destroyed by ground-fire during day, tens of thousands of Rounds per airplane destroyed at night

1944:       With Fuze: 90% kill rates of V-1 Buzz Bombs with 10 rounds of fire,
similar impact on Japanese Kamakaze attacks on US Pacific Fleet

Nearly total elimination of Japanese Aircraft and ships in Pacific Theatre

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu_WytZVJNYYApRJXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzNHVkOTJiBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA0gyNDlfMTIx/SIG=12pbjaoe5/EXP=1234634546/**http%3a//www.enginesofinnovation.com/html/proximity_fuse_case_study.HTM

Now since we have the proximity fuses in the 5 in guns I would say that is probably what is in place for the auto puffy as well.


Now to the better accuracy verses fighters than bombers, well I haven't seen better accuracy one way or the other. I have been shot down faster in a fighter than a bomber but that I would attribute to the fact that it usually takes more to down a bomber than a fighter anyway (typically speaking). Whenever I fly through the puffy I always get hit sometimes it is minor and others more severe.

I really have no problem with the accuracy of the puffy. Now again if it is firing through hills then that is a problem.


This has been hashed out many times here on the BB's and I think that it is at a happy medium now. We have had it less accurate and we have had it more accurate and both of these made game play worse. IMHO