Can pufy ack get turned down please

[Lusche]

Could it also target planes based on ordinance or sortie type, or even just plane type? I.E., the puffy ack shoots at the B24/what have you coming to bomb the CV/factory, not the furball happening just near it?

I wouldn't like to see such "magicc" knowledge. How could an ack gunner decide of an enemy P-47 has ords or not? Or if buffs are still heavy or not? Not mentioning the sortie type.

Also... even without ords, a plane can still be pretty dangerous to a CV or a strat target - BF 110, B-25H, Mossie, P-47...

[Motherland]

I wouldn't like to see such "magicc" knowledge. How could an ack gunner decide of an enemy P-47 has ords or not? Or if buffs are still heavy or not? Not mentioning the sortie type.

Also... even without ords, a plane can still be pretty dangerous to a CV or a strat target - BF 110, B-25H anybody?

I'm just trying to suggest something that would make the auto ack somewhat 'smart'. I don't know by what means, but there is some way that the code should be able to prioritize by the danger a plane poses to the thing they're trying to defend.

[SlapShot]

it shouldn't bother firing at a maneuvering fighter at 10k+ in real life it would be quite literally imposable to get any kind of solution on a target moving over 300mph and constantly changing direction at that altitude.. but yet in the game it will not only shoot at it, but it will often hit it, and not only will it often hit it, it will hit it while firing through a mountain.
 

5 inch guns, shooting proximity shells, do go for a "solution" ... the object is never to try and directly hit a plane ... the object is to get as many shells into the air in "close proximity" to the enemy aircraft ... and let the proximity fuse do it's job.

Why people think 5 inches are used like shooting trap targets at a shot gun range has always baffled me.

[hitech]

I have seen it happen over and over, in close wing with a friendly, slightly higher, I start getting flack puffs around me, I get beneath them, it picks them up. Will try to get film of the phenomenon.

How about priortizing ord-laden aircraft over clean ones, or at least 4 engine bombers over single-engine fighters, if possible? Anything to make it auto puffy do its job better without unduly annoying fighters attempting to dogfight would be nice.

Do you really think I just talk out of my rear end on this stuff? So much so that you persist in perpetuating the rumor?

static int _SelectFlackTarget(waautoAUTO_GUN * AutoGun,clkCLOCK * Clock)
{
int i;
int Cnt;
madPOINT Vec;
obOBJECT * CollideList[256];
double MinDistSqr;
obOBJECT * NewTargetObject;
madPOINT AutoPnt;
double DistSqr;

if(Clock->dblTime - AutoGun->LastTargetTime < _AUTO_TARGET_RATE)
{
return 0;
}
obTranslateObjDlbPoint(AutoGun->ParentObject,&AutoGun->BarrelPoints[0],&AutoGun->WldPnt);

AutoGun->LastTargetTime = Clock->dblTime;


AutoPnt = AutoGun->WldPnt;

Cnt = _GetPosibleTargetList(AutoGun,CollideList,255);

MinDistSqr = AutoGun->AutoWeaponClass->MaxRange *
AutoGun->AutoWeaponClass->MaxRange * 1.2;
NewTargetObject = NULL;


for(i=0;i<Cnt;++i)
{
if(CollideList[i]->ObjectClass == obOC_BAD_GUY_OBJECT ||
CollideList[i]->ObjectClass == obOC_USER_OBJECT ||
CollideList[i]->ObjectClass == obOC_USER_DRONE ||
CollideList[i]->ObjectClass == obOC_WEAPON)
{

#ifndef syscfgAUTO_TESTING

if(AutoGun->ParentObject->Country != CollideList[i]->Country)
#endif
{

maSUB_POINTS(Vec,AutoPnt,CollideList[i]->Pnt);
if(fabs(Vec.y) < _MIN_FLAK_ALT)
{
continue;
}

DistSqr = maVEC_LENGTH_SQR(Vec);
if(DistSqr < MinDistSqr)
{
MinDistSqr = DistSqr;
NewTargetObject = CollideList[i];
}
}
}
}

_SetAutoGunTargetObject(AutoGun,NewTargetObject);
return 0;
}

Where exactly, except for the min flak alt that everyone knows of, do you see anything to do with altitude for target selection.

[dunnrite]

Do you really think I just talk out of my rear end on this stuff? So much so that you persist in perpetuating the rumor?

snip

Where exactly, except for the min flak alt that everyone knows of, do you see anything to do with altitude for target selection.

[Ack-Ack]

Ouch!  Someone just received an epic beat down from HiTech.  Wonder if BnZ enjoys the taste of crow right about now.


ack-ack

[BnZs]

Do you really think I just talk out of my rear end on this stuff? So much so that you persist in perpetuating the rumor?

I have no idea why this effect happens, but sometimes, it does indeed happn. Do you deny that the auto-puffy sometimes (often?) targets clean, maneuvering, fighters instead of buffs making a bee-line for the carrier? Instead of looking for funny GIFs on the internet, why not fix the ack to do its job? Unless annoying the crap out of most of the player base IS its job?

[Ack-Ack]

I love it when players tell a developer they are wrong right after the developer has shown the player to be rather clueless on the subject matter.

I guess some players just need to be beaten a couple of times for things to sink in properly.



ack-ack

[BnZs]

I love it when players tell a developer they are wrong right after the developer has shown the player to be rather clueless on the subject matter.

I guess some players just need to be beaten a couple of times for things to sink in properly.



ack-ack

So, you are going on record as saying that auto-puffy has never shot at a clean fighter in lieu of buffs headed for the CV it was supposed to be protecting?

[moot]

HT was replying to your comment about flying lower "picking up" the flak from the higher friendly, not about clean/heavy biasing.

[sethipus]

So, you are going on record as saying that auto-puffy has never shot at a clean fighter in lieu of buffs headed for the CV it was supposed to be protecting?

BnZs, read the code, if you can.  And if you can't, then please get a clue and take it from those of us who can.  The fact is, this code clearly shows *exactly* how the new auto-puffy target is chosen.  And, other than skipping planes below the minimum altitude (which we know to be 3k), altitude doesn't factor into it.  Range to the target does.

Yes, the auto-puffy will fire at a fighter, rather than a set of buffs, if the fighter is closer.  

Please note that the distance being considered is the actual length of the vector from the gun to the target, not merely the X or Y offsets.  This means that someone could be "closer" to the autogun than another target according to horizontal distance, and yet be further from the gun in absolute terms because it's at a much higher altitude.  So, if you have a fighter at 4k off the deck and 2k out from the ship, or a set of buffs at 10k off the deck by only 1.5k out from the ship, the fighter is the closer target (despite being .5k further out horizontally), and the gun will fire at the fighter.

HiTech, is there any chance you guys would consider prioritizing bombers over fighters in these calculations?  I would think that any sane gunner would regard the threat of a set of B-17s lumbering toward the CV or factory to be far higher than the threat of a bobbing and weaving P51 or Bf 109 (or Me 262, arg).

[BnZs]

HT was replying to your comment about flying lower "picking up" the flak from the higher friendly, not about clean/heavy biasing.

So, Ack shooting at an aircraft that is both higher and farther horizontally from the CV than another, impossible? 

[sethipus]

So, Ack shooting at an aircraft that is both higher and farther horizontally from the CV than another, impossible? 

According to the actual source code that the game engine runs to make this decision, yes.

If you have film that shows otherwise, I'm sure HTC would very much like to see it.

[Ack-Ack]

So, you are going on record as saying that auto-puffy has never shot at a clean fighter in lieu of buffs headed for the CV it was supposed to be protecting?

When your original arguments gets blown out of the water and you're made to look like a tool by the developer, change the argument.  Great strategy.


ack-ack

[MachFly]

I was just flying FSO, and I almost lost my 190 because of puffy ack.
I was half sector away from the city and it was still firing at me.