Author Topic: Anti Air Guns  (Read 3578 times)

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Anti Air Guns
« on: December 17, 2010, 09:20:06 PM »
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.

I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.

Flame suit on
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline kvuo75

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3003
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2010, 09:30:29 PM »
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.

I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.

Flame suit on

manned or auto?

I dont think the auto's have very good range or accuracy, thats why people can bore thru at 500 mph to pork a radar and not be touched 90% of the time.

kvuo75

Kill the manned ack.

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2010, 10:00:59 PM »
Auto
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline Tyrannis

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3931
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2010, 10:03:58 PM »
Auto

it has been, it used to be full auto fire. now its just 3-5 round burst for the 20mm (i believe) and single shot for the auto 37mm. thats as close to being "nerfed" as your gonna get man, sorry.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #4 on: December 17, 2010, 10:05:01 PM »
AA fire was far more lethal in reality than it is in AH.

Come back when most shoot downs are from ground fire, which they were in reality.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline shotgunneeley

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2010, 01:57:09 PM »
one time i dove straight down to de-ack a vh base back when there were only 2 auto-acks at over 400 mph... got popped twice for a PW and oil leak (no GV's).

I've seen an enemy 190 glide dead-stick from one end of a large airfield to other without taking a single hit from the auto-ack. He got me sitting on the runway with one tater round spraying before he finally got hit.

"Lord, let us feel pity for Private Jenkins, and sorrow for ourselves, and all the angel warriors that fall. Let us fear death, but let it not live within us. Protect us, O Lord, and be merciful unto us. Amen"-from FALLEN ANGELS by Walter Dean Myers

Game ID: ShtGn (Inactive), Squad: 91st BG

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2010, 02:11:43 PM »
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.

I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.

Flame suit on

LOL!  Another one that wants to dumb down the game to make it easier for her to play. 

Post your "statistical and first hand account fact" that supports your whine...err I mean wish.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2010, 05:02:48 PM »
Quote W.E Johns. WW1 Pilot and reserve officer in WW2

"Archie is scattered and rarely hits anything, most gunners when they fire shoot straight at the target and most hits are registered in the fueselage or rear of the aircraft"

For someone who had more flying experience than us cartoon pilots and served in both World Wars, Im likely to take his word over yours Ack-Ack.

Also, note that the muzzle velocity of an Anti Air gun is slower due to the fact that they are A. firing against gravity, B. they start at ground level so there is denser air, C. a 20 mm flak gun takes time to change the trajectory of its fire, so it would take constant adjustment to fire at a fast moving aircraft at high altitude. Too long for any accurate shooting to be made, D. the fact that German AA and British Late War AA was so effective because it was radar guided is not to be ignored, E. the lower you fly the less effective the ack should be, not more effective, as you are moving too fast and close for effective shooting to be made, there should be a "butter zone" where Ack is most effective, anything above or below that zone should be harder to hit.

So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it. at any altitude within its range, let alone the puff ack that kills you in one hit from 30 K.

A. Add a buffer zone in which AA fire is at its maximum efficieny, anywhere below, or higher than that zone is harder to hit, say if you go in NOE, your almost impossible to hit, and ultra high your out of range. In between these is the buffer zone which should be almost certain death if you spend too much time at too slower speed.

B. Make the Dar a tactical target. So if a bomb takes out the Dar, it renders no assistance to ack. This of course both ways, so if the dar is up, your gonna die, if its down, you have an easy time. In short, Dar up, your toast. Dar down, cakewalk. (almost unless you fly through the zone)

I think these two things would make a GREAT addition to the game, it would add a whole new perspective to base taking.   
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 05:19:47 PM by Plawranc »
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline 007Rusty

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2634
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2010, 05:18:00 PM »
Fear my ACK-ACK  :D
Just like duck hunting got to lead em  :rock
C.O. 444TH AIR MAFIA
 WD40 (FS0)
 

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2010, 05:23:52 PM »
Quote W.E Johns. WW1 Pilot and reserve officer in WW2

"Archie is scattered and rarely hits anything, most gunners when they fire shoot straight at the target and most hits are registered in the fueselage or rear of the aircraft"

For someone who had more flying experience than us cartoon pilots and served in both World Wars, Im likely to take his word over yours Ack-Ack.

Also, note that the muzzle velocity of an Anti Air gun is slower due to the fact that they are A. firing against gravity, B. they start at ground level so there is denser air, C. a 20 mm flak gun takes time to change the trajectory of its fire, so it would take constant adjustment to fire at a fast moving aircraft at high altitude. Too long for any accurate shooting to be made, D. the fact that German AA and British Late War AA was so effective because it was radar guided is not to be ignored, E. the lower you fly the less effective the ack should be, not more effective, as you are moving too fast and close for effective shooting to be made, there should be a "butter zone" where Ack is most effective, anything above or below that zone should be harder to hit.

So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it. at any altitude within its range, let alone the puff ack that kills you in one hit from 30 K.

A. Add a buffer zone in which AA fire is at its maximum efficieny, anywhere below, or higher than that zone is harder to hit, say if you go in NOE, your almost impossible to hit, and ultra high your out of range. In between these is the buffer zone which should be almost certain death if you spend too much time at too slower speed.

B. Make the Dar a tactical target. So if a bomb takes out the Dar, it renders no assistance to ack. This of course both ways, so if the dar is up, your gonna die, if its down, you have an easy time. In short, Dar up, your toast. Dar down, cakewalk. (almost unless you fly through the zone)

I think these two things would make a GREAT addition to the game, it would add a whole new perspective to base taking.   

No offense but his comments hardly prove your point.  Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.

Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else?  Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2010, 05:27:55 PM »
My suggestion is valid though, interlocking the Dar with the AAA is a good idea I think.

Think Ack-Ack, it would give me no excuse to complain, I know how much you want that.  :lol
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline 321BAR

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6140
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2010, 05:58:19 PM »
My suggestion is valid though, interlocking the Dar with the AAA is a good idea I think.

Think Ack-Ack, it would give me no excuse to complain, I know how much you want that.  :lol
:headscratch: interlocking radar and AAA? uhhh.... radar and AAA... i dont think WWII HAD this!

AA maybe. ya know... manned AA guns. no assisted AA in here... yet at least
I am in need of a new epic quote
Happy Jack's Go Buggy

Offline kvuo75

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3003
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2010, 06:05:06 PM »
So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it.


this is the part you lose me on.. I see people fly thru auto ack willy-nilly all day long.. people even vulch thru it and barely ever get touched.  if you are carrying any sort of speed, you will rarely get touched.

i agree the puffy ack is annoying as hell, but the regular autoack on the bases I see no problem.

ultimate solution, stay out of the ack, or bring rockets and de-ack from a distance, if vulching is the objective. (same goes for town tho)
kvuo75

Kill the manned ack.

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2010, 11:33:39 PM »
:headscratch: interlocking radar and AAA? uhhh.... radar and AAA... i dont think WWII HAD this!

AA maybe. ya know... manned AA guns. no assisted AA in here... yet at least

It did, look up the Kammulhuber Line "i think thats the name". They were manned yes, BUT, the Radar gave them height, speed, range, and an operator would give them the rangefinding and lead info to engage the aircraft.
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline EskimoJoe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4831
Re: Anti Air Guns
« Reply #14 on: December 19, 2010, 01:42:39 AM »
No offense but his comments hardly prove your point.  Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.

Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else?  Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...


ack-ack

A... Automatic weapons?

Couldn't resist  :devil
Put a +1 on your geekness atribute  :aok