Puffy

[Tank-Ace]

LOL! Melvin, you're so far wrong. I'm not sure if you'll ever be right again.

First off, large ships like Fleet Carriers and Heavy Crusiers (what we have) didn't come within miles of the shoreline during combat for abundantly obvious reasons, and so their AAA would be incapable of providing any assistance to friendly aircraft fighting above an enemy instilation. Destroyers sometimes did (though the only time I can think of when they came close enough to shore to provide usefull AAA fire would be during D-Day).

But then again, they wouldn't be a problem to deal with on their own (if auto puffy would disapear along with the guns that are supposed to have fired the AA shells). One pass from a 190F8 and they're (or should be) nearly harmless.

Secondly, you're just wrong on this one. Theres no way to knock out the auto puffy short of destroying the entire task group (and I'm not 100% sure if even THAT stops it). That in and of itself means we need to change something about the AAA coading You're 'splitting' the fleet idea might work, though it seems to me it would be overly difficult to coad. But then it would still require a change to the AAA coading. Simplest way to fix this problem would be to change the auto-puffy and then leave it be.


@ Semp, is there anything in the game you don't find 'easy'? You often seem to be going on about how things are so easy that talking about it might as well be the same as doing it, or how every plane in the game is easy to fly. I'm rather curious, is that just bluster on your part, or have you been flying long enough to have mastered eveything there is to the game?

[guncrasher]

LOL! Melvin, you're so far wrong. I'm not sure if you'll ever be right again.




@ Semp, is there anything in the game you don't find 'easy'? You often seem to be going on about how things are so easy that talking about it might as well be the same as doing it, or how every plane in the game is easy to fly. I'm rather curious, is that just bluster on your part, or have you been flying long enough to have mastered eveything there is to the game?

nope havent mastered anything.  but from your average player that has flown perhaps 4 airplanes most of the time, zeke, spit9, spit8 and ponyd.   i can tell you that there's no such thing as a noob plane or a man's plane, (well not including the ones with "no" guns like the ju87).  but only some people who think they are so superior to others because they fly a certain plane that they must put others down in order to give themselves some importance.

except for the p38, now that is a man's plane.  now you really gotta have some skill to get that large piece of junk in the middle of action get kills and back to land them.  rest of the plane set is just for noobs and those who want to make themselves feel important.

granted there are some people that are highly skilled but the majority just think they are.

semp

[B-17]

I would love to see every gun mannable in the TG...

Even if when there is no human in the position, the AI we have right now are there instead, would be nice. SO many times I've thought "DAMMIT if i could just get that one angle... :"

Just my 2 cents.



(By the way, It would be awesome to see every single gun on the cruiser/destroyer/carrier/battleship ( : ) spitting fire

[hawkeyeluke13]

Pervert, Just shut up man, you know you sound alot like one of the biggest Knight loves/ annoyances LTown

[pervert]

Pervert, Just shut up man, you know you sound alot like one of the biggest Knight loves/ annoyances LTown

Ahhh don't think I will, have you ever tried drinking bleach btw?

[Peyton]

Tank read below

[Peyton]

Tank read below

[Peyton]

You are incorrect Tank.  There are plenty examples in the Pacific and in Italy (Anzio) where navy ships were in close support of ground troops or bases. Take it that we cannot seperate the carrier from the rest of the fleet but heavy cruisers and destroyers were often close to shore supporting ground troops, used their puffy ack, main guns, .50 calibers, to protect installations.

"Throughout this long struggle on the Italian littoral, our troops were strongly supported by naval gunfire, airpower and a shuttle of ships and craft that braved air and submarine attack to deliver reinforcements. Late in May 1944 the main Allied advance linked up with Anzio's defenders, and Rome was liberated a few days later. In what many consider a land battle, there were a total of 17 ships lost: ten British and seven U.S. Navy."
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/articles/anzio.aspx
Anzio-"Supporting warships were heavily attacked from the air: 23rd - On patrol off the beaches, destroyer "JANUS" was torpedoed and sunk by a He111 bomber. 29th - Six days later, cruiser SPARTAN was hit by a Hs293 glider bomb and capsized with many casualties."
http://www.naval-history.net/WW2RN19-194401.htm

[mthrockmor]

I think famously US Navy destroyers closed in on Mount Suribachi and provided direct fire support to Marines and they scaled to the top. They provided support with not only 5" but also 40mm and 20mm. In the Pacific Theater there are many examples of US Navy ships getting close to provide fire support. We should not confuse fire support against troops positions versus an active airfield. Not even at Guadalcanal, for what became Henderson Field, which is close to the beach. They landed a ways away and did not provide direct fire at the airfield, which was not active at the time.

In general I sense a pretty common voice of change to our current Task Force alignment and ability. A concept of allowing the TF to shift formation, they should also add an icon that allows the TF to travel from Point A to Point B using zigzag, which was very common. Or, as another suggested continue from assigned Point A to Point but allow a defense manuever of a 360degree turn without have to go in and change overall direction. A couple simple icons could add this. [Note: I am not a computer guru. I say simple, it may not be. It just seems simple.]

Boo

[Nathan60]

Just for the CV being parked on the beach I vote we get rid of insistence on historical skins in game.

The whole  "plane  must have  been produced in numbers and  used in combat" should go aswell

[Melvin]

O.K. maybe we are getting somewhere.

If we had the ability to split some destroyers off of the main Task Group and send them in close to shore while keeping the C.V. at a respectful distance, would players still have a leg to stand on concerning the "gaminess" of puffy ack keeping a cap on their field?

I believe that they would not.

[Saxman]

Currently, CV puffy is randomly generated in a box around the target. The amount of ack stays the same, however the size of the box varies on the size of a target. Bomber formations, therefore, have a much larger target box around them than does a small single-engined aircraft. the end result is that fighters are contending with a FAR heavier concentration of AAA than bombers. That puffy ack is generated automatically around the target also means it's impossible to attempt any sort of evasive action to avoid it. Additionally, the AI behavior of puffy ack is just BIZARRE. Often times it doesn't begin firing at you until you're nearly right on top of the carrier, however it can CONTINUE firing at you even if you withdraw from visual range. Let's not even get into how puffy ack can fire on you through mountains and other obstructions...

There's one quick and easy solution to a all of these problems:

Rather than randomly generated around the target once in range, model puffy ack to actually be FIRED like the other auto-ack.

[Tank-Ace]

You are incorrect Tank.  There are plenty examples in the Pacific and in Italy (Anzio) where navy 1) ships were in close support of ground troops or bases. Take it that we cannot seperate the carrier from the rest of the fleet but 2) heavy cruisers and destroyers were often close to shore supporting ground troops, used their puffy ack, main guns, .50 calibers, to protect installations.

"Throughout this long struggle on the Italian littoral, our troops were strongly supported by 3) naval gunfire, airpower and a shuttle of ships and craft that braved air and submarine attack to deliver reinforcements. Late in May 1944 the main Allied advance linked up with Anzio's defenders, and Rome was liberated a few days later. In what many consider a land battle, there were a total of 17 ships lost: ten British and seven U.S. Navy."
http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/articles/anzio.aspx
Anzio-"Supporting warships were heavily attacked from the air: 23rd - 4) (see, I can over-use font stylings too!) On patrol off the beaches, destroyer "JANUS" was torpedoed and sunk by a He111 bomber. 29th - Six days later, cruiser SPARTAN was hit by a Hs293 glider bomb and capsized with many casualties."
http://www.naval-history.net/WW2RN19-194401.htm

1) unspecified naval ships. Many DID opperate close to shore, even beaching themselves. But Carriers and Heavy Cruisers didn't (to the best of my knowledge). And BTW, sources of using AA shells in support of ground troops. And not sure, but its quite possible that a Heavy Cruiser would ground herself if she came within effective range for .50's. Not to mention that it would be close enough for even mortars to pose a threat.

2) Examples of a Heavy Cruiser closing to within 8,000 yds of shore during combat please. I think you mean light cruisers, but either way, upon closer inspection it appears we MIGHT even have a miss-armed Alaska-class Large Cruiser. Only other Heavy Cruisers (and it is at least a heavy cruiser, based on armament) that resembels the ones we have are the Witchita-class, and the Baltimore-class, of which the Baltimore-class is the closest match.

3) OK, this one doesn't even state close support fire! It could be talking about 14" fire from a battleship 17miles away.

4) 5 miles out could be called "off" the beaches as well. Even 10 miles could, and that would put the cruiser at about 17,000 yds off shore.

[ink]

except for the p38, now that is a man's plane.  now you really gotta have some skill to get that large piece of junk in the middle of action get kills and back to land them......


semp

wrong

 38 used properly is one of the easiest planes in the set.

[Melvin]

Currently, CV puffy is randomly generated in a box around the target. The amount of ack stays the same, however the size of the box varies on the size of a target. Bomber formations, therefore, have a much larger target box around them than does a small single-engined aircraft. the end result is that fighters are contending with a FAR heavier concentration of AAA than bombers. That puffy ack is generated automatically around the target also means it's impossible to attempt any sort of evasive action to avoid it. Additionally, the AI behavior of puffy ack is just BIZARRE. Often times it doesn't begin firing at you until you're nearly right on top of the carrier, however it can CONTINUE firing at you even if you withdraw from visual range. Let's not even get into how puffy ack can fire on you through mountains and other obstructions...

There's one quick and easy solution to a all of these problems:

Rather than randomly generated around the target once in range, model puffy ack to actually be FIRED like the other auto-ack.

Yes, puffy ack behaves in strange and often frustrating ways.

However, I feel that the end result would be the same if there were a couple DD's close to shore, as opposed to the whole TG.

I feel that two destroyers with a full compliment of manned guns could keep a small to medium airbase crippled with direct fire, given the opportunity to get in close enough.

The way I see it, the folks that are whining because they have a 3000 ft. cap should perhaps pause to think that they are getting off lightly.