CV puffy ack thread, again

[mthrockmor]

Yes, this is a whine...all the same stuff.

I'm in a Dora at 15k, CV group is a small white streak way down there. The puffy ack starts as it should be, distant but enough to let you know it is there. I drop my nose, speed climbs to over 400knts, taking evasive action around 6gs for sustained turns. And in general I have turned away from the CV. I am not loaded with a bomb on some suicide CV hunt mission.

The programming for puffy ack needs some more work. I sense AH has tuned it down a bit. What I experienced is that regardless of alt drop, speed increase and rapid direction changes with high g loading the puffy ack simply got more accurate, and I am putting more distance between me and the CV.

I made it out of this one with only 1 gun out of action. It seems to me that when you have one burst of ack, you drop a couple thousand feet and change your direction greater then 90 degrees the next burst of puffy ack should be a few thousand feet behind and above you. This needs to be fixed. If I continue on a straight line, makes sense it gets more accurate. When I am rapidly jinking...

Boo

[Shuffler]

Ha.... try it in a 38. 

[lunatic1]

 

[Ciaphas]

It seems to me that when you have one burst of ack, you drop a couple thousand feet and change your direction greater then 90 degrees the next burst of puffy ack should be a few thousand feet behind and above you.

Why should it be 1K or more behind you? If that were the case, CV defensive fire would be way to predictable and way to easy to avoid. I fly bombers and fly over CV's on a regular basis at varying altitudes and rarely sustain any damage from defensive fire. I think that the fire power from the CV's should actually be buffed to help fend off enemy bomber pilots. As it stands now flying over a CV does not really cause enough damage to make CV death runs risky. The only risk that I find are those that anticipate a bomb run and show up to defend against the threat.

I also think they should add "puffy ack" to large airfields and the towns that surround them.

This is just my opinion..

Cheers,
Ciaphas

[SEseph]

Why should it be 1K or more behind you? If that were the case, CV defensive fire would be way to predictable and way to easy to avoid. I fly bombers and fly over CV's on a regular basis at varying altitudes and rarely sustain any damage from defensive fire. I think that the fire power from the CV's should actually be buffed to help fend off enemy bomber pilots. As it stands now flying over a CV does not really cause enough damage to make CV death runs risky. The only risk that I find are those that anticipate a bomb run and show up to defend against the threat.

I also think they should add "puffy ack" to large airfields and the towns that surround them.  -1

This is just my opinion..

Cheers,
Ciaphas

You just explained the whole issue that has sent the remains of poor Secretariat to the dog food puree factory. You are in bombers. People in bombers don't get shot down nor hit NEARLY as much. Most everyone here has at the very least had a jet damaged by CV puffy ack.. and if it can do that to a jet going 600mph while nosing down and turning to get away.. think what it should do to your slow, lumber bombers.

Also, fire an 88mm once in a while and you'll notice that the round takes a relatively long time to travel from point A to point B. If you shoot at a plane and right after you fire that shot, he pulls a hard banking left.. well, you're shot won't be near him, you must reacquire him and so on... Puffy ack was more for mass formations anyway.

NO FIGHTERS, BAD PUFFY! 

[Ciaphas]

You just explained the whole issue that has sent the remains of poor Secretariat to the dog food puree factory. You are in bombers. People in bombers don't get shot down nor hit NEARLY as much. Most everyone here has at the very least had a jet damaged by CV puffy ack.. and if it can do that to a jet going 600mph while nosing down and turning to get away.. think what it should do to your slow, lumber bombers.

Also, fire an 88mm once in a while and you'll notice that the round takes a relatively long time to travel from point A to point B. If you shoot at a plane and right after you fire that shot, he pulls a hard banking left.. well, you're shot won't be near him, you must reacquire him and so on... Puffy ack was more for mass formations anyway.

And that is why i think it should be buffed up a bit.

[Ruah]

try being at 35k in a 152 chasing a formation of 29s and being dragged over CV ack.  One puff later I am on fire falling from 35k.

puffy ack is awful and there is no way it was that good during the war, no way.

[SEseph]

It needs to be toned down a bit for fighters and up for bombers. The closer the air unit, the worse the puffy should be. If you are at 35k, puffy should not be able to hit you unless it's a freak occurrence or you're in a HUGE bomber formation.. Otherwise, how do you even see something that high well enough to send puffy there, let alone if there's even the slightest cloud cover. If the response is: "well there's radar for shooting!" well, when we blow the dar on the CV it should make the puffy limp.

It needs to be changed, just not entirely sure how easy it would be or what concessions must be made, but no matter what, fighter need to be harder to hit and bombers, easier.

[Ciaphas]

Puffy ack is an area/effect weapon not a standard "aimed" weapon and the reason why it explodes instead of being a single object projectile like a bullet. Puffy should be the same for fighters and bombers; a bit more damaging to fighters when they are hit because of the typically smaller size of fighters compared to bombers. regardless of that, puff ack should be devastating on direct hits and if the explosion causes proximity damage, the amount of damage should vary depending on the distance from the aircraft a shell explodes.

[titanic3]

Kill radar - kill auto puffy ack and forces manned 5in guns to manually dial range.

Maybe then it'll actually take some skill instead of the point and shoot it is now. Increase the radar "health point" so that it doesn't go down with 1x bomb or even 1x rocket. 2000lb should be perfect.

[SEseph]

Puffy ack is an area/effect weapon not a standard "aimed" weapon and the reason why it explodes instead of being a single object projectile like a bullet. Puffy should be the same for fighters and bombers; a bit more damaging to fighters when they are hit because of the typically smaller size of fighters compared to bombers. regardless of that, puff ack should be devastating on direct hits and if the explosion causes proximity damage, the amount of damage should vary depending on the distance from the aircraft a shell explodes.

I understand that it's an area of effect, but it's designed right now (If memory serves) so that is bursts around every air unit the same. This is the problem. Even an AoE would need aiming unless they just blanketed the sky with it. Since it's already locked onto you the moment you enter it's range, there' no need for aiming or skill to avoid it. It's all chance. I've entered Puffy ack before where I didn't know the CV was even there and that first pop of puffy took half my plane out. Now, this is possible, but when it happens on a regular basis, at altitude, with massive amounts of speed, something is wrong, especially since those bombers can do 200 over the CV and not get touched except by manned 5inch. Bombers already, by design, take more damage than fighters, so the idea that the fighter should take more damage is already in effect. That isn't the issue, it's the ability to avoid the puffy.

I tried this, you and alot of others should too. Take a fighter, say a P47 (<-- what I used) and go near a CV, but make sure you are at 10k. Set and maintain a speed of 200 indicated then fly straight over the CV. I had a 30% success rating of making it out without damage that would remove me from the fight entirely. I took B24's and did the same thing at the same alt and speed. I lost one drone out of my 10 sorties. a bit of damage here or there, but nothing mortal except that single drone. I also counted the hits to each unit and the P47's were hit a total of 22 times where as the 24's were hit 13. Any noise I heard I counted as a hit since I have a bad habit of hitting 'Cancel' when I land. Much easier to ensure I had the info by just counting...

Anywho... The point is here's this HUGE target and it was hit LESS than the P47 with even less damage. I might test different altitudes later on, but for now that is enough for me to be certain. Either the Puffy shooters are blind to big objects, or something is amiss. I do agree with the proximity application, but not sure if thats how it is.

[Ciaphas]

I believe you and I agree with you.

All I'm saying (which we are agreeing on in different words) is that bombers (at least in my case) are not really affected by puffy (your results may vary). I think that bombers should be affected more than a fighter hauling balls over a CV.

[SEseph]

I believe you and I agree with you.

All I'm saying (which we are agreeing on in different words) is that bombers (at least in my case) are not really affected by puffy (your results may vary). I think that bombers should be affected more than a fighter hauling balls over a CV.

Well, hopefully we entertained people with it. 



Just for kicks, I went looking for other information. I found that by the end of the war, the 5 inch (127 mm)/38 caliber guns we being used to repeatedly destroy air units at 10-12k ft; so long as the gun crew was highly experienced, had radar and the target used was a drone. All three were required just to hit 12k ft and yet at the point puffy starts to puff, our fighters get hit all the time.

I understand the need for certain things to be the way they are, but maybe we could get the puffy toned down a wee bit. 

[mthrockmor]

Computer coding. Turn up for buffs, down for fighters.

If I took the time to research I could find the velocity of the 5" from the Essex Class CV. We would do a simple computation and come up with the time it takes from discharge to hitting my bird in excess of 6k icon range, well beyond 6k. It would likely take in excess of 10 seconds for some of these magic hits on fighters. Let's settle on 6 seconds travel time. While that shell is in flight for 6 seconds, my Dora was traveling well over 450knts, dropping a couple thousand feet and, at that speed, moving almost 1 mile during that 6 secs. If the gunner had been tracking me at 15k alt, X range (6 secs of flight) traveling from East to West...puffy ack burst, 6 secs later I am at 12.5k, moving from West to East. Gunner was leading me further to the West, I'm now almost that much further but to the East...yet the puffy ack takes out one of my guns.

Point is, puffy ack should have little chance of hitting a rapidly moving, jinking plane. Fighter or bomber it is just not realistic. For a buff group at 15k making a 220knt straight line with no course or speed adjustments, they should get hit far more often then they are currently.

Boo

[Krusty]

The problem is that the puffy ack is generated instantly at the client end. They appear on YOUR end. The sever never really "fires" them. There's nothing to dodge. It's all backwards.

IMO the game should randomly generate the shot based on where you are, your path, and then make the ack appear in the server near you. If you dodge or evade, more chance of missing you. It should also delay appearing based on the range from CV (further out, longer delay, meaning less accurate if you make the slightest course change). Closer range would mean much more accuracy.

Now, it's just all backwards. Bombers are nearly invulnerable, others tracked miles beyond visual targetting.