ack on crack

[Octavius]

There is, it seems, a GREATER chance of hitting the friendly engaged than hitting the enemy!!  Happened twice to me tonight.. I didn't die instantly the first time, but my fuel was hit and I eventually exploded to an extremely painful death.

------------------
-=///Octavius\\\=-
VMF-323 "Death Rattlers"
MAG-33

  Maz203@aol.com

[SpitLead]

I have to agree with Zigrat, Eskimo and Grunz on this.  Soooo many times I've been on the brunt end of a CV being parked just offshore and can't climb above 3K.  Also, have had numerous instances of 5" ack following me all over the place until I get so far away or dive below 3k.  I've also been killed by 1 ping at 15k feet and also had my wing blown off while at 20k, while in the clouds probably 5-8 miles away from the CV!  Talk about frustrating.  Anymore, I just avoid the CVs and go somewhere else.  It needs to be tweaked somehow.

[Torgo]

 

Originally posted by Pongo:
We are intended to atack these things with level bombers from 10-20k.  So thats what I do.

Interestingly, that's even more unrealistic than any aspect of the ack.

The number of hits scored by level bombers on maneuvering naval vessels bombing from 10K or higher in WWII could probably be counted on two hands, despite thousands of bombs dropped trying it :-)

[Kieran]

I read this thread and decided to see for myself what I must have been missing.

I have spent the whole day in the ack, making different approaches, dying a hundred horrible deaths. This is what I found-

I could climb relatively safely while under the ack umbrella, so long as I wasn't right on top of the fleet. I could climb to 10-12K, split-S and divebomb the fleet with an F4. So long as I didn't get too low I could usually pull out and escape. I eventually got a CV today when I worked this all out.

Now I died many, many times- to the fleet gunner named "Hector". That's right, the human got me far more than did the CV ack. I did get hit by ack and killed once, but considering I had spent 1 1/2 hours in the umbrella I thought it was more than a fair trade.

Later I took a Lanc to another enemy CV. I made 6 passes over the CV, sunk it, and only lost a flap. This I did from 20K (testing the upper limit of the suggestion).

I am not saying you guys are wrong, only saying that I haven't seen the problem as that big yet. I hate the ack, but after today it doesn't worry me near as much as it used to.

[GRUNHERZ]

Thats exactly what we are saying, Its useless as a CV defensive measure- planes thay directly attack CV arent killed. All CV flak does is suppress and annoy defenders who are trying to battle the CVs fighters.

[Voss]

Ergo, human gunners.

------------------
Voss
13th TAS

[DB603]

S!

 The CV ack seems to be in a need of some re-adjustment.And for those who claim it is radar guide(no rant intended)..gimme a break.Those radars back in 40's weren't some seen on Aegis-class destroyers today capable of seeing a fly 2inches above sea level.They were at best capable of pointing the general direction and alt,but in no way being fire control computers.And bout proximity fuses with no error IFF.Again it shows these are 100% working and combined with ridiculously accurate FCC on CV..oh well  
 Last thing on parking a CV near shore.Utter crap IMO.Wasn't done IRL so why here?Ppl want realism,so give them that.No CV's able to park near a field for FCC-Flak(tm) Sure,it can be explained by the size of the map and therefore give some "freedom" to let CV's get closer to shore(among other things I have noticed).




------------------
DB603
3.Lentue
Lentolaivue 34

[MrSiD]

One question bothers me:

Is ack somehow calculated on each players FE?
That is the only way I can explain the 'late joining bug' which brings autoack alive from a dead field to player who joins the game after a field is de-acked..

That would also explain the differences people are seeing in ack behaviour, I for one never ever - and I mean it - dive anywhere near an alive ack anymore. It's death on first pass 90% of the time no matter how you roll or yank the plane.
That means strat missions are a definate no-no for me.

Then there are others who manage to de-ack the whole field and think nothing of it.. There has to be something veeery wrong..

[Jigster]

I believe some aspect of the ack is relavent to the user's front end.

I see lots or people flying through the ack countless times without to much trouble...but it's a nightmare for me right now.

I usually make a 10k jabo dive, but presently if I don't release before 7k I am assured a plane-exploding blow.

It seems the opposite of how it should be...at the furthest ranges the ack has the highest probability of hitting me, on the other hand if I am on top of the ack strafing it, I rarely get hit, where it should be the deadliest because I generally use very little deviation from a headon pass.

[214thCavalier]

Regarding the AA umbrella from CV parked on shore, I believe it was during the Q&A session that involved the "Banning" TM.
One of the replies stated that it was their intention to have shore defences to put an end to the CV AA suppression at attacked fields.
As for the AA lethality it definitely affects some players more than others.
I used to be able to deack a field but not anymore, certain and rapid death is the usual end result, and yet i can watch others fly blindly in and deack whilst staying within the AA umbrella.

[CUTT]

See Rule #10

[Anaxogoras]

AI puffy isn't modeled well enough to deserve inclusion in the game.

• It fires through mountains.
• It targets aircraft that are no threat to the CV while ignoring those that are.
• It is more lethal against small, fast moving fighters than slow, large bombers.
• It does not obey Newtonian physics, i.e. it "spawns" around you.  It doesn't travel from point A to point B.

Remove it from the game unless it can be improved.

[batch]

8 years.... not a record

[gyrene81]

Holy digging for antiques Batman... ...how did you find a thread where the last post was in 2001 and why would you post a reply to it when there are newer threads about this subject?