Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Kweassa on June 09, 2005, 09:30:29 PM
-
(http://www.cloudster.com/realhardware/88mmFlak/flak01a.jpg)
(.. well, ofcourse, when your priorities are finished, that is)
IMO, this would be something I'd really frickin' enjoy riding in. Towable mobile 88mm flak.
So much fun use I see in this thing.
When preparing for an imminent enemy horde offensive... you can take one out, drive to the woods nearby and hide them. Whenever those pesky low-alt buffs come around, you can let 'er rip!
Or, when you anticipate an enemy tank column approaching, you can drag these out with your friends, set a defensive perimeter of 88mms loaded with AP shells.
This baby would be so cool.
A powerful, mobile AA/AT platform which the field attackers MUST search out and destroy... instead of those eak-o stationary ack that vaporizes the moment one lands a 20mm round nearby it.
To solve the problem of it being a virtually indestructible defense mechanism, you can limit their shells to only AA/HE or only AT/AP, never both.
(ie. drag the 88mm out, shoot at enemy buffs.. when the multiple ground attackers target you, enter the forest canopy... and when tanks approach you, switch to AP shells and kill them from 4.0 out... etc etc..)
Maybe you can also fit them with their own targetting system that is not so easy-mode as the 5" point-and-fire..
But integrating one of these, player manned, mobile 88mms will make both the ground warfare, and air warfare so much interesting. They could even serve as an artillery by fitting something like a 'general purpose' HE, that is only good for buildings, but not good for AT or AA purposes.
-
I still would like to see the use of coordinates implemented into the game. On clipboard when you leave your cursor over a certain spot on the map for 3 seconds, it shows the (X,Y) value and cruisers could be used to help ground forces. Or if battleships were ever added;)
-
I'm all for it. But I do believe it needs to be vulnerable. Also it needs to take a little bit of time to set up.
-
You guys realize I've been saying this for years now.
The German 88's would be an awesome idea.
As it is right now bombers have very little to worry about {except a few fighters now and then} this would be a great defensive weapon to have at fields.
I'm not sure how they would implement it's movement? The 88 was a towed gun platform and required a large crew to operate.
It would be nice to have it towed by an Sdkfz7 to location, then be deployed {which should take approx 20 sec's} When I played WW2OL they had these and the only way to move them was by "pushing them" {which you do not want to do, takes forever} or by towing them behind an Sdkfz7-HT
While in the field however they were extremely vulnerable to strafing, other tanks and small arms fire. Once the gunner was killed the gun became useless. You could make it that it took a crew of two or three to operate so it doesn't get abused.
Overall it would be a great addition to the game IMO
-
Mortars, bazookas, SMGs, grenades, etc would be simple to add to the chute model, implemented as an FPS troop.
Add the possibility to join M3s or C47s, keep the same vulnerability to splash and hit damage as now, and it could make for feasible sneak tactics.
-
hmmm looks like good canidate for another perked GV.
-
Adjustable timed fuse for HE for ack work and AP loadout for ground work?
Would be very nice.
-C+
-
Have long asked for a Studebaker truck with tow hitch...
Trailer options
Field Artilery (HE, AA, AT options)
Katyusha rocket rails
Supplies/ troops.
-
M3 should be capaable of towing that out to a good spot.
Heck yes please WE WANT IT!
make ammo selection same as it is for tanks. But penalize for carrying more than one type.
IE 150 AA rounds, or 150 AP rounds, or 150 HE rounds, or 50 AA & 50AP, or 50 AP & 50 HE.
-
I die to flak enough as it is...
-
make it arm only over 2000 yards or so, and perk it at 20 or so perks and i am all for it.
-
I love this idea of a 88mm Gun. Now we could shoot at planes then put the barrel down and shoot a M3 with troops in seconds. I use this 88mm all day. Then we could have something to take out a tiger in 1 or 2 shots with out using another Tiger, or a force of 8 T34s with 2 only surviving.
-
This might be a good solution to the currently anemic base defense situation, and add some color to the game. Maybe reskin the M3 as the German halftrack for some fun. Towable artillery would be an interesting addition. I'd think they'd have to be fairly easy to disable though, owing to almost no protection for the crew. Have to consider the possible effects on gameplay too.
-
6 guys attacking an airfield than 20 guys up that flak crap what a fun.
The idea is only good when there is a limit to the numbers upping.
I hate gv dweebs and they should all be clustered.
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
6 guys attacking an airfield than 20 guys up that flak crap what a fun.
The idea is only good when there is a limit to the numbers upping.
I hate gv dweebs and they should all be clustered.
Yeah what was I thinking:rolleyes: Everyone should just up Spits and Niki's and furball all day and night!!
What fun, THEN they can all come here to the BBS and whine, b1tch & complain on how boring the MA is and how everyone just flies "turnfighters" AND "BnZr's" Sign me up!
-
woooooot!
that's a good tank destroyer and AH needs that for its GV actions.
"UP" vote
-
i dont even fly those
-
Or whatever you fly. From the sig I'm guessing P38's of some sort, kewl fly what ya like.
Ok, furball's 24/7 in Spit's, Nik's and whatever the Twin Engine Devils fly.
Still would be mighty boring after hour 2 or so.
-
6 guys attacking an airfield than 20 guys up that flak crap what a fun.
The idea is only good when there is a limit to the numbers upping.
I hate gv dweebs and they should all be clustered.
So strap on a bomb and go kill the VH when you want to vulch.
Instead of wait for a free vulch meal to be served where others work their prettythang off to deack and deVH fields, while the casual vulcher just drops in and reaps what he did not sow.
Quite simple, ain't it?
-
Bug:
"The idea is only good when there is a limit to the numbers upping"
Although when you show up TO AN ENEMY FIELD with 3 times the amount of planes than ground guns, it's Ok:aok
When a plane arrives at an ENEMY field they should be met with heavy AA fire, that's the way it was in WW2. More planes were downed by AA fire in WW2 than another A/C.
-
Don't rock the craddle too hard guys :)
-
Originally posted by moot
Don't rock the craddle too hard guys :)
You're right;)
-
88mm flak would be fine - BUT make it so you have to set the range for it to explode before firing - no proximity automatic shots.
I think a range of crew served - towed vehicles would be great, 20mm, 20mm quad, 37mm, 40mm, 75mm, 88mm.
-
I think it is an execlent idea. atm all i spend GV perks on is tigers, which are atleast somewhat useful. but i'd like to have a varity in perked gv's added. also AP rounds added to the LTVA4. we could vastly increase the ground war from simple tank to tank into artilery, tanks, flaks, m16's, and mabey troops? i would think letting out 10 troops from an m3, they'd all run up to the nme tanks/other weapons, and shoot thier guns at em. give em some different guns than the service pistol though.
in basic though, we need more GV's, and more types of them. I love trading long range shots with whichever ltar i target out, but i'd much rather some sort of forward observer be implemented and i kill him from 2-3 miles out :)
-
I would go for it, BUT like furball said make it arm at a certain alt or make it fairly easy to kill. I can see it now, you fight and kill a guy near his airfeild. He knows he can't beat you so he jumps into one of these bad boyz in a lame attempt for revenge. Just like CV guys who do it with the 5"ers.
-
We've got a discussion going over in the gameplay forum on a similiar issue - I suggested the quick & dirty solution of replacing the 37mm manned ack at airfields with the single 5" guns already modeled on the carriers. My thinking was that this was a change that would be simple to implement, yet accomplish the goal of giving land bases some sort of real ack threat.
I do like this idea of having towed 88mms available, although I think these would have to be perked to around 1/2 the value of a Tiger.
Also - does anyone have any historical info on 88mm fusing & ammo? I'd be interested to know if they had proximity fusing for these, and what the armor penetration was vs tanks.
EagleDNY
-
All I know is that 88mm kicked butt. I herd they could kill T-34 from 2,000m away and a T-34 couldnt even shoot them back cuz the 88mm could shoot father than most tanks in its days.
-
I can see that GV guys might enjoy this, but am concerned about proliferation of additional puffy acks.
Perhaps just limit it to shooting at GVs (assume the crew stripped off the AA fire control equipment as occured in N. Africa).
Also note that setup time for something like this is probably significant.
-
Here's a link to a story detailing early use of American radar-proximity fuses. All I can say is, after reading this, we shouldn't whine anymore about the ack being "too accurate" -
http://www.smecc.org/shooting_down_the_v-1.htm
EagleDNY
-
That thing would rule the battle field!
until a gloster gladiator showed up and strafed it dead in one pass.
It would be good to have something in the game that an m3 can easily kill though.
-
Sure we can whine about ack being "too accurate". Depends on
1) Whether the net effect of fighters being regularly picked out of the sky while dogfighting is duplicated in the historical record (it generally isn't).
2) Whether taking an anecdotal account about the best type of ack used in the war justifies applying this performance to all acks used in AH (it doesn't).
3) What the player wants the game to be (Some want a dogfighting game; looks like you prefer something else).
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
I can see that GV guys might enjoy this, but am concerned about proliferation of additional puffy acks.
Perhaps just limit it to shooting at GVs (assume the crew stripped off the AA fire control equipment as occured in N. Africa).
Also note that setup time for something like this is probably significant.
1. Make the "original puffy ack" go away or be limited to CV groups and large fields. There is no need to limit the gun to engage only other GV's, the gun was used on bomber groups and tanks. If that were the case then bombers get to only drop on hangers and cities. And not GV's or gun positions!
2.Why should there be a "limit" as discussed earlier? There's no "limit" on how many enemy A/C or bombers can show up to attack you, so why should this gun be "limited"?
3.As I stated and others, a gun like the 88 {Flak36} would need to be moved by an additional veh or 1/2track and then deployed. Set deployment time to like 20 sec's or something. The gun should require a crew of two to operate or some sort of team effort.
-
I like the idea of having it being towed by a sdfk or truck, the position of the driver would just be 1, with the gunner being number 2.
Hit o to "open doors" so the gun sets up.
Vehicle supplies can rearm it.
Let the truck move independently from the gun?
-
Moil
The reason for limits is gameplay issues. Remember this is "Aces High", not "Radar-controlled, Proximity-fused, Sky-sweepers High".
I like the fact that we have GVs, strat game, etc., in that in allows additional playing styles and brings in more money, thereby allowing HTC to continue to exist. However, the main focus is still fighter combat.
BTW setup time for AA usage would be on the order of minutes (edited: or even tens of minutes), not seconds.
-
Yep... That thing would give "spawn camping" a whole new meening.
-
So how about 'Aces Low'?
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
BTW setup time for AA usage would be on the order of minutes (edited: or even tens of minutes), not seconds.
Hmmm....so would arming and fueling aircraft, not to mention loading bombs and rockets. Insta-new armed aircraft. Gee, if we only had those............
Good for the goose, good for the gander.
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
Moil
The reason for limits is gameplay issues. Remember this is "Aces High", not "Radar-controlled, Proximity-fused, Sky-sweepers High".
I like the fact that we have GVs, strat game, etc., in that in allows additional playing styles and brings in more money, thereby allowing HTC to continue to exist. However, the main focus is still fighter combat.
BTW setup time for AA usage would be on the order of minutes (edited: or even tens of minutes), not seconds.
I hear ya Deacon, the name of the game is "Aces High" it's just a name. "Radar-controlled, Proximity-fused, Sky-sweepers High"
First off I don't think they will be "radio controlled" secondly, you make it sound as if fighters are getting dropped out of the sky left and right from ground guns or if this gun "were" allowed to be added {along with others} that you'd see them all over the place. I honestly don't think so {could be wrong} but don't think so.
I know guys love to complain about getting shot down over an enemy field but let's take a look at this a second. You {enemy} come to my field and A) attack targets and or fighters. B) Kill the city and hangers. C) vulch planes as they try to up and defend
This plays out the SAME way EVERY day, wash,rinse & repeat.
Bombers come in and if we don't have fighters up or at the right alt, the base gets pounded to oblivion.
What do you honestly think happened to planes in WW2 when they attacked or flew over hostile fields/bases ????
The argument of this is a "flight sim" is a dying one. To think that the "fighter pilot" guys just want to up planes and dog fight like in WW2 and attack things or places without the threat of any other enemy force is insane. If someone want's to argue realism that's fine, then just as you point out the "minutes" it would take to set up this gun or that it would be a Proxy-fuzed sky-sweeper is as crazy as bombers lifting off the runway only to fly to spawn point 2 miles away and drop 50 bombs on a GV's head at 200' off the deck.
I guess this will always be an argument for both sides, and I can see both sides.
I guess I just don't see the big deal, if you wan't to dog fight, be Mr sim-pilot that's fine dog fight all day & night who's to stop ya and why would you care about what I or anyone else is doing on the ground? It doesn't stop you from dog fighting, but wait you want to do it at my field? over my city? Think not, you should be greeted with a hail of AA fire!!!
-
Moil,
I appreciate your point of view. BTW, I'm not a member of a squad, and rarely participate in the strat game, so the objectionable base-capture behaviours you mention cannot be laid at my door. My main goal is to find 1-1 fighter duels, so as to emphasise the different planes' characteristics, and players tactical use of them. This humble goal is frequently frustrated by puffy acks, especially in the vicinity of CVs. In the latter case, the effective targeting of small numbers of dogfighting fighters by puffy acks from long range is not only unrealistic (as are many other things in wargames), but more importantly is not enjoyable. My point of view is of course only valid to the extent that it is shared by other players and HTC.
To clarify, I have adjusted to the current ack implementation, but adding movable non-AI puffy acks certainly has the potential of interfering with the type of gameplay described above.
Lye-El,
Good point. I can always fall back on the gameplay argument however. :-)
-
Fair enough, but this is what I don't understand "My main goal is to find 1-1 fighter duels" Then why not go to H2H or DA?
"This humble goal is frequently frustrated by puffy acks, especially in the vicinity of CVs"
Again no offence, but what do you think the warships did when enemy A/C flew near/over thier fleet?
Have you ever watched actual WW2 footage of the war in the Pacific?
Good points tho, GL with your 1-1 fites
;)
-
WRT the DA, have been there a lot lately. However, DA people tend to pick the more maneuverable plane types, and/or are fighting arranged fights (not open to outsiders), so MA still has its uses.
Been a wargamer since the late 60s, so lots of reference material. Large-caliber AA was generally used against bomber types, rather than fighter types. The pacific footage you refer to likely shows flak defending against kamikazes, or attack aircraft. No reason to waste flak ammo on fighters, and when they did, get the impression that effects were minimal.
Also, note that the number of fleets/bases per square mile is vastly greater in AH than in real life, so the chance of encountering acks is greater in our game.
So overall, we have a net effect on gameplay which we need to evaluate, and find a happy medium for.
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
No reason to waste flak ammo on fighters, and when they did, get the impression that effects were minimal.
Hmmm...I wouldn't say that. You looked at the bomb\rocket loadouts on some of these "Fighter aircraft" lately? Corsairs, Thunderbolts, Mustangs, Lightings can flatten a field faster than the bombers. The bombers, just leave more craters laying around. One aircraft can deack a field in what? A couple of minutes? Two or more the manned ack life expectancy is in seconds. Ostis aren't much better. Don't fly at it and circle at more that d1500 and you are pretty safe. If you want to neuter it the turrent isn't much harder to destroy though you do have to fly at it.
If any FH are still up they hang around vulching until they are bingo fuel or ammo. Then they leave. No C-47, no attack on the town.
The real dogfights happen when you have a fighter screen up several miles away from the base, not over each end of the runway. That gives the defenders time to get wheels up, some speed and some altitude. All of which is needed to have a proper dogfight.
Anyway, thats my perspective for what it's worth.
-
Originally posted by TDeacon
WRT the DA, have been there a lot lately. However, DA people tend to pick the more maneuverable plane types, and/or are fighting arranged fights (not open to outsiders), so MA still has its uses.
Been a wargamer since the late 60s, so lots of reference material. Large-caliber AA was generally used against bomber types, rather than fighter types. The pacific footage you refer to likely shows flak defending against kamikazes, or attack aircraft. No reason to waste flak ammo on fighters, and when they did, get the impression that effects were minimal.
Also, note that the number of fleets/bases per square mile is vastly greater in AH than in real life, so the chance of encountering acks is greater in our game.
So overall, we have a net effect on gameplay which we need to evaluate, and find a happy medium for.
I'm all for the "happy medium" trust me. I don't want the MA any more lopp-sided than you do. I would love for the game to be played a little more historically correct and with a little more realism.
I guess it all boils do to a question of how much realism/history vs. fun and still enjoyable.
I just think when ONE force greatly out weighs the other it makes for some boring times.
My 2 cents
Thanks for the input
-
programable fuse
none of this easymode prox fuse
oh I hate that
think of the fun with your own timed fuses
blow bombers to hell
fighters
give your squaddie a 6call then put a flak over his canopy and laugh at his soiled underwear
-
i loved using that thing in WWIIOL.....! :D
-
it would be a cool sight if you had 15 of those things shooting at a Large bomber group up high
but
im not sure if they even need to be perked all you have to do is take out the VH and the 88's are realy defenseless to attack from fast Jabos targeting them
1 small spray from a 50 cal and they would be toast:D
-
The 88 could be fired from an unlimbered position (ie. no set up time). Unlimbered it was not as accurate, but still deadly.