Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Yentl on March 13, 2000, 10:25:00 PM
-
I was thinking of joing Aces High when it went pay but the laser guided ack is ridiculous (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) I love flying the F4u. The F4u was one of the best jabo planes of the Pacific war and would have also been in the European but you cant jabo in ACES becuase of the ack. Either make the ack reload or add dispersion or randomize it or something. please! Add more ack if you feel that it will destabilize the game but get rid of the PHALANX!!
-
Amen!
-
The ack is like Phalanx. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/mad.gif)
------------------
mp-ten
Lt. J.G. VF-100 "The Haze"
(http://personal.palouse.net/ferens/mp-ten.jpg)
[This message has been edited by Rendar (edited 03-14-2000).]
-
I still like the ack, and I still jabo it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I think anything less than what we have, and the problems with a team down in members being run through will be much, much worse.
Fatty
-
Heavy Ack ??
-
Heavy Ack?
-
I've found jinking in to a base works well and also being the second in line does the trick too.
The jinking to avoid the fire is REAL-to-life although the second in line thing is not as usually the first guy in was the lucky bastidge and the rest took hits.
I agree that ack needs changing. But if I can work around it then so can most of you. Don't fly straight near any ack. Kind of simple.
I DO remember Pyro saying they had several different types of ack in the works ( a bit over due I'd say. would be nice to have an update on that front HTC) and that hopefully it will fix this issue once and for all.
The ack is currently too smart and pretty accurate - therefore too lethal.
To say you didn't sign up because of the way the ack is modelled is lame. I've straffed and bombed ack dead. Yet to nail it with rockets (yet to nail anything with rockets actually (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) )
-Westy
-
The age old saying of fighter/bombers, "Don't challenge the gun, the gun wins".
This refers to attacking AAA guns and is very historical. Typically guns are attacked from distances out of gun range.
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 03-14-2000).]
-
Truthfully half of my squads missions in WB are jabo missions. That is just not going to happen if 3/4 of the squad is killed on ingress. Ive seen the same documentary footage you all have seen and I dont believe anyone would say that the present ack is historical. Most of us play the simulation because they love WWII era. Most of us want the simulation to be as true to life as technologically possible. If I wanted to challenge phalanx guns I would be flying an SU27 at Mach 2.3
-
There is no reason you should die from the ack here. Miss yes, that's one thing, but die, no. With the slightest of practice, you will never be touched by the ack on jabo missions.
-
Just because we can work around it doesn't mean it's right. It simply ain't right.
-
The point is it's not that hard. I believe if we had an accurate AMOUNT of accurate acks, the overall danger would be much greater than what is there now. I'm not sure those asking for a change for more realistic aa are aware of what they're really asking for.
If the overall effect is that it is much easier to vultch and dive through when the ack is up then I have to vehemently argue against it. Having to stay 3k outside a field when it's up does not significantly hurt gameplay (if you don't have the speed to run through it, which can be done already to some extent with the current system), being able to vultch any field at any time would, I don't see a new player sticking around through that. I only see more cries of gangbanging because bases are so easy to run though.
A simple fat person.
-
Fatty, I'll take a dozen accurately modeled guns over the 2-4 ZSU-23 Shilkas we have now.
It is simply not that easy to calculate the correct lead to hit a target like these robots can do.
My father is a former professional in this field and he scoffs at the AH ack. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-14-2000).]
-
Funked, it is very clear that current ack is overmodeled. But, with less accurate and less powerful ack, a single fighter could negate a field to the enemy. Actually you need three or more planes to efectively negate those fields. In fact, actually modeled ack is IMHO the main reason to see so many bombers in the game and works in favour of play balance. From my point of view, acks in the bases should be entirely controled by players, including heavy acks.
-
Sounds good Manoble!
-
Sooo ask means AAA Right?
If that's the case then players should control'em but if they are no players then comp can control them.
Plus ground vehicals coming soon so ppl will use them (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Saturday night prime time, we took 3 straight bases knocking the ack out on each with a single fighter. We then knocked out the ack on a large (3 ack) base with two fighters. The only losses taken were to other fighters.
I really wish people experiment with this more so they will realize that jabo is not only possible, but relatively easy. I won't argue realism because I'm not a WWII pilot, but based on what is needed for a semblance of ground based defense the ack strength if anything is too weak.
Manned ack? Nice idea, but with as little as 6 people or at the peak of 30 people per team, who's going to man them?
I'd like to see a dozen or more per field too Funked (as long as the overall defense strength went up, not down), but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
(http://www.geocities.com/clwoodson_99/images/fdb_small.gif)
------------------
Fatty
FAT DRUNK BASTARDS (http://fdb.50megs.com)
-
Fatty,
I would love to see the films of your 1 fighter JABO on those enemy fields. Please post a link as soon as possible.
Thanx!
Aaron "Terror" Edwards
-
There's one posted on the webpage here (http://www6.50megs.com/fdb/archives.html) Terror, I'd link it directly but 50megs doesn't like that (they don't get to spam you with their banners then.) In the film the ack is a little goofy, they tend to fire at the wrong people and fire after they're knocked out. The approach and egress are the main things though and you can get the idea from the film.
A couple of dives and you'll have the hang of coming out without getting hit, from there you can fine-tune the drop itself. (From anywhere near vertical, the crosshairs work accurately as a divebomb sight)
(http://home.austin.rr.com/fdbfatty/images/FDBLogo1.gif)
------------------
Fatty
FAT DRUNK BASTARDS (http://fdb.50megs.com)
-
Very impressive Fatty (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)Thanx for the film!
-
Because I didn't have time to play, but wanted to screw around some today, I made similar offline films of p51 (http://home.austin.rr.com/fdbfatty/films/divebp51.zip) and p38 (http://home.austin.rr.com/fdbfatty/films/divebomb38.zip) hitting both ack on a small field. Since the ack doesn't seem to want to fire on film replay or is a little goofy at best, I added in landing on the runway before ending recording. Going to get Gordo to put this on the FDB archives sight when he gets a chance. Also when I get a chance I'll go ahead and make film for the 109s, 190, spit and n1k (but first two obviously can only take out 1, and the latter two are going to be difficult at best limited to 250lb'ers (well with spit IX I get those two plus a 500, so is possible))
edit note: added spitIX (http://home.austin.rr.com/fdbfatty/films/divebspitix.zip). First 250 misses, but to be expected with smaller bombs, still gets both acks.
------------------
Fatty
FAT DRUNK BASTARDS (http://fdb.50megs.com)
[This message has been edited by Fatty (edited 03-21-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Fatty (edited 03-21-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Fatty (edited 03-21-2000).]
-
Was it not said that they were working on the various types of ack?
My understanding was that only one type was modeled and more were to come. When we get that I can see making the adjustment to what we have.
Ping
-
You're correct Ping. It's why this talk of the uber ack is pointless as Pyro HAS stated that several models of ack will be modelled and coming out.
-Westy
-
Thanks much for posting the film.
Hitting the target isn't much of a problem for me, but avoiding the ack is. I find that rolls seem to confuse the ack somehow.
"A couple of dives and you'll have the hang of coming out without getting hit"
The film doesn't show the ack shooting at you, but what maneuvers are you doing to avoid or confuse the ack. It looks like a straight dive to target followed by a simple pull out. What keeps the ack from hitting you??
Thanks
RANGER BOB
-
Bob, you'll notice the initial dive is aimed a little below the ack. This way I can slowly pull up as I set aim on the ack, and I'll be avoiding it at the same time (by slightly changing my trajectory). Then drop as the sight passes over the target and keep pulling out (with slight turn). You should be unscathed.
------------------
Fatty
FAT DRUNK BASTARDS (http://fdb.50megs.com)
-
Thanks Fatty.
Will practice.
Ranger Bob