Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: moot on May 27, 2009, 12:33:52 AM
-
5.5 mile hit from a CV on a 400mph plane. (http://dasmuppets.com/public/moot/OneWeekStuff/film23_1438_0000.ahf) The ships were 9.8K away. That means at least 10 seconds of flight between the 5" batteries and a 400-350mph fighter that's maneuvering perpendicular WRT the batteries.
-
Yeah... The puffy is a bit... TOO random...
My favorite is the first-shot-kill-shot that happens from time to time.
-
Happened to me twice this tour................ :huh
Yeah... The puffy is a bit... TOO random...
My favorite is the first-shot-kill-shot that happens from time to time.
-
We would all be happier if auto puffy would do its *job* well and defend the CV from level bombers, and not pick off fighters.
-
Yeah... The puffy is a bit... TOO random...
My favorite is the first-shot-kill-shot that happens from time to time.
:rofl :rofl :rofl The 1st ping from "NO vis cv or strat" on my 600 mph 262 at 3001 ft alt is my absolute favorite!! :aok But it can't hit lumbering 250 mph bombers at 1K :furious
-
This wouldnt happen if you stay away from my cv, :rofl i take planes out on a regular basis outside of icon range.
-
But it can't hit lumbering 250 mph bombers at 1K :furious
for the auto puffy ack, they have to be higher than 3k i think
-
Please...
-
5.5 mile hit from a CV on a 400mph plane. (http://dasmuppets.com/public/moot/OneWeekStuff/film23_1438_0000.ahf) The ships were 9.8K away. That means at least 10 seconds of flight between the 5" batteries and a 400-350mph fighter that's maneuvering perpendicular WRT the batteries.
There is a "wish" in there somewhere ... ;)
-
We would all be happier if auto puffy would do its *job* well and defend the CV from level bombers, and not pick off fighters.
It wouldn't be doing it's *job* if it only fired at bombers.
ack-ack
-
It's implied. :)
It wouldn't be doing it's *job* if it only fired at bombers.
ack-ack
But it would be doin a better *job* than it does now...
:D
-
Puffy = :mad: :furious
I utterly despise the puffy ack system in AH. It is ridiculous.
-
It's implied. :)
But it would be doin a better *job* than it does now...
:D
No it wouldn't. If it only did it's "job" like BnZ wants and fire at bombers only, then that means a fighter with eggs could easily get through and bomb the CV. Then you'll start seeing thread whines about how the fleet AAA only fires at bombers and lets fighters through to bomb the fleet unmolested.
The fleet AAA is doing it's "job" already by firing at bombers and fighters. However, how the fleet AAA does its "job" might need some changing.
ack-ack
-
That is why I suggest bomb laiden aircraft as a first priority.
-
Come to think of it..... In the last 3 years I don't think I've ever lost a bomber to the puffy............ But fighters, forget about it.
It wouldn't be doing it's *job* if it only fired at bombers.
ack-ack
-
This wouldnt happen if you stay away from my cv, :rofl i take planes out on a regular basis outside of icon range.
Impossible.
There is a "wish" in there somewhere ... ;)
Realistic time of flight modeling...
-
That is why I suggest bomb laiden aircraft as a first priority.
Yep...that is what I have suggested in the past. Leave clean fighters alone. There are enough guns firing from the CV to keep people from literally vulching the carrier deck without having autopuffy killing maneuvering fighters miles away.
-
Maybe in the game model, only ord could be targeted by puffy, no mater if its on board fighter or bomber!
-
Puffy ack should be changed to Fluffy ack :D
-
I can't recall a time that I have been dammaged by puffy ack in bombers. Hell, I can't recall a time I have been hit in a fighter with bombs! Its only that 2 second accidental slip from 2.9K to 3.1K that kills me.
-
If you look at the puffy when it's shooting at bombers, the puffy lights up more of the sky. When attacking a fighter, the puffy is much more concentrated. If they took what *seems* to be the aircraft size factor out of the equation, it might make more sense and we'd stop getting these random fighter deaths while those bomber formations don't get hit. Just put a box around the a/c that the puffy will hit randomly within, both the same size box for bombers and fighters.
-
I can't recall a time that I have been dammaged by puffy ack in bombers. Hell, I can't recall a time I have been hit in a fighter with bombs! Its only that 2 second accidental slip from 2.9K to 3.1K that kills me.
I once did an offline test where i hovered above CV in bombers with a headwind set - didn't lose one bomber in approx 15 minutes (the time it took me to get frustrated and bored). With the 'box' system theoretically i should have been nailed almost immediately. I did the same in a fighter and was almost insta-death.
Realism is opposite when it comes to puffy ack in AH, it should be the bombers getting nailed with ease.
I have complained about this more times than i probably should have. I think that this 'feature' is the only thing which the whole of the AH community seems to agree on: -
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,124842.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,240376.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,156370.0.html - HiTech explains the current system in this one
-
I once did an offline test where i hovered above CV in bombers with a headwind set - didn't lose one bomber in approx 15 minutes (the time it took me to get frustrated and bored). With the 'box' system theoretically i should have been nailed almost immediately. I did the same in a fighter and was almost insta-death.
Realism is opposite when it comes to puffy ack in AH, it should be the bombers getting nailed with ease.
I have complained about this more times than i probably should have. I think that this 'feature' is the only thing which the whole of the AH community seems to agree on: -
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,124842.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,240376.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,156370.0.html - HiTech explains the current system in this one
I once stayed in a Holiday Inn Express.
HiTech
-
Impossible.
Icon range is shorter than "action bubble" range. If the shells have infinite range it is possible to hit a target that is just outside icon range. I've never done it though.
-
:lol
(http://www.howemilitary.com/Directions/images/holidayexpress.jpg)
-
I once stayed in a Holiday Inn Express.
HiTech
:lol
And did you have a nice time?
-
I believe you but post a film of said test anyway.
I once did an offline test where i hovered above CV in bombers with a headwind set - didn't lose one bomber in approx 15 minutes (the time it took me to get frustrated and bored). With the 'box' system theoretically i should have been nailed almost immediately. I did the same in a fighter and was almost insta-death.
Realism is opposite when it comes to puffy ack in AH, it should be the bombers getting nailed with ease.
I have complained about this more times than i probably should have. I think that this 'feature' is the only thing which the whole of the AH community seems to agree on: -
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,124842.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,240376.0.html
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,156370.0.html - HiTech explains the current system in this one
-
I believe you but post a film of said test anyway.
It was about 2 or 3 years ago, on an old machine, long since gone. I also did another testing the puffy ack with a 163 before i understood the box system, that is in one of the links i posted.
Anyone can do the bomber test - it is quick and easy to set up and i recommend someone to try it. Just set the headwind to max and jump a task group below the bombers on the same heading. You can use an updraft to get alt quickly.
Edit: here is the 163 test: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,124842.msg1390330.html#msg1390330
-
Not exactly............... There is a problem with the range model in this sense...... You can be 40k and still get the puffy... But at 3k and a distance of 7k(yds), the puffy does not fire. It goes up an unlimited distance but does not travel past it's envelope......... That's what I notice anyway. I could be wrong. I've never had puffy ack firing if I couldn't see the cv.
Icon range is shorter than "action bubble" range. If the shells have infinite range it is possible to hit a target that is just outside icon range. I've never done it though.
-
Furball, I agree with your post in the other thread 100%:
from the discussion in the last thread, from what i gathered the shells have nothing to do with where they are being fired from. they just appear in this box. the shots appear instantaneously so maneuvering has no effect at all (apart from the speed loss)
one of my suggestions in the other thread was to put in a time delay: -
so it would be distance from ack gun = time variable from location calculation to where the shells explode.
so for example, an aircraft flying near a gun 5 miles away, the shells that explode near it would have been calculated 5 seconds ago. if the aircraft turns in that 5 seconds the shells would land where it would have been - not where it is.
but i dont think that could be coded.
I'm no pro, nor do I know how the game is written, but I think that is possible to code (just like the lead on the auto ack on the field) and would really solve the problem.
-
WOW... That was BS.
-FYB
-
Puffy = :mad: :furious
I utterly despise the puffy ack system in AH. It is ridiculous.
It is better than the one in Il-2, in that one, you can fly around the flak screen, while .50 and .30 cals. give you pilot wounds, set fuel tanks afire, and destroy your rudder in the first two shots.
-
Icon range is shorter than "action bubble" range. If the shells have infinite range it is possible to hit a target that is just outside icon range. I've never done it though.
It's impossible for you to hit a plane maneuvering 10 seconds down-range at 400mph, perpendicular to the 5" pov. Unless you're guessing where the plane is going to maneuver in the next 10 sec and win the lottery.
-
It's impossible for you to hit a plane maneuvering 10 seconds down-range at 400mph, perpendicular to the 5" pov. Unless you're guessing where the plane is going to maneuver in the next 10 sec and win the lottery.
It would appear that the Puffy ack code doesn't take into account angles like you describe but only the random chance of getting hit if you are in range above 3k...
It wouldn't hurt to go back to the drawing board and see if there's a more effective, more realistic way to design a system to better address a lot of problems people have been reporting such as: fighters being more frequently affected (killed) by the puffy ack than bombers, impossible angles (through mountains, perpendicular shots), absurd accuracies at 20 mile distances, absurd accuracies at 400mph+ fighters.
Perhaps 'the box' that has been mentioned by HiTech could be enlarged to a greater degree as the speed of the airplane increases? HiTech, you have said that a fast airplane does have a larger box, but perhaps the box is not getting as large as it needs to as the speed increases?
-
It doesnt, I'm answering Die Hard's specific reply to someone saying that shot in a manned 5" is feasible.
The puffy ack works like you say yep.. I'm just wishing for some time of flight modeling.
Thru mountains can't be fixed cheaply. Collision calc is too expensive.
-
Puffy ack is nearly impossible to dodge most times! In 1 sortie I got hit by puffy ack 4 times! Somehow it didn't do any damage.