Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on January 30, 2010, 06:53:45 PM

Title: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: DREDIOCK on January 30, 2010, 06:53:45 PM
By a third.  And increase the alt it blows up at by 10%

Its like those "Too weak, too strong" commercials
I used to fly by the CVs admiring the puffs of black smoke that hardly ever hit me unless I got really close Now I get one pinged at extreme ranges regularly
We went from one extreme to the other. although puffy ack is still pretty tame on bomber formations

When furballing anywhere near a CV on the deck You have to be careful even doing a simple loop because puffy ack starts going off all around you.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bravoa8 on January 30, 2010, 07:19:55 PM
I have to give a +1 to this idea cv ack is too deadly.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Saxman on January 30, 2010, 07:26:07 PM
At the very least they need to address its relative effectiveness against fighters vs. bombers. And they also need to look at the firing range.

I can't tell you how many times I've flown over a boat when no other friendlies were around and the puffy ack didn't open up until I was RIGHT on top of it. The ack then proceeds to follow me until I'm half a a sector away. I'd REALLY like to see max range decreased, but the guns to open up AT its max range.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: RaptorL on January 30, 2010, 07:40:57 PM
I don't think its that deadly. I think your only is either not taking evasive action to avoid flack, or your bellybutton is getting capped by the guys in the turrets.
But that just my opinion.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bj229r on January 30, 2010, 09:26:06 PM
If I had a nickel for every time I was blown outta the sky by a CV auto-puffy that originated so far away I couldnt #$^^$^# SEE it...
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Wingnutt on January 30, 2010, 09:34:31 PM
I have no issue with it being able to dial in and start hammering a bomber formation from a pretty good range..  big target, steady heading, steady alt..  fine..

what I take issue with is being in a fighter ripping along at 400mph at 15K and suddenly Im in the tower "you have been killed"   first burst of puff.. dead.

that has happened to me more than a few times.

I think if your in a fighter and you change your course (laterally or vertically) more than say 20 degrees every 10 seconds or so, the puff shouldent even bother shooting at you, much less be able to blot you out of the sky in short order.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: jolly22 on January 30, 2010, 09:40:15 PM
auto puffy ack i think is to weak actually. Manned puffy ack needs to be lightend up a little bit.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: thndregg on January 30, 2010, 11:27:33 PM
Against bombers, it's weak. Against fighters it's very strong. Seldom do my B26's get gunned down by auto puff-ack.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Clone155 on January 30, 2010, 11:56:56 PM
I have no issue with it being able to dial in and start hammering a bomber formation from a pretty good range..  big target, steady heading, steady alt..  fine..

what I take issue with is being in a fighter ripping along at 400mph at 15K and suddenly Im in the tower "you have been killed"   first burst of puff.. dead.

that has happened to me more than a few times.

I think if your in a fighter and you change your course (laterally or vertically) more than say 20 degrees every 10 seconds or so, the puff shouldent even bother shooting at you, much less be able to blot you out of the sky in short order.

I remember a discussion on these boards about how even if you change coarse it won't do a thing
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: LCCajun on January 31, 2010, 04:11:51 AM
I have no issue with it being able to dial in and start hammering a bomber formation from a pretty good range..  big target, steady heading, steady alt..  fine..

what I take issue with is being in a fighter ripping along at 400mph at 15K and suddenly Im in the tower "you have been killed"   first burst of puff.. dead.

that has happened to me more than a few times.

I think if your in a fighter and you change your course (laterally or vertically) more than say 20 degrees every 10 seconds or so, the puff shouldent even bother shooting at you, much less be able to blot you out of the sky in short order.

I am in the same boat as you wingnutt. I can't tell you how many times I would be about 15k just hauling a** and one shot one kill from the ack.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: RTHolmes on January 31, 2010, 07:10:35 AM
iirc the most effective late war fire control systems using proxy fused shells achieved a kill per 1000 rounds fired ...
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: mechanic on January 31, 2010, 07:38:21 AM
what seems to happen is that on my FE the puffy ack is hitting me, but on someone else's FE the puffy ack is hitting them. I cannot see it hitting them, they cannot see it hitting me. So is it shooting two targets at once? It's common to hear 'Why does the puffy ack always shoot at me not you?' Seems that there is some kind of code that means everyone gets shot at but only you see yourself being hit? Maybe i'm way off base, but thats what it feels like.  :cry
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Latrobe on January 31, 2010, 07:45:53 AM
The accuracy needs to be reduced a bit. I've been hit by CV ack 3-4 times in a sortie while dogfighting so many times. The amount of ack I personally think is ok. It's probably no where near the amount of ack pilots back in WWII saw on a daily basis!
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: trigger2 on January 31, 2010, 11:03:06 AM
I don't think its that deadly. I think your only is either not taking evasive action to avoid flack, or your bellybutton is getting capped by the guys in the turrets.
But that just my opinion.

...Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries, now go away or I shall insult you for a second time.

I wish I could dig up the video, I posted it here once before, but mediafire took the video down and I'm afraid it's gone. :/

But, flying at ~17k in P-47-d-25's going around 325 mph, *poof*, just like that, our flight lead was gone. I take formation leader as we were 4 1/2 sectors away from the nearest friendly base, continue our strike, and a sector or so away, we run into the CV firing at us... All of us were killed.

I would love to see WWII footage of a flak gunner hitting anything at 17k clocking >300mph, much less in one burst from BVR.

And Raptor, no, we're talking about AUTO ack...
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: DOUG on January 31, 2010, 02:30:28 PM
If nothing else,atLEAST make the rounds obey the laws of physics, and STOP being faster than light..... :uhoh
try THIS sometime.....fly parallel to the TG @5-6-even 8 miles away ; be at absolute top speed; be at 2,995ft;
NOW, pull up ever so slightly....The INSTANT you reach 3,000ft a burst of puffy goes off all around you, as if it were allready there, waiting 4 u to break 3K alt to detonate. Might not be Faster than light, but 8miles in 1/100th
a second probably exceeds historic muzzel velocity :neener:         elfy
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: SmokinLoon on January 31, 2010, 02:35:55 PM
I think it should be suicide to attack a carrier group in singles and maybe even pairs.  Unless the buffs are 20k or higher, they should expect to lose a drone or two to puffy ack.  Only the suicidal wold attack a CV alone or with a suicidal buddy.

If anything... bump it up.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Saxman on January 31, 2010, 02:45:57 PM
Loon,

The problem is there's a pretty consistent history that puffy ack in the game is more effective against fast moving and constantly maneuvering fighters than it is the Buff formations flying straight and level at low speeds. Part of it has to do with the way it's generated around the target. IIRC, puffy ack is generated in a box around the target. This box changes size depending on the size of the target, however the AMOUNT of ack does NOT change. This means if you have ten flak bursts for each box, for a small fighter that's ten ack bursts in a tighter space than those same ten ack bursts in the bounding box for a formation of bombers. Automatically, this means a small fighter has a higher chance of getting hit because of the greater density of the flak.

As Doug suggests: Change the modeling of puffy ack so there's actually guns on the ship FIRING those shells, rather than having the flak bursts randomly generated in a bounding box around the target. That would solve a LOT of the problems.

Also, the AI for puffy ack is pretty screwed up. We've ALL seen puffy ack ignore an approaching bomber formation RIGHT overhead and ready to drop only to attack a small fighter engaged with CAP five miles away.

Do I really need to mention the puffy ack that can shoot through mountains...?
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: 10thmd on January 31, 2010, 05:59:58 PM
I agree the Puffy is a joke. I fly JU-88's at 210 and 10k and never get hit once. Fly a Ta-152 at 450 and 25k 1 hit tower everytime.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: guncrasher on January 31, 2010, 07:00:28 PM
so true about the ack.  I'll fly at 5.5 above the cv and ack starts hitting around me about 7 seconds before drop and for 30 seconds after, and once I drop turn and start maneuvering to opposite direction of CV while diving below 3k. most of the time I'll get hit some but no biggie.  and yet the moment I go 3001 alt on my spit8 puff goes the wing If I am lucky, really unlucky i get killed right away  :rofl.

semp
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: waystin2 on February 01, 2010, 09:04:53 AM
I do not think CV puffy ack lethality should be altered.  I do think that the CV's are still allowed to close to shore.  If I can be whacked by manned or unmanned ack right above my own field, then they are getting to close. :aok
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bustr on February 03, 2010, 12:12:56 PM
Double the shore battery's at every feild to allow a broader arc of coverage. As for the puffy ack response itself. By the Okinawa campaign in 45, wasnt american ship board ack about this dense in it's coverage? As for ack density bombers vs fighters, dialing back the lethality seems fair to the fighters. I rarely ever see auto ack down a bomber unless its about to crash on the CV's deck Lankstukaing.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Jayhawk on February 03, 2010, 02:11:20 PM
Although many of you have experienced it, here's a quick low quality video of some dang puffy ack.  Alt was just below 15k.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU7VyKYTuvg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU7VyKYTuvg)
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Crash Orange on February 04, 2010, 10:49:35 AM
I do not think CV puffy ack lethality should be altered.  I do think that the CV's are still allowed to close to shore.  If I can be whacked by manned or unmanned ack right above my own field, then they are getting to close. :aok

Abso-freakin-lutely. You should not be able to use ship ack as an offensive weapon.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: grizz441 on February 04, 2010, 10:53:26 AM
Puffy ack is a joke, get rid of the whole thing.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bustr on February 04, 2010, 12:49:58 PM
The 5inch Proximity fuze model HiTech is using seems historicly on for the auto 5inch and rate of fire from 4 destroyers. I don't know if HiTech is programing 100% of the fuzed rounds to work 100% of the time though. 100% of the rounds working did not happen in real life. The british had about a 79% kill rate against the 400mph V1 using the fuzed round.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
For more information on the VT fuze, see the Ralph Baldwin book, "The Deadly Fuze - Secret Weapon of World War II."  An analysis in this book of the 278 aircraft shot down by VT fuzed projectiles between October 1944 and August 1945 indicates that only 46 of these would have been destroyed if time fuzed projectiles had been employed.  However, Will Jurens, noted ordnance authority, estimates that Baldwin's 6:1 ratio apparently assumes that 70% of the VT fuzes worked.  A 50% failure rate - the Navy's lower limit of acceptability - meant the effectiveness ratio was closer to 4:1.  In comparison, mechanical time fuzes such as the Mk 18 typically worked about 90%-95% of the time.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The earlier naval stats against kamikaze was 310 fuzed rounds per plane.

Type of Attack       Planes Shot Down                               Rounds per Plane
                                                                     20 mm     40 mm    5"/38 MT*      5"/38 VT 
Kamikaze                    24                                  27,200     6,000        1,000             200
Non-Kamikaze              41                                  30,100     4,500        1,000             550

* MT = Mechanical Timer (i.e., Time Fuzed AA Common)

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-075.htm

Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Saurdaukar on February 04, 2010, 01:04:56 PM
AI puffy ack

Dont care about it.



Remove the player's ability to load laser-guided, heat-seeking, homing, proximity-triggered AA rounds into the 5 inchers.  That, or eliminate their ability to traverse below a certain horizontal plain consistent with the 3K AI limitation; subject to reasonable distance from the CV.

Nothing ruins a good ol' Army/Navy game faster.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: JunkyII on February 04, 2010, 01:07:21 PM
CV puffy forces one side to stay under 3k.......I dont think that ever happened at an airfield in WW2 :noid
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Saurdaukar on February 04, 2010, 01:08:36 PM
CV puffy forces one side to stay under 3k.......I dont think that ever happened at an airfield in WW2 :noid

OMGF!!11 TIS IS NT WW2!!!111   :bolt:
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: JunkyII on February 04, 2010, 01:13:12 PM
OMGF!!11 TIS IS NT WW2!!!111   :bolt:
Shhhh, Im fishing :aok
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bustr on February 04, 2010, 02:12:11 PM
If AI ack is disabled we can assume most CV will be sitting on the bottom most of the night.

Then we will be repeating this conversation but, the complaint will be about milk runners gaming the CV groups, bases and strat for easy points to avoid fighting. Isn't a CV group really a movable airfield and city style strat with auto ack? We used to have AI puffy ack protecting towns that players complained was unfair. In that case this argument should include disabling field ack and strat ack since its all Lazar guided unfair death and spoils a good furball.

So once the AI ack for everything in the MA is disabled, what do we do? If logic is followed a bit, the furball lake environment in the DA is all we will be left with but on a Macro scale with better scenery. Everything becomes a milk run but for the risks related to furballing. Except the maps are too big for furballers to protect everything or hunt down all the nonfurballers. But, there would be no hiding in the AI ack to frustrate the hardcore furballer. Then I suppose the next complaint would logicly be to make the maps smaller to give the milk runners no way to hide from the furballers. What vicious circular reasoning. Is this a profit sustainable scenario for HiTech?

1. So why turn the MA into a giant DA with better scenery?
2. Honestly, what percentage of the community would that benifit?
3. Why not ask HiTech to change the DA instead, if it's so boring to the hard core furballers? No milk runners and AI Lazer guided ack in the DA.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: RTHolmes on February 04, 2010, 03:21:11 PM
If AI ack is disabled we can assume most CV will be sitting on the bottom most of the night.

disagree. the biggest threat to cvs is buffs (after cruisers ;)) and puffy doesnt affect them enough to prevent bomb release. next big threat is jabos. I drop alot of ords on ships and in my experience the bomb run isnt when you get hit by puffy, its when your 5 miles from the cv engaged with another fighter. its only effective use is as a funkiller.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: Jayhawk on February 04, 2010, 04:35:32 PM
I sure don't want to get rid of puffy ack.  However, auto puffy is basically useless against bombers but deadly against fighters, seems like it should be the other way around.

Slow and strait vs. Fast and nimble.  Would it be easier to shoot a hummingbird or a turkey?
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: bustr on February 04, 2010, 05:55:05 PM
I sure don't want to get rid of puffy ack.  However, auto puffy is basically useless against bombers but deadly against fighters, seems like it should be the other way around.

Slow and strait vs. Fast and nimble.  Would it be easier to shoot a hummingbird or a turkey?

Short of turning off AI ack on CV's, this probably won't satisfy the furballers.

The bombers being such a big broad slow target logicaly should be more vulnerable to the radar fuzed 5inch rounds. It is the same shooting a manned 5incher. At 2.5k I can knock off fighters from a 5 inch all day. Bombers just keep flying on through to the CV while my shells explode all around them. One would think a box of bombers would be as vulnerable to radar fuzed 5inch shells at max icon distance due to their size as fighters are at 2.5k.

Bombers seem to become most vulnerable to the ack at about 1.5k which is too late because the bombs are out. As the size of the aircraft or bomber gets smaller they seem to be easier to hit. I see very few "single" B25H or Ju88 get close to CV untill an extensive amount of damage has been sustained by the whole fleet. Medium bombers like those two as single planes seem to loose a wing between 2.5k and 1k out. Bomber boxes cruise over and fly away trailing smoke to rinse and repeat inside of max icon range.
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: AWwrgwy on February 04, 2010, 09:16:28 PM
How many heavy bombers attacking cv groups (or even ships) were ever shot down by ship mounted puffy ack historically?


 :noid

wrongway
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: guncrasher on February 04, 2010, 09:24:34 PM
about the same as the number of  cv groups that were sunk by 3 buffs in ww2.  of course this doesnt include the numerous cv groups that were sunk by diving lancs which was pretty much the standard in ww2.

semp
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: DarkHawk on February 05, 2010, 12:59:18 PM
Puffy ack should open at Icon range, about 6k yards, from the nearest ship, Half a sector away looking for a CV, puffy ack show me where to go to drop my bombs.
reduce the range, leave the rest alone.

DHawk
Title: Re: Reduce Cv puffy ack
Post by: DREDIOCK on February 08, 2010, 01:10:51 PM
about the same as the number of  cv groups that were sunk by 3 buffs in ww2.  of course this doesnt include the numerous cv groups that were sunk by diving lancs which was pretty much the standard in ww2.

semp

Dont forget the stuka 17's