Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Plawranc on December 17, 2010, 09:20:06 PM
-
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.
I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.
Flame suit on
-
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.
I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.
Flame suit on
manned or auto?
I dont think the auto's have very good range or accuracy, thats why people can bore thru at 500 mph to pork a radar and not be touched 90% of the time.
-
Auto
-
Auto
it has been, it used to be full auto fire. now its just 3-5 round burst for the 20mm (i believe) and single shot for the auto 37mm. thats as close to being "nerfed" as your gonna get man, sorry.
-
AA fire was far more lethal in reality than it is in AH.
Come back when most shoot downs are from ground fire, which they were in reality.
-
one time i dove straight down to de-ack a vh base back when there were only 2 auto-acks at over 400 mph... got popped twice for a PW and oil leak (no GV's).
I've seen an enemy 190 glide dead-stick from one end of a large airfield to other without taking a single hit from the auto-ack. He got me sitting on the runway with one tater round spraying before he finally got hit.
-
I would like to see AA guns in MA nerfed considerably. Due to their unbelievable range and acuracy when hitting small fast moving targets. Its a statistical and first hand account fact, that anti air fire from single AA guns is no where close to how accurate it is without radar guidance.
I propose that if the Radar at a base is knocked out, AA efficiency beyond close range is halved.
Flame suit on
LOL! Another one that wants to dumb down the game to make it easier for her to play.
Post your "statistical and first hand account fact" that supports your whine...err I mean wish.
ack-ack
-
Quote W.E Johns. WW1 Pilot and reserve officer in WW2
"Archie is scattered and rarely hits anything, most gunners when they fire shoot straight at the target and most hits are registered in the fueselage or rear of the aircraft"
For someone who had more flying experience than us cartoon pilots and served in both World Wars, Im likely to take his word over yours Ack-Ack.
Also, note that the muzzle velocity of an Anti Air gun is slower due to the fact that they are A. firing against gravity, B. they start at ground level so there is denser air, C. a 20 mm flak gun takes time to change the trajectory of its fire, so it would take constant adjustment to fire at a fast moving aircraft at high altitude. Too long for any accurate shooting to be made, D. the fact that German AA and British Late War AA was so effective because it was radar guided is not to be ignored, E. the lower you fly the less effective the ack should be, not more effective, as you are moving too fast and close for effective shooting to be made, there should be a "butter zone" where Ack is most effective, anything above or below that zone should be harder to hit.
So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it. at any altitude within its range, let alone the puff ack that kills you in one hit from 30 K.
A. Add a buffer zone in which AA fire is at its maximum efficieny, anywhere below, or higher than that zone is harder to hit, say if you go in NOE, your almost impossible to hit, and ultra high your out of range. In between these is the buffer zone which should be almost certain death if you spend too much time at too slower speed.
B. Make the Dar a tactical target. So if a bomb takes out the Dar, it renders no assistance to ack. This of course both ways, so if the dar is up, your gonna die, if its down, you have an easy time. In short, Dar up, your toast. Dar down, cakewalk. (almost unless you fly through the zone)
I think these two things would make a GREAT addition to the game, it would add a whole new perspective to base taking.
-
Fear my ACK-ACK :D
Just like duck hunting got to lead em :rock
-
Quote W.E Johns. WW1 Pilot and reserve officer in WW2
"Archie is scattered and rarely hits anything, most gunners when they fire shoot straight at the target and most hits are registered in the fueselage or rear of the aircraft"
For someone who had more flying experience than us cartoon pilots and served in both World Wars, Im likely to take his word over yours Ack-Ack.
Also, note that the muzzle velocity of an Anti Air gun is slower due to the fact that they are A. firing against gravity, B. they start at ground level so there is denser air, C. a 20 mm flak gun takes time to change the trajectory of its fire, so it would take constant adjustment to fire at a fast moving aircraft at high altitude. Too long for any accurate shooting to be made, D. the fact that German AA and British Late War AA was so effective because it was radar guided is not to be ignored, E. the lower you fly the less effective the ack should be, not more effective, as you are moving too fast and close for effective shooting to be made, there should be a "butter zone" where Ack is most effective, anything above or below that zone should be harder to hit.
So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it. at any altitude within its range, let alone the puff ack that kills you in one hit from 30 K.
A. Add a buffer zone in which AA fire is at its maximum efficieny, anywhere below, or higher than that zone is harder to hit, say if you go in NOE, your almost impossible to hit, and ultra high your out of range. In between these is the buffer zone which should be almost certain death if you spend too much time at too slower speed.
B. Make the Dar a tactical target. So if a bomb takes out the Dar, it renders no assistance to ack. This of course both ways, so if the dar is up, your gonna die, if its down, you have an easy time. In short, Dar up, your toast. Dar down, cakewalk. (almost unless you fly through the zone)
I think these two things would make a GREAT addition to the game, it would add a whole new perspective to base taking.
No offense but his comments hardly prove your point. Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.
Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else? Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...
ack-ack
-
My suggestion is valid though, interlocking the Dar with the AAA is a good idea I think.
Think Ack-Ack, it would give me no excuse to complain, I know how much you want that. :lol
-
My suggestion is valid though, interlocking the Dar with the AAA is a good idea I think.
Think Ack-Ack, it would give me no excuse to complain, I know how much you want that. :lol
:headscratch: interlocking radar and AAA? uhhh.... radar and AAA... i dont think WWII HAD this!
AA maybe. ya know... manned AA guns. no assisted AA in here... yet at least
-
So, I put forward that AA fire should be more complexly modeled to add a greater tactical aspect. Pilots would come in ultra high or Ultra low to dodge AA fire, but on AH2 its modeled that besides range, its instant death almost to fly through it.
this is the part you lose me on.. I see people fly thru auto ack willy-nilly all day long.. people even vulch thru it and barely ever get touched. if you are carrying any sort of speed, you will rarely get touched.
i agree the puffy ack is annoying as hell, but the regular autoack on the bases I see no problem.
ultimate solution, stay out of the ack, or bring rockets and de-ack from a distance, if vulching is the objective. (same goes for town tho)
-
:headscratch: interlocking radar and AAA? uhhh.... radar and AAA... i dont think WWII HAD this!
AA maybe. ya know... manned AA guns. no assisted AA in here... yet at least
It did, look up the Kammulhuber Line "i think thats the name". They were manned yes, BUT, the Radar gave them height, speed, range, and an operator would give them the rangefinding and lead info to engage the aircraft.
-
No offense but his comments hardly prove your point. Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.
Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else? Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...
ack-ack
A... Automatic weapons?
Couldn't resist :devil
-
I am a poor pilot yet I can manage to kill auto acks on the fields on a regular basis.
There are times I will take out 2 on a single pass. This flying an A5.
What I do not do is fly the length of the field to minimize exposure time.
Is it possible its your tactics?
-
someone posted awhile back about the amount of 5" 20mm 37mm 20cal etc fired on navy ships to the amount of aircraft destroyed. It was a lot of rounds (30,000 rounds of 20mm per plane) and few kills.
-
someone posted awhile back about the amount of 5" 20mm 37mm 20cal etc fired on navy ships to the amount of aircraft destroyed. It was a lot of rounds (30,000 rounds of 20mm per plane) and few kills.
After WW2, the USN took the numbers of all the 5" AA rounds fired and statistically averaged out that it took 1,000 rounds per plane kill. Not that it actually took 1,000 rounds to kill a plane, but that was the statistical average. Again, this in no way validates or confirms the OP's original whine..err wish that ack of any kind in AH is too powerful.
The only real issue with the any of the acks is how the puffy acks track the target in regards to being able to track and fire at planes that flying are flying on the other side of a mountain that is between the plane and the fleet. There is nothing wrong with the lethality levels of any of the AAA guns and those that claim there is are the ones that are using piss poor tactics and are paying the price. Basically, these whines..err wishes to tone down the lethality of the AAA guns are from those that want to vulch or fly through enemy acks umolested.
ack-ack
-
Albatross's?
-
Get rid of the unmanned guns alltogether,if you cant be botherd to
defend your town boat or field kiss it good bye.
-
pointless wish, offline I fly raids all the time and ALMOST NEVER get hit, the only time I really have a hard time with the auto-ack is when I'm dive bombing a CV with all the destroyers and the cruiser still afloat
-
No offense but his comments hardly prove your point. Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.
Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else? Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...
ack-ack
Ack, I have to disagree with you on this. I will research it and find the article that discussed a study of the affect of AA for both the Germans and the Allies in WWII. If I remember correctly over 80% of bombers made it to their targets even with high tech AA systems in place. True some radar guided AA was effective but not to the point where it stopped bombing raids. What gave the 8th Air Force problems was bein gunescorted into Germany and German fighters having a field day. If possible can you provide stats to back up your pont? Not being an bellybutton or anythign but if you have the data then that would be great to see and then it may answer questions for all of us.
BigKev
-
I sink cvs from 5.5k and hardly get hit by ack. but over town or base it just tears my planes apart.
semp
-
Ack, I have to disagree with you on this. I will research it and find the article that discussed a study of the affect of AA for both the Germans and the Allies in WWII. If I remember correctly over 80% of bombers made it to their targets even with high tech AA systems in place. True some radar guided AA was effective but not to the point where it stopped bombing raids. What gave the 8th Air Force problems was bein gunescorted into Germany and German fighters having a field day. If possible can you provide stats to back up your pont? Not being a sweetie or anythign but if you have the data then that would be great to see and then it may answer questions for all of us.
BigKev
You are comparing apples and oranges. The OP seems to be about the low level field ack rather than the "puffy" fired at high altitude bombers. Strafing an airfield protected by ack was one of the most dangerous things an allied fighter pilot could do.
-
After WW2, the USN took the numbers of all the 5" AA rounds fired and statistically averaged out that it took 1,000 rounds per plane kill. Not that it actually took 1,000 rounds to kill a plane, but that was the statistical average. Again, this in no way validates or confirms the OP's original whine..err wish that ack of any kind in AH is too powerful.
The only real issue with the any of the acks is how the puffy acks track the target in regards to being able to track and fire at planes that flying are flying on the other side of a mountain that is between the plane and the fleet. There is nothing wrong with the lethality levels of any of the AAA guns and those that claim there is are the ones that are using piss poor tactics and are paying the price. Basically, these whines..err wishes to tone down the lethality of the AAA guns are from those that want to vulch or fly through enemy acks umolested.
ack-ack
If you include that towards the end of the war the japanese had obsolete planes doing kamikaze runs the statistic is misleading. Kinda like saying the japanese had inferior pilots by analyzing the mariana turkey shoot.
Semp
-
I sink cvs from 5.5k and hardly get hit by ack. but over town or base it just tears my planes apart.
semp
different strengths, differet weaknessess
-
I sink cvs from 5.5k and hardly get hit by ack. but over town or base it just tears my planes apart.
semp
this. i usually take up a group of b25c's and come in about 3k and bomb the cv, if no1's gunning i got pretty much a 99% chance of sinking it even if ack has hit me. ive sunk 23 cvs doing this technique since the summer
-
Oh, I thought this thread was a protest against Air Rifles :bolt:
-
You are comparing apples and oranges. The OP seems to be about the low level field ack rather than the "puffy" fired at high altitude bombers. Strafing an airfield protected by ack was one of the most dangerous things an allied fighter pilot could do.
On the contrary I am not comparing apples and oranges. The odds of a low level plane being hit on a strafing run is dependent on many things: number of gun emplacements, skill level of the gun crews, speed of the aircraft, and a ton of other things including "LUCK'. The same thing goes for the high level planes and the ack fired their way. All am saying if we have data to support the effectiveness of the ack in the game then please post it so we can look at it. For example, on a small field in this game there are how many guns? Answer is about 12-14, split between manned and auto ack. Now if you are a lone plane then your chances of getting hit are vastly increased vice attacking with multiple planes. But what I get out of a lot of people is that it seems like the auto ack we have has the effectivenss of the CIWS (MK 15 Phalanx) system used on US Navy Ships today. I will take some time in the early hours and run some tests on airfields solo and chart the number of hits and other vitals to support or debunk this topic as best I can.
BigKev
-
-1 AAA is SUPPOSED to be dangerous. I'm still pushing for the inclusion of the Sdkfz half-track with the 88mm AA gun on it. As it stands now, there is NO way for AAA at a base to take down a bomber unless he is stupid enough to come NOE. All I have to do is get a pack of B-17s up to 8.5K and the base is toast. Bring us the 88, the flak tower, and puffy ack at bases (and over town) until the flak tower(s) are destroyed.
-
After WW2, the USN took the numbers of all the 5" AA rounds fired and statistically averaged out that it took 1,000 rounds per plane kill. Not that it actually took 1,000 rounds to kill a plane, but that was the statistical average. Again, this in no way validates or confirms the OP's original whine..err wish that ack of any kind in AH is too powerful.
The only real issue with the any of the acks is how the puffy acks track the target in regards to being able to track and fire at planes that flying are flying on the other side of a mountain that is between the plane and the fleet. There is nothing wrong with the lethality levels of any of the AAA guns and those that claim there is are the ones that are using piss poor tactics and are paying the price. Basically, these whines..err wishes to tone down the lethality of the AAA guns are from those that want to vulch or fly through enemy acks umolested.
ack-ack
No one is saying it takes 1000 5" hits to kill a plane but ya can see how the accuracy of the 5" gun is by those numbers.
-
AA be it on the fields or on the CV group I find fine. Its accurate enough to keep you wary,
but not invincible.
I routinely Dive bomb the CV Group in a fighter and fly away,
I also will straffe AA at fields, and fly away afterwards.
I suggest its in your approaches and tactics that make it so bad.
What aircraft are you using? Armour may make a difference as well.
-
No one is saying it takes 1000 5" hits to kill a plane but ya can see how the accuracy of the 5" gun is by those numbers.
The 5" guns were actually quite accurate but as the old adage goes, the more lead you put out the greater chance of hitting something. It was far more effective to throw out as much of a wall of lead around the ships as possible and had really nothing do with the mispercieved inaccuracy of the radar guided 5" guns used by the USN during WW2.
ack-ack
-
As it stands now, there is NO way for AAA at a base to take down a bomber unless he is stupid enough to come NOE. All I have to do is get a pack of B-17s up to 8.5K and the base is toast.
thats high enough for auto ack, but not manned. I hit bombers flying over at 4.5k yds (13500 ft) range all the time with 37mm field guns.
-
BigKev, if you fly a high-alt bomber raid over strat where you experience puffy ack, I can guarantee that 80% or more of your bombers will survive. Ack in AH is fine. It is a matter of tactics employed rather than ack lethality. Someone can't expect to survive running down the length of a field by themselves and expect to live. Shorter routes in ack range and teamwork need to be used. Vultures have it too easy as is.
-
Whoops. I apologize for that redundant sentence. On my crackberry and couldn't see my whole post.
-
I like the current ack settings albeit they can be lethal they are no where near as bad as the last starfighter deathblossom that they used to be. It used to be unlikely a single plane could deack a field. Now it is plausible. For the record, I got single hit PK from auto ack yesterday, from the very first tracer that came up from the field, so I feel your pain.
To the OP... keep looking for the data, some guys are just wrong. Had a guy try to tell me that the Jug N was a clipped wing version of the jug, and never cared to admit that he was wrong although he posts here daily like a sage on high. Stick to your guns, just find something more tangible then a first hand personal account.
-
To the OP... keep looking for the data, some guys are just wrong. Had a guy try to tell me that the Jug N was a clipped wing version of the jug, and never cared to admit that he was wrong although he posts here daily like a sage on high. Stick to your guns, just find something more tangible then a first hand personal account.
When people refer to a plane with clipped wings, they aren't referring to the wings being "shortened" but rather the wing tips being clipped or "blunted" compared to the regular wings.
P-47N with clipped or "blunted wing tips"
(http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/4269/p47n01hz0.jpg)
P-47M with regular wing tips
(http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/P47M56fgcomp.jpg)
/hijack over and thank you for playing, better luck next time.
ack-ack
-
it has been, it used to be full auto fire. now its just 3-5 round burst for the 20mm (i believe) and single shot for the auto 37mm. thats as close to being "nerfed" as your gonna get man, sorry.
It is 3-5 TRACER bursts. There should be rounds between the tracers you cannot see, unless the game is set up as all tracers. :salute
-
When people refer to a plane with clipped wings, they aren't referring to the wings being "shortened" but rather the wing tips being clipped or "blunted" compared to the regular wings.
P-47N with clipped or "blunted wing tips"
(http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/4269/p47n01hz0.jpg)
P-47M with regular wing tips
(http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/P47M56fgcomp.jpg)
/hijack over and thank you for playing, better luck next time.
ack-ack
/quote]
lol... you said 36 inches shorter, nice try "expert"
-
But way to air yourself out. For the record... a clipped wing in most terms, most people I reckon means shorter.... like say a "clipped wing cub" or a "clipped wing spit" quit trying to dig yourself in deeper. Back to the OP, like I said no one in here knows everything, stick to your guns if you think you can support it with data. Some of us have a lack of resources which prevent us from knowing all things about WWII vehicles and stats.
-
When people refer to a plane with clipped wings, they aren't referring to the wings being "shortened" but rather the wing tips being clipped or "blunted" compared to the regular wings.
P-47N with clipped or "blunted wing tips"
(http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/4269/p47n01hz0.jpg)
P-47M with regular wing tips
(http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/P47M56fgcomp.jpg)
/hijack over and thank you for playing, better luck next time.
ack-ack
lol... you said 36 inches shorter, nice try "expert"
I never said anything of the sort, you must have me confused with someone else then if someone made that comment especially since the N model had a redesigned longer wing for the two 50 gallon fuel tanks that were added. Nice try though, better luck next time kiddo.
ack-ack
ack-ack
-
I never said anything of the sort, you must have me confused with someone else then if someone made that comment.
ack-ack
Nope, I am not. Long screed of a conversation on jugs on country about a month ago. Anyhoo... my point is, no one knows everything and there are always perspectives to be respected.
-
Nope, I am not. Long screed of a conversation on jugs on country about a month ago. Anyhoo... my point is, no one knows everything and there are always perspectives to be respected.
Please, post the screenshot of my saying what you claim that I said then.
ack-ack
-
Please, post the screenshot of my saying what you claim that I said then.
ack-ack
No. A system crash (sigh) prevents it. This will result in impasse which is why I kept you out of it till you saw your way in.
-
No. A system crash (sigh) prevents it. This will result in impasse which is why I kept you out of it till you saw your way in.
LOL!!!
You do bring them out of the wood work Ak-Ak :aok
-
He does cause he intends too. He hasnt learnt that being friendly and chilled gets you more friends, and makes you have a better time playing the game yet. One day he will, but my breath is not going to be held to that expense.
-
He does cause he intends too. He hasnt learnt that being friendly and chilled gets you more friends, and makes you have a better time playing the game yet. One day he will, but my breath is not going to be held to that expense.
LOL! No offense but I really don't give a rat's bellybutton what a tool like you thinks of me nor do tools such as yourself prevent me from enjoying my time playing the game. In fact, shooting down and beating the crap out of unskilled ankle humping tools such as yourself provides me hours of enjoyment and has so for the last 17 years I've played these games.
We can keep going on nancy boy if you like, otherwise get off the ankle kiddo.
ack-ack
-
LOL! No offense but I really don't give a rat's bellybutton what a tool like you thinks of me nor do tools such as yourself prevent me from enjoying my time playing the game. In fact, shooting down and beating the crap out of unskilled ankle humping tools such as yourself provides me hours of enjoyment and has so for the last 17 years I've played these games.
We can keep going on nancy boy if you like, otherwise get off the ankle kiddo.
ack-ack
I guess you are immune to forum rules....
1. Ack Ack the fact that you have been playing games like these for 17 years makes me laugh. I guess if I go back to my first PC based game, it would be FS 1 on a PCjr with the 64KB expansion mod back in 1985 or so (128KB or memory, what a beast that was :rock). So youngin you ain't the oldest thing in here. You may have your own business, etc... but your position of eminent expert is diminished by your sarcastic, bullyish, moronic responses. I respect your knowledge, but certainly not you.
2. Unlike you, a virtual world sally, I have actually been there and done that.
3. If you go to the bugs forum and look for my name, the last update crashed my system, check the date. Since AH is not the center of my existance, everything lives in one file. I guess I need to create a new one for screen shots titled "BBs tool".
4. The fact that you jumped in on this thread just demonstrates to me that you have nothing better to do in life than hijack a thread to flame anything.
5. Again to the OP, stick to your guns, jackwagons like this bottom feeding fungus of a creature will always be here as a naysayer. Do the research and stick to your guns. There are multiple versions of history, multiple interpretations of data, and frankly no one has all of them.
-
+1 for the OP, sure most shoot-downs were from AA, the germans had btwn 150-200 (or more) QUAD 20mm AA guns near some airfields, I dare anyone to fly through that! OTOH, if there were only 10-15 to contend with...
-
LOL! No offense but I really don't give a rat's bellybutton what a tool like you thinks of me nor do tools such as yourself prevent me from enjoying my time playing the game. In fact, shooting down and beating the crap out of unskilled ankle humping tools such as yourself provides me hours of enjoyment and has so for the last 17 years I've played these games.
We can keep going on nancy boy if you like, otherwise get off the ankle kiddo.
ack-ack
Point illustrated. You act like an A hole for the pure fact that you can. That annoys me. And I do not know who is a greater tool, the one claiming to be all seeing and all knowing, or the one who has a GF, school, a Part Time Job, and a NCO rank in ROTC, who likes to have fun flying planes on his computer (which I have been doing for 12 years) and a love of aviation. And its this fact which makes me respect 800Nate and other 12 year olds more than you.
and the funny part of that whole bit is your going to say thats no big deal. But replace the simulation with actual flying or RC flying or Airfix kits, and almost eveery other person on this board started out the exact same way I am doing now. So by attacking me you attack everyone on this board.
The simple fact is your a d!ck , and go around proclaiming it, you purposely do it, your not mad or angry at us, you just do what you do for laughs and annoying the rest of us. You have a high and mighty opinion of yourself that proves that you are a far greater tool than I could ever hope to be, and are intent of ruining the good intentions, and fair points brought up anywhere on this game for the sake of satisfying your huge asss ego.
I just want to have a good time playing the game, its not for the shooting, or for the ego boosts. But its for the friends you make on it, some squads im on first name terms with, and its that that keeps me around, not the game itself but the "good" people to play it with.
You joined this community to play the game and enjoy the air combat, I respect that. And did so when I was about 8 years old. BUT, you seem to lost that and replace it with a air of hostility and trying to prove how big, but in this case small your wang is.
So, why dont you do this board, and Game a favour, and QUIT, unless you have something constructive, or friendly to say.
Pacman
-
he's the biggest troll on the forums. That's what happens when you're spoiled. I get tired of reading threads just to see him throwing his used tampon around and not being punished for it. I can't stand him.
Flame on.
-
So to bring this back on topic MarineUs
To Avoid falling victim to the Ack-Ack you must use appropriate tactics.
Field ack as well as CV ack is completely survivable. If you are always being killed
by it you are doing something wrong.
Re-Up and Re-Invent your approach.
-
Whaoh...I just made Silver Member.. :banana: :banana: :banana:
:x How many friken years?
If you want a good time join a Scenario. It always Blows away the MA :salute
-
I suggest taking the time to visit Normandy and travel the roads from Caen to Falaise visiting the cemeteries along the way. I was amazed at the number of fighter bomber/ground attack pilots are buried alongside the ground troops. Do a bit of reading on the Tiffie pilots supporting the ground troops. They lost a lot of pilots to ack. An old Airwarrior pilot who was a ground attack pilot in WW2 flying Jugs said if they didn't get hit, they figured they were doing something wrong.
The general rule attacking an airfield was one pass. Going back once the ack was alerted was almost certainly a death wish.
If anything the ack in AH isn't tough enough.
-
No offense but his comments hardly prove your point. Try posting some real concrete data that tries to prove your whine..err wish.
Can you guess what shot down more planes than anything else? Probably not, but here is a hint..it starts with an "A"...
ack-ack
Aeroplanes
Aircraft
Aces
Anton "Toni" Hafner
Adrian Philip Goldsmith
Andrew William Barr
Alexander Vraciu
Akio Matsuba
-
it starts with an "A"...
...ammunition?
-
I didnt find the story from the net but didnt Closterman told his story they lost several tempests in one pass ground attack? Ack was really lethal.
-
There is always a balance that must be struck between reality and game play. Otherwise neither would be had.
I believe that the current levels of accuracy and damage are sufficient. I'm not sure how it could be coded, but the damage that a 40mm Bofors (manned or auto ack) can do to a tank at 1000 yards or more seems a bit much.
-
Ack, I have to disagree with you on this. I will research it and find the article that discussed a study of the affect of AA for both the Germans and the Allies in WWII. If I remember correctly over 80% of bombers made it to their targets even with high tech AA systems in place. True some radar guided AA was effective but not to the point where it stopped bombing raids. What gave the 8th Air Force problems was bein gunescorted into Germany and German fighters having a field day. If possible can you provide stats to back up your pont? Not being a sweetie or anythign but if you have the data then that would be great to see and then it may answer questions for all of us.
BigKev
i was gonna stay out of this one.......but if 80% made it to target, then why did the mighty 8th suspend raids after their second attempt at schweinfurt? (at least that's what i think i read)
i think their losses were about 65% at ploesti, around 60% each time at schweinfurt.
-
There is always a balance that must be struck between reality and game play. Otherwise neither would be had.
I believe that the current levels of accuracy and damage are sufficient. I'm not sure how it could be coded, but the damage that a 40mm Bofors (manned or auto ack) can do to a tank at 1000 yards or more seems a bit much.
I kill a fair amount of tanks with field guns admittedly, but remember it aint just one (37mm btw, even tho it looks like a bofors) shot thats killing the tank. it takes multiple hits (10+) in very specific spots with field gun to take out tanks. and if those spots are not presented, the most you can hope for is to get his tracks.
-
i was gonna stay out of this one.......but if 80% made it to target, then why did the mighty 8th suspend raids after their second attempt at schweinfurt? (at least that's what i think i read)
i think their losses were about 65% at ploesti, around 60% each time at schweinfurt.
Flak is deadly and in this game it is toned down for sure. I lost a 262 once to a 5" from a CV I could not see. They were radar guided after all.
-
Flak is deadly and in this game it is toned down for sure. I lost a 262 once to a 5" from a CV I could not see. They were radar guided after all.
i don't have any issues with the ack in this game. none. nada. zilch.
i don/'t wanna die in it, so i just don't fly into it.
if i decide to try to de-ack a base, then i deserve whatever i get...same as if i were to follow you into it......
keep it strong as it is.
-
i don't have any issues with the ack in this game. none. nada. zilch.
i don/'t wanna die in it, so i just don't fly into it.
if i decide to try to de-ack a base, then i deserve whatever i get...same as if i were to follow you into it......
keep it strong as it is.
QFT
-
I say, nerf the Ack for the Bish and Rooks and upgrade the knights ack :aok
-
i was gonna stay out of this one.......but if 80% made it to target, then why did the mighty 8th suspend raids after their second attempt at schweinfurt? (at least that's what i think i read)
i think their losses were about 65% at ploesti, around 60% each time at schweinfurt.
Unescorted bombers vs. fighters.
wrongway
-
Unescorted bombers vs. fighters.
wrongway
the point was/is ack doesn't have to be accurate. simply throw up a wall, and it pretty much doesn't matter what kind of plane it is.....it's gonna drop.
-
the point was/is ack doesn't have to be accurate. simply throw up a wall, and it pretty much doesn't matter what kind of plane it is.....it's gonna drop.
Actually, I would disagree with this statement.
I don't have numbers to back anything up, but if this were true losses of high altitude bombers in formation while flying straight, level, and at a steady speed while on their bomb run would seem to have been suicidal.
wrongway
-
Actually, I would disagree with this statement.
I don't have numbers to back anything up, but if this were true losses of high altitude bombers in formation while flying straight, level, and at a steady speed while on their bomb run would seem to have been suicidal.
wrongway
you do realize that the bomber crews feared anti aircraft fire more than they feared interceptors, right?
and i think it was often bordering on suicidal.
-
I de-acked a fresh V base with a 190 & 12 rockets, no wirbles, but one manned gun up. It really jazzed me. I couldn't believe I made it out of there. So? too accurate? NOT!
-
if u need a 190 and 12 rockets to deack a vbase u must really suck at it
-
if u need a 190 and 12 rockets to deack a vbase u must really suck at it
Why be so rude? 11 posts into your BB career....
If any ack needs to be dialed up, it is the stuff over the strats. I do not hink I have ever lost a set of bombers or for that matter on, while dropping on the strats.
-
if u need a 190 and 12 rockets to deack a vbase u must really suck at it
Wow, what a great post... :noid
-
if u need a 190 and 12 rockets to deack a vbase u must really suck at it
if you need to get flamed post this ^ :D
-
lol
-
if u need a 190 and 12 rockets to deack a vbase u must really suck at it
You're a wise arse aren't you Top Gun's Mavrick!? I was describing the 190 configuration, not stating it took all 12 rkts to do it. I was being shot at, it was not an undefended base, and I got away clean, hence the reason for the topic Bone-Head! Stay on topic or Shuddup. :neener:
-
Wow, what a great post... :noid
I'm glad you were impressed. :old:
-
if you need to get flamed post this ^ :D
If you need to Bite Me post this...
-
If you need to Bite Me post this...
That chip on your should must get to hurting after awhile.
Had you read and COMPREHENDED what "warphoenix" said you might have realized he was taking a shot at at the stupid comment that "shermanjr" posted. Basically, he was on your side.
Try not to be such a dip next time ok?
-
To get back to the original post on the effectiveness of anti aircraft guns I ask this question as I am not 100% sure of the answer. Maybe someone on here knows more or has a reference to the answer. It tried some quic research but found nothing concrete. We know American flak on carriers was radar controlled and used proximity fuses and the groun dbased 90mm used proximity fuses but I don think it was radar controlled. However, did the Germans, British, and Japanese use radar controlled guns and proximity fuzes on their naval air guns? From what I have found the answer is no. If at all only the Germans and British either used a proximity or an altimeter fuse for their AA. From wha I found the Japs didnt have those and if they did it was only altimeter fused. So are we balancing the affectiveness of our AA due to having only American carriers? Would it not be fair to have carriers from the other combatants? I know that has been asked before but think of maybe having a Japanese carrier that does not have radr controlled guns firing proximity fuzes?? Or maybe tie in the reduction in AA strats to the effectiveness of flak over your territory and your task groups??? I know it is not possible and many will not like the idea but I bring it up just to see if others are thinking along this same line and last but not least ask for input on others the subject.
BigKev
-
That chip on your should must get to hurting after awhile.
Had you read and COMPREHENDED what "warphoenix" said you might have realized he was taking a shot at at the stupid comment that "shermanjr" posted. Basically, he was on your side.
Try not to be such a dip next time ok?
Does it help that I was grinning when I wrote Bite me. I guess I better use more emoticons if I'm being an arse huh? :angel: