Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Crash Orange on April 27, 2011, 01:39:41 AM
-
Ship guns and SBs worked fine before, why did they have to go to WASD? It's a PITA plain and simple.
The new system also removes vital functionality from sea mode, as you have no visual cue to gauge how far you are traversing left and right. Anytime you're shooting in sea mode you're going to be zoomed in and the little gunsight circle is going to be WAY out of view above the top of your view. You used to have a target crosshair that in sea mode stayed at horizon level no matter how much you elevated the guns, now that is gone. Also, as your ship moved and your bearing to target changed, you could rotate the turret and use the crosshair (or mouse cursor) to keep the same impact point, but you can't do that now.
I would suggest just making ship guns and SBs the way they were before. They weren't broken, and unlike for GVs the new system adds nothing to naval gunnery in the game. If we have to have WASD, at least put the horizon-level crosshair (that moves with the guns, not the view) back in sea mode.
Also, is there a way to make ship and field guns use control mode 2 rather than mode 1? I'm mapping WASD to buttons in mode 2 for GVs, but that's not practical for flight mode. Ideally IMHO ship and field guns should default to mode 2 anyway.
-
I'm trying to work out the big guns, but they elude me thus far
-
first thing I did after the new update was to check out 8" gunnery. just completely perplexing. I have no idea how you're supposed to use that system against shipping.
btw: before someone tells me about sea mode I used to do alot of 8" gunning and had no problem laying fire onto ships 20k+ away.
-
Could be that ship guns were always sharing code with vehicles/tank turrets.
-
+1 to putting a visual marker out at eye level to indicate where the gun is pointing.
I would like the guns to be controlled by the joystick as before but keep the new reticule controllable by the mouse.
With the new reticule you can calculate the range to the target. Last night I was able to get first shot hits at 17K using it.
-
:noid
-
With the new reticule you can calculate the range to the target. Last night I was able to get first shot hits at 17K using it.
how did you do that?
-
how did you do that?
(Known ship length(yrds)/length measured in mils) *1000 = range to target (yards)
Broadside the carrier is 296 yards long, and I measured it to be 17 mils with the reticule; by applying the above equation the carrier should be 17,411 yards away. Elevate the guns to 17.4K and let loose. This is easiest to do in the DA where the ships are moving in the same direction parallel, just to see that it works.
This works if you get a broadside view of the carrier, if it is moving at some odd angle with relation to you the height of the carrier can be used instead of the length with some loss in precision and complication of leading the target.
With some more math you can calculate the heading of the carrier and figure out the lead you need for each shot.
In most cases it is quickest to just get a rough idea of the range and then guess at your lead.
-
(Known ship length(yrds)/length measured in mils) *1000 = range to target (yards)
Broadside the carrier is 296 yards long, and I measured it to be 17 mils with the reticule; by applying the above equation the carrier should be 17,411 yards away. Elevate the guns to 17.4K and let loose. This is easiest to do in the DA where the ships are moving in the same direction parallel, just to see that it works.
This works if you get a broadside view of the carrier, if it is moving at some odd angle with relation to you the height of the carrier can be used instead of the length with some loss in precision and complication of leading the target.
With some more math you can calculate the heading of the carrier and figure out the lead you need for each shot.
In most cases it is quickest to just get a rough idea of the range and then guess at your lead.
You mean it requires thinking, now?
Perish the thougtht
-
(Known ship length(yrds)/length measured in mils) *1000 = range to target (yards)
Broadside the carrier is 296 yards long, and I measured it to be 17 mils with the reticule; by applying the above equation the carrier should be 17,411 yards away. Elevate the guns to 17.4K and let loose. This is easiest to do in the DA where the ships are moving in the same direction parallel, just to see that it works.
This works if you get a broadside view of the carrier, if it is moving at some odd angle with relation to you the height of the carrier can be used instead of the length with some loss in precision and complication of leading the target.
With some more math you can calculate the heading of the carrier and figure out the lead you need for each shot.
In most cases it is quickest to just get a rough idea of the range and then guess at your lead.
^^^
I like the way this is going. An actual way to measure (better than guessing) the range of object from visual cues. :aok Okay, now yes this has got me thinking about tinkering around with a piece of cut out card board to make my very own version of the home made Mitchell bomb sight for ship guns. (Sweeet!!! )
-
Ship guns and SBs worked fine before, why did they have to go to WASD? It's a PITA plain and simple.
The new system also removes vital functionality from sea mode, as you have no visual cue to gauge how far you are traversing left and right. Anytime you're shooting in sea mode you're going to be zoomed in and the little gunsight circle is going to be WAY out of view above the top of your view. You used to have a target crosshair that in sea mode stayed at horizon level no matter how much you elevated the guns, now that is gone. Also, as your ship moved and your bearing to target changed, you could rotate the turret and use the crosshair (or mouse cursor) to keep the same impact point, but you can't do that now.
I would suggest just making ship guns and SBs the way they were before. They weren't broken, and unlike for GVs the new system adds nothing to naval gunnery in the game. If we have to have WASD, at least put the horizon-level crosshair (that moves with the guns, not the view) back in sea mode.
Also, is there a way to make ship and field guns use control mode 2 rather than mode 1? I'm mapping WASD to buttons in mode 2 for GVs, but that's not practical for flight mode. Ideally IMHO ship and field guns should default to mode 2 anyway.
Has the hyper zoom been removed from the 5" guns as well?
-
The sea mode was always a joke anyway. We don't need it fixed. I would rather see it replaced. The current system is very unfriendly to use, even before the controls were changed.
I know that direct is you aim the guns, good only for point blank shooting.
Land mode lets you click on the map, then adjust the point that shells hit the map. FYI, that is now done with WASD.
Sea mode the aim point moves with you, which isn't really good enough. We don't need a system that moves with us, but one that we can fine tune to stay on top of the enemy. Does the aim point move independently from your ship based on the average of your past corrections? Shouldn't it? Let me set the range, and then the enemy course. Then fine tune that aim point over time with corrections to left/right and over/under.
-
sea mode worked great, you had to adjust for the relative movement of the target (ie. leading like deflection shooting in aircraft). it was essentially like the directors used by most ships for most of WWII (unlike the completely unrealistic, ultra-modern radar guided system used by puffy ack ...). it took practice to get good at.
-
sea mode worked great, you had to adjust for the relative movement of the target (ie. leading like deflection shooting in aircraft). it was essentially like the directors used by most ships for most of WWII (unlike the completely unrealistic, ultra-modern radar guided system used by puffy ack ...). it took practice to get good at.
Yeah, but don't you have to set the same lead every time you fire?
Ok, I've done work on simulations before, like the Dreadnought Project website where the guy simulated a Dreyer fire control table. I've also done manual Torpedo Data Computer aiming in Silent Hunter games. Yes, I am one who likes that sort of thing.
You set range, speed, bearing, and course of the enemy, then adjust the numbers over time as you never get them right the first try. Ships have mechanical computers (about as big as a fridge) that have knobs you turn on them for those settings, and they give you a running solution to lead the enemy, and that is how the turrets are aimed.
1. Range. Use a Range finder. Those boxes on top of the ship are two horizontal periscopes with finely adjustable prisms. You create a right angle geometry solution with it (they do the math for you, don't worry). Bassically you see two images from each side of the range finder, then turn a knob to line them up so you only see one image. That gives you the range. Or you can go vertical with a stadimeter from the waterline to the top of the mast, but that requires you to know how tall the thing you are looking at is (you use a book made up before the war with every known ship in it).
They also have radar, which makes using the periscope system just a backup.
2. Bearing. Easy. Which way was the range finder pointed when you looked at it?
3. Course. Harder to figure out. Takes time. You can guess the first time based on what direction the enemy looks like is going. However, after having made several plots on a map sheet on the enemy ship with the range finder you can see his course that way.
4. Speed. Again, takes time. You guess at first, but after having plotted the enemy down on a map several times, preferably 3:15 minutes apart, you can figure out the speed. I say doing a plot every 3 minutes and 15 seconds is best, as you won't need to do math. Just measure the distance traveled in that time. If the guy moved 1500 yards/meters in that time, then he is going 15 knots. This might be redundant in AH as all ships go 35 knots no mater what.
-
oh I agree it could be modelled more accrately wrt to director dials etc, but as a very basic system it worked fine. the parallel with deflection shooting is pretty good, late war aircraft used lead computing gunsights which required similar inputs for size of target etc etc which we dont have modelled in AH.
-
You set range, speed, bearing, and course of the enemy, then adjust the numbers over time as you never get them right the first try. Ships have mechanical computers (about as big as a fridge) that have knobs you turn on them for those settings, and they give you a running solution to lead the enemy, and that is how the turrets are aimed.
[snip]
4. Speed. Again, takes time. You guess at first
Not in this game - ships always move at the same set speed, as you note. And that's the problem with completely realistic fire control for ship guns - like our hyper-accurate laser-guided bombsights, it makes it way too easy because the things that made it difficult in real life aren't modeled in the game. Our ships don't even roll! And then there's wind, air temp and pressure at different altitudes, which had to be guessed, age and other variables that affected powder performance, barrel wear... long-range ship gunnery is like shooting a rifle at 1000 yards: all sorts of things affect it that are small enough to be ignored at 100 yards, so it becomes a completely different skill.
I think the old sea mode was about right in difficulty - an experienced gunner could get hit rates well above historical ones even in controlled conditions, but the nature of this game kinda demands more decisive action in less time than IRL.
They also have radar, which makes using the periscope system just a backup.
I won't swear to this, but believe the radar was generally the backup for surface gunnery when visibility was good - the optical systems were more accurate, and at least in early and mid-war the crews were better trained at using the optics. Radar range finding was a huge advantage to the allies at night and in bad visibility, when they used it properly - but often they didn't, as at Savo Island. IIRC the Axis powers developed search radar but never developed radar fire control or rangefinding (I'd imagine anything concerning naval surface warfare was very low priority for the Germans after 1941).
-
I think a simplistic plotting system could work as a game. I don't like the old system. It only fires at an enemy ship accurately if you are in parallel courses.
To me a system should also have human errors in it. You should never be able to get it laser accurate. Mastering the human error part is what should separate the good players from the chumps.
I would rather a system work like this.
1. Similar to calibrating the bomb sight, set the initial range/bearing/course. Use a coincidence range finder (double image, line them up = range), bearing is automatic, but the most difficult would be course. You set that manually by guestimation on a dial. We don't need to set speed, as it is always 35 knots.
2. Enter in corrections based on shell splashes. The aim point is a moving point in space. I want the system to remember the corrections we put in and average them all together, then aim on that point, which is reset if you go back and do step 1 again.
I also think maps could use more fleets of just cruisers with escorts. This way the carrier pilots wouldn't complain too hard that we're taking their ship too close to the enemy so we can shell them. They could also be spawn points for LTV's.
-
double post.
-
:O I was never good at math...... Now I have a headache. :bhead
-
look at u dweebs talking geometry, angles, plotting n such. the old system was fine, the new systems boggles the mind. DOes HT think this will attract more newbs to stick around after 2 weeks??
-
Actually, we're still using the old system. It is just a bit harder to control as you have to use WASD to aim.
I was dreaming about a day when we could have something more accurate.
I do like the new gunsight with the mil dot scales. That math equation for figuring out range is useful now.
-
The recent changes almost seem geared toward steering the game toward button based play.
I wonder if a port to xbox or ps3 is in the works?
-
I messed with a shore battery a bit the other night and I think I get the general idea of how it is supposed to work but not having much of an indicator to rell me where the gun was pointing in relation to where I had the range indicator didn't work for me and I gave up.
It's much simpler to just up my 26's and go sink the ship from 13K. :D
-
Yeah, but I am one of those guys who dreams of having a virtual battlefield. All combatants in large scale warfare, all made of players.
Aces High is the closest thing to it right now that I have seen to that, including WW2 Online (noble attempt, but their game is even less user friendly then most games I have ever played, and I have played some odd ones).
I just keep suggesting things to get us closer to that goal. I would like a gunnery system for the cruiser that isn't too complicated, but gets the basics right for how it would have been done on ships in the 40's.