Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Gwjr2 on March 17, 2012, 01:31:55 AM
-
I don't mind getting hit here and there but tired of playing against your puffy ack HT, last 4 times near a cv 14 to 20k 1 puff boom while maneuvering, it been over modeled for 10 years and you know it! I come in here to fight against Humans not your over powered lazer 1shot BS :mad: too bad stats don't show it kind of makes it easy for you to say "its random,really does not happen that much" I took a 3 year break and came back to some really cool stuff but also same ole same ole.
-
its funny that I enjoy being shot at by player manned 88mm. a mind working against me with shell travel times and human reactions. no one enjoys or even likes the "challenge" of the ai insta spawn puffy flak box. the "coding" resource problem excuse flew for a few years but 10 years... my god ten years and its still that same neglected piece of code. when a problem persists this long just put a player behind the trigger and be done with it. everyone will be happier and the flak will actually be feared instead of just hated as the most annoying crap ever.
if its a matter of quantity slave the whole fleet to one player and give them control of the firing box with the same shell travel times as 88mm and firing fuzing. if more players man the guns divide the guns up equally. it would be amazing to have shell travel times like the manned 88mm and never see this bad flak box insta spawn code in action again.
it would actually be able to stop a set of 10k level bombers in its tracks making level bombing of fleets more hazerdous... omg.
-
lets have a history lesson on how the ai insta spawn puffy box came into being.
Hitech had coded some detailed great 88mm ai flak complete with actual shells. it worked great for a few 88mm guns and was great fun to dodge as it had the actual bullet travel time constraints like normal ai ack which could be dodged but could also kill you fair and square.
Enter the problem... carrier groups were added.
and above these shiny new carrier groups was a black cloud. a cloud in the form of that ai flak code that basically lost its mind with that many guns on a moving platform. the specifics of what went wrong with the nice detailed flak code are not entirely known. only the part visible to the players of it not firing at anything and just being a black cloud above the ship are what is remembered (by me).
so next patch or so quick and dirty all that detail and realism of the origional malfucntioning flak code is removed. not fixed. removed.
in its place is low detail no shell travel time. no prediction of current path or picking best target. A user front end based instant spawn box system that bases its spawn point on the players current position at all times regardless of change in altitude direction or speed with the small caveat that the spread changes based on speed and altitude. yet the box center is always the player no matter what. whats more to make it "fair" to bombers the box is larger and less concentrated so that in the end a level bomber has less to fear from the slot machine puffy flak statistically than a small maneuvering fighter.
its rather ironic that I built an entire terrain called ozkansas filled with tons of carriers and I never fly near carriers because i am so annoyed by the flak code alone. I even changed how many ships in the fleet when I built it thinking it might cut down on the awful annoying nature of it but even a carrier with no escorts annoys the hell out of me.
10 years. my god. is this even considered a problem that this LOW DETAIL AI CODE has never been replaced when the HIGH DETAIL AI CODE it took over for was replaced in a matter of weeks when carrier groups were added?
fix it please. its worth the effort. it is the biggest realism killer in game at the moment. nothing screams fake like that popcorn box.
its about detail, realism, high fidelity and fun isn't it? this ai flak code fails in all of these categories.
-
Very well put as I was just pissed lol
-
+1
-
I can't say I love that the puffy is innefective against straight and level buff formations or that there is a magic floor of 3K. Having said that, I do recall that the proximity fuzed ack was very accurate, like 1 in 45 hitting it's mark. I'm curious to know what our magic ack's probability to hit is.
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
-
yet the box center is always the player no matter what.
Whilst one would wish for the realism Fester describes...its seems to me that this alone could be fixed even on an FE based system.
-
10 years. my god. is this even considered a problem that this LOW DETAIL AI CODE
No not really. Sure they could code all the actual guns and rounds, etc, and say on average it kills you 5% of the time. Or they could use the current stastistical "let's draw a box around the player and randomly explode rounds" that kills you 5% of the time.
Either way you will die 5% of the time, the big difference is that in the first option your framerate will be a lot lower. Personally I'll take the second option.
-
Personally I have no trouble with puffy ack and I have rarely been shot down by it.
I don't KNOW how it works in the game other than how Hitech explained it recently in a thread. Fester is very good telling stories. Once an idea blooms in his mind it become HIS reality in which he uses as the basis of his arguments. While entertaining, they are only accurate in his mind. Hitech has said that the ack will target the closest guy over 3k to the cv. I try to keep someone between me and the CV at all times and have no trouble. Once that person is shot down it's time to move out. Long swooping moves that continually change me alt and direction with out blowing much "E" until I find another guy that gets closer taking the ack from me.
Can the ack be made better? heck yes! I think buffs should be hit far more easily, bigger target, steady slower speed, less maneuvering so easier to target. All factors that logic says they should be the one targeted, but a fighter escort will go down long before the buffs will.
-
No not really. Sure they could code all the actual guns and rounds, etc, and say on average it kills you 5% of the time. Or they could use the current stastistical "let's draw a box around the player and randomly explode rounds" that kills you 5% of the time.
Either way you will die 5% of the time, the big difference is that in the first option your framerate will be a lot lower. Personally I'll take the second option.
No, they couldn't. If the shells were modeled then pulling Gs would make you almost impossible to hit and being behind a hill or mountain would also offer protection. Currently all that increased Gs do is make the box a bit larger and hills and mountains have no effect.
I don't think Citabria is correct about bombers getting a bigger box though, I think they follow the same rules as everything else. The difference is that while 25 damage from a hit will take your Spitfire's wing off or kill your Bf109's engine, a B-17G will shrug it off because each damage area on the B-17G takes more than that and the next hit on the bomber is unlikely to be in the same place. Losing your wing or engine is a lot more dramatic and memorable than a "pwang" sound and a hole appearing on the wing.
-
Easy fix, Don't fly in puffy ack.
That's not so easy ....I've had puffy ack chase me to where I cant even see the enemy fleet anymore ...yet it's still firing .....and since there is no Icon on the map for enemy CV you can stumble into an enemy CV very easily ....the only sure way to avoid it is to never fly over water ....even that does not work ...you can be defending a base near the water and puffy can reach out and touch ya
Helm....out
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
Not easy. There are times i would be so far out from the CV that I can not see it. And still get hit or killed by it.
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
lets say the motor on your car starts puking oil and smoking. get it repaired? of course not. here's an easy fix, don't drive anymore. c'mon man, if you don't have something remotely intelligent to add, don't post. :rolleyes:
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
:bhead
fix the puffy ack please
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
I find this a most sensible solution.
I avoid fights anywhere near water* just because some stupid obnoxious CV comes around the corner, surrounded by ugly black flies, like some filthy Charles Schultz character.
When it's one of those damnable oceans and islands maps I just log off. It's a chance for me to catch up on C-SPAN 2 'Booknotes'.
*though I WILL check to see if there's any 5" skeet shooting opportunities
regards, TEShaw
-
the box of ack rather than individual shells isnt really the problem for me, its the instant tracking which needs fixing. and it could be a fairly easy fix. my suggestion (which simulates the real director operation):
1. target designated, target location A (xA,yA,zA) noted.
2. wait 10s, target new location B (xB,yB,zB) noted.
3. wait 10s, ack bursts at location C, predicted from A and B (xC,yC,zC) = (2xB-xA,2yB-yA,2zB-zA) and ack continues to burst along the predicted path.
etc.
-
I love puffy acks. They are so bastards!!!
Yestarday, I dove against a cv and I released my ords.
I sunk it. But the puffy (bastards) acks had the time to got ... my radiator !!!!
Generally, they reduce my plane in pieces. Not this time ... radiator was most sadic!
I ditched at 200 meters from the deck of the field!!!!!!
I was very slow, hit one little tree with left wing and I exploded.
:salute
-
Fly at 2900ft, when less then 10k from a CV pull straight up and see how long you live.
-
Puffy ack for cv groups seems relatively fair except: when it fires through mountains and gets hits.
-
Puffy ack only targets the closest player which creates openings for everyone else to attack. This is very unrealistic but I can live with it not targeting everyone in range.
-
If your flying along and puffy ack starts poping and you keep flying into it you should be shot down. Last night night flying from A82 to attack A 83 puffy ack started I turned around droped tp 6000 found the CV called position and went on to A83. Dont fly in puffy ack.
-
If your flying along and puffy ack starts poping and you keep flying into it you should be shot down.
agreed, but this is not the problem.
the problem is your flying along and puffy ack starts popping, so you make evasive maneuvers that even the most advanced WWII directors could not track, and you still get shot down.
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl I love serving up a heaping helping of PuffPie....muahahahahaahha! :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
agreed, but this is not the problem.
the problem is your flying along and puffy ack starts popping, so you make evasive maneuvers that even the most advanced WWII directors could not track, and you still get shot down.
That's not a problem, it's a random hit. If it happened every time it would be a problem.
-
maybe increase alt range to 4,000ft. or not.
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl I love serving up a heaping helping of PuffPie....muahahahahaahha! :rofl :rofl :rofl
This clown is just too crazy. :devil
-
Yes, avoid CVs. That is the easy answer. The real answer is the programming is very wrong and needs to be fixed.
+1 a few times over on this.
Boo
-
Yes, avoid CVs. That is the easy answer. The real answer is the programming is very wrong and needs to be fixed.
+1 a few times over on this.
Boo
+1
:aok
I wouldn't claim the programming to be wrong it just needs a little tweaking in the , instant 1st ping hits you from 20k away at 3.01k doing 400mph+ in a fighter.
don't get me started on the whole chase a bad guy and you take all the pings. I thought Killshooter was turned on!!
-
Three years absent cause of the puffy? That's some powerful ack.
-
My absolute biggest complaint about puffy ack is the distance that it can get you from. Just turning down the range of puffy to about half of what it is would go a helluva long way to fixing the problem. I hate getting nailed by puffy when I am not even trying to go near the CV or attack it in any sort of way.
-
Has anyone from HTC ever posted in a puffyack thread? Just wondering-- I'd love to hear why they coded ack the way they did.
On a side note, when flying above a CV offline, underneath 3000 feet, I'm taking craploads of small ack, but there's STILL loads being fired at the planes.
-
maybe reduce the range by half and double intensity and accuracy. I'd like to see an end to the 2,999 foot buff formations carpet bombing the CV's.
-
Layers and timing is important.
When at very long range in real life the first few puffy acks would be a full click off and almost random. The longer you stayed on course the closer it would get. Stay on one path too long, damage.
At some range this begins to change. The ack is more intense and "first" shots are much closer. At some point, consider proximity rounds the ack is very likely going to damage the plane. This would likely go well below 3,000 feet alt, though you would need to be within 3.0 icon range?
And the timing...beyond icon range, climb to 3,001 feet and instant ack. Those rounds would need to travel at well over 10,000 mph to get there that quick. Not quite actual muzzle velocity, and again first shots are going to be off by a good margin.
Just some realism is all.
Boo
-
Puffy ack only targets the closest player which creates openings for everyone else to attack. This is very unrealistic but I can live with it not targeting everyone in range.
Yup...never be the closest, never be the highest...that thought goes through my mind when I'm in a fight NEAR a cv (I never vocalize it..I'm not TOTALLY stupid...)....let some other poor slob be the AI target
-
Yup...never be the closest, never be the highest...that thought goes through my mind when I'm in a fight NEAR a cv (I never vocalize it..I'm not TOTALLY stupid...)....let some other poor slob be the AI target
That's how I've always behaved around them too. If there isn't anybody between me and the CV I'm diving at 60 degrees away from it until I break Angels 3 or until someone else udecides to move closer to it.
-
That's not a problem, it's a random hit. If it happened every time it would be a problem.
the distribution of puffy within its box may be random, but there is nothing random about the tracking - whatever you do the box is always centred exactly on your aircraft. its the precise realtime tracking which is the problem, and the reason why AH puffy is massively more capable than WWII systems. that an evading fighter ever gets hit is a problem.
-
My opinion is that AH is a flight combat simulator, and the puffy ack is at the wrong end of realistic. I absolutly hate running into a CV as I know that my likelyhood of getting blasted is high, based on a random hit box. My expectations from a HTC product are higher, so I also agree that this should be updated please.
-
When at very long range in real life the first few puffy acks would be a full click off and almost random.
What is your basis for this statement? In real life puffy ack sometimes hit fighters at 20k with the first shot. In AH it mostly misses but sometimes hits fighters with the first shot.
the distribution of puffy within its box may be random, but there is nothing random about the tracking - whatever you do the box is always centred exactly on your aircraft. its the precise realtime tracking which is the problem, and the reason why AH puffy is massively more capable than WWII systems. that an evading fighter ever gets hit is a problem.
Since the ack doesn't shoot the center of the box I don't see the problem. You want to never get hit while evading. That would be completely unrealistic.
-
Of the thousands of puffy ack that I have had go off near the aircraft I've been flying and only the a dozen or legit damaging hits, I will take the odds when flying in to puffy ack.
The odds are in the favor of the player 10 fold.
I think this is a complaint by people not able to understand what the odds are.
-
Puffyack is a true pain.
Many-a-time the first sign of it being in the area is the immediate oiling of the engine.
Many-a-time while turning in evation 3 ping in a row end the flight.
It's the same for all of us, like our collective lack of mirrors, so HTC will pass it off as a "Design choise".
-
Of the thousands of puffy ack that I have had go off near the aircraft I've been flying and only the a dozen or legit damaging hits, I will take the odds when flying in to puffy ack.
The odds are in the favor of the player 10 fold.
I think this is a complaint by people not able to understand what the odds are.
For heaven's sake - keep these people away from Las Vegas, Atlantic City and the Riviera!
-
Easy fix, Dont fly in puffy ack.
In soviet russia, puffy ack fly to you.
-
In soviet russia, puffy ack fly to you.
lol
-
(http://dansbane.com/images/Ack-Ack_Interference.jpg)
(http://www.cs.miami.edu/~geoff/Seminars/HowToGiveATalk/Ack.JPG)
(http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/85000/ACK-ACK-ACK--85293.jpg)
(http://georgetownmetropolitan.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/ack.jpg)
-
I love how the puffy cant hit a buff formation 5k over head. Yet same puffy can kill friendly 262 trying to stop said formation from sinking your cv, 8 sectors in no mans land. :rolleyes: Try turning your graphics all the way down and you'll see a puffy box in the sky around bombers. Notice how it doesn't come within a certain radius of the bomber as it passes thru lol. Could be wrong but thats what it looks like. :rofl
-
I want to get hit by puffy while evading it in a fighter almost never, just like RL. say 1 in 1,000,000 rounds.
not, for example, like 2 out of my first 3 sorties this tour. while evading, at 350+, at ~14k, flying in a zig/zag pattern, constantly changing my alt, flying at oblique angles to the CV group, right at the very edge of puffy range, while trying to get out of the puffy range asap.
if anyone think thats realistic, then they plainly do not understand how WWII directors worked, or the resolution of their radars, or how to interpret the RL hit stats.
-
I want to get hit by puffy while evading it in a fighter almost never, just like RL. say 1 in 1,000,000 rounds.
not, for example, like 2 out of my first 3 sorties this tour. while evading, at 350+, at ~14k, flying in a zig/zag pattern, constantly changing my alt, flying at oblique angles to the CV group, right at the very edge of puffy range, while trying to get out of the puffy range asap.
if anyone think thats realistic, then they plainly do not understand how WWII directors worked, or the resolution of their radars, or how to interpret the RL hit stats.
Methinks your first two sentences disqualifies you from claims of realism. It's as extreme as what you're protesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37Mjbw0GBog
-
your post reads as "you're wrong" with a link to a 1h documentary.
can you be more specific?
edit: for example, explain exactly how a WWII director system could track and fire accurately on a fighter as described in my 2nd para.
-
Getting hit 2 out of 3 times this tour already doesn't indicate a problem but I'm sure it's frustrating for you. It's in the nature of random events that they will not occur regularly. When you flip a coin it doesn't alternate heads and tails. The average from 100 sorties would be a better indicator.
-
your post reads as "you're wrong" with a link to a 1h documentary.
can you be more specific?
edit: for example, explain exactly how a WWII director system could track and fire accurately on a fighter as described in my 2nd para.
Your post reads as 'I think it should be damned near impossible for naval AAA to hit my fighter but I'm too damned lazy to actually watch historical footage without being led by the hand.'
Can do. 42:25 in. 50:15 in.
Bottom line - getting hit by flak is not a 1:1,000,000 chance. Less so if you're going in alone. This doesn't have to be a case of the entire aaa of a single ship being directed with 100% precision from a single director. It doesn't even have to be a case of individual batteries directing themselves with 50% precision. You get enough metal and explosive material in quantity around your evading fighter and the odds aren't even a 1000 to 1 in your favor. Wanna try to meet reality closer to .... well .... where it lives?
-
yes absolutely, it should be nearly impossible for WWII naval AAA to hit a single fighter moving at high speed and evading (using his knowledge of how that radar and tracking computer operates) at 14,000' at the very edge of the gun's range.
I'd say watching some newsreel/propaganda footage which doesnt even mention radar, directors or their operation and effectiveness is about as lazy as you can get in terms of research. otoh when I smelt something fishy about the puffy modelling I dug out every document I could find about late war naval AAA, VT fuses etc and learnt how directors were designed and operated, likewise radar and their limitations, and of course all the available stats. I now have a pretty good idea of how it should work.
my bottom line, from the research ive done, is that if you fly on exactly the same vector for 20s there is a good chance you should get puffy ack around you. if you keep going on that vector, the chances of you taking damage rise. if you're flying towards the radar, the chances rise further.
if you do even the simplest evasives (and we are talking out of effective manual tracking range here, so no kentucky windage) there is no way you can be tracked. its just impossible given the resolution of the radar and the consequent operating delay from the director.
-
what is sure is that the puffy is failing its primary purpose : defending the task group
-
[quote author=RTHolmes link=topic=330605.msg4334154#msg4334154 date=1332032554
...if you do even the simplest evasives (and we are talking out of effective manual tracking range here, so no kentucky windage) there is no way you can be tracked. its just impossible given the resolution of the radar and the consequent operating delay from the director.
[/quote]
I'm not disagreeing about the tracking but getting the occasional hit doesn't require accurate tracking and maneuvering in AH does make you less likely to get hit.
-
FLS the occasional hit is fine its the 80%+ hit rate that's annoying, and it seems to me if your in a perk ride your as good as dead.
Arlo go play with the little kiddies now, since you have nothing here to add. For the record it wasn't puffy ack that kept me away it was people like you in the community.
-
from the research ive done, is that if you fly on exactly the same vector for 20s there is a good chance you should get puffy ack around you. if you keep going on that vector, the chances of you taking damage rise. if you're flying towards the radar, the chances rise further.
if you do even the simplest evasives (and we are talking out of effective manual tracking range here, so no kentucky windage) there is no way you can be tracked. its just impossible given the resolution of the radar and the consequent operating delay from the director.
Well then untwist yer panties for half a second and share your intensive research instead of throwing out your 1:100,000,000 chance of getting hit by the entire complement of naval task force AAA firing at your single inbound aircraft claim and having a ball-eyed hissy fit about how unfair AHII is to you. I can stand to be corrected if you can stand to do it. :D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A tachymetric anti-aircraft fire control system refers to a method of generating target position, speed, direction, and rate of target range change, by computing these parameters directly from measured data.[1] The target's range, height and observed bearing data is fed into a computer which uses the measured change in range, height and bearing from successive observations of the target to compute the true range, direction, speed and rate of climb or descent of the target. The computer then calculates the required elevation and bearing of the AA guns to hit the target based upon its predicted movement.
The computers were at first entirely mechanical analog computers utilizing gears and levers to physically perform the calculations of protractors and slide rules, using moving graph charts and markers to provide an estimate of speed and position. Variation of target position over time was accomplished with constant-drive motors to run the mechanical simulation.
The term tachymetric should more properly be spelled as "tachometric"[2] which comes from the Greek "takhos" = speed, and "metric" = measure, hence tachometric, to measure speed.
An alternative, non-tachometric, gonometric [3][4] method of AA prediction is for specially trained observers to manually estimate the course and speed of the target and feed these estimates, along with the measured bearing and range data, into the AA fire control computer which then generates change of bearing rate, and change of range data, and passes it back to the observer, typically by a "follow the pointer", indicator of predicted target elevation and bearing or by remote power control of the observer's optical instruments.[5] The observer then corrects the estimate, creating a feed back loop, by comparing the observed target motion against the computer generated motion of his optical sights. When the sights stay on the target, the estimated speed, range, and change of rate data can be considered correct.[6]
An example of tachometric AA fire control would be the USN Mk 37 system. The early RN High Angle Control System (HACS) I through IV and the early Fuze Keeping Clock (FKC) were examples of non-tachometric systems.[7]
By 1940 the RN was adding a Gyro Rate Unit (GRU)[8] which fed bearing and elevation data to a Gyro Rate Unit Box computer (GRUB), which also received ranging data to then directly calculate target speed and direction, and this tachometric data was then fed directly to the HACS fire control computer, converting the HACS into a tachometric system.[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachymetric_anti-aircraft_fire_control_system
http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/research/tr/tr223.pdf - specifically pages 10 -22 aaa (page 16 on specifically for naval aaa)
http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/A/n/Antiaircraft.htm
http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/antiaircraft_action_summary_wwii.htm#III (page 9)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The above would be a good example of sharing info regarding subject matter instead of wetting ones pants and shaking a virtual fist or giving a virtual glare. :cool:
-
Arlo go play with the little kiddies now, since you have nothing here to add. For the record it wasn't puffy ack that kept me away it was people like you in the community.
Huh. I've added more than you here. All I've seen from you is hurt feelings and skin thin enough to rupture at the sight of a puffy burst. :D
-
Unless AH puffy projectiles are radar-controlled missiles, the ones alREADY in the air oughtn't be able to change course to intersect your new heading
-
Puffy ack only targets the closest player which creates openings for everyone else to attack. This is very unrealistic but I can live with it not targeting everyone in range.
True now after hitech fixed an epic bug a 6 months ago.
-
The above would be a good example of sharing info regarding subject matter instead of wetting ones pants and shaking a virtual fist or giving a virtual glare. :cool:
all good sources :aok
another discussion about this with some pics: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,291851.msg3722883.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,291851.msg3722883.html)
so now you've had a look at the Mk 37 operation what do you think?
-
True now after hitech fixed an epic bug a 6 months ago.
Which one would that be?
-
Which one would that be?
There was a bug that was causing the puffy ack to shoot at more than just the closest aircraft.
-
all good sources :aok
another discussion about this with some pics: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,291851.msg3722883.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,291851.msg3722883.html)
so now you've had a look at the Mk 37 operation what do you think?
I think a lone enemy aircraft had a pretty good chance of being shot down. Even if it was stunt flying toward the fleet. Multiple inbounds? Each had a better chance but not to the degree you've claimed.
-
There was a bug that was causing the puffy ack to shoot at more than just the closest aircraft.
That's a bug?
-
That's a bug?
I think he means that the CVs were putting up max ack towards EVERY fighter, regardless of distance.
-
I think he means that the CVs were putting up max ack towards EVERY fighter, regardless of distance.
Ah!
-
FLS the occasional hit is fine its the 80%+ hit rate that's annoying, and it seems to me if your in a perk ride your as good as dead.
Puffy doesn't hit me that often but I'm sure I'd be annoyed if it did. I do believe you're exaggerating for effect. :D
-
I think he means that the CVs were putting up max ack towards EVERY fighter, regardless of distance.
That was never a bug. But it could on rare occasion shoot at more then 1.
HiTech
-
That was never a bug. But it could on rare occasion shoot at more then 1.
HiTech
Oh, my bad.
-
+1
-
You can't get rid of puffyack. That's warbeasts squad.
-
That was never a bug. But it could on rare occasion shoot at more then 1.
HiTech
My mistake. :angel:
-
Getting hit 2 out of 3 times this tour already doesn't indicate a problem but I'm sure it's frustrating for you. It's in the nature of random events that they will not occur regularly. When you flip a coin it doesn't alternate heads and tails. The average from 100 sorties would be a better indicator.
There is nothing random about it. I get every time the magic flak box targets me, usually 2-3 times, and more than half the time I get hit on the first salvo. Anyone who actually flys knows this. It's been a joke for years and apparently will never be changed. So I guess we should all just run and hide from CVs with Bolt. I'm sure there's a radar that needs porked somewhere anyway.
-
There is nothing random about it. I get every time the magic flak box targets me, usually 2-3 times, and more than half the time I get hit on the first salvo. Anyone who actually flys knows this. It's been a joke for years and apparently will never be changed. So I guess we should all just run and hide from CVs with Bolt. I'm sure there's a radar that needs porked somewhere anyway.
You're just special. It's random for everybody else.
-
There is nothing random about it. I get every time the magic flak box targets me, usually 2-3 times, and more than half the time I get hit on the first salvo. Anyone who actually flys knows this. It's been a joke for years and apparently will never be changed. So I guess we should all just run and hide from CVs with Bolt. I'm sure there's a radar that needs porked somewhere anyway.
Sheet, Slash. I always took you along when we were headed into enema fleet ack cause you was my ack magnet. I shoulda bought you more beer. Now, when and where do I correct that oversight? :D
-
You're just special. It's random for everybody else.
Cute. Bs, but cute.
-
It is random but it's probability of hitting you is too high.
-
<-------------One shot Killed by my own puffy tonight chasing a bomber
-
When the Justice League says it's broken u know it's broken.
/thread
-
Cute. Bs, but cute.
Post your film, unless you just make stuff up.
-
Oh, I'm IN
:cheers: Oz
-
It is random but it's probability of hitting you is too high.
After been hit by the 1rst round from the cv @ beyond visual distance I fully agree with this statement.
I do not know how probability changes with distance to target, but in a real world shells wont travel exactly the way you want with wind direction/speed changes every 1000 feet.
-
After been hit by the 1rst round from the cv @ beyond visual distance I fully agree with this statement.
I do not know how probability changes with distance to target, but in a real world shells wont travel exactly the way you want with wind direction/speed changes every 1000 feet.
So in the real world that would have to be a random hit and not something that happens every time? Just like it's modeled in AH?
-
like quoted, "but it's probability of hitting you is too high"
-
like quoted, "but it's probability of hitting you is too high"
While the probability to do any sort of damage on bomber is too low (is it even possible with the crazy hit points the bombers have got?). Also I love the friendly fire on puff ack :aok :rofl
-
<-------------One shot Killed by my own puffy tonight chasing a bomber
Getting killed by the flak shooting at the enemy doth not prove the ack is coded to laser accuracy.
-
Never been bothered too much by CV ack and I have been shot down in bombers by it. What some people think is CV ack is a good 5" gunner. :uhoh They are deadly to attack aircraft. Change course and Alt. often to throw off ack. Killed many a CV that didn't have high cap or a good gunner.
-
All this whining I wish we had the real deal ack for a day, specifically the american navy naval upgrades of 1945 (What we have now is a 1941 type setup with minimum ack)
Put into perspectives:
(http://steeljawscribe.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Enterprise-under-attack-26Oct.jpg)
(http://www.fortunecity.com/millenium/aylesbury/196/carrier-attacked-9-7-44.jpg)
If you look at the AAA upgrades of american naval ships from 1942 to 1945, everyone of them pretty much became a floating AAA battery packed with as many guns as possible,
Light cruisers were remodeled to become floating 5/6 inch gun batteries.
I would much rather fly through aces high ack then try to fly through historical ack for 1 day.
-
See rule #4
-
In other words there won't be any film. :rofl
-
In other words there won't be any film. :rofl
Film of what, puffy ack hitting airplanes? Would that be some sort of a smoking gun? Here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8gHii2CHes&context=C4ba35c9ADvjVQa1PpcFMTzYwq5pz9CUGsKiA67SOKkWwnmYfjgcM=
-
want a film of my plane loosing radiator as I get to 3001 feet altitude?
-
Film of what, puffy ack hitting airplanes? Would that be some sort of a smoking gun? Here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8gHii2CHes&context=C4ba35c9ADvjVQa1PpcFMTzYwq5pz9CUGsKiA67SOKkWwnmYfjgcM=
The film that shows somebody getting hit all the time instead of randomly. :aok
-
The film that shows somebody getting hit all the time instead of randomly. :aok
If the lethality was set at 90%, you would get hit "all the time" and it would also be "random". I don't understand your point.
A good experiment to do would be to fly over the carrier for given periods of time and record the data, how many times did it hit you, what damage did it record, etc. Then with enough data points conclude what the chance to be hit is per second of time in the ack range.
-
If the lethality was set at 90%, you would get hit "all the time" and it would also be "random". I don't understand your point.
A good experiment to do would be to fly over the carrier for given periods of time and record the data, how many times did it hit you, what damage did it record, etc. Then with enough data points conclude what the chance to be hit is per second of time in the ack range.
that's a mission for super snail!!!
(http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/174720_97337493217_216131_n.jpg)
-
Getting hit 2 out of 3 times this tour already doesn't indicate a problem but I'm sure it's frustrating for you. It's in the nature of random events that they will not occur regularly. When you flip a coin it doesn't alternate heads and tails. The average from 100 sorties would be a better indicator.
If the lethality was set at 90%, you would get hit "all the time" and it would also be "random". I don't understand your point.
A good experiment to do would be to fly over the carrier for given periods of time and record the data, how many times did it hit you, what damage did it record, etc. Then with enough data points conclude what the chance to be hit is per second of time in the ack range.
I see we agree about that. ;)
-
I see we agree about that. ;)
I don't see how something that 99% of the player base hates can be good for business.
-
I am not a huge fan of the carrier ack system, there are several aspects that I thank could be improved.
However, I also think most (not all) of the complaints about it, are overly dramatic "woe is me" and lack any real points for discussion.
Here are some real points to discuss (and/or lobby for change) or just to think about. They are not all historically accurate but are focused on an attempt to improve gameplay.
1.) Puffy ack should NEVER be able to shoot around mountains. There has to be a reasonable way to run some sort of collision detection, maybe not for every shell but something will be better than nothing. Perhaps just a check to the bottom corners of the box once every five seconds or so?
2.) There are 26 five inch guns that make up the carrier puffy ack barrage, if a shell randomly passes you outside the proximity range you never know it was there. So it is impossible to say from the players end that you were hit by the first round. Think about it, at any one time there could be a maximum of 26 shells within the box around the closest plane that's a lot of lead with proximity fuses in a relatively small airspace.
3.) The current ack system has no way of determining who's really the biggest threat to the ships. If you're chasing/furballing a guy back near his CV at 3001 feet and 5k out from the ship, and a set of buffs is inbound at 10,000 feet and 7k out guess who is going to get targeted? I think the pufy ack should run some sort of friendly proximity check to the target it see if the target is possibly being fought by a friendly if so then it should select the next farther target and repeat the process. If there is no friendly within 1.5k the the ack should fire at the target.
4.) As I understand the current system, the ack only fires at one target at a time. I think that the ack system should run 2 boxes if there are multiple targets, if it's possible. I suspect it may not be feasible due to performance issues but at least it should be discussed. This would cut in half the number of shells within the box of any one target (provided you're not the only one) and slightly improve your chances of survival.
Dale and the rest of the crew at HTC seem very willing to work on things if you discuss them in a rational manner. So if you really want to see a change let's dial back the drama and focus on specific points.
-
(http://rlv.zcache.com/we_are_the_99_tshirt-p235907988095270820z85l1_500.jpg)
Puffy Ack oppresses all but the elite! :D
-
If the lethality was set at 90%, you would get hit "all the time" and it would also be "random". I don't understand your point.
A good experiment to do would be to fly over the carrier for given periods of time and record the data, how many times did it hit you, what damage did it record, etc. Then with enough data points conclude what the chance to be hit is per second of time in the ack range.
As a CM who spent many hours testing this, I can tell you that changing the lethality setting DOES NOT change the frequency of getting hit, only the amount of damage that is done. and even at low settings like 30% you can and will get first ping pilot kills. Now this testing was done over a year ago but I don't think anythings changed significantly.
-
Film of what, puffy ack hitting airplanes? Would that be some sort of a smoking gun? Here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8gHii2CHes&context=C4ba35c9ADvjVQa1PpcFMTzYwq5pz9CUGsKiA67SOKkWwnmYfjgcM=
Yeah thats it in a nutshell really, and its not even like it only happens once in a blue moon. Factor in the time you spent trying to get to a fight and it just makes the game seem like a big waste of time, its hard enough to find decent action without the game conspiring against you :mad:
-
As a CM who spent many hours testing this, I can tell you that changing the lethality setting DOES NOT change the frequency of getting hit, only the amount of damage that is done. and even at low settings like 30% you can and will get first ping pilot kills. Now this testing was done over a year ago but I don't think anythings changed significantly.
Still very true. AvA typically has a 25% (of the MA 100% standard) setting. You get pinged all the time, you'll even see holes appear in the wings, but you won't take damage (from most pings).
It's very pleasing in a way. The angst of being in the ack is still there, but the flight-ending nature of puffy ack is not.
- oldman
-
As a CM who spent many hours testing this, I can tell you that changing the lethality setting DOES NOT change the frequency of getting hit, only the amount of damage that is done. and even at low settings like 30% you can and will get first ping pilot kills. Now this testing was done over a year ago but I don't think anythings changed significantly.
Yeah I figured that, I wasn't talking about lethality, just frequency. So in a nutshell, you'd be able to figure out the probability of being hit per unit of time flying through the puffy ack. Or hitech could just tell us.
-
I don't see how something that 99% of the player base hates can be good for business.
Quit being so dramatic. It's only been 10 years, these things take time.
-
I do not like puffy but it is part of the game. My wish is that the cv could not get close enough for puffy to be over a base. Now it will shoot at you when your way inland. One time I got so mad I took a piece of paper out of the printer and tore it in half.
-
One time I got so mad I took a piece of paper out of the printer and tore it in half.
scary stuff :cry
-
actually, i remember for a while it was really weak, and they patched it and made it more effective about a year ago...
-
whats funny is if a player was able to do what the ai does on this one piece of code they would be banned from the game for cheating.
and that there in is the real rub is there are not realistic constraints on the system to approximate reality of the system it represents.
the end result is the ai bends the rules to arrive at an end result that was not earned but manufactured without regard to projectile travel time and distance that the projectiles must travel to arrive at an end result that happens instantaneously.
why does every other single bullet and round in this game go through such agonizing balistic modelling while this one is allowed to persist without having to do the legwork of every other gun in the game?
no game gets a pass on this. not offline games and especially not online ones. any time a player recognizes an ai system that blatently does not follow the rules that a player would it diminishes the quality of play dramatically whenever things like this are encountered.
-
whats funny is if a player was able to do what the ai does on this one piece of code they would be banned from the game for cheating.
True. And if they were caught firing all of the ai controlled fleet aaa, I would expect them to be. :neener:
why does every other single bullet and round in this game go through such agonizing balistic modelling while this one is allowed to persist without having to do the legwork of every other gun in the game?
I would venture (as someone who has no coding experience in this game or any other) that it's because we're not talking about one bullet, one shell, one puffy burst.
-
I do not like puffy but it is part of the game. My wish is that the cv could not get close enough for puffy to be over a base. Now it will shoot at you when your way inland. One time I got so mad I took a piece of paper out of the printer and tore it in half.
Well I hope you recycle.
-
Well I hope you recycle.
Yaknow - Shuffler really is hitting on something more significant. Destroyers being able to plow beaches, being it.
-
so whan a players b29 formation fires every gun directed by one player the code has to forget the rules of the ballistics system based on the quantity of guns being fired? same goes for a p47 or b25? numbers should not be a valid excuse.
take into account the advances of modern computers over ten years when arguing that fixing the 10 yr old ai puffy ack code to operate with actual physics is beyond the ability of even low end current computing power.
the real question is not should it be updated to somthing realistic. the question is will it?
-
whats funny is if a player was able to do what the ai does on this one piece of code they would be banned from the game for cheating.
and that there in is the real rub is there are not realistic constraints on the system to approximate reality of the system it represents.
the end result is the ai bends the rules to arrive at an end result that was not earned but manufactured without regard to projectile travel time and distance that the projectiles must travel to arrive at an end result that happens instantaneously.
why does every other single bullet and round in this game go through such agonizing balistic modelling while this one is allowed to persist without having to do the legwork of every other gun in the game?
no game gets a pass on this. not offline games and especially not online ones. any time a player recognizes an ai system that blatently does not follow the rules that a player would it diminishes the quality of play dramatically whenever things like this are encountered.
And thats before you even factor in friendly aircraft in the path of flak mountains, if the gun firing can actually fire ie the ships in the way. Would real flak start firing at a con thats in a dogfight with a friendly in real life?
-
so whan a players b29 formation fires every gun directed by one player the code has to forget the rules of the ballistics system based on the quantity of guns being fired? same goes for a p47 or b25? numbers should not be a valid excuse.
take into account the advances of modern computers over ten years when arguing that fixing the 10 yr old ai puffy ack code to operate with actual physics is beyond the ability of even low end current computing power.
the real question is not should it be updated to somthing realistic. the question is will it?
B-29s aren't equipped with 5" aaa mounts with proximity fused warheads. That would be unrealistic poor modeling.
-
why does every other single bullet and round in this game go through such agonizing balistic modelling while this one is allowed to persist without having to do the legwork of every other gun in the game?
That is an interesting point. Diving onto a field or carrier group, you've got all those guns calculating line of sight and lead on you, but with it being a puffy gun, processing power to calculate what those guns are already doing, plus a range component before it bursts, suddenly becomes an issue?
I don't get it.
Wiley.
-
And thats before you even factor in friendly aircraft in the path of flak mountains, if the gun firing can actually fire ie the ships in the way. Would real flak start firing at a con thats in a dogfight with a friendly in real life?
For the equipment and time frame we are talking about the simple answer is yes, the carrier group would fire on the target once it was in range no matter what. It was the FDO's responsibility in the CiC to direct the fighter engagement and warn them when they approached the AA barrier. If a friendly fighter chose to continue the pursuit into the AA barrier they likely to be hit.
Just be thankful the IFF in game is tremendously more effective than what happened historically.
-
Yaknow - Shuffler really is hitting on something more significant. Destroyers being able to plow beaches, being it.
Another long time issue. I'm sure some HTC cheerleader will be along to explain why it's perfectly fine.
-
Another long time issue. I'm sure some HTC cheerleader will be along to explain why it's perfectly fine.
What about those rare souls that don't have issues with the ack lethality but do with the hover-fleets? :D
Hey .... 6 yrs dude. Beer? New wife supports my AHer buddy carousing. :aok
(Bear brings up the 2006 con often - chuckle)
-
What about those rare souls that don't have issues with the ack lethality but do with the hover-fleets? :D
Hey .... 6 yrs dude. Beer? New wife supports my AHer buddy carousing. :aok
(Bear brings up the 2006 con often - chuckle)
I'll have to bring Changeup with me. He might buy us dinner.
-
I'll have to bring Changeup with me. He might buy us dinner.
Only if I can tip.
-
why does every other single bullet and round in this game go through such agonizing balistic modelling while this one is allowed to persist without having to do the legwork of every other gun in the game?
Because the computer really doesn't care how exact the bullet looks when it leaves it's gun. And because player maned guns have this thing called a Brain making choices where to aim it. And the computer never complains when the persons brain controlling it doesn't keep up with what the computer is displaying.
HiTech
-
Because the computer really doesn't care how exact the bullet looks when it leaves it's gun. And because player maned guns have this thing called a Brain making choices where to aim it. And the computer never complains when the persons brain controlling it doesn't keep up with what the computer is displaying.
HiTech
And to add. Computer doesn't whine when it hits, or misses :aok
<S> Oz
-
Because the computer really doesn't care how exact the bullet looks when it leaves it's gun. And because player maned guns have this thing called a Brain making choices where to aim it. And the computer never complains when the persons brain controlling it doesn't keep up with what the computer is displaying.
HiTech
How is that any different from what the 37mm on the boats/fields do now though? Aren't they doing the same thing as the puffy would need to do if it was modeled as a gun, with the exception of the proximity/range fuse?
Wiley.
-
See rule #4
-
Hitech Creations: So, what percentage/ratio do you think is fair?
Player: 1:100,000,000 chance of getting hit by fleet ack if I turn my fighter every three seconds.
Hitech Creations: Bwahahahahahahaha!
:D
Just make an additional layer of water 'depth.' No Task Forces within ack range of the beach. No beach plowing. :aok
-
It would actually be my wish that there was no AI in the game at all. If a player isn't manning the item then it does not work.
No AI.
No Buff formations.
No field ack.
No ship ack.
Please keep in mind that I am however, stupid.
-
Another long time issue. I'm sure some HTC cheerleader will be along to explain why it's perfectly fine.
I got your HTC cheerleaders right here. :rock
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_wFAbPxKCw
-
Hitech Creations: So, what percentage/ratio do you think is fair?
Player: 1:100,000,000 chance of getting hit by fleet ack if I turn my fighter every three seconds.
Hitech Creations: Bwahahahahahahaha!
where are the quotes you're paraphrasing? because I havent seen anything like this.
I'd guess that given unlimited resources HT would haul the puffy modelling up to the excellent standards of the other modelling in the game, its the only blatant jury-rig I can think of when it comes to the aerial aspect of the game.
its a shame because the modelling of the small and medium calibre AAA seems pretty good to me, historical evasion tactics work pretty much as they should do. If I'm sloppy with my attack, field/town/boat auto ack will probably hit me, if I do it right it probably wont.
I wonder why the puffy doesnt use a tweaked version of the same tracking code as the rest of the ack, although still using the box rather than individually modelled rounds. this would be much better than what we have for not much recoading :headscratch:
-
In the previous puffy ack thread a few months ago Hitech mentioned looking at changing it to real time tracking and making it more accurate.
-
I do not like puffy but it is part of the game. My wish is that the cv could not get close enough for puffy to be over a base. Now it will shoot at you when your way inland. One time I got so mad I took a piece of paper out of the printer and tore it in half.
Well I hope you recycle.
or maybe he just ran out of toilet paper, and likes it rough ;)
-
It would actually my wish that there was no AI in the game at all. If a player isn't manning the item then it does not work.
No AI.
No Buff formations.
No field ack.
No ship ack.
Please keep in mind that I am however, stupid.
i dont think so, it makes perfect sense to me.. make everything manned.. if nobody's manning it, it doesn't shoot..
-
i dont think so, it makes perfect sense to me.. make everything manned.. if nobody's manning it, it doesn't shoot..
the vtards heaven :)
-
I'd guess that given unlimited resources HT would haul the puffy modelling up to the excellent standards of the other modelling in the game, its the only blatant jury-rig I can think of when it comes to the aerial aspect of the game.
its a shame because the modelling of the small and medium calibre AAA seems pretty good to me, historical evasion tactics work pretty much as they should do. If I'm sloppy with my attack, field/town/boat auto ack will probably hit me, if I do it right it probably wont.
Perhaps you should look at the small and medium AAA AI more closely then. There are a few surprises in that model that would make everyone cry if it was fixed. ;)
-
In the previous puffy ack thread a few months ago Hitech mentioned looking at changing it to real time tracking and making it more accurate.
excellent! :aok I must have missed that one.
edit: I wish someone had posted that at the beginning, would have saved 9 pages of posts repeating every other puffy ack discussion thats gone before ...
-
I can't say I love that the puffy is innefective against straight and level buff formations or that there is a magic floor of 3K. Having said that, I do recall that the proximity fuzed ack was very accurate, like 1 in 45 hitting it's mark. I'm curious to know what our magic ack's probability to hit is.
The figure I have heard quoted was 1 in 16 shells being a hit.
-
1 in 16?
against a zeppelin from a mile out on a clear, calm day maybe :D
-
(http://shikagoland.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/beating-a-dead-horse.gif)
-
"No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'!" :D
-
I'll have to bring Changeup with me. He might buy us dinner.
IN
-
I got your HTC cheerleaders right here. :rock
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_wFAbPxKCw
That'll do.
-
If you take this thread on an empty stomach, nausea and vomiting can occur. Other possible side affects are rectal itching, excessive groin sweating, balled fists, chipped teeth from gritting and a piapism. If your priapism lasts longer than 4 hours, please seek medical attention immediately as permanent damage can occur.
AH Puffy Ack...when the time is right...
-
I avoid flying near CVs because of how ridiculous the puffy ack is, except for the odd bit of base defense on the deck
Today I flew over a CV at about 15k because I didn't know it was there, the first indication of my predicament was *boom* engine gone
:rolleyes:
After I rage quit I remembered this thread and thought I should have saved the film :bhead
-
Personally I have no trouble with puffy ack and I have rarely been shot down by it.
I don't KNOW how it works in the game other than how Hitech explained it recently in a thread. Fester is very good telling stories. Once an idea blooms in his mind it become HIS reality in which he uses as the basis of his arguments. While entertaining, they are only accurate in his mind. Hitech has said that the ack will target the closest guy over 3k to the cv. I try to keep someone between me and the CV at all times and have no trouble. Once that person is shot down it's time to move out. Long swooping moves that continually change me alt and direction with out blowing much "E" until I find another guy that gets closer taking the ack from me.
Can the ack be made better? heck yes! I think buffs should be hit far more easily, bigger target, steady slower speed, less maneuvering so easier to target. All factors that logic says they should be the one targeted, but a fighter escort will go down long before the buffs will.
I have had many times other friendly a/c and i am not talking just one between myself and cv and 1 ping poof gone....explain?
-
How can puffy ack be good for game play if 99% of the players hate it? This unanswerable question trumps all explanations.
-
(http://rlv.zcache.com/we_are_the_99_tshirt-p235907988095270820z85l1_500.jpg)
Puffy Ack oppresses all but the elite! :D
:rofl
-
I have had many times other friendly a/c and i am not talking just one between myself and cv and 1 ping poof gone....explain?
Could be a manned 5 inch gun, could be before the bug fix, or it could be that the ack targeted the closer aircraft, missed and hit you. Hard to say without film.
How can puffy ack be good for game play if 99% of the players hate it? This unanswerable question trumps all explanations.
Making up percentages is about as useful as insulting people when trying to have a productive discussion.
-
Could be a manned 5 inch gun, could be before the bug fix, or it could be that the ack targeted the closer aircraft, missed and hit you. Hard to say without film.
Making up percentages is about as useful as insulting people when trying to have a productive discussion.
Sorry, I don't need to conduct an experiment using the scientific method to deduce that the vast majority of the players hate the puffy ack. If it is under 90% who hate it then hurl poop at me and call me a monkey's uncle, because that's what monkey's do, they throw poop.
-
The only time players hate it is when is shooting at them. They love it when the ack is providing cover for them. But getting anyone to admit that is a different story. \
Haven't we all ran to the boat ack when we're in over our heads? Be honest :old:
-
The only time players hate it is when is shooting at them. They love it when the ack is providing cover for them. But getting anyone to admit that is a different story.
Provide cover? My own ack shoots me just as much as any cover it provides for me.
-
Oh c'mon now Grizz. If friendly fire gets you as much as the enemy ack does then you're the unluckiest guy in the game. Yeah it's gotten me too, but not near as much the enemy stuff.
-
Provide cover? My own ack shoots me just as much as any cover it provides for me.
You're not hugging hard enough.
-
Oh c'mon now Grizz. If friendly fire gets you as much as the enemy ack does then you're the unluckiest guy in the game. Yeah it's gotten me too, but not near as much the enemy stuff.
If I am fighting the enemy it is shooting at, I am almost as likely to get nailed as my opponent is yes? That's how the popcorn box works.
-
If I am fighting the enemy it is shooting at, I am almost as likely to get nailed as my opponent is yes? That's how the popcorn box works.
If you say it does then I believe ya but now i'm wondering just how big that "popcorn box" is? I was under the impression that the ack target box is about the same size as 1 plane if that.... any bigger I'd think the ack would take out buffs 3 at a time. :headscratch:
-
Because the computer really doesn't care how exact the bullet looks when it leaves it's gun. And because player maned guns have this thing called a Brain making choices where to aim it. And the computer never complains when the persons brain controlling it doesn't keep up with what the computer is displaying.
HiTech
Hitech doesnt it tell you something when so many people complain about this for years on end? :old:
-
No, because we don't know what we really want... or I think some similar phrase.
-
See rule #4
-
No, because we don't know what we really want... or I think some similar phrase.
I want hot lesbians! :banana:
-
If you say it does then I believe ya but now i'm wondering just how big that "popcorn box" is? I was under the impression that the ack target box is about the same size as 1 plane if that.... any bigger I'd think the ack would take out buffs 3 at a time. :headscratch:
If you fly near a CV in the TA and use the F5 view you'll get a good idea of the puffy ack box size.
-
Is the box accuracy in any way degraded by its range/distance from origin to target?
Is the accuracy of the first salvo as effective as subsequent salvo's?
Could the game implement a "warning" salvo infront of the target?
Should it (ships AA) not (as a priority) target the greatest threat (enemy bombers etc) rather than the closest enemy of any ac type?
-
I have flown a spitXIV near enemy HQ (near, not directly over) at 35,000 feet and have been killed multiple times by the first ack explosion.
Puffy ack is a necessary evil here at this time but it could use some adjustment.
-
Tilt, the ack spawns randomly within the box. The size of the box changes according to speed, direction, distance, and G load. Changing the size of the box affects the hit probability but there is always a chance of a first shot hit.
My understanding is that the closest enemy is generally considered the highest threat.
-
Heres an idea, puffy ack as it is modelled at the moment is there to provide an opportunity for people who want to win the easy way to win easily, as a side effect it cheeses off anyone else who can think about the situation rationally.
Reading Festers comments just highlights that fact, it isn't so much an opinion as it is a rational thought process, there is no other explanation apart from, its modelled that way to make the game easier for people to win without effort, a comfort blanket for lazy players to succeed.
-
I want hot lesbians! :banana:
Ladies and gentlemen, Exhibit A. This is a prime example of not actually asking for what you're really wanting. Would you not actually prefer hot, openminded bisexual women? :D
Wiley.
-
Heres an idea, puffy ack as it is modelled at the moment is there to provide an opportunity for people who want to win the easy way to win easily, as a side effect it cheeses off anyone else who can think about the situation rationally.
Reading Festers comments just highlights that fact, it isn't so much an opinion as it is a rational thought process, there is no other explanation apart from, its modelled that way to make the game easier for people to win without effort, a comfort blanket for lazy players to succeed.
And here I thought this 11 page complaint centered on lazy players wanting to be able to sink fleets easy mode.
-
And here I thought this 11 page complaint centered on lazy players wanting to be able to sink fleets easy mode.
Do you know any hot lesbians?
-
Puffy ack has never once stopped me from bombing down the cv.
-
Puffy ack has never once stopped me from bombing down the cv.
me neither, it killed a few fighters of mine tho.
-
Do you know any hot lesbians?
I'm suspecting a few in the thread as we waste time on this subject. :D
-
If you say it does then I believe ya but now i'm wondering just how big that "popcorn box" is? I was under the impression that the ack target box is about the same size as 1 plane if that.... any bigger I'd think the ack would take out buffs 3 at a time. :headscratch:
Box size is in the 3/4 mile range.
HiTech
-
Box size is in the 3/4 mile range.
HiTech
Thank you. There's a lot of room there.
-
Puffy ack has never once stopped me from bombing down the cv.
Nope, level bombers are always able to sink moving ships. Just like WW2. It's the poor saps in fighters, red or green that get it.
-
Nope, level bombers are always able to sink moving ships. Just like WW2. It's the poor saps in fighters, red or green that get it.
I am pretty sure that level bombers were never widely successful against moving targets like ships. Perhaps you are being really sarcastic?
-
Uh, yeah. I think he was. And I hate that guy.
-
I am pretty sure that level bombers were never widely successful against moving targets like ships. Perhaps you are being really sarcastic?
Well, maybe you should read up on what bombed the British ships in Singapore.
:cheers: Oz
-
Nope, level bombers are always able to sink moving ships. Just like WW2. It's the poor saps in fighters, red or green that get it.
check the hit percentage of Coral Sea, Midway, Guadalcanal, Papua New Guinea - there is a reason buffs were given 75mm cannons and a boatload of 50s and practiced skip bombing, air drops simply did not work or were quite ineffective.
First air drop went against the Shoho at the Coral Sea, here's a photo -
(http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/I/img/AAF-I-49.jpg)
non-moving targets is a different story, Rubaul and Wewak ports were plastured by air bombardments, but those ships were stationary in a lagoon type area.
-
Thanks for the history lesson. Now google "sarcasm".
-
sarcasm: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com : Flench when he is drunk , LOL ..... :)
-
Well, maybe you should read up on what bombed the British ships in Singapore.
:cheers: Oz
In the harbor or on the move? Repulse and Prince of Wales come to mind, but then there were all those 17s that dropped on ships at Midway etc and didn't hit a thing. How many tries by the RAF before they finally got the non-moving Tirpitz?
Gonna have to check and see if any carriers ever went down to level bombers.
-
In the harbor or on the move? Repulse and Prince of Wales come to mind, but then there were all those 17s that dropped on ships at Midway etc and didn't hit a thing. How many tries by the RAF before they finally got the non-moving Tirpitz?
Gonna have to check and see if any carriers ever went down to level bombers.
If I remember right the first ship to go down was from a level bomber . Seems like just 2 of them ?
-
I rarely get shot down by puffy ack. then again. Once I realise Im in it. I do what I can to get out of it unless im attcking a ship at which point I tryt o fly as evasively as possible
-
In the harbor or on the move? Repulse and Prince of Wales come to mind, but then there were all those 17s that dropped on ships at Midway etc and didn't hit a thing. How many tries by the RAF before they finally got the non-moving Tirpitz?
Gonna have to check and see if any carriers ever went down to level bombers.
CV's to level bombers? My bet is none....not one.
-
Gonna have to check and see if any carriers ever went down to level bombers.
"If you want to put holes in ships, use dive bombers. If you want to sink ships, use torpedo bombers"
-
Repulse and Prince of Wales come to mind,
Torpedos. I think from Nells, of all things.
- oldman
-
Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk by G3M's and G4M's carrying torpedoes.
-
puffy ack is realistic, i like puffy ack. been killed many times by it. thats half the fun. ive also sunk carriers with ju88's while diving through it. the trick is to go fast! its not like there were a bunch of guys laying around on a ship saying, "hey, that puffy ack is too harsh on the enemy, lets not shoot at them!". its a condition of the game! like a stray bullet, worry not of the one that has your name on it, worry about the one that is addressed "to whom it may concern!".
-
the trick is to fly slowly, in a straight line, in a formation of level bombers!
fixed :D
-
Gonna have to check and see if any carriers ever went down to level bombers.
None. Nada. Zero. Not a single CV was ever sunk in all of WW2 by level medium or heavy
bombers.
-
None. Nada. Zero. Not a single CV was ever sunk in all of WW2 by level medium or heavy
bombers.
I know what I was thinking of was the sub's .