Author Topic: Bring on the 88 !! (Read 1457 times)

tedrbr · « **Reply #15 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:46:08 PM »

Kweassa, have to agree to disagree.

The traverse speed of the gun on a FlaK36, and the weak defense (no armor, exposed troops), I think will offset any quick or close engagement problems other GV's would encounter with it. Then there is it's slow travel speeds and will probably maneuver like a bus.

It's a good multi-purpose, long range weapon, and probably good in an ambush role guarding an avenue of approach like a tank destroyer. Up close it is weak. A towed 88 with even a 10 to 30 second deployment time would normally be dead meat if it comes across a tank, Ostie, M-8, or even an M16 in it's travels. Proably best if you were unable to access the gunsite and turn toward a target until after deployment was complete.

1 to 2 minutes is a long time in game, and I think it would negate it's ability to be used in an AA role to some degree. You hear bombers are inbound. You spawn at the VH. Start engine, roll out, find a spot, deploy..... takes time as it is to respond. And these are not the large batteries of centrally directed FlaK36's used to lay a carpet of flak down against bombers. It's a few scattered flak guns at best.

JB88 · « **Reply #16 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:17:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by WMDnow
WE GOTTA HAVE 88!

easy now. theres only so much of me to go around.

Iron_Cross · « **Reply #17 on:** April 18, 2007, 02:15:04 PM »

OK. First off, 88 good. I like it and have been wanting it for ages. It would help out the field defences imesurably, and would help prevent the bombers from becoming glorified JABOs. An 88, would be a welcome addition to AHII it has the right combination of utillity, and history. It's lack of armor will make it non Uber. It will also force the use of "Scout" vehicles(Jeep, M-3, M-8, M-16), and attack planes, to find them and destroy them. The 88 is already moddled in the Tiger I, the AP, and HE shells are already there, and just borrow the code for the AA ammunition from the 5" shells and were golden.

Second, any time delay IMHO, is a bad idea. Simply because the unit is weak on defence. If it is moving, and chances uppon a tank, it is dead. Even without the delay to set up, it has to traverse the gun to put it on target. That traverse is slow, and a pintle 0.50"on an enemy tank could swing arround and would kill the gun/crew with a 3-5 second burst. Swiching between round types is automatic even in the 5" guns, so a delay to swich round types will have to go out the window.

stephen · « **Reply #18 on:** April 20, 2007, 04:26:31 PM »

I hate to burst your bubble, but a low altitude airfield attacks with B25's/26's are historical FACT,

Kweassa · « **Reply #19 on:** April 20, 2007, 06:15:48 PM »

Quote

I hate to burst your bubble, but a low altitude airfield attacks with B25's/26's are historical FACT,

So were the 88mms.

So let's just see how much one would enjoy the "historical low altitude airfield attacks", when we are able to counter it with the "historical blow-your-plane-to-confetti-if-you-dare-come-low 88mm FlaKs".

Ghosth · « **Reply #20 on:** April 21, 2007, 05:56:41 AM »

Kweassa has a valid point.

While there was certainly some low level attacks made in the European theater. The vast majority I've heard/read about happened in the Pacific. Did the Japanese not have a good equivilent to the 88?

The 88's at Ploesti cut the low level buffs to pieces before enemy fighters were even up in the air.

88 on a flex mount so that it can do dual purpose Anti Air/Anti Tank would be a huge step in the right direction for AH IMO.

CAF001 · « **Reply #21 on:** April 21, 2007, 07:45:49 AM »

GIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEGIMME GIMMEV

nough said

GGGIIIIMMMMEEEEEEEEEee

MOIL · « **Reply #22 on:** April 21, 2007, 06:03:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by stephen
I hate to burst your bubble, but a low altitude airfield attacks with B25's/26's are historical FACT,

This is a true statement, however the "low altitude airfield attacks" were usually met with horrendous Anti-Aircraft fire.

kennyhayes · « **Reply #23 on:** April 21, 2007, 06:17:43 PM »

SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND! THAT WOULD BE AWESOME!

_____________________________ _
I KNOW WHAT YOU DID IN YOU'R JEEP LAST SUMMER

-VM- · « **Reply #24 on:** May 04, 2007, 08:02:42 AM »

88 pits at the shore batteries. Full traverse AP , HE , and Air defense ammo. CV's and ports are pathetically defended currently. Ports should be THE single toughest stationary target in the game. Give em 88's. Then go from there.

MOIL I like the Wirblewind idea too.

Tilt · « **Reply #25 on:** May 04, 2007, 09:20:21 AM »

Agreed 88mm AA, AP & HE Artilery please. (using variable time fuses on the AA)

tedrbr · « **Reply #26 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:44:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
Agreed 88mm AA, AP & HE Artilery please. (using variable time fuses on the AA)

I've no problem with variable time fuses if you can come up with a decent sighting system for it.

88's in air defense mode all got target information from central directors using optical range finding, speed and altitude determination, and radar support. The data from this determined the time fuse settings, and if you watch WWII battle footage of bombers encountering this kind of flak, you'll see a "carpet" of co-alt ack amid the bomber formations. They definitely could nail down the altitude formations were at pretty accurately. Nothing we have in game gives that kind of detailed target info.

Failing to present a decent targeting system, I'd settle for using the existing proxy fuse code that is in the game now for the 5 inch gun as a "shortcut" or work around, as supporting game-play over historical accuracy.

Tilt · « **Reply #27 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:45:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by tedrbr
I've no problem with variable time fuses if you can come up with a decent sighting system for it.
..............

Nothing we have in game gives that kind of detailed target info.

............I'd settle for using the existing proxy fuse code that is in the game now for the 5 inch gun as a "shortcut" or work around, as supporting game-play over historical accuracy.

We know the range of the incoming bombers from the icon data........hence the fuse timer is a function of that range..all we have to do is dial in and adjust the fuse time/ range (it would look like a range setting on the top left hand corner of the screen).

Even if the bombers are beyond present icon ranges they could be revealed when in the 88 AA gun sight.

The range would also show when in Land mode using HE as artilery fire.

If a proxy fuse was the only way then they (manned AA 88's) should never be added IMO