PDA

View Full Version : Low level AAAs are too accurate & strong.



TooCooL34
11-30-2005, 04:21 AM
Are they simulation of Aegis ship defence turret system? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
I've been playing this game since the release and I think I am a good ground pounder myself thou I flew in fighters recently.
No patch has given me a serious headache about AAA since I could suppress it with proper tactic maintaining high speed, selecting good angle etc.

But AAA in this patch works like a 21st century thing.
No way to avoid that lethal sniper shot if I go low to attack the AAA or targets around it.
A single 20mm AAA is enough to cut my wing off or hit my head directly at a few shots.
Ground attacking in singleplay or Warcoulds multiplay is almost a pure suicide now. I'd fight 2 fighter aces rather than single robot AAA.
Wonder what you ground attackers think and hope Oleg bring back old AAA AI routine.

actionhank1786
11-30-2005, 04:28 AM
I know the AAA can seem a bit rediculous, but just make sure you've always got a fair bit of speed with you, and the room to get up and away in case you need to. Also make sure you're not just going in straight lines at the gunners. You're easier to hit that way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ImpStarDuece
11-30-2005, 05:13 AM
The Allied tactical airforces lost twice as many aircraft to flak as they did to fighters in the last 18 months of the war. I have several reports of Typhoon and Spitfire squadrons going down to attack targets only to lose 3, 4 or once even 5 of their number in a single straffing run, all from light, multi-barreled flak.

Flak was very dangerous during the war. Its too accurate as it is at the moment, but don't tone it down too much.

TooCooL34
11-30-2005, 05:40 AM
I read history books too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
But current ingame AAA, even single AAA is too accurate as you might agree.
Just tone it down a little to make it game-wise. We always need more bomber or attacker pilots and I don't want to get them off scared by single AAA.

Zoom2136
11-30-2005, 06:58 AM
Only point I beleive that could be hadded is that a tank shooting down a plane with is MAIN gun is to say.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Tanks should have light to heavy machine gun that could be fired at plane... and not their main gun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Tater-SW-
11-30-2005, 09:24 AM
The tank guns are simply absurd, tis true. The regular AA doesn;t seem any worse to me. I was trying to get hit with 20mm, 50 cal and 30 cal as a zeke (was looking for a certain screenshot) and I had trouble getting hit, actually (I wanted a leak). I was facing 2x20mm, 1x50 cal, and 3x30 cal AA. Flew in circles around them.

I don't disagree with you in general though.

tater

ZG77_Lignite
11-30-2005, 10:38 AM
I could easily be wrong, but I believe that land based AA can have its rate of fire set in the conf.ini (as per ship aa and aaa). Have you tried slowing it down a bit to suit your tastes better?

LEXX_Luthor
11-30-2005, 10:39 AM
Each AA gun represents about 10 AA guns.

If that were not the case, mission sculptors would not be able to place the thousands of AA guns needed in FMB. That, and your computer would have to calculate all the shell trajectories of the thousands of "real" AA guns. So each AA gun should be as deadly as maybe 10 "real" AA guns. There were maybe 50 AA guns made for every plane made in WW2.

The trick is not to be the Lone Ace popular in computer gaming but go in with your AI friends.

KG26_Oranje
11-30-2005, 11:31 AM
Lexx_Luthor got it correct.
In may 1940 , the germans atackt France belgium and Holland.
After 5 day`s it was over for Holland.
Buht we got still a recort of most distroyd aircrafts in one day.
overall we shoot down more than 500 german plane`s down.
And u belive we done it wiht +/- 50 fighters (Fokker D21 and Fokker G1)?
No way it was the flak that got many kills on the germans.
The dutch airforce diht there part and bombing from RAF and the dutch got there kills to.
Buht it was the Flak that diht the work on many ju52`s , Ju88 , He111 , Do17/215 , Me110 , me109e and on stuka`s.

The trick is to keep AA working for there pray.
One plane is a pray for AA , 4 plane`s are flying possible pray`s for AA

We as bomber SQD do many atacks on airfield , tanks and ahter ship/ground targets.
Buht online we loose more plane`s by fighter atacks than on AA atacks.
Wy?
Becose we go as a groop and work toghter.
And we dont fly straid.
Go up , down , left , and right , helps u to , to avoid AA hits.
Even as a singel plane its possible to avoid flak in .... lets say a slow flying stuka or in the bomber.
Just keep ure plane not in a straid line.

Buht i agree AA pilot kills is a bit strange.
Its possible u dont hear me saying that real AA dint get a hit on a pilot in the war.
Buht if we got hits from AA in the game than it was for 90% a pilot kill!!!!
And tanks firing wiht there main guns to plane`s is very strange lol.

S! I/KG26_Oranje

TooCooL34
11-30-2005, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Each AA gun represents about 10 AA guns.

If that were not the case, mission sculptors would not be able to place the thousands of AA guns needed in FMB. That, and your computer would have to calculate all the shell trajectories of the thousands of "real" AA guns. So each AA gun should be as deadly as maybe 10 "real" AA guns. There were maybe 50 AA guns made for every plane made in WW2.

The trick is not to be the Lone Ace popular in computer gaming but go in with your AI friends.
Agreed on that. Forgot to comment my thought on it.
But in multiplay, we usually have to go there alone most of the time.
I'll follow Oleg's design anyway as I have been. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
11-30-2005, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Each AA gun represents about 10 AA guns.

If that were not the case, mission sculptors would not be able to place the thousands of AA guns needed in FMB. That, and your computer would have to calculate all the shell trajectories of the thousands of "real" AA guns. So each AA gun should be as deadly as maybe 10 "real" AA guns. There were maybe 50 AA guns made for every plane made in WW2.

The trick is not to be the Lone Ace popular in computer gaming but go in with your AI friends.
I was just going to say that myself. I'm fairly certain they are accounting for the lack of CPU power by making things a bit more deadly by themselves.

I think this is a fair assessment. If you were to put in the number of flak guns per airbase that were actually present at the average 1945 Luftwaffe airbase most computers would be crawling.

I always think back to the story in Closterman's The Big Show where they attack an airbase with 8 Tempest V's at high speed (450mph on the deck) and only Closterman and one other Tempest survived the encounter. All the others were shot down by flak on the pass.

ElAurens
11-30-2005, 04:35 PM
My only real problem are the smaller (20mm and under)calibre weapons that appear to be radar guided. They shoot through clouds and in general track you with uncanny, and unrealistic precision.

It reminds me of a comment (in the book Fire In The Sky) by an American AA gunner in New Guinea who said his .50 Browning was more of a revenge weapon, because they could only fire on the enemy planes as they were leaving after their bomb runs because they were too fast to track.

Hardly what we have in PF.

LEXX_Luthor
11-30-2005, 06:03 PM
El Aurens::
My only real problem are the smaller (20mm and under) calibre weapons that appear to be radar guided. They shoot through clouds...
AI don't know about the clouds. Same thing with AI fighter pilots. If Oleg changes this in BoB And Beyond, it will be a First for combat flight sims.


...and in general track you with uncanny, and unrealistic precision.
10 or 20 "real" AA guns could have this effect collectively. That's what we were talking about...each FB/PF AA gun representing many "real" AA guns. If you are full mission sculptor, this keeps you from going insane.


It reminds me of a comment (in the book Fire In The Sky) by an American AA gunner in New Guinea who said his .50 Browning was more of a revenge weapon, because they could only fire on the enemy planes as they were leaving after their bomb runs because they were too fast to track.
USA 0.50 Quads brought down Major Preddy, top scoring USA ace, on Christmas Day 1944 as he was chasing low level target at top speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Worse, it was a Pilot Kill, his P-51 landed by itself, pilot shot dead. That's what I've read anyway.

Preddy much exactly what we have in FB/PF.

AA won't hurt you much if you bounce around a bit. Don't fly in a straight line (that's what happened to Major Preddy chasing his target). I find ground strafing particulary dangerous because you must maintain a straight path, and I get hit very often when I strafe alone with no AI support.

Riggsie15
11-30-2005, 06:20 PM
Me and my squadron (AI) just attacked an area with 4 airfields, i orderd the squadron to attack the flak first. We were flying Beaufighters and useing rockets. I only recieved 1 hit to the aircraft but the rest of my squadron was shot down. In this attack i took out 8 guns. I to found the low level 20mm to be the most dangerous. My tactic is to go into a shallow dive and use an accuret salvo of rockets. Rockets are the best weapon against low level AAA because if accuret it silences them at range and in on shot. I like trying to play the campain properly and keep my squadron alive so that mission was a bumber.

VW-IceFire
11-30-2005, 06:28 PM
Online, if you know about several AAA prior to attacking the target you can say...ok you and you are flak supression. One takes the port side and the other on the starboard. Go.

And if you've got rocket equipped aircraft it works so well.

Tipo_Man
12-01-2005, 01:44 AM
Flak too accurate ? hmmm....
It really depends on which side of the barrel you are at the moment
Each time I'm on the ground taking-off and some lonely enemy plane is vulching, I curse my AA gunners. You can make several passes on an airbase without a scratch, if you make tight high speed turns around it! The rotation speed of most AA guns is ridiculously slow at the moment,
though they compensate it with much higher practical rate of fire(i.e the number of shells fired for a minute). Generally an AA gun with theoretical rate of fire 600/rounds per minute had practical rate of fire about 120-150 shots per minute, since it required cooling and reloading.
AA guns are also much harder to destroj, you need several direct hits in their thin body to disabled them, since there are no gunners modelled. Even the lighest 20mm flak had a crew of 2-3 peaple I think(though I'm not sure). In reallity they are much more bigger and vulnerable target then the gun itself.
So AA gun modelling has it weak sides, I think an option for setting their level would be nice...

VF-19
12-02-2005, 09:03 AM
What I'd like to see is some sort of response to you shooting in the general direction of the flak, as in, the gunners have to duck. When you stop shooting, the remainders start going after you again. I'd really like to see this on ships, personally, as trying to skipbomb a ship is a rather... suicidal affair. Imagine, come in low, start blazing away with your guns, to get at least some of the gunners to stop shooting (and ducking for cover), drop your bombs, and then hightail it out of there.

Koenig_343KKT
12-02-2005, 10:24 AM
IMHO the problem doesn't lie with how the guns themselves are simulated, ie the precision and lethality, but more the fire control.
The directors of the time, if they were not the Mk1 Eyeball looking through a bead&crosshair, were cumbersome and fed information through a slow analog computer, the whole process of getting a solution (even with RADAR) taking something like 15 to 30 seconds, whereas in the game this is instantaneous.
This is why in game you get pummeled when executing surprise low-level attacks or when executing a dive-bombing attack, whereas in real life in those situations the guns couldn't be brought to bear accurately in time.

darkhorizon11
12-02-2005, 02:43 PM
Although accuracy may be overmodelled generally AAA is undermodelled in this game.

jds1978
12-02-2005, 03:15 PM
What I'd like to see is some sort of response to you shooting in the general direction of the flak, as in, the gunners have to duck. When you stop shooting, the remainders start going after you again. I'd really like to see this on ships, personally, as trying to skipbomb a ship is a rather... suicidal affair. Imagine, come in low, start blazing away with your guns, to get at least some of the gunners to stop shooting (and ducking for cover), drop your bombs, and then hightail it out of there.

My thoughts too!

call me sick, but i'd love to see AAA accuracy the same and the damage effects cranked up a bit. i think people get a little jaded as to what being hit by a 20mm or 37mm round would do to an AC in RL. Think, at least, near catastrophe for the pilot and his AC

Stanger_361st
12-02-2005, 09:52 PM
I think AAA is fine in game. One of the best coop missions I flew in was a coordinated attack. First strike group when in to get the AAA. Second strike group went in to get objective. We also had a group over us flying cover. That was a great mission where teamwork was involved.

I think its funny to watch people haul a** to objective to be the first in and be a AAA magnet. Instaed of being part of a group going in.

ECV56_Rolf
12-03-2005, 06:03 AM
High speed ground attacks are the most effective, but low speed attacks are almost suicidal with AA present over the target.

That seems ok for me. In the last patches, the AA was toned a bit down since PF appearance. Now it is more in the right place.

We almost got reckless while doing ground attacks. Now is as deadly as before PF. We are remembering old tactics that are needed again.

horseback
12-03-2005, 11:29 AM
I think the problem is that the flak accuracy is at late-war standards for all phases of the war. There is also no surprise factor advantage for the first low fast attack (the aforementioned death of George Preddy was the result of the AA gun crew being alerted by the passage of the German aircraft Preddy was pursuing-they thought that he was another low flying German until it was too late), or the ability to take out a gun crew without destroying a gun. It appears to me that there is one standard for accuracy for all the AA guns, which is ridiculous.

At high altitudes, the heavy guns were fired in the general direction and altitude of the intruding aircraft; early war, there was no radar guidance or aiming system available to anyone anywhere. They used the Mark I eyeball, sound directional finders or optical rangefinders, and occasionally, the radio reports of friendly aircraft flying in the vicinity. Radar information was gradually provided first by voice communication, and then as the science allowed, as a direct input by late war.

At low altitudes, it was a few guys primarily using muscle power to swing their guns to bear, gradually supplemented with powered systems as the war went on. Proximity fuses weren't triggered by a radar fuse (except in late-war Allied guns), they were set to explode at a certain altitude or range (often, just a timed fuse). Generally these would be designated by color coding, and the gun crew would change colors as the range or altitude varied.

None of these contributed to great accuracy.

It took a time for commanders to realize that they needed much more anti-aircraft capability than they started the war with, and more time to obtain the necessary weapons and teach the gunners how to aim and hit their targets.

Even so, the principle reason for late war AA being so effective was the sheer number of guns being aimed in the general direction of the attacking aircraft. The levels of accuracy demonstrated in-game are consistant with mid-to-late 1944 and after, not the preceding 4 or 5 years of the war.

The game needs a means of 'grading' the accuracy and volume of the AAA according to the point in the war, the type of target to be protected, and who is doing the shooting (let's be honest; some countries were better at the AA game than others much sooner-it should be a lot safer to attack a Japanese land target than a German one, for instance).

cheers

horseback

BH-21
12-04-2005, 06:31 AM
The AAA isn't all that bright. Yes it might track and hit a single target to easy, but it will not switch targets when confronted by a two pronged attack. A High group attack at 1500m or so with bombs or just fly near enough for the AAA to fire at you. The low level group at 400m or so with rockets or bombs can attack unhindered. Once the guns are attritted, strafing can take out the rest. When making missions for successful ground attacks I use this approach alot.