PDA

View Full Version : People complained about AA fire from ships in FB.



SkyChimp
04-03-2004, 05:57 PM
What are they going to do when they fly over American or Japanese carriers, battleships, cruisers and destroyers - ships that had REAL anti-aircraft capabilities?

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/5inch_BB40_15jun44.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/40mm_in_action.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/20mm_BB61_may43.jpg



http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/icon_twisted.gif

Regards,
SkyChimp
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg

[This message was edited by SkyChimp on Sat April 03 2004 at 05:05 PM.]

SkyChimp
04-03-2004, 05:57 PM
What are they going to do when they fly over American or Japanese carriers, battleships, cruisers and destroyers - ships that had REAL anti-aircraft capabilities?

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/5inch_BB40_15jun44.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/40mm_in_action.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/usstuscaloosa/images/20mm_BB61_may43.jpg



http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/icon_twisted.gif

Regards,
SkyChimp
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg

[This message was edited by SkyChimp on Sat April 03 2004 at 05:05 PM.]

clint-ruin
04-03-2004, 06:06 PM
It's going to be pretty harsh :>

I submitted a bunch of ideas over in this thread: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=273103613

The one thing I can think of that might be a lot easier than altering AI is to do what some clever chaps did for Operation Flashpoint. Sometimes the AI there can pull off very long range and frustrating shots .. so some guys came up with alternate magazines for weapons that had much higher dispersion than usual. Might be an idea just to create a custom class of small cal AA guns for ships and fit them out with those.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

luthier1
04-03-2004, 06:08 PM
Have there ever been any arguments other than "it don't seem right" for AAA accuracy complaints?

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

clint-ruin
04-03-2004, 06:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luthier1:
Have there ever been any arguments other than "it don't seem right" for AAA accuracy complaints?

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From memory:

Lack of trajectory arc for ground AA

Lack of ship movement on waters surface

Can't think of any others other than "waa".

I think it's pretty good in FB - no complaints from me about it - but if every other mission has people flying against ships, particularly if they have to use slow aircraft to do it, we are going to see the mother of all whinefests about it :&gt;

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

SkyChimp
04-03-2004, 06:25 PM
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/mc6.jpg

Regards,
SkyChimp
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg

Longjocks
04-03-2004, 06:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
The one thing I can think of that might be a lot easier than altering AI is to do what some clever chaps did for Operation Flashpoint. Sometimes the AI there can pull off very long range and frustrating shots.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I remember sooooo many people saying that on our old forum. Yet I never once experienced it myself. I even did extensive testing for this in the mission editor because of the amount of people bringing it up and I could never find evidence of miracle shots. Hell, I had trouble getting even get a sniper to engage me at over 200m let alone a soldier.

In the end I just thought it boiled down to shots coming from the AI's limit which meant it took a couple of seconds for the 'death camera' to move to the guy that killed you. By this time he has engaged someone else and/or moved, giving the illusion that the shot was unrealistic.

That said, I've experience the most amazing BS shots from gunners in FB. Although the wonder of tracks is that we can watch these feats of gunnery from any angle and in slow motion. If OFP had this feature it would be easier to convince the sad likes of me that there is a problem. Either that or it will prove that out of the hundreds/thousands of rounds fired in battle, or more importantly the half a clip fired at you from this AI soldier, one is bound to hit you some time or another.

"Thanks for the inspiration to rise above you all."

clint-ruin
04-03-2004, 06:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Longjocks:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
The one thing I can think of that might be a lot easier than altering AI is to do what some clever chaps did for Operation Flashpoint. Sometimes the AI there can pull off very long range and frustrating shots.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I remember sooooo many people saying that on our old forum. Yet I never once experienced it myself. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't see it crop up much, at least not from super ranges. Occasionally I'd see semiauto bursts from 300-400m being quite surprisingly accurate, but nothing totally out of the realms of possibility. What the high-dispersion clips really helped with was missions where you wanted to join up with a battle in progress without both sides wiping each other out, or to simulate conscripts vs elite soldiers, etc.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

Oso2323
04-03-2004, 06:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luthier1:
Have there ever been any arguments other than "it don't seem right" for AAA accuracy complaints?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Probably the best test is to recreate a few historical scenarios using AI and see how it plays out.

I did this with the Stuka and Me-323 and found that rear gunners took out far more opposing fighters than what actually occurred.

Longjocks
04-03-2004, 07:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
I didn't see it crop up much, at least not from super ranges. Occasionally I'd see semiauto bursts from 300-400m being quite surprisingly accurate, but nothing totally out of the realms of possibility.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Which I can certainly believe is possible. No game is perfect. This is exactly why I don't dismiss those who post about FB gunners. I'd say that 95% of people just botch their tactics and blame it on a gunner that simply gets a good bead on them. However, I have witnessed AI super shots. They are common enough to be noticeable and frustrating when they happen, yet rare enough to not ruin the fun of the game. Afterall, it's war... many strange things happened in war from rare acts of stunning accuracy to simple, impressive flukes. I guess one could treat an AI bug as a feature of the simulation to make it more realistic. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"Thanks for the inspiration to rise above you all."

luthier1
04-03-2004, 08:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oso2323:
Probably the best test is to recreate a few historical scenarios using AI and see how it plays out.

I did this with the Stuka and Me-323 and found that rear gunners took out far more opposing fighters than what actually occurred.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How bout you use human players in those fighters attacking 323s and Stukas? They're not usually as good at getting shot down as AI fighters.

Your argument just proves my opinion further that flak and rear gunners are as much of a problem as they should be - they punish those who don't evade them properly (as AI planes for example)

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

luthier1
04-03-2004, 08:11 PM
P.S. To steer this thread back on track, I think we were talking about flak, not plane gunners.

I personally don't see flak guns as much of an issue. The larger caliber flak is absolutely random, and in 99% of the cases it just adds some pretty explosions around you with no ill effects - and the smaller caliber flak is only a problem when you present it with a low-deflection shot at slower speeds, which seems perfectly valid to me.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
04-03-2004, 08:44 PM
Also, its possible that most Whines about AA are from Ace flight simmers who attack a Battleship all alone by themselves instead as part of a large Team, like a one plane Air Force.

luthier1
04-03-2004, 08:47 PM
I think the American losses at Midway should be a pretty good indication of what ship AAA could do to moderately experienced pilots going against decent gunners.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

mike_espo
04-03-2004, 08:48 PM
All I can say is: its gonna be rough!

"Fatte vede che ridemo!"http://www.flying-tigers.net/caccia%20WW%20II/g50.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
04-03-2004, 09:06 PM
Brutal

A good way to test AA in FP is let AI planes sim the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales and see what happens.

mike_espo
04-03-2004, 09:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Brutal

A good way to test AA in FP is let AI planes sim the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales and see what happens.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Lexx, you ever read Zero! by Okumiya, Horikoshi, and Caidin. Great read. Whole chapter devoted to the sinking of the British Force Z. At first the Japanese thought they were attacking their own ships...the battleship Kongo. The 22nd Air Flotilla consisting of two air corps:the Genzan and the Mihoro, with 48 type 98 bombers(nells) each. Can the engine support 96 planes?

"Fatte vede che ridemo!"http://www.flying-tigers.net/caccia%20WW%20II/g50.jpg

luthier1
04-03-2004, 09:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
A good way to test AA in FP is let AI planes sim the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales and see what happens.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not going to work. FB gunners don't have a variable Alertness and Skill level - in this case we'd need to slide it all the way down. Our AI pilots also have neither the skill nor the tactics of the Japanese pilots who flew in that battle.

In short, I really don't think there's anything wrong with our flak gunners being better than those on board of PoW and Repulse.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

VMF-214_HaVoK
04-03-2004, 09:43 PM
How about human controled AA guns on ships? Much better chance of getting through http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

luthier1
04-03-2004, 09:47 PM
Not being an *** - just reminding everyone that the Search link is right there easily accessible to everyone.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=513101723

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

Fennec_P
04-03-2004, 09:53 PM
In short, I really don't think there's anything wrong with our flak gunners being better than those on board of PoW and Repulse.

How to make historical missions then? Surely, you don't want us to attack Pearl Harbor with all of the ships there at full readiness. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

A.K.Davis
04-03-2004, 09:59 PM
I think that a 40mm Bofors quad-mount might really piss some virtual pilots off. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

luthier1
04-03-2004, 10:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fennec_P:
How to make historical missions then? Surely, you don't want us to attack Pearl Harbor with all of the ships there at full readiness. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We're aware of this problem http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Stil the solution will have nothing to do with the skill level of the gunners once they are shooting.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

xenios
04-04-2004, 12:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luthier1:
I think the American losses at Midway should be a pretty good indication of what ship AAA could do to moderately experienced pilots going against decent gunners.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by that--do you mean that AAA was really effective or not so effective? If you are saying it was extremely effective, this same argument was made years ago to justify the then excessive ship AAA in IL2. (I don't believe it is that bad in our current version.) Another example often given was the supposed slaughter endured by the Swordfish attacking the Bismarck.

In the case of the infamous Devastator debacle, all of these unfortunate torpedo bombers were downed by fighters (except for one survivor). Not one was hit was hit by flak. At Midway, and at most of the early Pacific battles, fighters were the worst threat to bombers. Later, AAA became much more effective, especially on USN ships. If this sim is anything like history, a Japanese attack on a US carrier in 1944 or 45 will be almost unplayable.

In the case of the Swordfish attack on the Bismarck, none of the 15 planes were hit. Early war AAA was relatively ineffective in every navy. At Taranto, the British crippled the Italian navy, losing only 2 Swordfish to AAA. There was a time in IL2 when you could send 16 planes against a single corvette and all would be shot down in seconds--I saw it happen.

Anyhow, nice to see you on the boards, Luthier. I'm confident this will be an excellent sim. S!

[This message was edited by xenios on Sat April 03 2004 at 11:58 PM.]

[This message was edited by xenios on Sat April 03 2004 at 11:59 PM.]

Pentallion
04-04-2004, 04:00 AM
I just flew a mission last night where I saw 4 IL2's flown by very good pilots come across a German submarine. 2 IL2's were shot down. I myself was shot down from long range with a single bullet to the engine. I wasn't even close enough to shoot back with any hope of hitting.
This was one lone freaking submarine! I don't need anymore proof that the ship AA is ridiculous in IL2. Before I wasn't sure. Now I am.

I wish it was as hard for AI ships to hit a plane as it is for a human to shoot one down in Silent Hunter 2. You can do it but it's very hard. For the AI in FB, it isn't hard at all.

http://www.simops.com/249th/sigs/Wildcard.jpg

|CoB|_Spectre
04-04-2004, 06:35 AM
I know what you mean Pentallion. One factor that seems to be emerging in the debates over AI gunner accuracy from ships or from aircraft seems tied to whether you are playing online or offline. There was some mention of this in the FB forums and, having flown identical missions on/offline, I believe it has creedence. I was hosting a co-op last evening and watched an AI Fw-190 leisurely fly right up to a box of B-17s and shoot one down. If I had used the same tactic, rest assured I'd have, at the minimum, had my engine killed. In one of the later FB patches I had setup a co-op wherein a flight of He-111s armed with torpedoes at 100m altitude were encountering large caliber flak and the ships that were shooting were 25km away. Someone put forth the idea that, to keep framerates playable, the quantity of AA fire has been replaced by the quality of it.

clint-ruin
04-04-2004, 06:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ZG77_Spectre:
In one of the later FB patches I had setup a co-op wherein a flight of He-111s armed with torpedoes at 100m altitude were encountering large caliber flak and the ships that were shooting were 25km away.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that's something of a known issue with the Destroyer Type 7. Last time I went playing with it, it had easily the longest range of fire of any object in FB.

No idea why.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

NegativeGee
04-04-2004, 10:10 AM
I think this was a problem with the original FB 1.0. Small calibre naval AAA was simply brutal (remember Pdogs "Patch Fiction" movie http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif) but its okay now.

The only thing is, there is no modelling of ship motion due to waves etc. at the moment, so naval AAA never has to contend with that particular issue that was present in RL (although I don't know if systems were developed to deal with this or not).

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg

Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!