Your consensus of AA ( Archie) in game

[Womenfly2]

I started this from a comment posted by Winder in the thread " Phase-4".

 

Let the FLAK start ladies and gentleman.

 

WF2

Edited June 12, 2009 by Womenfly2

[+Winder]

I started this from a comment posted by Winder in the thread " Phase-4".

 

Let the FLAK start ladies and gentleman.

 

WF2

 

 

Ta - I will use this feedback for P4.

I will also need to know what your workshop settings are.

 

WM

[Creaghorn]

Ta - I will use this feedback for P4.

I will also need to know what your workshop settings are.

 

WM

 

 

as i said, if possible, very tight on target, but 99% missing would be perfect.

[tttiger]

Here's an interesting discussion of the topic, at least for the effect of German AA on British aircraft (since the Germans rarely flew across the British lines, this makes sense):

 

http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/referenc...914-1918-a.html

 

Note the distinction between ground fire (ineffective above 3,000 feet by this author's definition) and AA fire.

 

I think it's important to make that distinction.

 

I like it the way it is.

 

Tony

[Fortiesboy]

I use the flak settings in CFS3 QC mostly, where they are gradable. So I like 'em as they are.

 

Are they not so in campaign?

[+Hasse Wind]

I'm using all the normal AA settings, and I've found the results to be quite satisfactory in the latest version. Earlier the AA was ridiculously accurate, like the gunners had radars and proximity fuses.

[Bandy]

First off, I'm not sure how to vote here, since the choices are ambiguous: overbalanced/underbalanced in what direction and relative to whom??? Better clarify this soon so the poll reflects true intentions, ie: no hanging chads...

 

I believe I have AI accuracy settings on hard, though I do not remember a specific AAA setting in the workshop... I remember reading that it would affect ground MG's as well. They should be separate.

 

As I mentioned in the other P4 post, currently the Anti-aircraft artillery or AAA, (as opposed to ground fire machine guns is entirely separate) in campaign is not realistic at all since the flak bursts are going off miles away from their targets. Sometimes the bursts are closer to me than the targets --and I can barely see the enemy I'm sneaking up on! Remember, white puffs are Allied, black are German.

 

This resulted from frustrated early P3 complaints about being killed and game balance. I agreed at that point, after loosing many early pilots, but the pendulum swung too far to the other side. If you've read any WWI accounts, the pilots really didn't worry about AAA but had to dodge the bursts none-the-less; if they flew without dodging only then would they get nailed.

 

The bursts also helped them identify distant aircraft that they couldn't see, and that would significantly help the game/graphics/monitor limitation of pixels and viewing distance that is in EVERY flight sim.

 

So I argue (in the good sense of argue) that the AAA bursts need to be more concentrated around the target than they are currently. They shouldn't have the same deadliness that WWII AAA would have, since it is WWI after all, and they didn't have proximity fuses, but had to hand set the range of the shells.

Edited June 12, 2009 by B Bandy RFC

[Launchbury]

Every historical account I have gotten my hands on (including Winged Victory) shows nothing but disdain for Archie, but considered low-altitude machine guns as the holy terror. However, in Eddie Rickenbacker's "Fighing the Flying Circus" one pilot and his machine are taken out by a direct hit from an Archie shell that blew the entire crate to bits.

[Womenfly2]

Are we talking about having AA like this? ..... See time frame 6:50.

 

 

Cheers,

WF2

[Rick Rawlings]

I am on the middle section (normal, I think) and find AA to be pretty reasonable there. I have been taken out occaisionally, but if I am dodging, it seems pretty reasonable. There should probably be more AA and more accurate near Balloons, as they are currently very easy to take out. Otherwise, I like it as it is. One point, however, once you engage the enemy, your AA should stop shooting! I have been killed by my own Archie as they were aiming for the enemy before!

 

RR

[chrispdm1]

I found that RB3d had good archie IIRC, you could see the general area where the planes were that were getting shot at but rarely did it hit anything, it also stopped below a certain altitude and when friendly planes engaged. On OFF BHAH I cannot use it to pinpoint anything... it seems to be nearly random. It still fires as you are engaging the enemy and I usually see bursts within a couple feet of the ground when dogfighting at treetop level.

[Madmatt]

It's funny that this topic has come to light recently as I HAD been wondering the same thing. When I first got OFF, I thought Archie was a little too potent but after the 1.30 patch I had THOUGHT that it got nerfed a little too much.

 

I was beginning to think that it was all but useless and even asked as much in a few MP sessions as I hadn't seen it do much in recent flights but was told by several other pilots that they had seen AAA still take down planes. Then last night, while playing in my April 1917 campaign I watched as a flight of enemy Neuiports got SAVAGED by friendly Archie. In less than 10 minutes, I watched as two planes were virtually obliterated as they flew into a tight, thick concentration of flak near my airbase.

 

As mentioned below, pilots during the day certainly feared getting hit from flak bursts, but actual accounts of this occuring (with a direct blast, not just shrapnel damage) seems to have been a little uncommon. The fact that I DO see it occur while playing, but not in every flight, to me at least, seems to prove well enough that the balance is pretty good as is.

 

If I strafe enemy positions, or balloons, there seems to be enough MG and flak in the air to make it every bit the challenge that our realworld squadmates had to contend with.

 

So, for me, it seems fine AS-IS.

 

Madmatt

Edited June 12, 2009 by Madmatt

[+Dej]

I think the balance in terms of effectiveness is good.. it took a Sopwith Pup right out from under my guns yesterday, so when it hits, rarely as it should, it's damned effective. I agree with the comment about how it clusters though, it doesn't seem to have enough visual concentration where you would expect it to.

 

That's on a normal setting.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Dej

[Hellshade]

I think the balance is good. It doesn't seem to hit nearly as often, but I did witness it take out an Alb DVa I was busy peppering with some Allied "love". It seems like most people feel the same way, judging by the results so far. That said, the accuracy of AA fire improved quite a bit between 1915 and 1918. I wonder if it's possible to make the AA get more accurate with each year in the campaign or have a selection in the workshop for AA accuracy 1915, 1916, 1917 and 1918 which is progressively more deadly the later you choose. Sounds like a P4 'wish list' item though. As for P3, either up the accuracy a tiny bit or just leave it alone.

 

/salute

Hellshade

[AROTH]

Good the way it is now - I have killed enough pilots on my own without having to worry about AA!

[Bletchley]

Since writing the article that tttiger refers to above (quite a long time ago) I have been able to look closely at further data sources, for French and German as well as British, and can say with some confidence that pilot losses to AAA were approximately 8% to 9% of the total combat losses (this excludes losses as a result of accidents). This means that out of 100 pilots lost in combat, 8-9 were lost to AAA, and a similar number were lost to ground fire. This is an average for the whole period of the war - there were obviously peaks and troughs, and seasonal variations.

 

I don't have any problems with the current AI Gun Fire (Range) settings, as they can be varied. They seem about right to me, so far. I have seen aircraft shot down on the easy setting, and the AAA seems deadly enough on the hard setting. I have been flying with the "easy" setting in 1915, and the "normal" setting in 1916-1917. The flak bursts seem to me to be reasonably grouped - I can usually get a good general idea of where the e/a are from the bursts, even on "easy", and I doubt if they could be grouped any more tightly without making them also more effective. I think the setting also effects the range at which AI pilots open fire, so keeping the setting to easy-normal prevents the kind of accurate long-range mg fire from AI pilots that have been complained about in the past. I am still getting a feel for it in the later years of the war (I have been flying mostly 1915/16), so the "hard" option is still there if "normal" starts to feel too inneffective in the later war period of 1918.

 

Bletchley

[Gous]

I like the flak the way that they are now.

[Duce Lewis]

I think the devs did a good job remodeling Archie for P3

I haven't changed it from whatever default setting it sets up with

Been hit occasionally, about 10% of my pilot losses I'd say

[JimAttrill]

I don't like to see the use of the modernism AAA in relation to WWI. Just my own personal opinion, of course. I notice nobody mentions 'flak', that being a WWII use. Good, lets stick to Archie or AA.

[+Polovski]

As Bletchley says making them group closer to you makes it obvious you will be hit more. We can't make bursts appear nearer to you without making it more dangerous.. i.e. closer = you are hit more QED... you can't be more accurate without being er more accurate :)

 

The only other way round that is to make less bursts but closer, they seem about right to me.

[Womenfly2]

AA seems pretty good in BH&H, if it was like in the Flyboy movie above .... none of us would be alive!

 

How did they get through that Archie as close as its shown? ........ Haaaa, Hollywood!

 

Cheers,

WF2

[+Winder]

Thanks for the feedback guys - and yes as Pol says we cannot make them closer without them damaging your craft.

 

We are not after hollywood type effects that are there ony for ooooh and ahhhhh - if its that close you are going to suffer damage.

 

HTH

 

WM

[Launchbury]

Are we talking about having AA like this? ..... See time frame 6:50.

 

 

Cheers,

WF2

 

Great combat scene, terrible movie. Thanks for that, though.

 

Huh, it's kind of hard to see but does James Fraco have frosted tips in his hair? HAH. Wasn't aware that was a big hairstyle back then. :P

Edited June 13, 2009 by Launchbury

[Guest British_eh]

Yes, I echo Bletchley, and believe that the losses are about correct. It is interesting to note that while making a mission for P2 that there was a tremendous amout of FLAK created by a number of German torpedo boats, which the AI ( British Mission) were able to survive, yet I was shot down as a flyer, on every occasion. At the end, the AI went in and bombed the boats, and the "player" was an escort. ANy comment POL/WINDER?

 

Cheers,

 

British_eh

[Guest British_eh]

Yes, I echo Bletchley, and believe that the losses are about correct. It is interesting to note that while making a mission for P2 that there was a tremendous amout of FLAK created by a number of German torpedo boats, which the AI ( British Mission) were able to survive, yet I was shot down as a flyer, on every occasion. At the end, the AI went in and bombed the boats, and the "player" was an escort. ANy comment POL/WINDER?

 

Cheers,

 

British_eh