Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

jeffs -> Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 9:05:35 AM)

I am playing the allies and very disturbing thing happens.[:@]

When I fly against his fleet, especially DBs, but sometimes other bombers as well
His ships fire flak[&:], then I do the air resolution (with his fighters taking their pound of flesh)
then I go through flak again.).

Obviously I need to go through air cover, then flak...But why I am I being nailed
by flak just before the air resolution phase?[X(]

Somebody, please give me a clue!![&o]



Alfred -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 9:58:06 AM)

Your DB and TB encounter enemy flak at both their allocated flying to destination altitude and then at their code predetermined altitude. For example you could set your TBD Devastators to fly at 12,000 feet but no way would they be able to launch their torpedoes at that height, they had to go down in order to be able to launch their torpedoes.

Alfred



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 2:08:26 PM)

Thanks. But I understand that. My point is, i am subjected to a 3rd round of flack that happens before the intercept phase..

Please correct me if I am wrong but the usual sequence is

intercept
flak before bombing.
bombing (or torpedoes)
flak after bombing

I have
flak
intercept
flak before bombing.
bombing (or torpedoes)
flak after bombing

my point have people seen the flak hit before the intercept phase?



castor troy -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 4:05:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffs

I am playing the allies and very disturbing thing happens.[:@]

When I fly against his fleet, especially DBs, but sometimes other bombers as well
His ships fire flak[&:], then I do the air resolution (with his fighters taking their pound of flesh)
then I go through flak again.).

Obviously I need to go through air cover, then flak...But why I am I being nailed
by flak just before the air resolution phase?[X(]

Somebody, please give me a clue!![&o]




The Japanese get an unhistorical additional flak phase because in real life their TFs were more spread out than the Allied and due to not having real fighter control the Japanese used their heavy flak to fire in the direction of incoming strikes. In the game, this turns out to cause at least 1/3 of the flak hits on the Allied aircraft, no matter if bomber of fighter, they all have to go through that new "feature". The way it turns out in the game is ridicoulos comparing it to real life. The fact that IJN flak barely takes a bomber down though makes it not that much of an issue IF (big if) flak fire or damage isnīt influencing bombing accuracy. If it does, itīs a big issue.

But a fact is that instead of suffering from their spread out TFs, in the game, they get an advantage due to an additional flak phase, which is 10 times too effective.



Miller -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 10:19:41 PM)

I have noticed this myself, and have to say despite playing as Japan it is bullshit, simple as that.

Even without the above crap, IJN flak is still better than in real life, whilst the Allies seems about right.



Dili -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/18/2010 11:46:54 PM)

[8|] hardcodes...



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/19/2010 8:04:32 AM)

Thanks.

So I am neither insane nor is my opponent doing some secret stuff beyond my limited knowledge.



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/19/2010 8:04:58 AM)

This seems like an excellent routine to be wiped out in a future update!



castor troy -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/19/2010 8:15:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffs

This seems like an excellent routine to be wiped out in a future update!




wouldnīt say that as it was deliberetely put into the game as a new feature so I doubt it will be wiped out. With the recent developments of bug busting only I also doubt that weīre going to see any routine tweakings in the next months either.



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/19/2010 8:45:47 AM)

We can always wish!



ChickenOfTheSea -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/19/2010 5:05:53 PM)

This is not a new feature. It has been around since the beginning of WITP. What has changed is altitude limits for dive bombing. In WITP you could have the dive bombers come in at 30000 ft to avoid the first round of flak. Now you have to be at 10000-15000 ft to dive bomb.



Nikademus -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/21/2010 7:29:55 PM)

The pre-CAP Flak is a new feature.




ChickenOfTheSea -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/21/2010 8:55:23 PM)

I obviously didn't read the original post clearly enough. I have also noticed the pre-CAP flak, but since I am currently playing the Japanese it didn't bother me[:D][:D]



LoBaron -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/22/2010 2:19:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

I have noticed this myself, and have to say despite playing as Japan it is bullshit, simple as that.

Even without the above crap, IJN flak is still better than in real life, whilst the Allies seems about right.


Absolutely agree.
Iīm also playing Japan and recently seen a situation where a huge Allied CV attack was chopped to 3/4
non damaged planes by the pre-attack flak only.

I apprechiate the bare survival of some of my CVīs naturally, but this is way out of whack.
And I guess Rob Brennan shares that sentiment...



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/23/2010 7:38:50 AM)

I have had the same thing....I had a nice whack (so I thought) at a transport fleet with some semi trained A-24s......In spite of seeing only one SC 8 out of 14 A-24s were damaged even before the main attack began.....
Pathetic joke....Especially when the allies have to face betties that score 60% of the time with torpedoes.......



Rob Brennan UK -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 1:13:22 AM)

quote:

.Especially when the allies have to face betties that score 60% of the time with torpedoes.......


thankfully that didnt happen to me vs LoBaron .. they got through but only 2 hits out of ?? 60 bombers iirc. Damn lucky. (unless you on the Long island)

re the pre Flak barrage .. attack was HUGE for 42 levels . over 100 SBD's and thier accuracy when they got through the japanese CAP was appalling for pilots with good 70+ exp. So i suspect that this flak trap does impact pilot accuracy on top of cap intercept and 'normal' flak seems to really hamstring the allies.

As a game feature i quite like it oddly enough [8D] I must be a massochist at heart [;)]



Sardaukar -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 7:15:01 AM)

Like I said in other thread discussing about this on main forum, I was wondering why my USN was cosntantly losing more planes to flak than IJN in carrier battles. Now it's explained.

Pre-CAP phase was supposed to be weak, but it is not and as it is now, gives IJN about 50% better AAA than otherwise. That is definitely not historical. Hopefully Devs can check what's going on.



castor troy -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 8:49:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Like I said in other thread discussing about this on main forum, I was wondering why my USN was cosntantly losing more planes to flak than IJN in carrier battles. Now it's explained.

Pre-CAP phase was supposed to be weak, but it is not and as it is now, gives IJN about 50% better AAA than otherwise. That is definitely not historical. Hopefully Devs can check what's going on.




someone heard an official word on it yet?



Sardaukar -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 9:57:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Like I said in other thread discussing about this on main forum, I was wondering why my USN was cosntantly losing more planes to flak than IJN in carrier battles. Now it's explained.

Pre-CAP phase was supposed to be weak, but it is not and as it is now, gives IJN about 50% better AAA than otherwise. That is definitely not historical. Hopefully Devs can check what's going on.




someone heard an official word on it yet?


As far as I know, not. Only thing I have seen is that "pre-CAP flak" was supposed to be "weak" (which would be historical). Unfortunately it is not, which would suggest it's not WAD but bug.



LoBaron -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 10:26:34 AM)

What would be interesting was if the pre-intercept AA lethality is somehow dependent on number of attacking planes.
The worst losses seem to happen with the largest strikes (at least thats my impression).
Can anyone confirm this?

Wonder if this somehow similar to the artillery bug when too many units were stacked in one hex.



Sardaukar -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/24/2010 1:36:55 PM)

I brought this up in "Air issues" sticky, since it might be a bug. 



TheElf -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 6:31:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffs

I am playing the allies and very disturbing thing happens.[:@]

When I fly against his fleet, especially DBs, but sometimes other bombers as well
His ships fire flak[&:], then I do the air resolution (with his fighters taking their pound of flesh)
then I go through flak again.).

Obviously I need to go through air cover, then flak...But why I am I being nailed
by flak just before the air resolution phase?[X(]

Somebody, please give me a clue!![&o]




The Japanese get an unhistorical additional flak phase because in real life their TFs were more spread out than the Allied and due to not having real fighter control the Japanese used their heavy flak to fire in the direction of incoming strikes. In the game, this turns out to cause at least 1/3 of the flak hits on the Allied aircraft, no matter if bomber of fighter, they all have to go through that new "feature". The way it turns out in the game is ridicoulos comparing it to real life. The fact that IJN flak barely takes a bomber down though makes it not that much of an issue IF (big if) flak fire or damage isnīt influencing bombing accuracy. If it does, itīs a big issue.

But a fact is that instead of suffering from their spread out TFs, in the game, they get an advantage due to an additional flak phase, which is 10 times too effective.

nothing in this post is true.



TheElf -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 6:33:16 AM)

see my post here http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2446654&mpage=2



TheElf -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 6:35:07 AM)

Can someone provide some evidence that Pre-CAP flak is too strong? Keep in mind while you do so that each damaged AC reported in a single instance of damage. So 10 damaged AC could be 10 separate damaged AC or it could be 1 AC damaged 10 times. This is nothing new.



castor troy -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 9:27:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffs

I am playing the allies and very disturbing thing happens.[:@]

When I fly against his fleet, especially DBs, but sometimes other bombers as well
His ships fire flak[&:], then I do the air resolution (with his fighters taking their pound of flesh)
then I go through flak again.).

Obviously I need to go through air cover, then flak...But why I am I being nailed
by flak just before the air resolution phase?[X(]

Somebody, please give me a clue!![&o]




The Japanese get an unhistorical additional flak phase because in real life their TFs were more spread out than the Allied and due to not having real fighter control the Japanese used their heavy flak to fire in the direction of incoming strikes. In the game, this turns out to cause at least 1/3 of the flak hits on the Allied aircraft, no matter if bomber of fighter, they all have to go through that new "feature". The way it turns out in the game is ridicoulos comparing it to real life. The fact that IJN flak barely takes a bomber down though makes it not that much of an issue IF (big if) flak fire or damage isnīt influencing bombing accuracy. If it does, itīs a big issue.

But a fact is that instead of suffering from their spread out TFs, in the game, they get an advantage due to an additional flak phase, which is 10 times too effective.

nothing in this post is true.




prove it, PLAY and do an AAR with daily, detailed combat reports. Otherwise youīre just a developer that developed the game, others have tested it (and there was no freaking out during the development [:'(]) and you donīt play it nor really know if it works how you designed it. Youīre only making assumptions that it actually is how you thought you would design it. You ask for evidence all the time? Whereīs your evidence that it is working like youīve designed it or not? The only evidence you always talk about are combat reports, daily combat reports. Pages and pages of them can be seen in the AAR forum, mind you, one of the sub forums...



jeffs -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 12:02:01 PM)

Reading the Elf`s arrogant answer, I think we should change his name to Admiral Christie. Admiral Christie, if one remembers correctly was the man behind the defective
Mark 14 torpedo. If they had bothered to test the torpedo for real, they would have quickly realized its failures. However, as Christie was rather arrogant, he argued
"trust me, I am a genius "(obviouly limited budgets did not help either). So it took 21 months of abjct failure before the defects were fixed. Please Elf, run tests...You will be
shocked at how well Japanese AA does vs allied AA.

But merely whining you designed it so everything is a-ok is bogus...So until there is testing, I will call you Admiral Christie.



treespider -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 12:21:22 PM)

I read through this ... I see a lot of whining...but no one is providing any hard data. Just some obscure anecdotes that the pre-Cap is too strong.

Run some tests and generate some hard data....just like I did during the artillery debate when it was suggested that artillery was completely nerfed...testing showed artillery bombarments by artillery units still causes the defender to use elevated supply levels ...helping sieges end faster.

If someone can provide some hard data and post it in the tech support forum I'm sure MichaelM will take a look...



Dili -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 1:45:19 PM)

Testing showed artillery doesn't have effects like IRL.



treespider -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 2:17:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Testing showed artillery doesn't have effects like IRL.



Ohhh so you'd like the monitor to throw shrapnel, blood sweat and grime at you so its like it is in IRL....

IRL you don't have electons whirling through some imaginary functions to achieve a result...

The allegation was that artillery was useless....testing showed that the aritilley "in game" when used in a bombardment mission caused the defender to use elevated rates of supply....which when applied to an isolated siege will cause the siege to end sooner. So my contention is artillery is not useless...it will help to end a siege sooner...like IRL.




LoBaron -> RE: Pre flak attacks against dive bombers (4/28/2010 4:32:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffs

Reading the Elf`s arrogant answer, I think we should change his name to Admiral Christie. Admiral Christie, if one remembers correctly was the man behind the defective
Mark 14 torpedo. If they had bothered to test the torpedo for real, they would have quickly realized its failures. However, as Christie was rather arrogant, he argued
"trust me, I am a genius "(obviouly limited budgets did not help either). So it took 21 months of abjct failure before the defects were fixed. Please Elf, run tests...You will be
shocked at how well Japanese AA does vs allied AA.

But merely whining you designed it so everything is a-ok is bogus...So until there is testing, I will call you Admiral Christie.



jeffs donīt confuse arrogance with slowly increasing boredom, which is the result of explaining the same things to the same person over and over again
to no effect.

I totally changed my opinion on this topic after reading The Elfīs explanation on this in the general discussion thread. (link is some posts above).

If you read through CTīs posts you will notice a unhealthy tendency to misinterprete othersī answers or advices, to not accept alternative explanations
for the in-game situations he is experiencing which contradict his own, and to repeatedly reposting false assumptions which others have long ago accepted as explained.

To counter this can be quite unnerving, more so if you in fact try to help others getting a better understanding of game mechanics. [;)]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.438477