fixed Is flak OP?

[alip]

Hello

I've been getting into DCS warbirds. The instant action missions that have flak seem to be very hard to complete. (Even on easy setting). No matter how I fly the flak hits and kills me sooner or later, usually sooner. Even at treetop level, flying fast and erratically.

Now I am no expert on WW2 AA/flak effectiveness, but is this realistic? Was it really this effective?

Comments/tips appreciated.

[BIGNEWY]

Hi alip, 

 

we do have some tweaks coming for FLAK in a future update that will adjust the effectiveness especially at lower levels. 

 

Thanks

[Nealius]

Just food for thought, but they currently have LOS through terrain and buildings, which is just one of the variables making them op:

 

 

[rkk01]

They also open fire at ridiculous ranges - and are accurate…

 

This isn’t just ground units, but boats and air gunners…

 

Flying the Mossie around today I had an S-Boat open up on me at 6,000m and a Ju-88 at 3,000m

 

Whats worse - they both inflicted damage and were set in ME as “average”

[Mr_sukebe]

3 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi alip, 

 

we do have some tweaks coming for FLAK in a future update that will adjust the effectiveness especially at lower levels. 

 

Thanks

 

Excellent news.

Right now, both AAA and Flak are ridiculously accurate, which is even more outrageous with the Flak units, as they would have needed to use delay times prior to firing, which I assume means that they probably wouldn't have even been fired at single aircraft or fighters.

[Nealius]

88s would have required altitude, heading, and speed information to calculate lead, then relay that info from the KdO to the guns. The guns would crank into the calculated lead, loaders would have to set their fuse timers appropriately, load, and fire. If the target(s) changed altitude, heading, or speed, this process would have to be repeated. Currently all of this happens in milliseconds in DCS.

[Iron Sights]

I also guess if they are all shooting you and it’s not a mass formation, then that ups the likelihood of them hitting you, but I agree, they are way too accurate. I’ll be looking for that fix. It’s similar in modern missions too for ground fire that I think is way too accurate at times.

[peachmonkey]

in ME I set them to whatever's after rookie.. average I think?  Although the QF 3.7" AA needs to be set to rookie, otherwise at any level above that it will kill you when you dive on it, however a rookie setting itself will render it pretty much useless...

 

It's a love-hate relationship with AA right now.

[wowbagger]

I've been flying the brilliant Big Show campaign. In three mission attempts in a row, the very first burst of flak is a terminal hit on my plane. Only after I have been hit is there any indication that flak is targeting us and I start to see the black puffs pop up all around ... as I am already spluttering deckwards, wind whistling through the thousands of holes in my wings and fuselage.

 

I know Greg is constantly tweaking and altering his campaigns to circumvent the AI deficiencies (massive appreciation of this!). I may have just had some bad luck, but I think I'm going to have to shelve the warbird campaigns until the flak changes arrive.

[Bremspropeller]

22 hours ago, alip said:

Now I am no expert on WW2 AA/flak effectiveness, but is this realistic? Was it really this effective?

 

No.

Had it been as effective, the whole Ruhr Valley would have been defended by just a single flak-battery.

 

Flak needs to be dumbed down a long ways.

[rkk01]

Same with the air gunners…

 

Combat box would have been fine, P-51D wouldn’t have been a thing

[LooseSeal]

I finally started trying out the WWII part of DCS recently, with the 109. Tried the instant mission "Maltese convoy" or whatever it's called. Immediately destroyed by the first shots of flak.

 

So I tried again, this time much higher and weaving around. Hit again almost immediately. And I chose the "easy" setting at the start!

 

Let's just say, if flak was this effective during the war and could hit a tiny, fast-moving target like a 109 at will, then I'm not entirely sure how Allied bombers managed to level Germany quite the way they did. Those 8.8's are as frighteningly accurate as the dreaded ZU-23 hidden in a field (helicopter pilots know all about that...).

 

In general, I feel like AI gunnery in DCS is, ironically, a bit off-target. There's little to no human error, delay or dispersion.

[Lurker]

You have WW2 flak guns, but within the AI Game logic of DCS World, they have the equivalent of modern infallible search radars, which relay the positions and vectors of incoming aircraft within milliseconds of said aircraft changing course. Not only that but the crew operating the flak guns are world class sharp shooters able to accurately and precisely lead targets and time their fuzes for the exact altitude to the last millimeter. 

 

In general the AI Gunners\AA logic needs to be "dumbed down" significantly, it's as bad in modern DCS World units as it is with the WWII stuff. At least in the more modern stuff it can be sort of explained away by better equipment but it's still way too accurate. 

Edited October 4, 2021 by Lurker

[StevanJ]

11 hours ago, Lurker said:

You have WW2 flak guns, but within the AI Game logic of DCS World, they have the equivalent of modern infallible search radars, which relay the positions and vectors of incoming aircraft within milliseconds of said aircraft changing course. Not only that but the crew operating the flak guns are world class sharp shooters able to accurately and precisely lead targets and time their fuzes for the exact altitude to the last millimeter. 

 

Is it not that the ai as a whole is based upon one single logic?

 

Rather than separate logics for each individual vehicle.

 

I've tested the AAA battery A ww2 Flak unit Vs a shilka, and they seem equally effective with the only difference being range and rate of fire..

 

Do we have any definite figures?

Edited October 4, 2021 by StevanJ
Changed definition to please..

[BIGNEWY]

please do not go off topic, this thread is about WWII Flak, 

 

if you think there is a problem somewhere else make a new thread with track replays in the correct forum section.

 

thanks

[rkk01]

Got hit several times in my last session…

 

Mossie kept losing a wing and I wasn’t throwing the aircraft around….

 

Turns out I was hit by a 10.5cm gun both times.  Not sure of the range, but I was RTB Manston and the gun battery was off Cap Gris Nez - probably 15-20km range

 

OK, so this was a mod (Prinz Eugen), but point remains the same

Edited October 4, 2021 by rkk01

[S. Low]

Was about to post a thread asking if flak was way too accurate lol. Glad to see one exists and they are working on the issue. Thanks fellas.

[Mr_sukebe]

Having given it some consideration, my personal view is that Flak units (e.g. Flak 18, 41) was highly unlikely to even have been used against lone fighters or low level strike aircraft.

As such, I'm going to be replacing the "live" units with "static" flak batteries.

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Mr_sukebe

[Katj]

I just got into dca wwii a few days ago when I got the 109. I was surprised to say the least when I tried the airfield attack instant action mission. I can evade the flak for long enough to down both spitfires, but sooner or later they always get me. After maybe 15 attempts I've never been able to strafe an appreciable amount of parked aircraft.

Doesn't seem realistic at all, but I enjoyed the challenge nonetheless.

[peachmonkey]

22 minutes ago, Katj said:

I just got into dca wwii a few days ago when I got the 109. I was surprised to say the least when I tried the airfield attack instant action mission. I can evade the flak for long enough to down both spitfires, but sooner or later they always get me. After maybe 15 attempts I've never been able to strafe an appreciable amount of parked aircraft.

Doesn't seem realistic at all, but I enjoyed the challenge nonetheless.

 

I found only 1 method that's proven to work against the flack. Constant weaving. Left right left right left right... Obviously it's only useful when diving at high speeds and when for running away. Anything in between you are 100% guaranteed to get shot.

 

[Katj]

 
I found only 1 method that's proven to work against the flack. Constant weaving. Left right left right left right... Obviously it's only useful when diving at high speeds and when for running away. Anything in between you are 100% guaranteed to get shot.
 

Yeah, constant weaving is key. The only thing you've got to work with is the flight time of the shell, and considering the high velocity of those 88s and their impressive splash radius you really need to work it. Makes it hard to line up for a strafing run.

[peachmonkey]

10 minutes ago, Katj said:

44 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

 
I found only 1 method that's proven to work against the flack. Constant weaving. Left right left right left right... Obviously it's only useful when diving at high speeds and when for running away. Anything in between you are 100% guaranteed to get shot.
 

Yeah, constant weaving is key. The only thing you've got to work with is the flight time of the shell, and considering the high velocity of those 88s and their impressive splash radius you really need to work it. Makes it hard to line up for a strafing run.

I had very little success with strafing runs against the AF's because of Flack. I stopped it altogether. It's frustrating because it's such an immersion killer. Bombing is the only method left, unfortunately.

 

[Nealius]

I constantly weave, with altitude changes, and still get hit mid-turn…

[Katj]

I constantly weave, with altitude changes, and still get hit mid-turn…

Keep the speed up pull and hard and out of plane (I.e. perpendicular to the direction of the AA fire). That's the best you can do, but eventually they will get you. Because as the headline of this thread suggests they are currently OP.

[valleyboy]

There are a few discussions on facebook pages for DCS etc with very good information and ww2 training videos on flak types, 88’s weren’t used for very low altitude aircraft - generally if it was below 3000 ft the 88’s were not able to be used as that was minimum fusing - plus those fuses were set manually by the loaders, again, good luck in keeping up with changing fusing correctly and accurately! 
 

then you have dedicated low altitude flak guns, 2.0 cm - various types, they used fusing for self destruct - so relied on direct shell hits to the enemy aircraft - typically fuses were set for up to 5.5 seconds, depending on round - it was not adjustable,  so would explode either by hitting an aircraft or 5.5 seconds for example after being fired - so shouldn’t expect flak exploding around the aircraft at low altitude unless you fall into that 5.5 second zone - but that doesn't mean you are not being shot at!  Plus not all rounds were tracered either. 

no computer aided aiming, purely manually aimed - so human guesswork.

 

list of 2cm flak types and typical ammo types and fusing:

 

https://military.wikia.org/wiki/2_cm_Flak_30/38/Flakvierling