All Air mode

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-23 16:09

I was studying a few of the air offensives during the Vietnam conflicts, looking mainly at Operation Linebacker.

What I'm trying to suggest is to have a near all air mode, consisting of one team having to destroy a objective, heavily protected by the enemy team. BluFor, trying to bomb that target will have a limited number of tickets, but will have critical advantages over OpFor. OpFor will have many combined arms elements available to them, aircraft as well as ground units.
BluFor will have (Using US Airforce and Navy as example)
-8 Air to Air fighters, mostly F-4 Phantoms (accounts for 16 members of the team) these aircraft will have working radar and BVR capabilities
-2 F-4G "Wild Weasel" SEAD/DEAD aircraft (4 members of the team with delayed spawn)
-4 FB-111's (2 per aircraft) or 2 B-52H (Delayed spawn)
OpFor will have (Using NVA as example)
-15 Air to air fighters, a Mix of the MiG-19 and MiG-21
-GCI, providing radar contacts to the team, effective towards the half-way mark of the map
-Various Radar guided missile sites near the objectives, spawn points at forward bases with anti-aircraft vehicles available.

AaronFraher · Post by **AaronFraher** » 2010-07-23 16:31

Never going to work in the Bf2 engine.

Here are links to some proper sims. Listed in order of most realistic. They will probably be what you're after. There are plenty of YAP AAR's on Simhq to look at, which provide a nice insight if you're specifically looking for the Vietnam side of things.

F4:AF

LOMAC FC2

Yankee air Pirate (YAP)

Nitneuc · Post by **Nitneuc** » 2010-07-23 16:44

Someone miss the good ol' BF1942's battle of Britain

.
I actually like it as long as the round doesn't last 1h30 ; a quick 20-25mn aerial break wouldn't hurt in the middle of the maplist.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-23 17:44

AaronFraher wrote:Never going to work in the Bf2 engine.

Here are links to some proper sims. Listed in order of most realistic. They will probably be what you're after. There are plenty of YAP AAR's on Simhq to look at, which provide a nice insight if you're specifically looking for the Vietnam side of things.

F4:AF

LOMAC FC2

Yankee air Pirate (YAP)

Tell me now whats not going to work. Radar has been implemented into CA, which fulfills the need in the F-4 and the OpFor GCI. Long range SAM battery's don't necessarily need to have a radar object to lock on to, rather a heat object already in game. 8x8km Maps are already working with CA as well, SEAD/DEAD can be achieved using a modified version of the laser designation we have ingame.

I'm not looking for alternatives, so don't think I'm going after them.

AaronFraher · Post by **AaronFraher** » 2010-07-23 18:38

Drunkenup wrote:Tell me now whats not going to work. Radar has been implemented into CA, which fulfills the need in the F-4 and the OpFor GCI. Long range SAM battery's don't necessarily need to have a radar object to lock on to, rather a heat object already in game. 8x8km Maps are already working with CA as well, SEAD/DEAD can be achieved using a modified version of the laser designation we have ingame.

I'm not looking for alternatives, so don't think I'm going after them.

Well the way you outline it above it would work, but it would turn it into "Project Little Plane Arcade Game". You're absolutely delusional if you believe that any of this can be represented in a realistic way. As for the CA radar, it's nothing like any real life piece of equipment (AN/APG-68, AN/APG-63, AN/APG-71).

"Long Range" SAM Systems as you call them would not work on such small map sizes. For example, the SA-13 has an engagement envelope out to around 2.5NM. This would mean that you would be implementing an SA-2 for example with less range than a SA-13.

As I said, it would work, but not in any realistic way whatsoever. Basically it would be Ace Combat on a smaller scale.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-23 20:01

AaronFraher wrote:Well the way you outline it above it would work, but it would turn it into "Project Little Plane Arcade Game". You're absolutely delusional if you believe that any of this can be represented in a realistic way. As for the CA radar, it's nothing like any real life piece of equipment (AN/APG-68, AN/APG-63, AN/APG-71).

"Long Range" SAM Systems as you call them would not work on such small map sizes. For example, the SA-13 has an engagement envelope out to around 2.5NM. This would mean that you would be implementing an SA-2 for example with less range than a SA-13.

As I said, it would work, but not in any realistic way whatsoever. Basically it would be Ace Combat on a smaller scale.

Would it not be fun? Why are you trying to sink my bandwagon?

PR isn't exactly realistic either when you think about it, the AIM-120 doesn't even have the 30 mile range it does have in real life, armor values are the same for the heavily differing T-90 and M1A2 Abrams, do you not know how large a 8x8 map is? The scale of a "Long Range" SAM system you pointed out would not be the full 45km the SA-2 has in real life. It would just be outside of the visual range of the operator. PR itself isn't exactly accurate either, plus its gameplay > realism.

=Toasted= · Post by **=Toasted=** » 2010-07-23 20:27

So, Vehicle Warfare in the skies? Seems interesting. I just hope all the skilled pilots wouldnt flock to this, leaving the rest of us groud pounders with crashed wreckage on the runways and landing pads.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-23 20:53

=Toasted= wrote:So, Vehicle Warfare in the skies? Seems interesting. I just hope all the skilled pilots wouldnt flock to this, leaving the rest of us groud pounders with crashed wreckage on the runways and landing pads.

Well, most of the aircraft are dual seat, so there are roles for those less-than adequate flyboys.

snotmaster0 · Post by **snotmaster0** » 2010-07-23 22:13

The gamemode looks good in concept but IMHO would turn into a smacktard fest. Since aircraft won't insta rrespawn people will get stuck waiting for planes with nothing to do and then to for an asset.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-23 23:49

snotmaster0 wrote:The gamemode looks good in concept but IMHO would turn into a smacktard fest. Since aircraft won't insta rrespawn people will get stuck waiting for planes with nothing to do and then to for an asset.

We could do the same thing as the armor on Kashan Desert, have a set spawn initially, and have a second set spawn a few minutes after. The gamemode will have to require the bombers to win so having the extra fighters be whored by those supposed to bomb would not happen.

WelshManDan · Post by **WelshManDan** » 2010-07-24 00:19

Drunkenup wrote:Would it not be fun? Why are you trying to sink my bandwagon?

Since when do Wagons float? I presume you mean a BandBarge, in which case you never left the drydock

AaronFraher · Post by **AaronFraher** » 2010-07-24 00:24

Drunkenup wrote:Would it not be fun?

Giving everyone an M249 in PR would be fun. Should we do it?

Drunkenup wrote:PR isn't exactly realistic either when you think about it

I never said it was, and i dont think it is either.

Drunkenup wrote:do you not know how large a 8x8 map is?

Yes, suprisingly, I think you'll find that its 8km x 8km. Giving a total of 64KM2.

Tiny when you think that 8 x .55 gives 4.4NM. The Shortest join to final I'd make IRL is about 2-3NM, in a PA-28.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-24 00:48

AaronFraher wrote:Giving everyone an M249 in PR would be fun. Should we do it?

I never said it was, and i dont think it is either.

Yes, suprisingly, I think you'll find that its 8km x 8km. Giving a total of 64KM2.

Tiny when you think that 8 x .55 gives 4.4NM. The Shortest join to final I'd make IRL is about 2-3NM, in a PA-28.

In PR, aircraft fly in a 2x2 structure. You're saying 8x8 isn't adequate, why don't we remove fixed wing aircraft all together in both the PR:V and PR:BF2 releases?

So you're criticizing my idea to give aircraft working aircraft and radar guided SAMs.

Let me ask you this then, do you think it would work at all?

AaronFraher · Post by **AaronFraher** » 2010-07-24 01:04

Drunkenup wrote:In PR, aircraft fly in a 2x2 structure. You're saying 8x8 isn't adequate, why don't we remove fixed wing aircraft all together in both the PR:V and PR:BF2 releases?

So you're criticizing my idea to give aircraft working aircraft and radar guided SAMs.

Let me ask you this then, do you think it would work at all?

Nope. The only reason I commented was to suggest other alternatives much better than PR for an Aircraft Simulation, seen as you seem to have some idea what you're talking about.

Drunkenup · Post by **Drunkenup** » 2010-07-24 01:12

AaronFraher wrote:Nope. The only reason I commented was to suggest other alternatives much better than PR for an Aircraft Simulation, seen as you seem to have some idea what you're talking about.

Well nice to near you opinion, definitely will be considered.

mati140 · Post by **mati140** » 2010-07-25 11:37

I have better idea: remove everything what flies in PR, leave this Vietnam thing alone and make some real, unskipable, singleplayer training to remove noobs from servers. PR:V was better as an April Fools joke.

killonsight95 · Post by **killonsight95** » 2010-07-26 10:58

i like this idea, sounds very fun and realistic. AA and ranges will be scaled down obv.... as they are in PR:BF2 as to make it seem more realistic. I could see this being one of those games modes to have fun on and not bee all serious for about 20 mins.

mat552 · Post by **mat552** » 2010-07-26 19:06

AaronFraher wrote:Giving everyone an M249 in PR would be fun. Should we do it?

I dunno if you've played insurgency mode lately, but this is generally how it winds up in my experience.

[T]waylay00 · Post by **[T]waylay00** » 2010-07-30 00:46

The argument not to implement it because it isn't "realistic" doesn't hold up, especially when you look at PR itself. PR has always been about making the Battlefield experience as realistic as possible, not necessarily shooting for exact realism. Otherwise, it would have been a lost cause from the start, as none of the PR maps truly represent realistic engagements.

I'm all for an air-centric mode, and I think the OP has outlined some good ideas.

Hunt3r · Post by **Hunt3r** » 2010-08-04 09:10

Seems like a realistic scenario, with the goal of establishing air superiority, and carrying out objectives.

May be rather... chaotic though. It'll take some ATC to make sure it doesn't end with all the planes going kaboom on the takeoff roll.

All Air mode

All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode

Re: All Air mode