Anti aircraft vehicle, Why can they still be used as a solo driven/fired vehicle?

[Oddsodz]

Anti aircraft vehicles are now beyond a joke.

This is going to turn into a rant by me. Please feel free to click to something funny.

How is it that even now after so many builds that in the current version. Players can still single seat an Anti aircraft vehicle? Can somebody please tell me why this is the case? To use a VN3-Batcar you need 2 crew men. To use a tank. You need 2 crew men. To use and APC, You need 2 crew men. So why is it you only need 1 player to drive it and gun it? This one issue is just so stupid now.

This is a story of a real game experience.

Map is Silent Eagle. One Russian player decides that he wished to camp the German airfield. He takes the Russian Anti aircraft vehicle. Takes a nice long drive to map grid K11. Swaps seats. And then proceeds to destroy 2 jets and 2 Transport helos, 1 Little bird and about 10 troops plus a truck or 2. Due to the map. There is no way to kill him unless a tank or Bradley comes along. But in the case of the Russian Anti aircraft vehicle. He can kill them too. He then drives back to his main and rearms and comes back and can do it all again. How is this right? How is it that 1 player can have so much power over the opposite team? Just by my story above. That one player has just cost the team 20 minutes with no air support. 5 or 10 minutes with no Supply's. No transport. Plus the silly amount of team tickets. It's a game winning tactic.

This is the same on Kashan and Battle for Q. 1 Player can effectively destroy a team by just base raping the assets. It's even worst on Silent Eagle due to no HAT/LAT kits (I know that is a side issue).

And before somebody says. Go play on server that don't allow base raping. This does not stop the above story from happening. If a player wants to base rape in this way. He will do the damage. By the time a Admin can get on the case. It almost always to late. The damage is done. It's not the admins fault. He can not be watching every Tom, **** and Harry's move all game long. Their is also the side note that a single seated Anti Aircraft Vehicle does not show up on the map. So even if an admin is looking about. He will not see that player on the map. And so does not know that there is an issue to deal with. Again. Not the admins fault. If the Anti aircraft vehicle is crewed by 2 men. Then it is easy for an admin to see and deal with.


So can somebody please tell me where Solo/Single seated Anti aircraft vehicles promote teamwork? Can somebody give a good valid reason why the Anti aircraft vehicles should stay usable in this manner?

It's time to bring the Anti aircraft vehicles in line with every other vehicle that has a gun (note: not including light vehicles like Hummers/BRDMs/Techys and so on - TOW Hummer should also need 2 crew men but I will leave that to somebody else to deal with). Make them a 2 man job like everything else.


With a tool like the Anti aircraft vehicle. It should be a 2 man job.

End of my rant.

[Bazul14]

Ok, well, if the team is so mentally challanged that it can not bring a HAT or LAT on the field of battle, then I am seriously sorry for them. Also, a TOW can be built. Another, sometimes even easier variant would be C4 and some flanking action, since only 1 person is in the vehicle, it will be preoccupied with what's in front of him or his sides, and not his back. Also, I think the AAVs don't have thermals, so SE and infantry should go hand in hand on such a map. Also, if the Jets are dumb enough to fly low without knowing that other jets died, then sorry for them, too bad.
The AAVs should remain one mannable since they are often brought in with the tanks in order to provide AA cover, and since most tank squads are not always full, they would still prefer to get the most tanks up, and leave the AA job for only one guy. Or even better, bring TWO AAVs out in the field with them, for double the ownage.

I know I might be advocating some unruly behaviour, but it helps gameplay a lot. So keep soloing AAVs To Victory!

[Oddsodz]

Oh my, Did you even read my story above? Please do tell me how you are going to build a TOW when you have no crates to build with? Or fact you have to be so far away from your main before you can build a FOB. Please tell me how you are going to get a HAT/LAt kit when the Anti aircraft vehicles has full on sights on the spawn point at your main? Please do tell me how you are going to bomb the Anti aircraft vehicle when he has already based raped both jets/CAS-HELOS before take off because Anti aircraft vehicles spawn 10 minutes before any jets/CAS-HELOS do? Please tell me how you are going get near him when he as a 4x zoom? The only Anti aircraft vehicles that does not have some sort of cannon are the MEC Anti aircraft vehicles. All the rest have a fast firing cannon of some sort (ok the Brit one does not. but it can still kill tanks). Plus the Anti aircraft missiles that can destroy a tank. Oh and did you forget in my story the map was Silent Eagle? I Would love for you to show me how to get a HAT/LAT. You are up to date on the current build of PR right? No HAT/LAT kits on that map at this time due to bug. As I stated above. It's a side issue that is going to be fix. In fact the only map where there is hope of getting ride of the offending base raper is Silent Eagle. Due to the extra tank spawn point. But as I said above (you did read that right?) The damage is done by the time a tank/Bradly/BMP/Whatever can get near. Plus they too can also can also be destroyed by an Anti aircraft vehicle. YEs, that's right. The big Anti aircraft vehicles can take out tanks.

All your ideas to deal with the task of killing the Anti aircraft vehicle take lots of time. Good luck getting C4 on him. That's along walk to where it might be sitting. And again. All the damage is done by the time you get there. As I said before. Just in a ticket count alone. It is a game winning tactic. An Anti aircraft vehicles cost a team 5+1 tickles if destroyed. Now if he just gets 1 CAS asset. Jet or CAS-HELO. He has paid for himself. And by my count on my story above. He destroyed 85 tickets worth (ruff guess) with in 1 minute. And was able to go back and rearm to come and do it again.

I Am sorry. But it's far to much fire power for just one player alone. Remember. It takes teamwork to do anything in PR. Want to kill something in a tank. Need 2 crewmen. Want to bomb something from a jet, Need 2 players to work together, spotter and jet pilot. Again teamwork. Want to go to town in the Bradley? Best get 2 crewmen. Want to rack up them kills in a CAS-HELO? Best get 2 pilots and a spotter (spotter is optional but highly recommended). Again team work.

The only exception is the Anti aircraft vehicle. No teamwork required. Get in and drive to where you want and swap seats. Bingo. 30 seconds latter you can kill everything you like. And where on any map is the most lightly defended place on the map? Where is the one place you can go that you can guarantee nobody is guarding? Yes. You guess it. The main.

Making the Anti aircraft vehicles a 2 man job will not stop base rapping. I Am not that silly. But it will make admins jobs a lot easier with identifying offenders of server rules that have them. And it will also mean that it will take 2 players to agree to go base raping. Not just one lone nub cake who has no sense on how the game is meant to be played.

Your argument is that it helps game play a lot. How is that so? The Anti aircraft vehicles primary role is to kill aircraft. Now CAS aircraft needs lots of things to work right before it can do it's job. Spotter needs to know how to laze. Pilot need to know how to bomb. Communication needs to work right between the two of them. IE: squad to squad and map marks with Como-Rose And so on. Lots of teamwork. Now in relation to all that teamwork. How much does an Anti aircraft vehicle need to kill anything? The answer is 0. No teamwork is need at all. It does not help game play. In fact it promotes lone wolfing. I Can't remember the last time I saw an Anti aircraft vehicle stay with the tanks. 80% of the time I see Anti aircraft vehicle in 1 of 3 places on any given map. Near the opposite teams main base camping or base raping. Near the current flag in contest. Never where they need to be to help the team. Only where they can get the best score/KDR.

This needs to be changed. Make Anti aircraft vehicle work for it's kills like everything else in PR has too. It's only right.

[PLODDITHANLEY]

I disagree with the little AA vehicles being two manned, the humvee Avenger and the little no .50cal MEC one, but the Tungska is so powered it needs it.

If this becomes a more frequent problem, which it may do after this thread put it on a 20min spawn?

[Oddsodz]

Does not matter what Anti aircraft vehicle you think of. The end result is the same. Zero teamwork needed to use. 100% teamwork to kill an Anti aircraft vehicle. Ok the light MEC BRDM and Avenger Anti aircraft vehicle you can destroy as a lone soldier. But still the amount of damage them light Anti aircraft vehicle can do with just one player at the helm is still out of balance with the rest of PR.

[DonDOOM]

I agree, AA Vehicles have been changed from 1 manned to 2 manned in earlyer releases, and the fact that you can solo it again in 0.95 seems a bit silly to me.

[Alex6714]

And then people complain the AA is not good enough.


I agree though, it makes no sense. Me and mora were playing on iron eagle, server not even half full, in a tank, and we got killed. We knew the apache was up, so I took the AAV and Mora took a tank, we drove out of base. Saw the apache, so I stopped, switched seats, shot it down, and abandoned the AAV to get in the tank, and off we went. I don?t defend that play style, I think its stupid, but it worked... I think its silly that that is possible really.

With all the teamwork that is required to operate any air asset, its strange that even with the abundance of AA it still requires none at all to use.

Edit: Iirc its because there aren?t enough players in game, or it would take too many away from the front. I would say thats not an issue, because if it were 2 manned then you have to make the tactical decision if you want to take 2 tanks out, or 1 tank and 1 AAV and AA would actually become more important.

[Jaymz]

I agree actually. Whatever reasons we had for this in the past are outlived now.

[Tim270]

I definitely agree for vehicles like the Avenger and Tunguska that have two weapons. Not so much for stuff like the Gaskin/Stormer though.

[Oddsodz]

If it's armoured and can kill a tank. It should be a 2 man job in my opinion.

The Question is. Will a change happen? I Have a felling that it can be changed with a server side update/fix.

[ma21212]

If it's armoured and can kill a tank. It should be a 2 man job in my opinion.

The Question is. Will a change happen? I Have a felling that it can be changed with a server side update/fix.

wait why even that? if it needs more than one person irl then it should in PR.

[Mongolian_dude]

I do still think that its important to remind ourselves that its hard taking people away from the battlefield, especially if it proves to not be much fun.

Sitting around on an AA staring at the sky all day is pretty abysmal and can be a real anti-climax when you've waited for a long amount of time, for the benefit of the team, only to be busted open by a random HAT round for a distant ridge-line.

AA is very hard to code realistically/game-play wise, and people will be familiar with how random AA can appear against aircraft:

"I shot 4 missiles at him before he could drop flares and they ALL missed! That sux!"

"Wtf?! He had a crappy angel on me, I dropped all 30 flares, was going top speed and he STILL got me!! FUUUUU!!"

With that said...

I'd personally like to see a well thought out return of AAA(anti-aircraft-artillery), both fixed and self-propelled. Not only is AAA, in experienced hands, potentially more effective against helicopters, but it actually allows players to still have a direct effect in the ground conflict; aka, fun.

Unfortunately, due to hitbox problems with the speeds they move at, it proves very difficult to hit fixed wing aircraft with AAA. I think continued research into AAA PR:CA (Combined Arms) was looking at may prove value for gameplay in this regard.


For those willing to discuss this solution, continue your read below

View (01:01 - 02:38 )


Alright men, by looking at this intel, we can see here that AAA fires 'homing-rounds'. These are essentially lots of tiny AA-missiles that will explode in proximity to an aircraft, resulting in continuous damage against the targeted aircraft; meaning for the pilot, the longer he exposes his aircraft to AAA, the more DMG he takes.

Perhaps with the disabling-damage feature we see in other vehicles, the pilot would loose control over his weapons systems (maybe even his flares?), forcing him to withdraw from the battlefield and land. Direct hits against an enemy aircraft would be even more costly and harrowing for the pilot.
This, coupled with the current standard, manual firing mode of AAA (for better use against helicopters) would make a fierce weapons system that gives both gunner and target a chance and puts a gradient into the current 0.0 or 1.0 success-rate of both AA and evasion.


Help me out fellas, thoughts? Criticisms?
x


...mongol...

[Zoddom]

the automatic mode is very realistic, however the proximity rounds would probably be a bit useless then, and unrealistic imo. that, with normal AP rounds and its fine, but add a warning signal for lock on in aircrafts! or the advantage of the manual firemode is lost.

[Oddsodz]

Oh noezesez, Thread has been hijacked by an [R-Mod] lol

Your point about sitting in an Anti aircraft vehicle and looking up all game long being boring can be true to a point. But there is a lot of roles in PR that can be boring. Setting up an IED ambush and waiting for a target is boring. Guarding a FOB is boring. Driving a truck can be boring. Building a FOB is boring. A Pilot flying round and round a map because there are no targets for him/her to engage is boring. But all are roles needed to be played out for a team to win. So I don't think your point counts on this matter.

As cool as that video maybe with it's auto locking long range exploding bullets and so on. The point remains the same. It should be a 2 man job. Again the main point is that the amount of fire power the Anti aircraft vehicles have at the hands of just one player is too much. Again zero teamwork needed to use and dominate.

[Tim270]

wait why even that? if it needs more than one person irl then it should in PR.

Because they hardly get used as it is. How many times have you spawned in the mec main on Kashan to see 4 Gaskins sitting there untouched? Waiting for a air-target to pop onto the radar can get boring and driving even more so.

I like the AAA idea as it does indeed give the user much more input and involvement in ones actions.

I am not too sure I see where forcing the vehicle to have to require 2 crew members will actually have any impact on balance at all? It still comes down to 1 guy still in the turret with a lot of firepower. If anything it will lead to less AAV's around the map which imo there are already very few of.

[Oddsodz]

I am not too sure I see where forcing the vehicle to have to require 2 crew members will actually have any impact on balance at all? It still comes down to 1 guy still in the turret with a lot of firepower.

Making it need 2 crewmen means teamwork is needed for it to be used. I Am not saying the Anti aircraft vehicle should not have it's level of fire power. I Am saying it should take 2 players to use that fire power.

As for the MEC Gaskins (I Had forgotten it's name). Easy fix. Dump it and bring back the Tunguska for the MEC.

[Mongolian_dude]

Oh noezesez, Thread has been hijacked by an [R-Mod] lol

Your point about sitting in an Anti aircraft vehicle and looking up all game long being boring can be true to a point. But there is a lot of roles in PR that can be boring. Setting up an IED ambush and waiting for a target is boring. Guarding a FOB is boring. Driving a truck can be boring. Building a FOB is boring. A Pilot flying round and round a map because there are no targets for him/her to engage is boring. But all are roles needed to be played out for a team to win. So I don't think your point counts on this matter.

As cool as that video maybe with it's auto locking long range exploding bullets and so on. The point remains the same. It should be a 2 man job. Again the main point is that the amount of fire power the Anti aircraft vehicles have at the hands of just one player is too much. Again zero teamwork needed to use and dominate.

Yeah, sorry about the mega post. I thought someone might think that

Considering this is a modification for a videogame which we all play for our enjoyment, I think that alone makes the point valid. Just because it's proven difficult to rectify other not-so-fun roles playable/ uninspiring scenarios in the game, it doesn't make it any more sensible to withhold enjoyment in other areas.
And most relevant to you, it's an effort to rectify what is most likely the cause of the observation you've made of players one-manning an AAV.

Yes, while the game allows a player to do this, an AAV can be employed more effectively with a full crew; not waiting for weapon times, more eyes, move-firing etc. However, even with players offered a way to maximise their potential, they dont. Because its rather boring. By making this game aspect more fun, you wouldnt only have made the game better overall, but you wouldnt have to bother changing any code anyway.


...mongol...

[Wh33lman]

if AA is so strong, why havent people figured this out yet? instead of taking 3 tanks, you can take 2 tanks and an AAV, which can fight off aircraft and other tanks. i think your overstating their power just to try and scare everyone.

i agree with the original statment, require 2 crewman for an AAV. no changing of vehicles, just a 2 seat restriction like the tanks. i actually wonder why this hasnt been done already.

...you wouldnt have to bother changing any code anyway.


...mongol...

Mongol, please, its cut and paste. the gunner w/o driver coding cant be more then 5 or 6 lines. it would take all of a minute to change

[hiberNative]

yes, make it 2 manned.

[Oddsodz]

if AA is so strong, why havent people figured this out yet?

Some have I Am not so sure about the smaller Gaskin and Avenger. I Did once damage a tank so that it was "tracked" with the Avenger. But the bigger Anti aircraft vehicles like the Stormer and the Russian/PLA Tunguska (I Don't know about the new MEC Gopher as I have not been in it as of yet but I asume it has the same sort of missiles) can and do kill tanks. I Have myself killed with the Brit Stormer Anti aircraft vehicle killed 1 MEC Havoc CAS-HELO, 1 MEC Gopher + 1 MEC BMP and 1 MEC Tank before I ran out of ammo and had to go and rearm. This was down to the fact we was crewed up as a driver and a gunner. So we could move and hide. This would be harder to do as a solo/single setter. But it would be doable.

This is why it should be a 2 man job. They have so much fire power. I Am not saying we should not have this fire power. And I don't really care how Anti aircraft vehicles are made for the game. Anti aircraft vehicles do have a place in PR. No matter how they work. But they should be dealt with like the rest of the game. Teamwork to do the job. Look at all the teamwork needed to do anything in the game. Then look at the teamwork needed to use an Anti aircraft vehicle. Can you see the imbalance yet?