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

[dtacs]

The Tunguska, since its an infantry rape machine, should be 2 manned. Every other AA should require just a single, its unrealistic, but the extra person on the ground/in a tank etc. is more beneficial to the team.

[Nebsif]

^ Agree
Gunning+Driving AA is wtf boring enough, but only driving one is just /wrists...

[mat552]

I'd like to point out that the tunguska may be a rape machine, but it sounds like one, and deploys like a tank.

The Avenger Humvee on the other hand, sounds like a normal light vehicle until it rolls up and dumps 200 rounds of .50 into you and your squad, with a few wildly aimed missiles to boot. And then flees the scene before anyone can show up to deal with it.

[Alex6714]

So its not ok if it rapes infantry but it is if it rapes aircraft?

[Grizzly]

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.

Don't you completely invalidate your point with that statement? Make it two man and the same thing will happen, yes you stated that but YOU already do/have done it. Sounds to me you had a bad day and then came home to PR and then got the short end of the stick. S**t happens man get use to it.

[Oddsodz]

Don't you completely invalidate your point with that statement? Make it two man and the same thing will happen, yes you stated that but YOU already do/have done it. Sounds to me you had a bad day and then came home to PR and then got the short end of the stick. S**t happens man get use to it.

The point is it would take 2 players to agree go base raping. One player on his/her own can do it. But making it 2 man job means making it harder for him/her to do so own there own. Plus admins would be able to find them on the map and deal with it before it becomes an issue.

I Will say it again as it looks like the point has been lost.

Base raping issues aside (remember that some server don't have that rule). The amount of teamwork needed to use the Anti aircraft vehicle is zero. Yet it has the power to kill a tank. This is wrong. Just today I saw an US Army Anti aircraft vehicle Avenger kill a tank (it may have been damaged before the the Anti aircraft vehicle hit it, But I did not see that). This is a lot of fire power at the hands of just one player. It's armored. Making it require a LAT or more to kill it (yes I know you can fozz/C4/mine it if you can get close). For such a thing to have this much power and need zero teamwork to use/kill is just plan wrong. Everything else in PR needs teamwork to be used. Why should the Anti aircraft vehicle be any different? Some of you say it would take away players from other jobs/roles on the battle field. Fine. Make it have 1 single seat. And reduce it's ammo count to just 2 rockets. Then it can still fill the role of an Anti aircraft vehicle. But it can't go around killing tanks and troops to it's hearts content.

[Nebsif]

How can an AAV kill a tank? spam missiles and hope they hit somewhere around it or wut? Tank crew must be wtfubernub..

[Grizzly]

The point is it would take 2 players to agree go base raping. One player on his/her own can do it. But making it 2 man job means making it harder for him/her to do so own there own. Plus admins would be able to find them on the map and deal with it before it becomes an issue.

I Will say it again as it looks like the point has been lost.

Base raping issues aside (remember that some server don't have that rule). The amount of teamwork needed to use the Anti aircraft vehicle is zero. Yet it has the power to kill a tank. This is wrong. Just today I saw an US Army Anti aircraft vehicle Avenger kill a tank (it may have been damaged before the the Anti aircraft vehicle hit it, But I did not see that). This is a lot of fire power at the hands of just one player. It's armored. Making it require a LAT or more to kill it (yes I know you can fozz/C4/mine it if you can get close). For such a thing to have this much power and need zero teamwork to use/kill is just plan wrong. Everything else in PR needs teamwork to be used. Why should the Anti aircraft vehicle be any different? Some of you say it would take away players from other jobs/roles on the battle field. Fine. Make it have 1 single seat. And reduce it's ammo count to just 2 rockets. Then it can still fill the role of an Anti aircraft vehicle. But it can't go around killing tanks and troops to it's hearts content.

So if used properly you would rather have two players waiting around doing almost nothing instead of one...

Also this reminds me of an old quote on here that "Players are hard coded". No matter what you do or how you do it, jackasses will be jackasses and find a way to screw it up.

[Oddsodz]

So if used properly you would rather have two players waiting around doing almost nothing instead of one...

If you and your team want protection from the sky's. YES. Teamwork should always trump lone wolf.

[Maverick]

I disagree. AA vehicles are supposed to be defensive units and unless you pay somebody to do it, nobody is going to volunteer a driver. How much fun is that? Sitting in a vehicle and do nothing all day long?

Baserape however, needs to be treated alternatively. With a script kicking players who baserape - it's as simple as that.

Sorry to maybe-necro this thread, but VBF2 has this script. Auto Admin has it to where it knows when someone baserapes, rams, commits teamklling, a whole lot of really interesting features.

[Dev1200]

tl;dr


Sorry oddsoddz, but I'm sure they'll fix this Perhaps they have them like how it is now so they are mobile AA positions, like the emplacements are?

[Stealthgato]

The Stormer, SA-13 Gopher and SA-9 Gaskin should remain able to be 1-manned, they don't have any armament other than anti-aircraft missiles.

[Oddsodz]

lol, did you not read the whole thread? They can kill tanks even when one manned.

[Rudd]

lol, did you not read the whole thread? They can kill tanks even when one manned.

not reliably, and not if a tanker is actually looking at his computer screen instead of arguing with his mother about coming down for dinner....

[Oddsodz]

It is what it is, They can kill tanks, troops, aircraft. All that power in one players hands is to much. Even more so when everything else armored has to be 2 manned.

[illidur]

i can see the reason for having 1 person aa.(only takes 1 person to fly a jet) but them turning invisible on the map makes it a pain to admin baseraping. on the other side who wants to sit in a driver seat while ur friend stares at the sky?

[W4lt3r89]

i can see the reason for having 1 person aa.(only takes 1 person to fly a jet) but them turning invisible on the map makes it a pain to admin baseraping. on the other side who wants to sit in a driver seat while ur friend stares at the sky?

Pretty much same in bomber jets. Who wants to sit in the pilot seat when friend is staring in the bomber's FLIR or who wants to sit in APC/Tank driver seat while friend watches the buildings / bushes / hills...

It was already stated earlier on first page that to use a jet effectively, it requires help from the people on the ground in the form of lasering and informing the jet on the whereabouts of enemy units.

AA does not require this right now. You can just ride one to random part of the map and just look in the sky to take down an asset from the enemy that requires coordination to be used effectively in a unit that doesn't require such thing.

[Bob of Mage]

In real life does an AAV driver have to stay at the wheel when it's in use like a tank? I would think that if the AAV stops to guard a location the driver can get out and stretch his legs, or something like helping to reload the weapons. The real question that hasn't been answered is how the AAVs are used in real life. If they are used like artillery, than leave like it is, if not than change it.

[ShockUnitBlack]

I support two men simply 'cause that's how it is in real-life and there's the distinct possibility of some noob stealing the vehicle so he can get to some vantage point with his sniper kit, in which case the team loses a valuable asset.

AAA, as suggested by Mongol, doesn't really work as I believe the only exclusively AAA vehicle in any sort of relevant use currently is the ZPU-23-4 (the 57-2 could be used by the Militia though). You got all sorts of vehicles like the Tunguska that have a mix of guns and missiles, but then you have missiles too and all the aforementioned problems that go along with that. To summarize, that means unless you want to give the US the Sergeant York or an M113 with a Vulcan - which either never were or are no longer in use - that isn't going to work.

Also, I'm fairly certain that the Tunguska and other "heavy" AA vehicles are far too powerful to be in PR and be balanced at the same time.