Removal of helicopter carried Anti-Air missiles

[Zoddom]

BMP and 30mm MTLBs can look straight up.... imagine what will happen if they are on a hill, you won't be able to see them as you can't look straight down but they will see and rape you as they can look straight up.

but still you would have to locate the heli first without seeing him to get below him to get visual contact, and if the heli would be on 1000m youd have to be straight below and that is a bit unlikely

[Mantak08]

Zoddom you have your own thread about changing max altitude, stop infecting other peoples threads.

[Zoddom]

Zoddom you have your own thread about changing max altitude, stop infecting other peoples threads.

the thing is, we cannot look at every single issue but at the whole problem of helicopters.
whatever it is, something went wrong

[Bringerof_D]

i see that its getting clear to some people that we HAVE to do something about those CAS battles.
i fully agree with you OP, as it is now, it just sucks.
@mat552:
youre right, i get the feeling that most of our "skilled pilots" like heli hunting more then CAS, and if thats true, then theyre the wrong guys for that role and have to be sorted out. this suggestion (or something equally) would be one method to achieve this.

this suggestion has nothing to do with getting rid of CAS battles, it's about lengthening it and making it more fun. you have your own thread on this, dont try and hi-jack another.

[lukeyu2005]

The only problem is the CAS choppers are hunting each other but flying high. However if there was background heat it would solve the problem as the diving CAS chopper wouldn't be able to lock on as the heat of the chopper would blend in with the heat of the ground. (See my other thread concerning background heat) Thus making the only viable way for CAS vs CAS combat is at low attitude where they are engaging in front of a cool background the sky. And now we have no more diving CAS choppers the CAS can now do what they are meant to do and provide CAS and chopper vs chopper battles will now be less common as they are now in range of SAMs

[ComradeHX]

Good alternative(compromise):

Buff flares, they are already really spammy...make them spammable enough to completely nullify any AA missile lock until they are spent. However, make them fire even faster so they are easy to empty.

Now we get prolonged air battle...of waiting to see who runs out of flares and trying to get a angle in which you do not lock onto enemy flares.

While that is happening I think the autocannons on the attack helicopters will be useful enough.

---------------------
There is a limit to how much realism we can sacrifice for gameplay, and removing the AA missiles to revert battle to vBF2 **** is not an option.

[Saarna]

All compromises and off-topic suggestions aside, I can't really see why there's even a discussion about the subject. Like I pointed out in a similar thread a couple months back, and as has been stated in this thread, barring the AH-64D's twin-Stinger racks on either wingtip none of PR's gunships are capable of carrying A-A missiles in addition to the full A-G complement they are now armed with.

The current loadouts would simply be impossible to mount on the real choppers, which should be reason enough to remove the A-A missiles, or at least have them replace either the rockets or AT missiles. This would of course play in favor of the Apache, which might actually have double the current amount of A-A missiles (with no lesser performance in PR's scope) while retaining all A-G weaponry, but I'd say that would fit in nicely with the asymmetric balance concept - after all, PR doesn't have Leopards firing guided missiles, or Bradleys armed with twenty weapons of differing calibers to match their Russian counterparts.

[Archerchef]

I agree with this suggestion. Helo hunting>Providing CAS because of AA missiles but this wont prevent helo hunting via cannon which could be just as easy..

[PatrickLA_CA]

No, flares are a must for any aircraft, we need to have more flares, but in order to fix the problem of Helicopter dogfights for the whole round, simply put 1 helicopter on each team.

[Zoddom]

No, flares are a must for any aircraft, we need to have more flares, but in order to fix the problem of Helicopter dogfights for the whole round, simply put 1 helicopter on each team.

could work imo

[Bluedrake42]

I think we should just wait for PR ArmA 2 to come out and stop attempting to make drastic changes to PR gameplay. Lets face it, BF2 isn't made to handle things like this. So there might be a way to make certain things more appeasing, but generally I feel that we've reached the engines breaking point. suggestions like this are becoming all too common, and I feel like a line must be drawn between pursuing Realism by making changes that are completely unrealistic. If helicopters were to meet, they would shoot missiles at each other, end of story. The Realism lost by removing that would well outweigh the Realism gained. I'm also a strong supporter of removing the kit pickup block. But in the end I guess it all comes down to "to each his own".

[Bluedrake42]

The only problem is the CAS choppers are hunting each other but flying high. However if there was background heat it would solve the problem as the diving CAS chopper wouldn't be able to lock on as the heat of the chopper would blend in with the heat of the ground. (See my other thread concerning background heat) Thus making the only viable way for CAS vs CAS combat is at low attitude where they are engaging in front of a cool background the sky. And now we have no more diving CAS choppers the CAS can now do what they are meant to do and provide CAS and chopper vs chopper battles will now be less common as they are now in range of SAMs

although I must say that is an EXCELLENT idea

[Kim Jong ill]

Except that IR seekers have far long ago evolved from being deceived by any of kind of "background heat" if they were even at all (Except for perhaps the sun)

[lukeyu2005]

I saw a documentary on the a10 and it the story behind the first air to air gun kill was during the first gulf war. when a a10 pilot could not lock on due to the excess background heat from the sand. And thus used the gau 8 on an mi-17.

I'll try and find that documentary

[mat552]

There is of course, no chance, the A10 pilot was merely looking to have his crew chief paint something interesting on the side of his bird, and gave up on the AA lock before all his options were truly exhausted.

*cough*

[Bringerof_D]

problem with adding more flares deploying faster, means ground based AA becomes all the more useless, they are already far too easily distracted by flares. I'm liking the IR idea though.

@kim: he's not talking about missiles losing lock, i think he's talking about not being able to see the target through FLIR. Which works in the mid east around mid day when the sun is directly over head most IR systems as i've been taught are blind. Not sure if that applies to aircraft but anything close to the ground would be well camouflaged against the hot sand. however IR sights have a limited range so i dont think a chopper flying several hundred meters above the sand would be necesarily well hidden against another chopper.

[Cassius]

Well as it is tactics revolve around getting that first lock and avoid being locked on. Both can do it, so the challenge is still there. Its like saying nascar is lame because they drive in circles and formula 1 more challenging, but they all race under the same conditions, so winning and any easier, just because it looks easier than formula 1.

[Saarna]

suggestions like this are becoming all too common, and I feel like a line must be drawn between pursuing Realism by making changes that are completely unrealistic. If helicopters were to meet, they would shoot missiles at each other, end of story. The Realism lost by removing that would well outweigh the Realism gained.

Completely unrealistic, you say? The choppers might indeed fire missiles at each other, but first they'd have to carry those missiles somewhere:

AH-1W (and any prior to AH-1Z)




No wingtip station. Capacity in real life two AIM-9's on the outer pylons, replacing the TOW/Hellfire missiles.

WZ-10




Trickier since there's relatively little info or photographs of this helo available, so much so that the vBF2 model used in PR is a straight up Agusta A129. Still, only four hardpoints, meaning a reduction in A-G ordnance in order to carry any A-A.

Eurocopter Tiger




PR reference from Hauteclocque's thread, capacity in real life four Mistral or Stinger missiles on outer hardpoints.

Mi-28




My personal favorite, just stick another missile on a rack already holding 8 Atakas. IRL carries R-73's or twin-Igla racks on the hardpoints.

Gonna skip the Apache since it's already presented in this thread. All in all, the helos in PR are unrealistically overarmed, which should have no viable counterpoint. If you fear that removing the A-A missiles would trigger a spam-fest of rockets and A-T missiles - which can be used in aerial engagements btw - then maybe something should be done to discourage their usage in such a manner. A hefty reload time might do the trick, or perhaps some concept I can't be bothered to think of in this instance, but surely the best solution is not to lump even more weapons on the helos, in the hopes people would use what they realistically should have more conservatively.

[Bluedrake42]

Completely unrealistic, you say? The choppers might indeed fire missiles at each other, but first they'd have to carry those missiles somewhere:

AH-1W (and any prior to AH-1Z)




No wingtip station. Capacity in real life two AIM-9's on the outer pylons, replacing the TOW/Hellfire missiles.

WZ-10




Trickier since there's relatively little info or photographs of this helo available, so much so that the vBF2 model used in PR is a straight up Agusta A129. Still, only four hardpoints, meaning a reduction in A-G ordnance in order to carry any A-A.

Eurocopter Tiger




PR reference from Hauteclocque's thread, capacity in real life four Mistral or Stinger missiles on outer hardpoints.

Mi-28




My personal favorite, just stick another missile on a rack already holding 8 Atakas. IRL carries R-73's or twin-Igla racks on the hardpoints.

Gonna skip the Apache since it's already presented in this thread. All in all, the helos in PR are unrealistically overarmed, which should have no viable counterpoint. If you fear that removing the A-A missiles would trigger a spam-fest of rockets and A-T missiles - which can be used in aerial engagements btw - then maybe something should be done to discourage their usage in such a manner. A hefty reload time might do the trick, or perhaps some concept I can't be bothered to think of in this instance, but surely the best solution is not to lump even more weapons on the helos, in the hopes people would use what they realistically should have more conservatively.

Good post, I can see that.
If its realistic then I say go for it.
But my general point is that some of these solutions are becoming... ridiculous.
If it can't be solved with a realistic (or near realistic) compromise then it shouldn't be changed until one comes up.

Deviation is pretty borderline, and I personally kit pickup blocks are over the line. But I'm all for rethinking ways to make aircombat more interesting. But not like... lowering the flight ceiling or taking away AA's for heli's that have them (unless they don't... in which case take them off). Because people who get in this game... and try to fly high, and then fall out of the sky are going to be like PFT wtf am I playing I thought this was project REALITY.

[Jaymz]

I would just like to state that Saarna's posts have been confirmed by our MA's.

Most of our helicopters in-game would have to sacrifice entire pylons in order to carry AAM's. So it's time for us to start considering their removal.