Light Vehicle Engine out after 50% damage.

[General Dragosh]

Would be good if you could make it so that if the vehicle is at arround 30 %(% may varry on) of health that every shot that hits the vehicle (bullets that can damage the vehicle) has an X ammount of % chance that it will disable the vehicle with the shot, to simulate that bullet has hit something vital

pistols would propably have something like 1% chance
5.56 like 3%
7.62 5%

and so on depending on the bullet size

But im 105% sure thats not possible in the game, still a nice idea me thinks

[=LK= A.H.]

This is the best suggestion I have seen in ages. Granted, there's no telling how it will affect the actual gameplay but it should be tested at the very least.

[mosinmatt]

I would like to see vehicles not suddenly EXPLODE unless they are very severly damaged. Like a good hit from the RPG, RKG, or arty IED.
Id like to see the vehicle be disabled for a while. Then after more damage, then explode.
I like how you can tack an armored vehicle as well. Perhaps we could implement this into light vehicles?
I am no DEV, but you may have to increase the over all health of vehicles for this

[Damian(>>>PL]

Would be good if you could make it so that if the vehicle is at arround 30 %(% may varry on) of health that every shot that hits the vehicle (bullets that can damage the vehicle) has an X ammount of % chance that it will disable the vehicle with the shot, to simulate that bullet has hit something vital

pistols would propably have something like 1% chance
5.56 like 3%
7.62 5%

and so on depending on the bullet size

But im 105% sure thats not possible in the game, still a nice idea me thinks

If this could work corectly it would be used not only for light, even for chopers or, jets.

You know that one good shoot from riffle can disable whole jet that cost xxx 000 000 of dolars.

[goguapsy]

I like this suggestion. Prevents non-armored vehicles to not wander off under enemy fire.

HMMVVs and Brit Logi Trucks, for example, should handle something closer to 20%. But insurgent cars (and Land Rovers?) should be a little weaker.

[Total_Overkill]

If this suggestion is implemented, explain to me why the following will not happen

A light vehicle is worth 2 tickets
A logi is worth 2, its driver 2

Why would players risk 4 tickets driving across the map, to rescue a 2 ticket vehicle, thats already served its purpose, by getting a squad into combat? Why would this suggestion not lead to regular and rampant abandoning and self destruction of vehicles by friendly forces on a routine basis?
The risk vs reward is out-matched... it "could" be worth it, if the vehicles had a higher ticket value, but thats another discussion. As far as i can see, this change would make light vehicles a 1 off transport, that is to be used, abused, and destroyed with minimal positive impact to gameplay beyond "cool!" factor.

[Stoickk]

This:

insurgents can't repair them in the field. Unless you give civis wrenches

This is one more reason that the Insurgent, Militia, Taliban, and Hamas factions need a wrench. There is no logical or reality argument for these factions not to be able to use this basic tool for either light vehicle repair or demolitions work. Although, I don't think the collaborator needs the wrench.

For the Militia, Taliban, and Hamas factions, the Artillery Engineer kit should have the wrench in place of the shovel. This is the faction equivalent of the Combat Engineer and is the demolitions expert for the faction.

The Insurgent faction Artillery Sapper kit should have the wrench in place of the shovel. This is the demolitions expert for this faction, and is the faction equivalent of the Combat Engineer.

[Boris.T.Spider]

How about use the 50% damage and vehicle becomes inopperable idea, including the turrets, but double the actual hit point capability of the vehicle. So it still becomes inoperable and useless at the same damage level as current. But instead the crew all being killed they take some dammage, maybe randomised between 25% and 125% of their hitpoints for every occupant at the same time removing all the armour protection the vehicle offers to the occupants. So a tank/TOW hit or something will kill the vehicle and crew out right, but an RPG round will render the vehicle useless and probably kill at least one of the occupants and injure the rest. Once the 50% threshold is reached, the crew will be forced to deboard as they will be totaly vunerable to even light arms fire.

[Psyko]

Instead of blowing up at all the vehicle should just be disabled. Rifles don't blow up cars. IEDs IRL damage the vehicle and passengers, but generally render the vehicle unable to function instead of blowing them into pure charged steal. Arty IEDs would be another thing though.

agreed. Maybe light vehicles should have way higher hitpoints, but they disable at a high percentage so you really have to hit it hard with rifles to blow it up or light it on fire. But not so much hitpoints to require tank and APC sabot rounds to be increased.

[Calhoun]

If this suggestion is implemented, explain to me why the following will not happen

A light vehicle is worth 2 tickets
A logi is worth 2, its driver 2

Why would players risk 4 tickets driving across the map, to rescue a 2 ticket vehicle, thats already served its purpose, by getting a squad into combat? Why would this suggestion not lead to regular and rampant abandoning and self destruction of vehicles by friendly forces on a routine basis?
The risk vs reward is out-matched... it "could" be worth it, if the vehicles had a higher ticket value, but thats another discussion. As far as i can see, this change would make light vehicles a 1 off transport, that is to be used, abused, and destroyed with minimal positive impact to gameplay beyond "cool!" factor.

A player could leave the vehicle, but they would be unable to use it until it is retrieved or destroyed so that it may respawn. A squad might need it to move to an objective though. They could still walk to their objective, but the additional time may allow the enemy to reinforce and as a result, it may cost more time and tickets to secure the objective.

You could just destroy the vehicle so it would respawn, but this (intentional destruction of friendly assets) is against the rules on many servers. This wouldn't be practical anyway, because the ticket loss would be very significant if every disabled vehicle was destroyed to respawn rather than recovered. Furthermore, penalties could be increased for friendly vehicle destruction to discourage it and/or ticket costs for vehicles could be raised.

A flaw with the system is that it may encourage people to ambush the enemy as they attempt vehicle recovery. A tactic like this would make no sense for a conventional military force and have absolutely no place in AAS mode. A possible positive result, however, is that people may coordinate with an APC for transportation more frequently, because it would make more sense and involve less risk than leaving in independent transportation when you are simply going from one destination to another and then sticking around for quite a while.

If this is implemented, it will be a disaster unless people change how they play. They will need to utilize APC/Helicopter transportation whenever possible (even if it is necessary to wait for their arrival for a minute or several), and they will need to recover vehicles. If no one decided to recover vehicles, it would be much like Iron Eagle without a helicopter, except that these vehicles would not respawn. Ever.

[Dev1200]

YES!!! . . . I CANT STAND when your driving a Car and it suddenly BLOWS up when you hit a bump inthe road . .. this way when it is damaged it will just simply Stop working before you sustain any real damage . . .

This will "GREATLY" promote the usage of Field Engineer ... running around repairing Vehicles in the disabled state . . . opposed to repairing vehicles that have sustained large amounts of battle damage before they blow up in your face .. . like a race against the clock sort of deal . .

except i would say make it 70%-80% damage. ( Flat tire, struggling engine if possible making the vehicle move very slowly if at all or both so the vehicle moves in slow circles )

10+ points for the idea its so simple it makes you think .. . why didnt i think of that

+1

50% is insane. A PKM would be able to take out a humvee in half the time.. =\ It's fine the way it is.

[goguapsy]

^
It is a nightmare when you actually don't have any logis. Trust me.

[ComradeHX]

If this suggestion is implemented, explain to me why the following will not happen

A light vehicle is worth 2 tickets
A logi is worth 2, its driver 2

Why would players risk 4 tickets driving across the map, to rescue a 2 ticket vehicle, thats already served its purpose, by getting a squad into combat? Why would this suggestion not lead to regular and rampant abandoning and self destruction of vehicles by friendly forces on a routine basis?
The risk vs reward is out-matched... it "could" be worth it, if the vehicles had a higher ticket value, but thats another discussion. As far as i can see, this change would make light vehicles a 1 off transport, that is to be used, abused, and destroyed with minimal positive impact to gameplay beyond "cool!" factor.

Because your 4 tickets does not have a mounted 50 cal and cannot carry enough people(IDF excluded).

[drs79]

If anything their strength should be increased or the player effects of being injured while driving in rough terrain should be reduced greatly/or injury shouldn't happen unless the vehicle is flipped or tumbles down a hill or mountain.

In response to people saying that if a vehicle is damaged more than 50% it shouldn't run, I have to disagree.

There is a reason why land rovers are used with the British military. They are extremely rugged and can withstand a huge amount of punishment (google the land rover challenge)

HMMVW's as well, reinforced Kevlar strong steel driving on almost and full flat tires, they are built for being able to drive in rough terrain and take damage.

5-Ton Trucks - These have been around since World War 2, there's a reason for that.

Russain made trucks used by russia mec, Chechnya, not as tough at the American five ton but durable and lasting.

Toyota Pickups - there is a reason why terrorists love them, they are durable, take a beating and last over hundreds of thousands of miles.

IMHO the damage effects are fine, if the 50% disabled vehicle action goes into effect you will see so many more abandoned vehicles, players leave too many vehicles as is abandoned on maps, this will increase it 110%.

*Can we add the option to shoot out of the Front Passenger seat window

[illidur]

Although realistic, you haven't put nearly enough thought into the gameplay aspect of this suggestion. If this was implemented, the use of vehicles sporting weaponry would be almost halted, as no crew would want to risk getting shot so bad that they have to bail out under fire. Vehicles designed to handle rough terrain such as the Humvee would be halted before they could get into the action solely due to terrain damage. This isn't taking into account accidental crashes with friendly vehicles either.

No Insurgent squad should be hampered by a couple of lucky shots from a SAW gunner hundreds of meters away, and no G-wagon should be abandoned in the field simply because minor terrain damage stopped it from working.


There are no 'health bars' on real vehicles at all, there is nothing to determine how damaged a vehicle is other than individually inspecting the engine, frame, suspension, axles and whatnot. Until modular damage can be insituted (and most doubtfully on the BF2 engine) the current damage system should stick. Although vehicles getting tracked would be cool, would finally make the M113 as useful as a Humvee.

the op has a good suggestion, but the solution to what you said is to make it so the health of the vehicle while not tracked/disabled is the same as current. then the only difference from before to now is that it doesn't blow up, its just stalled. this would mean altering the health of every light vehicle and the thresholds it would take to reach stalled/blown up. i also think even the gun shouldn't work. it could even have a very nice chunk of health while stalled... why? because they shouldnt blow up.

there shouldn't be any bleedout while stalled untill it takes further damage. the only bad thing would be that you can jump into it and not take damage... but thats ok right? works for the apc. but this also leads to more abandoned light vehicles... unless its possible to make it bleedout while stalled without hurting the player?

that would mean the point in the vehicles health that it would stall would actually be a lower percentage of its health than w/e it is now. because its health as a whole would have been increased. this is just my idea of how it should be.

[Viper.Sw]

@ those of you who think vehicles should take more than 50% damage and keep driving:
If you destroy 50% of any light vehicle out there, IRL it will most likely NOT be driving:

• One shot into the right part of the engine can disable it.
• Vehicles without wheels adapted to drive with flat tires will not be driving very long/fast.
• If you damage a car to 50% with bullets you will be VERY likely to kill most of the men inside.

The ultimate thing would be to change how much damage you take to the different parts of the vehicle, but it feels like a lot of work to do.
Eg: Take more damage when shooting at engine/front so the vehicle will be disabled faster.
Just in the same way as tanks take more damage in the rear.

[LUKE_NUKE_EM]

The primary vehicles I think something like this should be applied to are Insurgent civilian vehicles, trucks, and technicals. They ARE NOT armored in any capacity, IRL a single bullet could potentially go clean through a civilian vehicle and actually kill someone hiding behind it. But mainly, I see this as a way to prevent ramming, which is ridiculously unrealistic. You will never, ever be able to ride circles around an infantry squad running them over. They will kill you easily. My main point, the best way IMO to discourage ramming would be civilian vehicles that are capable of being disabled, and then decreasing their agility/speed somewhat. As for military light vehicles, they can really take a beating, damage disablement really shouldn't apply. So the situation where BLUFOR has to recover them wouldn't, and shouldn't exist. And I'm not just saying this to give the BLUFOR an advantage because currently, being run over by an ammo truck is often more dangerous than a technical, which is laughably stupid. Also, BLUFOR generally don't ram Insurg infantry because of the high amount of RPGs makes it very dangerous

* It is very difficult to hit a civilian vehicle in PR with a LAT simply because of their sheer speed and agility. The speed may not be unrealistic, but the agility certainly is.

[rushn]

what about increasing health and making it 30-50%?

[illidur]

what about increasing health and making it 30-50%?

thats pretty much what i said. but it means more abandoned vehicles. and changing damage values... so things like rpgs will still blow it up in 1 hit.

[rushn]

thats pretty much what i said. but it means more abandoned vehicles. and changing damage values... so things like rpgs will still blow it up in 1 hit.

why would that cause more abandoned vehicles?