About the gunship AA missiles removal...

[Death!]

Before reading what I am about to say, please have in mind that I am not even a pilot on this game, so this is not just "childish e-drama". This the vision of an infantry man.

As I have read from the devs, the point of removing the AAs from attack choppers was to prevent them from hunting each other and focus on CAS. Good! That was really a nice idea, but the problem is: it is not working and now it is even worse for the CAS to help the guys on the ground. Instead of helping as soon as the chopper spawns, pilots go hunt the enemy attack helo in a bizarre cannon dance on the skyes that can take ages while the land troops are lasing targets on the ground for them in vain.

So, aftet all, the removal of sidewinders made no improvements on this issue. Attack helicopters will keep hunting each other no matter if they got AA or not... And, worse, now it can take a long time before their battle end. So, what is the point?

[dysin]

the first dogfight was a pistol fight between two biplane's in 1913. of course nothing changed. we all called this when that was first announced. if you're sharing airspace with another gunship, the natural and justified reaction is to clean that threat off the top of the list.

i don't think that it needs to be fixed, personally. i don't think that anything is broken to begin with.

to your point that it takes ages- that's a little exaggerated. i think we shot down the havok 3 times and hind 4 times today on saaremaa. of these, i'd estimate that the longest fight was still well under a minute. the only times these fights drag out is when one bird tries to extend to break off. those chases can take some time, sure, but we're still in a 3-4 minute range. you can't control the ground if you don't control the sky. that's reality.

[Eddie Baker]

So, what is the point?

The point is that the attack helicopters depicted in game either:

1. Don't have the capability to carry AAMs in real-life without sacrificing a pylon capable of mounting other ordnance.

2. If they even have the capability, the nation-states/services that use them don't mount AAMs on them because they don't have/use AAMs on helicopters.

The helicopter AAMs were yet another part of the clone war mentality that infects conventional factions of this game like an Umbrella bio-weapon and existed just because 1.5 of the helicopters in-game could carry AAMs on wingtips provided that ECM equipment was not installed. So the ones that couldn't apparently had them affixed with chewing gum and voodoo just so nobody would be too "overpowered."

Good fucking riddance to them.

[Brainlaag]

It was never meant to fully prevent air fights from happening, just making a direct approach more dangerous and favor retreat when in a disadvantageous position. Overall, it has improved ground support, since pilots tend to engage targets even while the enemy gunship is up. Furthermore it makes the air combat a bit more interesting, rather than the dull "spam sidewinders till it burns" tactic.

Since you are no pilot, you lack the perspective to see the bigger picture.

[Rhino]

and existed just because 1.5 of the helicopters in-game could carry AAMs on wingtips provided that ECM equipment was not installed.

You forgot the Zhi-9WA and Kiowa which can both carry Air To Air missiles too





Although haven't made them as didn't see much purpose of a helicopter solely dedicated to anti-air, although they both could have only one rack with AA missiles on but never seen the Zhi-9WA with mixed racks like that, and you don't see the Kiowa mount them often either.

[Eddie Baker]

You forgot the Zhi-9WA and Kiowa which can both carry Air To Air missiles too

1. Don't have the capability to carry AAMs in real-life without sacrificing a pylon capable of mounting other ordnance.

because 1.5 of the helicopters in-game could carry AAMs on wingtips provided that ECM equipment was not installed.

I sure didn't forget them.

[Rhino]

Ye, I knew you where referring to the Gunships but didn't mention the Light Attack/Scout ones

Although yes, they do need to sacrifice other weapons for them, but that goes for any of their loadouts and don't have any wingtips persay to mount them on

[Eddie Baker]

Ye, I knew you where referring to the Gunships but didn't mention the Light Attack/Scout ones

Although yes, they do need to sacrifice other weapons for them, but that goes for any of their loadouts and don't have any wingtips persay to mount them on

Yes, I know, that's why I pointed out the word wingtips.

Also, when you say "gunships" I think of a utility helicopter (or FW aircraft) with weapons stuck on it as a possible role. Attack helicopter makes me think Hind, Cobra or Apache.

[Rhino]

Ye true, guess I've just heard too many news reporters etc saying the word gunship when referring to the Apache and its kinda stuck but ye, Attack Helicopter is more appropriate

[Death!]

The point is that the attack helicopters depicted in game either:

1. Don't have the capability to carry AAMs in real-life without sacrificing a pylon capable of mounting other ordnance.

The AH-64D can carry 4 AIM-92s along with 8 Hellfires and 38 Rockets.



Source:
AH-64 Apache

USArmy just won't field it with Stingers because there is no need as USAF achieve air superiority before deploying CAS (same would happen to Russia). But on PR it won't happen.

2. If they even have the capability, the nation-states/services that use them don't mount AAMs on them because they don't have/use AAMs on helicopters.

USArmy just won't field it with Stingers because there is no need as USAF achieve air superiority before deploying CAS. But on PR it won't happen.

And yeah, Rhino, I meant the Havoc and the Apache. or even the Hind. Don't know about the Cobra loadout (and I am lazy to search about at the moment).

[Eddie Baker]

The AH-64D can carry 4 AIM-92s along with 8 Hellfires and 38 Rockets.



Source:
AH-64 Apache

USArmy just won't field it with Stingers because there is no need as USAF achieve air superiority before deploying CAS (same would happen to Russia). But on PR it won't happen.

Wrong, your source is outdated. It potentially could be armed with them before the Common Missile Warning System was installed; a CMWS sensor is on each wingtip. US Army just can't field it with Stingers unless those come off.


[quote=""'Eddie Baker'"]1.5 of the helicopters in-game could carry AAMs on wingtips provided that ECM equipment was not installed.[/quote]

Royal Netherlands AH-64D is in the same boat, with ASE/ECM pods on each wingtip.



And what made you think that this:

[quote="Eddie Baker""]2. If they even have the capability, the nation-states/services that use them don't mount AAMs on them because they don't have/use AAMs on helicopters.[/quote]

Referred to the US Army? British Army Air Corps uses Apache AH Mk1. To my knowledge, it doesn't have anything on the wingtips that would impede the installation of AAMs. However, AAC does not have ATA Stinger or ATA Starstreak and the RAF is most likely going to be stingy with its Sidewinders or ASRAAM, even in wartime.

Don't know about the Cobra loadout (and I am lazy to search about at the moment).

AH-1Z Super Cobra/Viper can carry Sidewinders on wingtip rails. But it is not in game. Something that resembles an AH-1W (which does not have wingtip rails) with four rotors is in game. Hence the "1.5."

[Death!]

Wrong, your source is outdated. It potentially could be armed with them before the Common Missile Warning System was installed; a CMWS sensor is on each wingtip. US Army just can't field it with Stingers unless those come off.




Royal Netherlands AH-64D is in the same boat, with ASE/ECM pods on each wingtip.

That makes sense.

And what made you think that this:



Referred to the US Army? British Army Air Corps uses Apache AH Mk1. To my knowledge, it doesn't have anything on the wingtips that would impede the installation of AAMs. However, AAC does not have ATA Stinger or ATA Starstreak and the RAF is most likely going to be stingy with its Sidewinders or ASRAAM, even in wartime.

Because I was talking about the American Apache itself, did not even consider the RAF one.

AH-1Z Super Cobra/Viper can carry Sidewinders on wingtip rails. But it is not in game. Something that resembles an AH-1W (which does not have wingtip rails) with four rotors is in game. Hence the "1.5."

Fair enough. But we still got the Havoc... Anyway, would not be fair to let only the Havoc have it with the current load.

I got your point.

[Rhino]

Because I was talking about the American Apache itself, did not even consider the RAF one.

The RAF don't fly them, the AAC, Army Air Core do, and as Eddie said the RAF (or FAA, although FAA is more likley if they where operating at sea) is unlikely to give the AAC any of its AtAM.

[Death!]

The RAF don't fly them, the AAC, Army Air Core do, and as Eddie said the RAF (or FAA, although FAA is more likley if they where operating at sea) is unlikely to give the AAC any of its AtAM.

Ups, my bad.

[Ca6e]

Eddie is right, only marines are using AA sidewings, on Ah-1, thats because on the sea is less armour and more Air-vihicles!


About the game, i think now is much better, despite we can still see dog fights, which is OK, if u are pilot, and maybe not good if u are infantry, but again it is infantry and armour fault, cause they didnt build FOBS with AA assets, or defend flag with AAv.

[Eddie Baker]

Fair enough. But we still got the Havoc... Anyway, would not be fair to let only the Havoc have it with the current load.

I got your point.

No, you still don't got the Havoc. And I don't think you did get the point: the Mi-28 cannot carry AAMs without sacrificing an entire pylon, either. The wingtip mounts are for ASE/ECM.

So, no, it wouldn't be fair to let only the Havoc have it with the current load, because it can't do it in real life. Which should have been the biggest reason why it was removed in the first place.

[Celestial1]

As a frequent flyer of attack helicopters, good f'in riddance.

Even with AA missiles in 1.0 being less wonky, it was an extremely awkward affair, both helicopters facing eachother, rising, and swaying in opposite directions trying to dodge missiles and fire first.
That still happens sometimes, but with the lack of AA missiles now the pilots tend not to fly at 600+ altitude all the time to spot the enemy attack helo. Now, they simply chase if the other one is already in the area.

It's a subtle difference, but it's much better than it used to be.

[tANNERRRR]

Not sure what you're talking about. Every person I know that runs CAS does not search for their attack helo, under they are sure of his position. When I do CAS, we hit ground targets first, and typically we run into their chopper and begin to engage it. Or the commander will spot it out for us. You must have been playing with bad pilots.

[Inspektura43]

As a frequent flyer of attack helicopters, good f'in riddance.

Even with AA missiles in 1.0 being less wonky, it was an extremely awkward affair, both helicopters facing eachother, rising, and swaying in opposite directions trying to dodge missiles and fire first.
That still happens sometimes, but with the lack of AA missiles now the pilots tend not to fly at 600+ altitude all the time to spot the enemy attack helo. Now, they simply chase if the other one is already in the area.

It's a subtle difference, but it's much better than it used to be.

They find eachother its pretty much whoever sees the other first and kills it with 5 cannon rounds.
The heli dogfights are soooo messed up now its not about skill i dont even

[Celestial1]

They find eachother its pretty much whoever sees the other first and kills it with 5 cannon rounds.
The heli dogfights are soooo messed up now its not about skill i dont even

The helo "dogfights" were never much about skill before. It was a ritual magic anti-air missile dance. It was stupid.

Now you've at least got to be aware of your position, keep in contact with the team to get notified of the enemy CAS. Fighting enemy CAS head-on is extremely stupid, and you should be aware of the advantages the other pilot has on you. More often, I see myself called in to scare off enemy CAS, and it's not unusual to push the enemy helo away via some positioning and a volley of fire, which tends to result in the enemy CAS diving away or trying to engage me and getting a face full of cannon and hydra.

You're more likely to survive if you run away or avoid confrontation with it now, engaging head-on is now a mutual destruction situation. Only when the enemy CAS is diving, or otherwise preoccupied, that would allow you time to move in, and when friendlies are threatened, is it worth confronting them.

Much, much better than it used to be, no matter how stupid some pilots will be in trying to relive the magic air dance with hydras instead of AA.