Weapon loadout on air vehciles; BVR possiblities;

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-08-09 03:01

well, you have good ideas, but the A-10 cant carry all those weapons at once, usually it would have AA missiles and another option along with its already very potent cannon.

as far as warning tones BF2 does have different tones, beeping for a lock and solid for an incoming missile. adding a tone for being painted is a good idea though.

the HUD is what really needs to be changed, instead of the flashing red icon, youre HUD needs to have a red flashing WARNING message in the center of your HUD and when you have an incoming missile the whole thing needs to go red.

Ugly Duck · Post by **Ugly Duck** » 2005-08-09 03:05

More than 2 loadouts would be a handy thing, yes. But I don't think the beyond visual range would work out so well. Air to Air combat, in some instances, would be reduced to firing one missile... wait for a bit, fire second missile while enemy is "recharging" counter measures and you score a kill. Not to mention the constant warnings of across the map lock-ons would be a pain in the ***

I think, if possible, the 3 warning tones instead of 2 is a must. It's a real pain to have him get a lock and dump counter measures only to have your enemy NOT fire a missile and there for leave you.... screwed.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-08-09 03:08

i dont think more than 2 is good, maybe if when you go back to base you can choose them (probably not possible) would be the only way. no beyond visual range stuff, thats too much in the small area.

3 tones is alright but really theres only need for 2, 1 for lock, 1 for incoming missile, which is already there, my main issue is the HUD

Tactical Advantage · Post by **Tactical Advantage** » 2005-08-09 05:00

I do like the idea of multiply weapon load outs, if we had the ability to load and change our loadout that would be nice, say 2 possible loadouts per plane, one ground based one with little air defense, and one air based one with little ground defense, overall it's a good idea...

Something like this I wouldnt mind...

for one setup...

-Laser guided bombs
-Cluster Bomb
-Short range Air to Air Missiles
-Cannon

As you can tell, this would be mostly a ground offensive kit.

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-08-09 05:43

Then if that can be done what about OTH SAM's. Pretty much makes getting within engagement range of the missles/batteries extremely dangerous.

In regards to missle it depends on the countermeasure suite on the plane. Some deploy them automatically with verying degrees of success. That is if they even deploy at all. Other times they'll deploy for non threats.

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-08-09 08:25

I agree it should be dangerous, but over the horizon AA missles might tip the balance too far in missle operators corner. The other problem is proper electronic warfare options to combat such a threat. It's love to see aircraft capable of scrambling radar and/or creating several false positives. Of coures effectiveness will depend on the missle systems being combated as well as the type of targeting radars. I just don't want to see god-like AA/SAM batteries.

Pak · Post by **Pak** » 2005-08-09 14:43

Forcing ground targets to communicate with flyers and take out the AA would be great. It really shouldn't be only the pilot's responsibility. I think we need to make the respawn time on SAM sites and mobile AA longer, since as it is right now, there is a new one as soon as you respawn.