Little Birds - Smoke Rocket Loadout

[IMI-50AE]

Ragni, are you familiar with the title of this mod, or just the initials? PR= Project REALITY. Guess what, this is about getting as realistic as possible (or so I'm assuming). Thus, whether or not you think it will "work" on public servers is technically irrelevant.


On the 'Smoke Chopper', is there a way to differentiate it from the AH-6 models? I mean, you'd have the pods on there, and maybe two types of smoke, one type in each pod? Would there be an additional distinction, to help prevent people from jumping in the bird thinking their going to 'pwn those n00bs' (to paraphrase pubbies) only to meet frustration at the fact that they can't do damage, and then probably end up ditching or crashing it, neutralizing an asset.

[Tikigod]

Exactly Eddie's Point from earlier..

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Eddie Baker;523238']
It is up to mappers if they want to have perfectly symmetrical. If things are perfectly symmetrical, "balancing" isn't necessary; balancing is done by giving things advantages in one aspect and disadvantages in another. And if you want things to be perfectly symmetrical, then maybe we should just have every individual weapon have the same magazine capacity/loadout, rate of fire and do the same damage?[/quote]

Its "Project Reality"...not "Project Balance"...leave it to the map makers to decide.

Ideally you would want a seperate model (like using the Kiowa with rocket pods rather than a seperate AH-6 which could lead to confusion) This would make it easy for everyone to identify what the role/function is.

If the AH-6 Model is used, the player would just have to check their loadout once they enter the pilot position (pressing 1 or 2 to display the ammo, or see what is listed on the HUD)...In my opinion, pilots should be checking ammo loadouts as preflight check anyway. (why assume the helicopter is fully armed only to find it has 1-2 rockets left?)

But, like you say not everyone will probably do this and waste assets others could use.

The models on the outside don't have to be different if the pilot can read what is onboard (HUD and Ammo selection indicator) Also, maps always spawn the same units in the same locations. If you have a smoke version spawning on right pad while a explosive rocket version spawns on left, people will eventually learn and remember which one to get into based on the map design.


[quote="IMI-50AE""]

On the 'Smoke Chopper', is there a way to differentiate it from the AH-6 models? I mean, you'd have the pods on there, and maybe two types of smoke, one type in each pod? Would there be an additional distinction, to help prevent people from jumping in the bird thinking their going to 'pwn those n00bs' (to paraphrase pubbies) only to meet frustration at the fact that they can't do damage, and then probably end up ditching or crashing it, neutralizing an asset.[/quote]

[Ragni<RangersPL>]

Ragni, are you familiar with the title of this mod, or just the initials? PR= Project REALITY. Guess what, this is about getting as realistic as possible (or so I'm assuming). Thus, whether or not you think it will "work" on public servers is technically irrelevant.

Don't worry about me. I know what "PR" means.
Guess what, there are a lot of things that are not "realistic as possible" in Project Reality.
Just a couple examples:
- more than one life per round.
- kit requesting system (new weapon and equipment appears from nowhere)
- fallen soldiers weapon and equipment are packed in a bag
- rally points
- fallen civilians equipment disappears
- all you need to disable mines and repair vehicles/bridges is a wrench
- aircrafts autorepair and autorearming

You can find all those things in PR because of a gameplay (or engine limitations). This mod is more realistic than BF2 but it is still a game (and it always will be).

Generaly I'm not against this freakin smoke rockets, it would be great idea after removing mini-map from the HUD, but right now (with mini-map, spotting system and BF2 engine limitations) I just can't see the point to use it.

[77SiCaRiO77]

Its "Project Reality"...not "Project Balance"...leave it to the map makers to decide.

dont waste your time , they are not going to remove the siccor-balance-symetrical-unrealistic "feature".

[Hotrod525]

Why everything in the game have to been balanced ? i mean, In real life, army are not balanced... look at modern conflict... NATO blown irakian army in a week, UK,CA and USA was controling afganistan in maybe 2-3 months if i remember good, Irak second episode didnot take so long to british and american to reach badgad, local resistance is more strongest than the Army itself...

[77SiCaRiO77]

we SHOULD have balance , otherwiste people will complain and the game will no longe be enjoyable

but we DONT NEED completaly symetrical balance(kasranh , kufa and all the maps except qwai ), we need realistic balance .

[Eddie Baker]

Back on topic, please.

[ryan d ale]

I'd love the idea however ;it seems your all scared of getting shot down.

1. How is the time & speed required to 'target' going to be any different?
2. So what if you can't kill. Do MEC have a light attack chopper? (correct me if I'm wrong?) Do the insurgents? Do the militia?
3. Smoke is a good non-lethal element and the chopper can be used as light transport and recceonaisance rather than speed and blast all the time.

I'm all for the idea. Plus on maps where there's overwhelming odds...well I know we don't have it anymore (except SP) but Muttrah city?

USMC: 2 little birds, cobra, 2 black hawks,
1/2 LAV's?, RIB's

MEC: ...hmmm...wait for it....o, nothing (fine they have AAA but still hardly fair)

[Tikigod]

Oh... Realy? Lets see... Oh there it is, your first post with suggestion.

Now, I compare it to my example...

Holy Sh*t, I can see no difference

I understand what you mean. I didn't mean the smoke would be used as "move to smoke" for telling others where to move (causing them to get into an ambush and lead them to their deaths). The smoke rocket is more for directing long range fire as an "attack here" command for those that can't see exactly where to fire.

Example: Most kits rely on only iron sites. Iron sites as we all know can only be fired blindly from great distances and aren't much help in finding and identifying units. (reason why there is a need for scopes and binoculars) Some kits like the crewman kit don't get scopes or binoculars.

Smoke rockets in the instance of infantry ground support would aid squads to direct all of their small arms fire on a location they can't see with their normal vision (using just the iron sites).

Kashan Desert Map for instance at South Village is a town located at the bottom of a valley surrounded by high rigid mountains. Snipers are pretty deadly in this area for any infantry located in the village. When I fly this map there are plenty of times I have spotted troop movements along the mountains and wasn't able to relay the information to others. (since the map was flooded with question marks as the units ran in different directions) On another occasion a wingman spotted a sniper I couldn't attack because he was trying to describe to me the location of where he was. He was moving so we lost track of him. If my friend had smoke he could have marked his general location where his last position was so that I could pick up where he left off in the search.

I understand pilots can fly as a squad leader and mark targets using the "attack here" order. But, in order to issue the order a pilot has to maintain a hover while he switches to the squad command interface. If I was a pilot why would I want to do this in flight when I can just fire a pair of smoke rockets and keep the helicopter in motion? The ability to use rockets is more natural and easier than messing around with command interface. Also you can only place one "attack here" marker with the interface you can't mark two different positions and say, "I want fire (or drop bombs) form point A to point B." With smoke rockets you can do this as many times as you have rockets. (In Falcon 4.0 Allied force you mark the begin and end of an armor column to line up the bomb run for others)

Sorry if my explaination was confusing earlier. But, what you said makes sense to me now.

I hope this clears any misunderstandings in smoke rocket use.

[Ninja2dan]

So far I have yet to see anyone use a Scout/Recon Helo as they are intended, and having a scout helo equipped with proper systems would be nice. The Kiowa would make a good choice, as there is already a model for it that is semi-finished. That topic is quite old (3 years), but if the original modeller doesn't want to finish it then maybe they can pass it on to someone else who will (giving credit where needed).

Smoke rockets, if colored (Red), would be ideal in marking the locations of enemy units such as armor or even artillery if they are implemented in the future. The Q-Spot markings are only lit up temporarily, and placing the Attack marker as stated is not the realistic approach. What if multiple units need to attack? Only the squad with the marker will see it, meaning multiple SL's must stop what they are doing to place their markers, and hope they all get the marker on the same spot. Hell, even artillery uses smoke markers.

Smoke would not only be useful for spotting targets at range, but also help in obscurring their vision or for friendly troop movement. There are times when troop-deployed smoke is not enough, and the helo smoke would come into play. It's also a good way to scatter a large enemy formation, as they would avoid smoke like the plague (I sure as hell would).

We need a viable scout helo, instead of the current technique that has been mentioned of people flying around looking for targets with the attack or transport helos instead of using them for their proper roles. Controllable mast optics on a Kiowa would also add to the helo's scout role, making it a fair choice. Hopefully more updates will be posted in the old Kiows thread that Tiki posted in.

[Ragni<RangersPL>]

I hope this clears any misunderstandings in smoke rocket use.

Sure, cheers mate

[Doc_Frank]

Eddie Baker;523238']

No, it isn't, it is about a marking smoke rocket. Though granted, WP rockets are used for marking, and being too close to them is a bad thing. As for the PLA and MEC scout helicopters only having machineguns or cannons, I really must say, so what? We didn't build those models and had the AH-6 before Armored Fury came out. Fixing all of DICE's ridiculous decisions is not a high priority when we are trying to make new assets from scratch.

It is up to mappers if they want to have perfectly symmetrical. If things are perfectly symmetrical, "balancing" isn't necessary; balancing is done by giving things advantages in one aspect and disadvantages in another. And if you want things to be perfectly symmetrical, then maybe we should just have every individual weapon have the same magazine capacity/loadout, rate of fire and do the same damage?

First, thanks for reminding me of the topic. My point (and credo) in the abovementioned declaration was that gameplay is still before absolute realism.

Apart from the upcoming Russian faction, all of the regular armies are balanced in their military hardware, correct me if I'm wrong. Also I'm aware of the balancing system you mentioned at map creation, and I'm perfectly satisfied with its executing. So there's no need for sarcasm, especially because I do have a distinction between balance and symmetry.

The addition of those rockets wouldn't have such a great impact, personally I'd find it dull. Still others could find great fun and advantage in it. But the way I see it, a lot of guys out on public servers doesn't even know how to take off with a chopper, before we start speaking about the proper usage of LBs. Otherwise the main issue regarding the OP is closed for me, since you told us your competent opinion.

[Tikigod]

Here is a post regarding the "Q" targeting distance bug in which smoke marking rockets would be an obvious solution:

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/fix-is ... ml?t=30191

[LeadMagnet]

I'd love to see a FAC in some of the larger maps. With the removal of the minimap this would fill a critical need and a very realistic one. Not only that but I can see this as a very useful tool for something Patty has been working on....

[Masaq]

So far I have yet to see anyone use a Scout/Recon Helo as they are intended, and having a scout helo equipped with proper systems would be nice. The Kiowa would make a good choice, as there is already a model for it that is semi-finished. That topic is quite old (3 years), but if the original modeller doesn't want to finish it then maybe they can pass it on to someone else who will (giving credit where needed).

Smoke rockets, if colored (Red), would be ideal in marking the locations of enemy units such as armor or even artillery if they are implemented in the future. The Q-Spot markings are only lit up temporarily, and placing the Attack marker as stated is not the realistic approach. What if multiple units need to attack? Only the squad with the marker will see it, meaning multiple SL's must stop what they are doing to place their markers, and hope they all get the marker on the same spot. Hell, even artillery uses smoke markers.

Smoke would not only be useful for spotting targets at range, but also help in obscurring their vision or for friendly troop movement. There are times when troop-deployed smoke is not enough, and the helo smoke would come into play. It's also a good way to scatter a large enemy formation, as they would avoid smoke like the plague (I sure as hell would).

We need a viable scout helo, instead of the current technique that has been mentioned of people flying around looking for targets with the attack or transport helos instead of using them for their proper roles. Controllable mast optics on a Kiowa would also add to the helo's scout role, making it a fair choice. Hopefully more updates will be posted in the old Kiows thread that Tiki posted in.

Well, there you go then... I've had some very sucessful rounds on Al Kufrah Oilfields in the littlebird (which doesn't respawn, hence the need to keep it alive) - just floating around the map with a squad leader in the co-pilot's seat. The pair of us spent the entire round flying above 200m, my SL spotting tanks, apcs, cars and groups of infantry, using both the spotting rose and VOIP to alert other squads and the commander.

It was good fun, and I got a single kill from strafeing a squad on the ground. Our tanks were totally sucessful in squashing the MEC, thanks to good intel.

Had we been able to provide even better markers for them - such as a smoke cloud showing where enemy tanks were moving to for, it'd've been ace. Also means the round would have been a little more fun- firing a smoke round rather than just circling endlessly would have made a little more engaging lol.

[G.Drew]

now if the smoke was coloured red, i could actually like this idea, cos it would be a clear indication of something going on there


just as a sidenote, heres how and how not to use normal smoke

Use it when throwing it at an enemy bunker or position, that way u cant see them coming, or when ur trying to cross a street, even then throw it towards their general direction

Dont Use it when ur defending or ur trying to hide urself and u throw it at ur feet, that only means u cant see the enemy coming!

[/note]

[Waaah_Wah]

God i love the MEC littlebird... Its a chopter killer when you get someone with the AA kit to be your passenger

[Artnez[US]]

i agree with this idea.

the commander could use the smoke as a great tactic. he could ask the LB pilot to drop smoke in certain locations. does sit matter why he would ask? everyone has different ideas and every battle is different.

if i were commanding, i would use it as a diversion. if i know there is a sniper hiding behind some ridge and popping out to kill my guys from far away... i'd ask the LB to drop some red smoke on him. this would scare the living **** out of the sniper and he would run.

besides that, there are a ton of tactics to use. commander could ask the LB to smoke a certain flag or building before attack.