Gameplay Behaviour Study

[Silvarius2000]

Of course they are, and that is how they should be. How many do you see being properly flown?


An Apache doesn´t get shot down with a 5.56 rifle. Even less so an A-10! I have seen a video about the Apache in Afghanistan, where one of the pilots explains that every single one there has taken small arms fire. Why then are they not all burning wrecks?

In game anything above a .50 cal can take out a chopper easily. Less so an attack heli because, well, a Hellfire >>> .50 cal.


AA is already deadly, it really isn´t hard to shoot a helicopter down in PR.

Hell, the littlebird is extremely fragile ingame. A few qbz shooting at it and its down if the pilot doesn't bug out fast, and that's if the pilot doesn´t get shot out!


The helicopters in PR lack a lot of realistic aspects such as stabilization, hellfires that can lock on etc...


I find the people who complain like this about the air assets, are the ones who never fly them. In that case, I think your opinion is void.

I think you misunderstand me.

I am not suggesting that aircraft and helicopters be shot down by small arms fire. I am suggesting that they should somehow be susceptible to small arms fire in such a way that though it wont destroy them it WOULD damage vital components to FORCE them to RTB.

Please try to see it in that context. I'm always peeved seeing a Attack Chopper hovering over the trees over a squad ignoring it since a whole squad spraying at it wouldnt leave more than a bad memory to a pilot.



And to clarify. I am perfectly fine with the offensive capabilities of a chopper. I am debating about their defensive capabilities.

[Alex6714]

Well, remember we are dealing with the BF2 engine here.

the fuselage is designed to withstand 12.7mm HMG fire and the rotors are designed to withstand 23mm cannon fire

Sounds about right, not saying it can´t be taken down by small arms fire but it would be very unlucky.

"Here's one of our OH-58D Combat Scouts from Iraq.
Needless to say, they got into a little hostile territory. This thing took hundreds of rounds and yet returned its crew back to base, including direct hits into the engine, transmission, control systems, avionics, flight computers, and both main and tail rotor. The 2-man crew sustained multiple injuries, but survived."

Not an apache, but as far as I know it isn´t still vietnam and helicopters are different now.

[Silvarius2000]

Well, remember we are dealing with the BF2 engine here.



Sounds about right, not saying it can´t be taken down by small arms fire but it would be very unlucky.



Not an apache, but as far as I know it isn´t still vietnam and helicopters are different now.

Well.. yes. I agree with you completely on those points. There should be that chance of " very unlucky " thing happening you know? Thats what I'm trying to forward.

What makes present helicopters more survivable is more due to Redundancies. The Blackhawk has two engines and their hydraulics all have secondary backups not to mention a crash worthy airframe. But it sure doesnt mean they could just hover a UH-60 over Somalia and say that this leet chopper wont get shot down by your 7.62's.

[Alex6714]

Well.. yes. I agree with you completely on those points. There should be that chance of " very unlucky " thing happening you know? Thats what I'm trying to forward.

What makes present helicopters more survivable is more due to Redundancies. The Blackhawk has two engines and their hydraulics all have secondary backups not to mention a crash worthy airframe. But it sure doesnt mean they could just hover a UH-60 over Somalia and say that this leet chopper wont get shot down by your 7.62's.

The thing is, I agree in part, but:

1) It would have to be a very lucky shot, rare. If in game I got shot down every time by 2 7.62 bullets I would not be very pleased.

2) As far as I know it is not possible to have this special damage model on the BF2 engine, there is something similar but it only works on local servers, not dedicated ones.

[Masaq]

Reminder to folks in here, particularly Marko, keep it civil.

[markonymous]

I think you misunderstand me.

I am not suggesting that aircraft and helicopters be shot down by small arms fire. I am suggesting that they should somehow be susceptible to small arms fire in such a way that though it wont destroy them it WOULD damage vital components to FORCE them to RTB.

Please try to see it in that context. I'm always peeved seeing a Attack Chopper hovering over the trees over a squad ignoring it since a whole squad spraying at it wouldnt leave more than a bad memory to a pilot.



And to clarify. I am perfectly fine with the offensive capabilities of a chopper. I am debating about their defensive capabilities.

i think i misunderstood you too in that case :S

i find they should be susceptible but not easily shot down if thats what you meant all along then i agree.

@Masaq i'l try and keep it down.

[Tirak]

Suppressive fire not able to pin down the enemy? Have you ever been under suppressive fire? This stuff makes people duck and run. I love my Minimi on Basrah, and let me tell you, when you start suppressing, people go to ground. If the rest of the squad doesn't advance or flank or get out of the area in the time that a SAW gunner can suppress, it's the fault of the SL and the SMs.

[maverick551]

I think that one problem is the fact that mounted HMG on vehicles in PR, (especially the Technical) are too deadly in game. Not because the damage is too much, or the rate of fire, More or less, I think that actually, the gunner is able to move the gun a little to easily. The ability to flip a 50 cal machine gun 90 degrees after a Merlin has flew over you and effectively and accurately put rounds into the bird traveling at full speed seems a little far fetched. If you think about it, those HMG's are extremely heavy, and I can guess that they are not that easy to aim in real life, especially on a technical that is more of a "unique" weapon on the battlefield, and has no spec sheet.

I agree on all other points, except for the suppression. I would like to see how the devs tweak the suppression in the next patch and then start asking a few questions about it. So far, I love it.
Good suggestions.

[Silvarius2000]

Suppressive fire not able to pin down the enemy? Have you ever been under suppressive fire? This stuff makes people duck and run. I love my Minimi on Basrah, and let me tell you, when you start suppressing, people go to ground. If the rest of the squad doesn't advance or flank or get out of the area in the time that a SAW gunner can suppress, it's the fault of the SL and the SMs.

Hehe actually that IS the problem imho. People duck and run. They dont get pinned down and stuck out in the nasty open by an MG. They just. Well. Run.

[Silvarius2000]

I think that one problem is the fact that mounted HMG on vehicles in PR, (especially the Technical) are too deadly in game. Not because the damage is too much, or the rate of fire, More or less, I think that actually, the gunner is able to move the gun a little to easily. The ability to flip a 50 cal machine gun 90 degrees after a Merlin has flew over you and effectively and accurately put rounds into the bird traveling at full speed seems a little far fetched. If you think about it, those HMG's are extremely heavy, and I can guess that they are not that easy to aim in real life, especially on a technical that is more of a "unique" weapon on the battlefield, and has no spec sheet.

I agree on all other points, except for the suppression. I would like to see how the devs tweak the suppression in the next patch and then start asking a few questions about it. So far, I love it.
Good suggestions.

Well whaddya know. I've never really thought of the 50 cal being heavy. That IS quite agile for a heavy machine gun isnt it? Eventhough its on a tripod or supported on something. Even the M249 feels more cumbersome. Perhaps that would be something to fix

[Tirak]

Hehe actually that IS the problem imho. People duck and run. They dont get pinned down and stuck out in the nasty open by an MG. They just. Well. Run.

I agree, they run to the nearest cover and get their head down till the noise stops (or in this case, when the blurry vision goes away), while their ducking down, a fireteam advances to a flanking position and you cut your enemy to ribbons. That's always how I've used suppressive fire, I don't think anything anyone does to change the effect is going to make people go prone and wait in the open because it's too easy to take them out that way.

[CAS_117]

Sorry but small arms are effed against moving targets. Hitboxes are all over the place unfortunately, so people essentially have to configure the ping to the server they're on. I've fired like 200 20mm rounds into an enemy plane and they don't work.

Ok and please, and this goes to everybody if you say the words "realism", "realistic", or "reality" in your posts PROVIDE A SOURCE. Otherwise its meaningless.

[ragchan]

You are extremely missinformed. Jets and helicopters are not as fragile as it seems you believe. This isnt world war I, the planes are not made out of fabrick. Helicopters and jets can take huge amounts of damage before they stop working. There are even cases of f-15's and a-10's that have lost entire wings and still landed safetly. Also, infantry are at a disadvantage? I didn't know that was unrealistic, because you always hear of jets being shot down by Ak's.

[Bringerof_D]

Where do you think the saying: "don't run you'll just die tired" comes from? its when the attack helicopters are comming

thats what the saying is used for now but it actually comes from when people on foot (criminals/runaway slaves) are chased by skilled trackers on horseback. but its pretty much the same thing though you're trading in a horse for a pile of metal and a revolver for missiles

[Bringerof_D]

You are extremely missinformed. Jets and helicopters are not as fragile as it seems you believe. This isnt world war I, the planes are not made out of fabrick. Helicopters and jets can take huge amounts of damage before they stop working. There are even cases of f-15's and a-10's that have lost entire wings and still landed safetly. Also, infantry are at a disadvantage? I didn't know that was unrealistic, because you always hear of jets being shot down by Ak's.

entire sections of wing maybe but if an aircraft lost an ENTIRE wing it would not be able to sit on the runway straight let alone fly, and not to mention even if it lost a section of wing and made it home the wholething would fall apart on landing, the only reason lancasters from ww2 could do it is cause they fly at much lower speeds than we do now adays, the only reason any plane could survive a dogfight in ww2 was because there were no vital parts behind the cockpit, thatw as all just empty space, fuel and ammunition were in the wings


and yes they can take lots of damage before they stop working, but working and flying are 2 completely different things

protection is compromised for fuel efficiency and speed, as well the more complex the engine the more can go wrong with it, hence the slightest damage to a jet engine can cause it to overheat and or explode, aswell that damage can also displace just enough metal to disrupt the turbine blades causeing them to bend, break and fracture and destroy the inside of the engine

[Bringerof_D]

one final thing...WHO THE HELL WOULD GET DOWN AND SIT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD WHILE BEING SHOT AT ANYWAYS?! being pinned down means you have cover but you cant leave it, if you have no cover you're not pinned down...you've been screwed

and every soldier every man every living thing would RUN FOR COVER not lie down in the middle of the road. ducking only helps if theres something there to protect you

[Silvarius2000]

You are extremely missinformed. Jets and helicopters are not as fragile as it seems you believe. This isnt world war I, the planes are not made out of fabrick. Helicopters and jets can take huge amounts of damage before they stop working. There are even cases of f-15's and a-10's that have lost entire wings and still landed safetly. Also, infantry are at a disadvantage? I didn't know that was unrealistic, because you always hear of jets being shot down by Ak's.

When I read about how low flying birds are a threat I'd often think that its not a flying tank. Most of my earlier points were refering to the helicopter though. Do kindly read the earlier discussion.

[ragchan]

entire sections of wing maybe but if an aircraft lost an ENTIRE wing it would not be able to sit on the runway straight let alone fly, and not to mention even if it lost a section of wing and made it home the wholething would fall apart on landing, the only reason lancasters from ww2 could do it is cause they fly at much lower speeds than we do now adays, the only reason any plane could survive a dogfight in ww2 was because there were no vital parts behind the cockpit, thatw as all just empty space, fuel and ammunition were in the wings


and yes they can take lots of damage before they stop working, but working and flying are 2 completely different things

protection is compromised for fuel efficiency and speed, as well the more complex the engine the more can go wrong with it, hence the slightest damage to a jet engine can cause it to overheat and or explode, aswell that damage can also displace just enough metal to disrupt the turbine blades causeing them to bend, break and fracture and destroy the inside of the engine

YouTube - F-15 landing with one wing. Real story.
Uh its very possible for a jet to fly with one wing. Also just because protection is compromised doesn't mean the protection its left with is bad. The a-10 cockpit can take 20mm fire. Also, it is sometimes reffered to as the flying tank.

[SuperTimo]

Air Units
Aviation units have too much 'endurance' in terms of a game round. With loitering time not portrayed in game and the inability of small arms fire to provide a risk factor to any air unit, helicopters and fast movers are decidedly overpowered against infantry units.

true Aircraft do have an OTT endurence time, howeve aircraft are not overpowerd agaisnt infantry infantry are just stupid. Often when im flying infantry sit on top of the bunkers in attempt to shot other infantry i presume, infantry on top of a largeflat roof are easy to hit. get your arses into cover. Also on ridges and stuff hit prone and try and bunker down behind the ridge, infantry are hard to spot from jets, the long distance and high speed makes this so, stay prone and you will be harder to spot. If an aircraft is called in to do a strafing run with an accurate marker peg it. yes infantry are vunerable to aircraft but this is a reality mod. IRL infantry arnt the super human ultra 1337 soldiers they think they should be in PR. Getting harresed by an A-10 call an AAV in or a mig. Its shot down? you should have told him about that F-16 on his tail.