Project Reality Forums

Rabbit wrote:I am starting to get the feeling viirus is some fat overweight finnish kid.

Did you just fat shame him?! Reeeeeeee!!! But seriously, i don't think that's actually him in his profile pic.

Instead of attacking the messenger, can you actually say anything about his argument?
Because i think he has a point.

DogACTUAL wrote:Did you just fat shame him?! Reeeeeeee!!! But seriously, i don't think that's actually him in his profile pic.

Instead of attacking the messenger, can you actually say anything about his argument?
Because i think he has a point.

Never mind the fact that its been said twice already that it the devs are still working on AA...

And i can already guess that after the 'fix', the AA missiles will still be way more effective than they were before the update.

It always goes like this:

-Introduce new update that is completely unbalanced (that either wasn't even properly tested on how it will affect balance, or deliberately released despite of that).

-Wait for outrage.

-Introduce new update that 'fixes' things to appease the critics, but is actually still unbalanced, just not as much as before.

The result is that you still introduced an unbalance to the game.
Wether this is all an intentional strategy to push certain changes to the game meta i don't know. Probably not.

But with all the things that happened to CAS over the years, that made CAS less and less effective, this seems like another step in that direction, which is suspicious imo.

DogACTUAL wrote:And i can already guess that after the 'fix', the AA missiles will still be way more effective than they were before the update.

What?? You're saying that after the fix, players will be able to defend themselves against CAS?

DogACTUAL wrote:Did you just fat shame him?! Reeeeeeee!!! But seriously, i don't think that's actually him in his profile pic.

Instead of attacking the messenger, can you actually say anything about his argument?
Because i think he has a point.

I mean the fact that they are actually heading toward a target rather than just fucking off and teamkilling someone on the other side of the map is a big win to me.

There is only one problem with AA missiles right now - 100000 m splash damage. Just reduce it and and it's gonna be alright, TY.

Splash should still be at authentic levels, i don't want to see splash that is as ridiculously tiny as in mainstream military games.

It isnt realistic to hover over AAs and pop some flares so you can shoot everything...

If the AA is lazed or you shoot him first its fine but otherwise it should always be AA > CAS or what is the purpose of AAs otherwise? Obviously not an immersive milsim sound...

DogACTUAL wrote:And i can already guess that after the 'fix', the AA missiles will still be way more effective than they were before the update.

Do you not understand that AA was broken before this? You seem to love CAS so much you don't see the other side at all, when AA went for flares it rarely exploded, it mostly redirected into nothing and did jack shit. All they did now was fix that.

AA was literally random before, it was all about if the missile was very close to the flare/jet in the same tick, at 4 ticks per second. DICE never intended missiles to be that fast.

The change was an assembly change, no one could tell the results of it. Seeing how it properly blows up when next to flares 99% of the time now is a great achievement and means its actually working. We didn't expect the change to work that well. It working so well that it achieved the opposite effect with the current settings, causing flares to just increase the your trigger radius, even though these were adjusted as well.

Missiles and flares now need to be adjusted now that flares literally work. This work is in progress.

Then i stand corrected. Thanks for improving the code and making missiles and flares work properly and more reliably. Altough some updates before the unpredictable nature of flares and missiles actually worked quite well balance wise imo, even if a system like that was not intended.

Also, i did some research, turns out that some IR missiles in fact explode on flares, i guess it depends on the specific trigger mechanism.

Can you please post the new values for missiles and flares, like trigger radius, explosion radius and how long flares burn?

Some questions:

Would it be possible if you made flares burn for longer and make missiles more effective in return to balance it out? For more authenticity, because i think irl most flares in military use burn longer than they do ingame right now. Of course irl there is variation, some burn like only 5 sec, others 20 sec. or more.

Would it be possible to give us the ability to only pop one flare at a time? Or maybe even the ability to select how many flares to pop? Maybe multiple weapon slots for flares with different amounts that get popped at a time?

Are you open to increase the distance flares get propelled away from aircraft for all aircraft to authentic levels?
Meaning jets too. In turn maybe adjust trigger radius and explosion radius of missiles to balance it out again?

I would really appreciate to get an answer because i think changes like these would improve balance and authenticity, although maybe i didn't account for other stuff.

And to other players, what is your opinion of the newest update, is the flare and missile balance good now?
After some testing i guess it is quite alright now, but could still use some improvements imo.

Rabbit wrote:I am starting to get the feeling viirus is some fat overweight finnish kid.

Where are the mods with their warnings for attitude problems or unhelpful post content when you need them

MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS MODS

[R-CON]UTurista wrote:What?? You're saying that after the fix, players will be able to defend themselves against CAS?

The real problem is MANPAD. I can take dying to AAV or static AA, they are problems you can avoid or address during a game. You cannot avoid 2 MANPADs which, if used carefully and from good positions, have no way of being killed by CAS. They can sit outside of a mainbase out of reach by most infantry and hide in a building or bunker you cannot destroy with CAS, and shoot out of them.

Handheld AA can also 1shot all helis and jets up to 1500m distance. It used to have 600m locking limitation to show that IRL, MANPAD has more limited range than its static, or vehicle mounted counterparts. Rightfully so.

Now every team has 2 near-impossible to find or avoid AAs that can be anywhere on the map with no such limitations. They can also engage fast and high flying jets, UNLIKE IRL.

Manpad locking distance should be limited to 600m as they used to be. They should also be limited to 1 kit per team, just like the HAT.

It is such an unrealistically powerful asset that shouldn't be the primary way to kill CAS, like it is now. First choice should always be AAVs and built AAs. The gameplay mechanics should guide towards that choice.

viirusiiseli wrote: The real problem is MANPAD. I can take dying to AAV or static AA, they are problems you can avoid or address during a game. You cannot avoid 2 MANPADs which, if used carefully and from good positions, have no way of being killed by CAS. They can sit outside of a mainbase out of reach by most infantry and hide in a building or bunker you cannot destroy with CAS, and shoot out of them.

Simple solution: Change gamefiles, delete bushes and other blocking stuff, kill MANPAD first and than rape the rest.

If all CAS maps would have AAVs I'd agree with only 1 MANPAD tbh.

fecht_niko wrote:
If all CAS maps would have AAVs I'd agree with only 1 MANPAD tbh.

2 is fine. You'd have to consider the "Tambov's variable" (also known as Murphy's Law).. There is always some peculiar reason why 1 AA would be unavailable.. and as a result CAS woud be able to rape away in solitude..

Yesterday my squad tried to get rid of some helo buzzing around us while we played Insurgency.. with zero success because nobody could get MANPAD's

IRL Russian MANPADs have up to 5km attack ceiling..

Ukrainian-Russian war has so far been entirely without CAS (except very early of the conflict) because there are simply too many MANPADs on the ground, watching the skies.. Would not be really something exclusive to see the same ingame..

Unit-RX400 wrote:2 is fine. You'd have to consider the "Tambov's variable" (also known as Murphy's Law).. There is always some peculiar reason why 1 AA would be unavailable.. and as a result CAS woud be able to rape away in solitude..

Yesterday my squad tried to get rid of some helo buzzing around us while we played Insurgency.. with zero success because nobody could get MANPAD's

IRL Russian MANPADs have up to 5km attack ceiling..

Ukrainian-Russian war has so far been entirely without CAS (except very early of the conflict) because there are simply too many MANPADs on the ground, watching the skies.. Would not be really something exclusive to see the same ingame..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... ian_crisis

... 16 shot down or destroyed on the ground

I guess they learnt their lesson after 2014 since 29 August 2014 was the last time pro-Russians shot down a Ukrainian aircraft

So yes, manpands are indeed effective and scary irl

fecht_niko wrote:Change gamefiles, delete bushes and other blocking stuff, .

comon now man lmao

Singh408 wrote:comon now man lmao

Pre 1.4 it was possible to change gamefiles and delete smoke, walls, bushes, gras, ....
You could also get more fps to get better recordings lmao

fecht_niko wrote:If all CAS maps would have AAVs I'd agree with only 1 MANPAD tbh.

It would be a much better solution because it would actually require some of that teamwork and being careful from AA troops that people want out of CAS crews. Using MANPADs requires none

Unit-RX400 wrote:There is always some peculiar reason why 1 AA would be unavailable.. and as a result CAS woud be able to rape away in solitude..

They would have AAV(s). And there's only 1 HAT a team, HATs are still killing armor all the time. Your point?

DogACTUAL wrote:Would it be possible if you made flares burn for longer and make missiles more effective in return to balance it out? For more authenticity, because i think irl most flares in military use burn longer than they do ingame right now. Of course irl there is variation, some burn like only 5 sec, others 20 sec. or more.

Would it be possible to give us the ability to only pop one flare at a time? Or maybe even the ability to select how many flares to pop? Maybe multiple weapon slots for flares with different amounts that get popped at a time?

Are you open to increase the distance flares get propelled away from aircraft for all aircraft to authentic levels?
Meaning jets too. In turn maybe adjust trigger radius and explosion radius of missiles to balance it out again?

Flares ingame are active for 8 seconds, about twice as long as their animation would lead you to believe. All the data on flares I could find pointed to a typical burn time of 3-4 seconds, I'm not sure where you're getting 20 seconds from.

It should be possible to have different slots for number of flares on transport helis, the main problem I can think of is consistency of the controls across different vehicles.

Current flare deployment patterns are pretty far from realistic - helicopters typically release flares to the side and forward, not towards the rear - but you have to account for the limitations of the BF2 seeking mechanisms.

One thing I'm curious about is that the new missiles seem to have a detonation distance much further than the explosion radius. Obviously AA can still kill things so I was just wondering about the mechanics behind how the numbers work in practice.

TBob wrote:Flares ingame are active for 8 seconds, about twice as long as their animation would lead you to believe. All the data on flares I could find pointed to a typical burn time of 3-4 seconds, I'm not sure where you're getting 20 seconds from.

It should be possible to have different slots for number of flares on transport helis, the main problem I can think of is consistency of the controls across different vehicles.

Current flare deployment patterns are pretty far from realistic - helicopters typically release flares to the side and forward, not towards the rear - but you have to account for the limitations of the BF2 seeking mechanisms.

One thing I'm curious about is that the new missiles seem to have a detonation distance much further than the explosion radius. Obviously AA can still kill things so I was just wondering about the mechanics behind how the numbers work in practice.

No one touched the way flares deploy for ages While it would be bit tedious task, changing them to deploy to side and forward would easily be possible.
Can you link sources that flares should only be effective for 4 seconds?