Project Reality Forums

I think the commander should get to deploy one B52 bombing run for each map...pretty cool!

Is anyone else getting annoyed by constant jet questions and their droning retardedness?

It's a ground-based infantry fighting game. It's not a flight simulator. If you want more realistic weapons, aircraft, and flight - go buy a combat flight sim! An aircraft like the tornado on a tiny BF2 map? Are you kidding me? What's next, an SR-71?

Sorry for the rant but I've about f'ng had it with these people. They're too lazy to learn how to fly in a real combat sim and they're too lazy play as the game was designed in infantry combat. They simply want to hop in the most basic flight "simulator" available, fly around in the most arcade-ish combat possible, and attempt to drop bombs on people. 99% of them aren't even any good. In fact they're awful. That's why they fly jets. They're terrible, uncoordinated, lazy, and dumb. They fly around strafing and bombing nothing before crashing into a freaking sand dune.

Just remove all the jets. They're worthless in the battles and are nothing but a noise nuisance at best.

We won't be removing Jets.

And the current breakdown for jets is:

Fighters
-- land based
-- carier based

Attack Jets
-- land based
-- carrier based

There are no maps with Fighter Bombers.

I just don't see where a 2 man Fighter Bomber fits into 17 sq km and 5km flight ceiling. They are horribly out of place and overpowered.

Maybe if we could get a scale 8 map working I could see them being used. But most of the Fighter Bombers modelled in BF2 dont operate from Carriers, and scale 8 maps would largely be carrier operations.

So erm... I just dont see where they fit and we have enough work to do to get the Attack Jeta and Fighters into some maps where they make sense.

Vanity, keep the yelling down will ya?

Fact is, BF2 isn't a ground-based infantry fighting game. It's a combined-arms game.

PR has attempted to make it less arcade-y and bring as much realism in as possible given the limitations of the engine. That means, on larger maps like Kashan, a jet or two is doable - 17km square of ground to play on for the ground-pounders, and 85 cubic kilometres for the aircraft. That's a reasonable amount of space for two jets and four choppers to zoom in.

You clearly have your prefered style of play - tactical infantry - and other people have theirs. Theirs isn't better than yours, and nor is yours superior.

On a map Kashan's size for the type of engagement being enacted, it's entirely reasonable to expect some level of air cover for one or both of the sides. That's a fact you have to deal with, just like the jet guys have to accept that they can't zoom and boom on any other map.

Finally, in the right hands the jets are lethal and can help sway the course of a battle in an immensely beneficial way to their side. The problem with poor pilots isn't to do with jets, it's to do with the players.

Some VERY skilled infantrymen are poor pilots- but still enjoy flying every now and again! Likewise, I've met some excellent pilots who are ALSO exceptionally good infantrymen.

Both sides on this discussion (pro- and anti-jet) need to accept that PR isn't vBF2; and nor is it a dedicated infantryman simulator. It's a mod of a game that had it's entire main selling point on the fact that you could play any role on the battlefield, and that although it brings the game closer to reality there will be some limitations and that at the basic level, the mod will retain some of the ethos of the original- that combined-arms battles are *FUN*.

^

are the fighter bombers faster than fighters jets?

i always belive that fighter bombers were fighter jets with bombs ,therefor fitable in a 4x4 km map .

Outlawz wrote: ^

Are you unaware of John Smeaton? The HERO OF GLASGOW? A one-man terror stopping machine?

here's a hint -> http://www.johnsmeaton.com/

You live in Chicago, so WTF?!

Anyway, if the attack jets are used effectively, they can be deadly.

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:are the fighter bombers faster than fighters jets?

i always belive that fighter bombers were fighter jets with bombs ,therefor fitable in a 4x4 km map .

It's not so much a speed issue as it is the nature of the ordinance they carry (assuming we model them realistically).

This would be stuff that would have LONG range capability (which doesn't fit) and has DEVESTATING firepower (which would be annoying) and would have a copious supply of this type of ordinance.

I think the Attack Jets (low and slow with mostly dumb fire munitions) and the Fighter Jets (fast with AA weaponry) is about all we really need to see in PR and only on the absolutely largest maps in the mod.

About the only place I can see Figher Bombers potentially being applicable would be in a "scale 8" 64 sk km map (320 cubic kilometers). And if used, they would be like a mission specific asset... meaning they would carry munitions that were the most probable munition capable of achieveing a particular objective.

However, there's a couple of major problems there:
- Scale 8 maps will be carrier operations with a land mass in the center of the map (if we can even make them work)
- The existing vBF2 fighter bombers dont operate from aircraft carriers irl

I'd be willing to turn a blind eye to the latter but I am sure I will get crucified for that lol.

Ultimately I just dont see the need for anything beyond Attack Jets and Fighter Jets. And as unreeaslistic as those are as game play elements, they are still fun and cool and a very real part of modern military combined arms operations.