Project Reality Forums

What would be the point of building a helicopter against a tank and they wouldn't even be able to destroy them? I have to say attack helis are superior to tanks. What does a tank have against them? COAX? Hardly efficient. On the other hand, the Hellfires are being flute-shitted in close vicinity, otherwise they just lunch a guided missle from miles.

If you make the TVguideds range longer (dunno about realism on that tho), choppers won't have to deal that much anymore with sniping tanks. (they can just hover on the other side of the map, like they do in real life).

And well, yes tancrews are trained to take choppers down. But I don't think that includes shooting choppers at speeds of 200-250 km/h? as they do in PR. If a chopper is hovering in a danger zone, then thats the pilot's fault, not PR's fault. But if a tank snipes down a chopper, at full speed, then that aint fair.

$kelet0r wrote:I know what you're talking about. You over-estimate the power of the attack helicopter - a capable weapons platform but limited and fragile. Where an AH is designed to fight tanks, a tank is built to fight everything (bar jets)

Attack helicopter are not tank killers but tank hunters. If need be they can find the armored targets themselves. The Apache longbow can do this while at or below tree level with its above the rotor "fire control radar". This radar can simultaneously track 256 targets. The Apache Longbow has "fire and forget" Hellfire missiles with means that it only needs to be exposed for a few seconds to fire a missile at a target more that 5km away then it can go back into cover. Apparently pilots sometimes override the normal firing procedures and shoot while below tree level which means that the helicopter doesn't need to expose itself at all. If the helicopter did pop up, the armor in question could not possibly hit the helicopter, as the tank would need to turn the turret, load the appropriate ammunition, calculate the appropriate fire solution, and fire the round. The round itself would take a fair few seconds to reach the helicopter exposed position. By that time helicopter would be back in cover or the tank already destroyed. This assumes that the tank actually knows where the helicopter is. If the helicopter flew in low then the tank hasn't a hope in hell in spotting the chopper.

Guerilla_Frank wrote:What would be the point of building a helicopter against a tank and they wouldn't even be able to destroy them? I have to say attack helis are superior to tanks. What does a tank have against them? COAX? Hardly efficient. On the other hand, the Hellfires are being flute-shitted in close vicinity, otherwise they just lunch a guided missle from miles.

And what would be the point of building tanks if there would be an ultimate weapon against them that cannot be stopped?
Mate, atack chopper is just a weapon. Say you have an infantry that is trained to use anti-tank, anti-aircraft or whatever weaponry, and he has proper equipment. Does it mean he cannot be killed by his prey? Well? He is "designed" to deal with it afterall.

WNxCareBear wrote:actually no

irl, attack choppers are very close to the ground, as they use the hills trees etc to hide behind, and only pop up to shoot at an identified target

if ur up in the air, very easy targets for AA of basically all types

That may be the case, but I'm not talking about RL, I'm talking about my experiences in PR being a chopper gunner.

I suggested going 800-1000m minimum. The lock-on range for all AA just happens to be... 1000m. So, assuming you stay 1000m above the ground, you could be hovering directly above an AA vehicle, and it wouldn't be able to lock on to you. (shooting you with it's pathetic little gun is another story, but I think the view distance is also limited to 1000m).

Nedlands1; wrote: Hovering at 800m to 1000m is a little ridiculous with the view distances. The gunner won't even be able to properly shoot off his missiles.

Hence why you wait for a target to be spotted (minimap, squad member, attack marker) then briefly swoop down to as close to 1000m as you can get (the distance a TV guided missile travels before exploding), gunner shoots, Pilot is back off in the clouds. If the gunner misses, re-spot, and try again. I'm pretty sure that this is the safest/most effective way to utilize a chopper in PR. But maybe this way is too conservative for most people.

I'm not basing this on nothing, people, my brother and I pilot/gun (respectively) the attack choppers quite often.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:500m? I think you mean something like 5km

isnt 5km more than 500m?

well, as I said before countless times , choppers need a better armamend against tanks , like hellfires or tows , something that can be more deadlty than the current TV guided missil .

i hear before that it was impossible to add zoom to the tv guided missil , so maybe changing it to a "lockable missil"(something like the f15 in bf2 ) a zoom can be added , making the AT capabilities of the chopper more like the real life part .

I'm not reading all the posts, but IRL heli's will fire from miles away, not 200metres, getting them exposed to tank-fire. However in-game, the maps and view distance will never be RL standards. My 2 cents.


Edit.

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:well, as I said before countless times , choppers need a better armamend against tanks , like hellfires or tows , something that can be more deadlty than the current TV guided missil.

MORE deadly? Lol. have you ever fired a TV missile in-game? it's the easiest thing their is.

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:maybe changing it to a "lockable missil"(something like the f15 in bf2 ) a zoom can be added , making the AT capabilities of the chopper more like the real life part .

POE2 has lockable missiles. These nerf the helis AT capabilities. Think about it.

-These would take a while to get a lock
-Tanks would need countermeasures such as flares.
-Only have a certain range.
-Wouldn't be able to "blind fire" and check the area.

If you get shot by a tank your flying too low or are attackign to close fool. Hellfire engagement range 5KM/Miles? It's that for a reason.

Warmagi wrote:And what would be the point of building tanks if there would be an ultimate weapon against them that cannot be stopped?
Mate, atack chopper is just a weapon. Say you have an infantry that is trained to use anti-tank, anti-aircraft or whatever weaponry, and he has proper equipment. Does it mean he cannot be killed by his prey? Well? He is "designed" to deal with it afterall.

Tanks own the ground. But SOTA attack-choppers own tanks. There really aren't much countries with that kind of helicopter. Helis are more expensive. And they don't operate in masses either.

BUT I never said a tank can't get a heli in the ***. If you would have the time to check the thread before you try to put words into my mouth that you just wrote, that would make my argument unnecessary. Take a peep at my first post for a start and behold!

H3eadshot wrote: Edit.MORE deadly? Lol. have you ever fired a TV missile in-game? it's the easiest thing their is. choppers are not armed with TVguided missils IRL

POE2 has lockable missiles. These nerf the helis AT capabilities. Think about it.

-These would take a while to get a lockexactly
-Tanks would need countermeasures such as flares.no, they dont have that IRL (well, except the t90)
-Only have a certain range.yeah , a tank should be in the range of the misil to be lookable
-Wouldn't be able to "blind fire" and check the area.blind fire dont happend IRL

also, the hellfire should be operated by the gunner , not like poe2 were the lockable missils are operated by the pilot

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:i hear before that it was impossible to add zoom to the tv guided missil , so maybe changing it to a "lockable missil"(something like the f15 in bf2 ) a zoom can be added , making the AT capabilities of the chopper more like the real life part .

The problems I see with lockable missiles are:

1. You say tanks don't have countermeasures, this would create unbalance. As in: Chopper = rape all. The gunner wouldn't even need to do anything. Just "ooo there's a tank 1000M away" *waits 1.5 seconds while the missile locks on* BOOM. Tank never had a chance. Not that countermeasures would help anyway, as it would only delay the inevitable "death from above". Believe me, I used the lockable chopper missiles in PoE. The tank's "flares" did nothing. Maybe delayed their death a couple seconds.

2. Would the tank make a heat signature when there's no driver? What if someone is solo-tanking, and sitting stationary in the turret? Also, what I'd end up doing when I heard the lock on sound, is simply switching to the cupola gunner's seat. The chopper would lose the lock, and I'd go on my merry way. People did this in vanilla already, switching to the gunner seat when they got locked on to in a chopper, so as to break the lock.

Jay wrote:2. Would the tank make a heat signature when there's no driver? What if someone is solo-tanking, and sitting stationary in the turret? Also, what I'd end up doing when I heard the lock on sound, is simply switching to the cupola gunner's seat. The chopper would lose the lock, and I'd go on my merry way. People did this in vanilla already, switching to the gunner seat when they got locked on to in a chopper, so as to break the lock.

In vBF2, the AA missiles will lock the vehicle, not the seat. (people used to solo in helis, then switch to F2 when getting locked. But dice fixed it with a patch).
I'm sure you can do the same with lockable AT missile.

maybe tanks should travel in group with a tunguska or an APC to have a higher % of survive , i mean they should not travel alone , they dont do that in real life .

i hear that in PR that tactic can not be done , since the tank still has a heat signature even when nobody is in it .


AA infantery>choppers>tank>infantery

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:maybe tanks should travel in group with a tunguska or an APC to have a higher % of survive , i mean they should not travel alone , they dont do that in real life .

i hear that in PR that tactic can not be done , since the tank still has a heat signature even when nobody is in it .


AA infantery>choppers>tank>infantery

Hmmm, I didn't know that they removed the ability to break a lock.

Well, I really have no objections to the current system, but I also can't really see any reason why your way shouldn't/can't be implemented. Just as long as the AA vehicles have at least some chance to kill the chopper before it kills them. I mean, a very competent chopper pilot should be able to kill an AA vehicle, but I think more often than not, the AA vehicle should win*.

*but then again, I have no idea how it is in real life. Do AA vehicles strike fear into the hearts of Cobra/Apache/Hind gunners? or do the choppers just blow them up from 5 KM away...?

I don't know, I guess I'd just like to see a kind of perfect balance which probably will/should never be achieved. Just like 77SiCaRiO77 said
AA(vehicles AND infantry) > choppers > tanks > AA vehicles (and infantry) > infantry.

if your taking tank hits in the apache your flying it wrong I mean for christs sake the danm thing is as fast as an a-10 and it can get pretty danm close to f16 speed.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:I think it is in fact easier for tanks to shoot down choppers in r/l, as the lase can let the turret track a moving object etc aswell as better turret stabilization etc. Its more down to the pilot to make sure he dont put himself in a position to get shot by a tank

I second that. So no more flying in straight lines pilot-guys, and don’t hover as if you were king of the hill above enemy controlled territory too.

Please.



In the tournament in example (in more than one campaign and on more than one team) pilots have been doing those maps from grey altitude more than 70% of the battle time.

It works, cause they stay alive. They don’t lose their birds.

And yes, T pilots do practise.


Note:
The slaughterhouse battle (Temple – Qwai River) in C5 was a good example on what happens when pilots does not do grey.

I think what would help is if there was a more pronounced indication for the pilot that the gunner had fired a missile. A lot of pilots just continue to dive towards the target after the gunner has fired the missile, making an easier target for the tank. In the bombers there is an automatic " I got a lock!" message played when the gunner locks on. If this was coded to play when a gunner fires a TV missile it lets the pilot know immediately that he can break away and help to improve the balance. Tanks should be scared of choppers.

Guerilla_Frank wrote:Tanks own the ground. But SOTA attack-choppers own tanks. There really aren't much countries with that kind of helicopter. Helis are more expensive. And they don't operate in masses either.

BUT I never said a tank can't get a heli in the ***. If you would have the time to check the thread before you try to put words into my mouth that you just wrote, that would make my argument unnecessary. Take a peep at my first post for a start and behold!

YES. I did read your first post, not only that, I have read your second too furthermore in both post I agree with you. My answer was only related to your post that I quoted and also I do not agree with a creator of that thread, that is lion551. Those helicopters are created to destroy tanks - yes, but not to wipe them all as they like and rule the battlefield.

you must be a preatty bad pilot if you get shot down my tanks xD

DrYakult wrote:I think what would help is if there was a more pronounced indication for the pilot that the gunner had fired a missile. A lot of pilots just continue to dive towards the target after the gunner has fired the missile, making an easier target for the tank. In the bombers there is an automatic " I got a lock!" message played when the gunner locks on. If this was coded to play when a gunner fires a TV missile it lets the pilot know immediately that he can break away and help to improve the balance. Tanks should be scared of choppers.

Thats why you say "Missile away" when you fire.


If you get shot down by a tank, your doing something wrong. Its just so bloody easy to shoot a guy that hovers 700-800 meters away. Ppl need to stop thinking that they are invincible in the chopters.