Project Reality Forums

DankE_SPB wrote:if 900mm penetration is meant for APCs then i dont know what is hard target
Vikhr (AT-9)
Ataka-V 9M120 (AT-16)
weg2001 mentions a bit different info


official KBP site removed info about Vikhr for some reason, the only thing left is Hermes-A
KBP. HERMES-A Guided Weapon System



yeah, i knew about IR jammers, but not about systems which detects missile launch(well, i heard about them, but they are detecting ICBM launches , not SAMs)

Almost all MBTs have 900mm of armor on all sides nowadays.

If you want to blow a bunker to bits you need a thermobaric ATGM.

So two ATGMs from the Mi-28 should take out an MBT.

The Hellfire in theory should take out a tank in 1 shot, but penetration figures are classified.

Almost all MBTs have 900mm of armor on all sides nowadays.

mh... even on Top? 900mm RHA at the Front ok, sites maybe... what are your sources for your statements?

Titan wrote:mh... even on Top? 900mm RHA at the Front ok, sites maybe... what are your sources for your statements?

Well if I'm not senile already, the M1A2 with TUSK has more then 900mm of RHA in everywhere but the top, I think.

That just means you have to either use two shots or land one on the top.

The M1 isn't as good as its cracked up to be. The thing spends 1/3 of its time refueling and repairing in combat. It required such a heavy logistics train that finding them is as hard as moving finger down a road of supply trucks. The exhaust from the Abrams is hundreds of degrees Fahrenheit, which can ignite small brush fires; If you don't have complete air superiority, leave at home.

CAS_117 wrote:The M1 isn't as good as its cracked up to be. The thing spends 1/3 of its time refueling and repairing in combat. It required such a heavy logistics train that finding them is as hard as moving finger down a road of supply trucks. The exhaust from the Abrams is hundreds of degrees Fahrenheit, which can ignite small brush fires; If you don't have complete air superiority, leave at home.

I'm guessing that a gas turbine would make the Abrams quite thirsty.

To be honest, I don't know who would call in tanks or attack helos without first confirming air superiority.

I wouldn't even think about sending in helos unless I knew that the areas they were in weren't stuffed to the gills with ZPUs and MANPADs.

Send in F-22s, have air superiority, send in tanks and inf. to do armed recon, take out stationary AA, then send in Apaches.

And AiX's Cobra is actually quite a nice example of how I'd like to see ATGMs work.

You shoot, and it'll show you where it's going to hit, with a lock on box, and the possibility of having a straight shot mess up is low.

But I'm still wondering, is it possible to code PR to make it hide heat sources until you point them out?

Hunt3r wrote:But I'm still wondering, is it possible to code PR to make it hide heat sources until you point them out?

This doesnt happen irl... but regardless the closest you are going to come with that is a GLTD type system where you fire a target object as a projectile. IRL if something is a heat target to begin with a given vehicle's tracking computer will either pick it up or not.

Hunt3r wrote:Almost all MBTs have 900mm of armor on all sides nowadays.Well if I'm not senile already, the M1A2 with TUSK has more then 900mm of RHA in everywhere but the top, I think.

That just means you have to either use two shots or land one on the top.

can you provide at least some sources?
there is not much info on M1A* armour, but those what i found, mentions 900mm only for front of turret(and this at 30 degree angle, not 0, as i understood)
Main Battle Tank - M1, M1A1, and M1A2 Abrams
Tank Protection Levels
M1 (on russian)

If you want to blow a bunker to bits you need a thermobaric ATGM.

didnt get it, we were talking about tank vs ATGM

The Hellfire in theory should take out a tank in 1 shot, but penetration figures are classified.

no offence, but its sounds biased, you have estimated numbers for Vikhr ATGM penetration which exceeds armour of tanks on nearly all sides and say it should take 2 to destroy, but after that you have no info about hellfire and say 1 shot\1 kill
i agree that there should be good chance of surviving if it hit frontal turret armour, but on other places it should be equal to other ATGMs

DankE_SPB wrote:can you provide at least some sources?
there is not much info on M1A* armour, but those what i found, mentions 900mm only for front of turret(and this at 30 degree angle, not 0, as i understood)
Main Battle Tank - M1, M1A1, and M1A2 Abrams
Tank Protection Levels
M1 (on russian)


didnt get it, we were talking about tank vs ATGM


no offence, but its sounds biased, you have estimated numbers for Vikhr ATGM penetration which exceeds armour of tanks on nearly all sides and say it should take 2 to destroy, but after that you have no info about hellfire and say 1 shot\1 kill
i agree that there should be good chance of surviving if it hit frontal turret armour, but on other places it should be equal to other ATGMs

Well, I don't claim to know this type of deal very well, since I don't look into it very much, so I'll concede that most likely the Vikhr and other ATGMs should still be 1 shot kill.

Yes, I realize that in real life any heatsource would be quickly detected, but in this game the laser is too slow, and it makes things harder then they should. The "showing heatsource" function would be akin to locking a target via contrast.

The attack helos are harder to use effectively in this game. Yes, they are wonderfully effective as CAS, completely devastating a FB, but against armor attack helos suddenly lose their power. I realize that having a lock system would seem gamey and all of that, but attack helos should at least beat tanks, the one thing they're supposed to do for breakfast.

Basically, try and port CA's attack helo gunning system, and the entire "attack helicopters fly into the stratosphere to nail tanks." system is done for.

Or we could simply make the attack helos with no radar only have a scanner range that shows targets to only be big enough to show the lock on box. Once you lock up a target is there a way to force the missile to only follow the target locked or is the BF2 engine still stupidly bugged?

omg how many helicopter threads do u need to make hunter u talk asif ur an expert that flys em in army every day.

u obviously arent very good if u cant get kils with the current system ( that is fine)
and give all this PR2 talk a rest . its not coming next week

alexaus wrote:omg how many helicopter threads do u need to make hunter u talk asif ur an expert that flys em in army every day.

u obviously arent very good if u cant get kils with the current system ( that is fine)
and give all this PR2 talk a rest . its not coming next week

Well obviously I don't fly helicopters in the military, I think everyone knows by now.

Sure, I get kills. But goddamn is it frustrating when you've managed to keep your sight perfectly on the tank and it dives down for no reason at all, and misses the tank.

I'm sick and tired of the unrealistic "fly at the absolute highest altitude and then swoop down at Mach 2" tactics that you have to use to avoid getting downed as soon as you see a tank.

This is coming from a pilot and a gunner who doesn't enjoy the fact that two people shooting fifty cals at you is enough to down you for good. A gunner that is tired of having Hellfires that require you to try and steady an inherently unstable camera by hand.

The fact is that attack helos as it is are very broken. When you have a completely perfect shot and even then, you don't have a complete guarantee of having the missile hitting the tank instead of the ground in front of it.

For the record, it's been two threads. One in the suggestion forum, one here. The unguided Hellfire one is from someone else.

Go to a Kashan Desert server, fly the apache realistically, and then come back to the forums without being downed at all by small arms fire, and with all tanks, APCs, and IFVs that you meet are destroyed.

You're only allowed to be downed by AAVs and MANPADS, or else you can't get "kils" and you need to practice more.

Go ahead, try it. If you can do it, I'll agree with you that I just suck at using the attack helicopters.

I'll concede that the attack helicopter is currently extremely effective against infantry and light vehicles, but as it is, killing tanks and IFVs with a single Hellfire requires luck. Lasing it yourself tends to have it bugger up and just fly straight up after getting close to the target.

The current system may work, but "work" and "works effectively" are two different things.

Simple fact is, helicopters are not very usefull now at all, nor realistic in attributes or behaviour.

However many spotters you have, wingmen etc, unless the enemy team is utter **** you are going to die, no choice about it.

The other point of course is if I want I can choose to single handedly take out all the enemy choppers, not only that, I can do it with many things.

Almosts standard procedure on kashan now is go to 1200 altitude, hunt enemy choppers, if you live, swoop down and shoot at stuff before you die. I have had spotters, been spotter, and the chopper never lasts long with bad pilots, good pilots (not the typic stereotype everyone is stuck too, but decent respected all round players)...


The people who think the current situation is ok are the ones that never or almost fly, have some strange dislike for anything airborne or simply don´t care. Every decent player I have spoken to that has a passion for flying whilst not being "uber leet air whore" seems to agree that they arent right, to differing levels.


Yes, sometimes a chopper will rape the eemy team, but its rare and the enemy team really has to be useless...


In any case, no need to keep discussing it, the point of CA is to increase the realism, teamwork, maintain balance (some of which imo is lacking atm) and at the same time make it fun as an experiment and proof of how it can work despite some peoples pessimism.

^ Alex speaks the truth - I agree 100%.

Replying to support what Alex wrote. He described the current situation spot on.

Hunt3r wrote: Go to a Kashan Desert server, fly the apache realistically, and then come back to the forums without being downed at all by small arms fire, and with all tanks, APCs, and IFVs that you meet are destroyed.

You're only allowed to be downed by AAVs and MANPADS, or else you can't get "kils" and you need to practice more.

Go ahead, try it. If you can do it, I'll agree with you that I just suck at using the attack helicopters.

Realistically meaning flying at <100m Altitude and hover to shoot targets kill 1/2 M1A2s and return to base?

Because there are enough people that I know including myself that can do that...

Alex is totally right on this matter..

Alex has some very good points here.

But by giving only firepower like lock on abilities, FLIR, stabilizing cameras etc (not mentioned by Alex but in other posts earlier) we solve the problem only partialy.
Whats the point to have all them if the helicopter still fly at 1200m?

IRL the power of attack helicopter is the ability to approach undetected, fire fast, disapear faster.
Even the powerfull Longbow doesnt fly all time with radar active saying to enemy AAs and fighters: "Hi! I am over here!"

So we must somehow "force" the pilots to fly low within a good planned route in order to approach and kill. One good solution could be:

1) Make helicopters less vulnerable to 0.50.
2) More time to lock for AA
3) Biggest range and more deadly missiles for AA.

With these the pilot must keep low and fast. Flying high gives to AA all time needed for a lock and hovering over a hot zone will be a clear suicide.
Plus he needs intel from his teammates to plan a clear route.

After approach then he makes use of FLIR, lock on Hellfires or whatever to make the kill.

"Get in - Kill - Get out"
Just like Alex said the problem right now is in all three stages.
Resolving only the "Kill" stage is good for people who wants to rule without effort. Just two clicks.
Resolving all three is good for every true "helicopter lover".

<3 Alex

He certainly has a way with words >.>

Yeah the AA needs some real help, and frankly there is one way to do that: Increase view distance.

*Edit: IF YOU AGREE WITH ALEX COME TO THE CA TEST ON THE 25TH PLEASE.

I agree with people that the havok is the best chopper in game at the moment, due to more missiles, meaning longer before refilling, also better view angles for both pilot and gunner are another plus =]. I also thing that the game is pretty spot on with the gameplay balance that is needed for the game to be playable with such assets. Otherwise we'd have to have apaches popping up a few km away and taking out pretty much everything.

CAS_117 wrote:

*Edit: IF YOU AGREE WITH ALEX COME TO THE CA TEST ON THE 25TH PLEASE.

Exactly. Put your money where your mouth is.

The stuff that CA is working on can only be implemented into PR if it is tested at FULL scale.

That way the PR brass can determine what could work and what can't for PR.

Enough talk about how helis are nerfed.
Ad nauseam.

CAS and Alex have set it up, so help them test it.

Well, If I must...

Oh sorry lads, I would totally be there, its just I have to volunteer for my Church's Greek Festival..Opa!

Good Luck CAS and Alex, I'm sure you'll do us all proud and I'll try to get my CIA boys over there.

Peace

Ace