Project Reality Forums

RHYS4190 wrote:They could work on operation archer, but then you would have to give the insurgent's lot of SA-7's or some thing better in which to counter them. And like many people have remarked, putting jet's on Archer would be like releasing a rabid fox into a hen house,

Why would you ever need to do that? Why would you need to recreate 0.8 Karbala? It's a silly vBF2 mentality that you absolutely need to be able to shoot down every enemy threat with ease.

The problem is that you couldn't put jets on a 2x2 map, not that it would ruin the game at all. It's like saying that players need to have C4 to blow the enemy artillery up, because it would be too much of a game breaker to have proper indirect fire that can't be killed.

McLuv wrote:Why would you ever need to do that? Why would you need to recreate 0.8 Karbala? It's a silly vBF2 mentality that you absolutely need to be able to shoot down every enemy threat with ease.

The problem is that you couldn't put jets on a 2x2 map, not that it would ruin the game at all. It's like saying that players need to have C4 to blow the enemy artillery up, because it would be too much of a game breaker to have proper indirect fire that can't be killed.

Anyhow, as it is, Apaches cannot take sustained 50 cal without having to go back to base. Having two Apaches would be enough.

Two to three technicals firing on the Apache, with the occasional RPG flying through the air would be enough to get the Apache running out of there before it dies. Getting hit by RPGs is bad bad news.

McLuv wrote:? It's a silly vBF2 mentality that you absolutely need to be able to shoot down every enemy threat with ease.

Have you ever tried shooting down a jet with a SA-7?, half the time it does not track, then there's the flares, and then the simple fact that it extremely weak, and even if it did hit it will only severely damage the plane not destroy it.

And yes the planes do need a counter or at least some scary enough to scare them off. and stop them annulate your forces.


And what im saying is if we put jet's on a map like Ramial, it whould kill the game play, because you whould not have to go into the city and look for the Cachies all you could just bomb the city with impunity.

Hunt3r wrote:Still smaller then most.

I'd absolutely love to see targetting pods for the frogfoot and A-10 btw.

And just have good AA. If we have radar or something to that tune on the Linebacker and Tunguska, jets and helos won't dare get near until someone HATs it.

Exactly. First one on the island gets the AA, and until AA is downed by ground forces you can't use jets to take out things like tanks.

RHYS4190 wrote:Have you ever tried shooting down a jet with a SA-7?, half the time it does not track, then there's the flares, and then the simple fact that it extremely weak, and even if it did hit it will only severely damage the plane not destroy it.

And yes the planes do need a counter or at least some scary enough to scare them off. and stop them annulate your forces.


And what im saying is if we put jet's on a map like Ramial, it whould kill the game play, because you whould not have to go into the city and look for the Cachies all you could just bomb the city with impunity.

You know, MANPADs are meant to deal mostly with helicopters. A Stinger has a 5km range about. Most jets cover that distance in seconds, in reality.

And adding an A-10 to Ramiel would be stupid. I'd be in favor of attack helos for city-based maps, but not jets. Maps like Archer, why not. But city maps don't work with jets.

Shooting down a jet with a MANPAD is a bad idea too. Use your MANPAD against trans helos, and attack helos. Fixed SAM sites and AAVs should be used against jets.

MANPADs in number can deal with a jet though, but it's hardly ideal.

To anyone who thinks jets are overpowered on a map like seethed waters I challenge you to take a jet while a squad of us caps flags, and we will see who dies more and has it harder.

Most of the people claiming these things probably never fly in pr, let alone tried a system like CAs.

Jets and aircraft are hugely important in modern warfare and contribute greatly to realism and teamwork if implemented and used properly.

Flew the F-16 in our match vs CATA and QcRulezz *the A-10 pilot* and I were immensly important to our victory. We maintained air superiority and systematically annhilated their armor support. With us and our own armor keeping them at bay there another squad dedicated to the defense of the Bunkers kept the flags for the entire game. Being able to hit enemy targets from beyond range of enemy AA helped win the round for us.

Fighter wrote:They made a Harrier, but it failed...Like major fail...Like facepalm fail...

you do know our harrier isn't coded yet? It should have never been on the training maps

Yes, to me I consider aircraft in PR, although they're slightly funky, to be important.

If there were only two attack helos, then there'd be the problem of attack helos doing something they shouldn't be doing; acting as anti air.

McLuv wrote:It's a silly vBF2 mentality that you absolutely need to be able to shoot down every enemy threat with ease.

It's also a silly vBF2 mentality to switch to US side because they get the l33t indestructible gear.

If you want to see something close to reality, check out "Lock On", "Lock On: Flaming Cliffs", "DCS Ka-50: Black Shark". Note the distances involved. A usual operation on A-10A1 involves a fly of about 30-50 km from the airfield to the operation zone and targets are usually scattered in no less than 10 km across (usually even more, with many AA threats on the way). A usual engagement distance is min. 2 km (come closer and you get your wings cut down by Shilka or shot down by a Strela-1 AA missile).

It's not bad to have aircraft in PR, but we have to understand that realism (and thus part of fun) may suffer. A compromise could be made though.

In terms of combined arms, only ground attack aircraft (e.g. A-10, Su-25) are used directly on the battlefield for close air support. Air superiority fighters, multi-roles, like F-15 or Su-27, are usually used in a more strategical manner: maintaining air superiority (destroying other aircraft and ground AA defenses), engaging important and hard-to-get ground targets (radars, bunkers etc.) from long range, etc.

What I would personally like to see in the future of PR, is (realistically) destroyable unmanned aircraft (like MQ-1 Predator), which is certainly becoming more and more common on the battlefield. Players could be able to fly armed battle drones over the battlefield from a (relatively) safe, but not invulnerable, location. This could add a twist to the whole game (giving a SpecOps mission in this game a whole new meaning)!

removing fixed wing would be a massive mistake. We just need 1 -2 more maps featuring them You can complain that maps aren't big enough but id rather have them and have to turn a lot than not at all. They are an awesome addition to game play and in my opinion the best thing in PR.

Meh, more maps ala Qinling, done.

Then no more problems, headaches, whatever.

Or a map like Seethed Waters.

That's basically all I can think of.

crAck_sh0t wrote:removing fixed wing would be a massive mistake. We just need 1 -2 more maps featuring them You can complain that maps aren't big enough but id rather have them and have to turn a lot than not at all. They are an awesome addition to game play and in my opinion the best thing in PR.

Devs are busy with even more militia/ins./Taliban maps,dont think we'll see one CA map before 2010.

Oh yeah! Those nasty Devs.
They' re spend THEIR time and THEIR effort to create some new maps so we can have fun all of us for free and they're not spend THEIR time and THEIR effort to create YOUR favorite toys!

Show some respect man. They deserve it.
Because their priority is to satisfy the majority of the players in every round (pilots are always less) doesn't mean they dont have plans for air assets.
Some of them (like Rhino) already stated that they are jet whores.
Give them some time.
You don't pay for it ...

Anyway I have to apologize to the mods for my style. But I just can't stand ungratfulness...

Good idea since as you said there is very few maps with jets in it.
I hope this idea comes to reality

Nemus, no worries, needed to be said.

Anyways, I think its clear that PR intends to continue to develope the attack aircraft with each new version. v0.8 if you all remember had a huge upgrade to aircraft capability. We have not come out with a major revision since that time, as like has been mentioned multiple times here, the lack of maps.

Attack Jets / Fighter Jets will only be seen in PR on a 4km (or larger) map. 2km maps will not be used for jets and only rarely with heavy attack helicopters.

To comments like Kruder's, we are focused on many areas of PR, not catering to specific pilot demographic, there are many other BF2 mods out there that cater specifically to pilots if your interest is purely in air assets.

v0.9 we will definitely see some new 4km maps which may or may not have jet aircraft available.

I think by v1.0 we will see a lot more jet aircraft in PR, but we can use all the help we can get! If you are interested to see this happen, instead of making whining like comments, go to the community modding section, follow the links to the tutorials and download the BF2 editor, and start mapping. Even if you dont make it too far, it will certainly give you a better appreciation for what challenges lie in the development of the mod.

With any luck this thread (or threads like it) will inspire the next would be mapper, to create the next Kashan or Qinling. It was afterall not too long ago that 4km maps were only a pipe dream, if you have ambition (and alot of time on your hands ) you can make jet aircraft in PR a reality and will definitely have enough fanboys to even rival Rhino

Allowing aircraft to enter the surrounding terrain is one of my favourite features of the Combined Arms Minimod, I hope its being considered for PR

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]fuzzhead;1148703']you can make jet aircraft in PR a reality and will definitely have enough fanboys to even rival Rhino [/quote]



blasphemy!


[quote="Dr2B Rudd""]Allowing aircraft to enter the surrounding terrain is one of my favourite features of the Combined Arms Minimod, I hope its being considered for PR[/quote]

We will certainly be looking into it but the main problem is the way CA have done it also disables combat zones around main bases that only effect the other team to make sure they do not main base rape which would be a huge loss but I do believe there may be anouther way to get the best of both but I need to look into it

Anti projectile bubble to fit tightly around the base.