Page 3 of 4
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 01:00
by ReadMenace
amazing_retard wrote:How come every time I visit this forum, I see more and more posts, about helo pilots wanting to be invincible. How about this, when you encounter a 50 cal, you break off and force him into a reflection shot? Use the terrain as cover, and fly low and fast. Don't attempt to simply pass a 50 cal, take evasive maneuvers. Don't fix something that simply isn't broken....
It's AMZAING RETARD (sic)! You're retar- I mean right!
-REad
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 01:18
by Alex6714
Its funny you say that, because it seems to me that there are many more posts wanting infantry to be gods, how that tank is overpowered, how every squad should be able to kill a tank, how aa still isn“t good enough etc...
I suggest some of you guys actually fly for a decent amount of time in pr then come bsck with respect on the work involved, compared to the absolute ease of taking an aircraft out, no teamwork required.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 01:27
by mp5punk
i think its unreal alistic, choppers in real life dont fly 100 feet off the ground or at least not most of them, they are at like 3000 feet high so yea right
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 01:56
by Alex6714
View distance in real life is also much bigger, giving helicopters a visibility and often a range advantage.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 04:40
by charliegrs
mp5punk wrote:i think its unreal alistic, choppers in real life dont fly 100 feet off the ground or at least not most of them, they are at like 3000 feet high so yea right
sources please
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 04:47
by SFOD_F HaXXeD
1 .50 can bring down a helo IRL. It's all about shot placement.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 10:22
by Mongolian_dude
In PR, its really quite easy to avoid 50. upwards, if you simply move the right way.
Going diagonally from the threat means he has to start thinking about vertical traverse as equally as horizontal. So a nice zig-zag-like flight path will do. Pretty obvious, but drasticly different results from directly at/away from the threat.
Whats the drop like for say, an M2.50? In PR, there is no drop at all and it makes it quite easy to shoot down the unsuspecting. I personally dont find it too hard to shoot down an attack helicopter at 600/700m in game.
I wouldnt really say anything sould be changed though. I personally get the feeling that the in-game 50cals dont really bare alot more significant impact to the battlefield than say a PKM. I think its to do with the lack of penetration, but thats difficult to code well, in relation to other weapons.
ZOMG, anyone used the M3.50cal on the Avenger?! Its a barrel of lol when you use it against INF.
...mongol...
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 12:08
by kf_reaper
i never really have any problems getting shot down by the enamy 50.cal but as for the Tking noobs on my team that think its fun to shoot out the back tail with an 50.cal thats another story.
the helos and 50.cal are good the way they are now. its just the ppl trying to fly dont know the right way to fly.
maby we need to start an helo flying school or something on a traning server.
and a AA school too

Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 12:25
by R.J.Travis
they need to fix some of the spots on the BH and Apache i can kill a BH in 2 shots with the 50cal and 4 in the Apache the same way i showed the devs how to kill a apc with a 5.56 clip.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 13:57
by V4.SKUNK
In "reality" 1 man with an AK-47 can take out an Apache chopper...
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 14:06
by Jaymz
[quote=""'[R-MOD"]Mongolian_dude;967595']
ZOMG, anyone used the M3.50cal on the Avenger?! Its a barrel of lol when you use it against INF.[/quote]
You'll have to be careful when doing that in the next update in which it will have a realistic ammo count. For 0.85, I accidentally gave it four times the ammo it has in real life
[quote="V4.SKUNK""]In "reality" 1 man with an AK-47 can take out an Apache chopper...[/quote]
You're probably thinking about the incident in which a Kiowa was brought down by an AK. One of the 7.62 rounds went straight into it's flight control system and they were forced to land.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 14:09
by Alex6714
V4.SKUNK wrote:In "reality" 1 man with an AK-47 can take out an Apache chopper...
+ Tons of luck. In reality he probably would have been spotted from miles away with either the helicopter itself or a UAV.
In "black hawk down" (not the film) 5 helicopters were effectively shot down, iirc 2 made it back to base with minor damage, 1 was forced to land at the docks, and only 2 were shot down "properly" by RPGs.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 16:33
by Mongolian_dude
In theory you could take out a chopper with a civi-stone, if you managed to get it in the right spot.
But what we need to think about, is "how likely is this to happen?"
And then somehow realistically implement an average between the best and worste outcome.
Its that, or you can plug your shovel into the barrel of a T-90, casuing it to blow its own turret clear off....wich would be retarded.
...mongol...
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 18:47
by Koroush47
Kruder wrote:No decent pilot is shot down unless hovering/on the ground/flying towards 0.50 cal/caught in very low speed.And if you or your team are not careful enough to spot the technical 100 meters away from your LZ you deserve to die.
Finally withstanding 123mm does not mean anything,i mean how much punishment can a BH take in general?Does anyone know,what does that mean?One bullet,a few?Obviously not 50-100 rounds.
Conclusion its find as it is,just give more flares to AC or nerf the noob friendly AAs.
Not realistic when shot down going full speed away from a 50 cal.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 18:51
by DankE_SPB
Koroush47 wrote:Not realistic when shot down going full speed away from a 50 cal.
if its going straight, nothing unrealistic
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 19:50
by Alex6714
[R-MOD]Mongolian_dude wrote:
But what we need to think about, is "how likely is this to happen?"
About as likely as you are to survive a headshot.
Oh wait.

Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 19:52
by ReaperMAC
Alex6714 wrote:About as likely as you are to survive a headshot.
Oh wait.
How likely are you to respawn when you die... oh wait
Just trying to keep the flow going

Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 20:00
by Rangu
I'd really like to see the movement speed of the .50s nerfed, a lot.
Also movement deviation, if possible.
Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 20:03
by Alex6714
[R-CON]ReaperMAC wrote:How likely are you to respawn when you die... oh wait
Just trying to keep the flow going
Because when you respawn you are a reinforcement noob.

Re: .50 cal vs helo's
Posted: 2009-03-19 20:33
by AquaticPenguin
In PR the distances all seem to be much smaller. Partly because of view distances and because people are lazy, choppers fly very low down and close to the fight which is asking for trouble. Although I don't think there's really any problem with the current damage, people just need to practise a bit more with choppers.
Maybe the suggestion about taking time to get into cars/technicals and switching to turrets would affect this. That would mean people wouldn't be able to stop and get on the .50 for all those soloing with technicals.
Also I think that a slight increase in flares is needed. I'm not sure how many are carried in rl but 30 flares doesn't seem to be enough to do anything. Especially since you can rarely even locate the threat before it's taken you out the sky. This might encourage people to use flares a bit less sparingly and might balance the aa a bit more (if you fire aa as soon as you lock you can nearly always get a kill. Although not with multiple flares in the sky)
Anyway /hi-jack