light anti-air cannon?

[General Dragosh]

Another idea would be to. Have a 50cal on a tripod as apposed to a full on ZSU.

I remember that i suggested that once not too long ago

[Stealthgato]

Maybe a mount with twin .50s.

[FLAP_BRBGOING2MOON]

the thing is someone has to MODEL all of this, if you feel like it needs to be in-game help the devs out!

the .50 cal DShK static wold be something to come first, as the mount and possibly sights are the only thing that need to be added.

[Mikemonster]

I nearly suggested this myself but kept forgetting.


Even a deployable AA .50 would be great - Those little arcadish SAM things are rendered useless by Airtank armour or a laze from far away. The SAM's are a deterrent that is all bark and no bite - Muttrah proves that beyond doubt.

A .50 AA Deployable could replace the current .50's and have a dual role. This would also mean that FOB's will be a bigger deal to enemy airpower, not just a big target on the map.

Down with Airtanks, up with FOBs that are a threat to enemy rushes.

[Mikemonster]

Obviously we could just make SAM's the threat they present in 'Real Life', and give the choppers a realistic amount of flares (thus preventing Permaflare), but that would be all to simple.

[samogon100500]

ZPU and Vulcans no needed.
Better idea - make high tripod,like on technical,as alternative HMG.Like this.

[Sgt.Desert Tiger[TR]]

ZPU and Vulcans no needed.
Better idea - make high tripod,like on technical,as alternative HMG.Like this.

We are saying ZPU for AA teachy not for deploy but even ZPU-1 easy to move for make it as deployable.

That gun DSHK and I know this desing for AA not you showed because of difference in sights.

[Dev1200]

Would be OP to have ZSU. 23mm Quad is too powerful.

[Stealthgato]

Would be OP to have ZSU. 23mm Quad is too powerful.

There's the Type 95 SPAAG in-game already. 25mm quad cannons with 4 AA missile launchers. So no, it wouldn't be too powerful I guess.

[rushn]

why not making them be able to shoot at land targets?

seems pretty realistic to me

in real life they are used as infantry suppression too

In Falklands war for example the Argentinians used them to suppress the brits


You can lower the damage and remove sandbags so that the operator could be easily sniped

[PLODDITHANLEY]

Once again on Barra ownage by US cas Hueys.

My squad was at supply fortification with Quad cannon manned, manpad and an AA kit.

We managed to get one CAS huey, after this ofc they came in full on for the quad cannon.

Dreaming about the type 95 Spaag on there.....

[samogon100500]

;1670395']We are saying ZPU for AA teachy not for deploy but even ZPU-1 easy to move for make it as deployable.

That gun DSHK and I know this desing for AA not you showed because of difference in sights.

Well,sight doesn't matters to much.

[Sgt.Desert Tiger[TR]]

Well,sight doesn't matters to much.

Sight matter much because in RL you cant attack air targets with normal sight effectively.

[General Dragosh]

;1670671']Sight matter much because in RL you cant attack air targets with normal sight effectively.

He means sights mean nothing in PR:BF2 not in RL

[Tarranauha200]

Use tracers to aim, simple.

[Psyko]

ZPU-4 is an awesome weapon and used too infrequently. I think MEC, insurgents, and taliban should be able to use them as much as they like on whatever targets they like.

With the deployment mechanisms that are currently in place, the locations for these weapons would be limited to medium open flat areas, and are immediately noticeable.

If the ZPU was a deployable asset, it would most likely be placed, in fields, roads, squars, courtyards and roof tops where applicable.

But everybody knows that you shouldnt place assets on easy to see places like rooftops because the gunner gets shot off easily, and quickly. it also takes 6 seconds or so to ready the weapon to fire at people when a new gunner gets on, so using it like a HMG while powerful would be inefficient.

This is why i think it should be a deployable asset. it makes sense in my mind because the factors are balanced. Not only that, but as it stands the HMG has the upper hand because it has a zoom feature where the ZPU-4 does not.

I also think its a nice idea to have a technical with a ZPU-4 on the back. I'm fairly certain i have seen photographs of examples somewhere, but they are not common.

[Dev1200]

There's the Type 95 SPAAG in-game already. 25mm quad cannons with 4 AA missile launchers. So no, it wouldn't be too powerful I guess.

On a map that nobody plays


However, if you give insurgents / militia quad cannons to set about the map with firebases, it will quickly become a replacement for the .50 cal emplacement.

The China-AAV is used to take down jets. Giving insurgents a quad cannon to take down kiowas and the occasional blackhawk is a bit much.

[Stealthgato]

On a map that nobody plays

Battle for Qinling and Shijia Valley (and Wanda Shan).

If made a deployable (do eet) it should be limited to 1 on the map as a balancing measure.

Also, Type 95 on Barracuda hohoho do want!

[PLODDITHANLEY]

A quad would be too powerful, either a single or twin the same as a .50 cal placement but just that it has the possibility of more elevation and movement - but less cover for the gunner.

[Rhino]

This is why i think it (the ZPU-4) should be a deployable asset.

Did you ever play Fools Road in v0.7 when the militia had a deployable ZPU-4? Trust me when I say, its not a good idea (remembers all the rape the ZPU-4 did on that map, mainly when deployed on the top of the Hill estate buildings with huge over watch).