Project Reality Forums

I'm against this, whilst I find it annoying when you're calling in CAS urgently, they have to consider the threats and acquire air supremacy.

Yay!! Hopefully now helicopters can worry about their main role of attacking ground targets without worrying about air carried AA weapons that barely give you a chance. Do you think you will completely remove them where required or on certain maps make one attack chopper air centered and the other one ground attack?

I think it should be done. The attack helos spend at least half their time fighting enemy helos.
2 helos on kashan: 10 minutes to kill one teams helo's.
Other team has 10 minutes of CAS and we all know how sluggish it usually is.

It may be unrealistic to remove AA missles but there are so many other unrealisitc factors in the game it's a moot point. I feel that removing missles would really improve the gameplay.

I'm for it, its a realistic change and signifies the importance of AAV's, instead of just taking them since 'there isn't any tanks or APC's'

Riflewizard wrote:It may be unrealistic to remove AA missles but there are so many other unrealisitc factors in the game it's a moot point. I feel that removing missles would really improve the gameplay.

Actually, removing the AAM's from helicopters, based on their current configurations, would be realistic. This is because the current loadouts are using configurations that are generally impossible.

It would be unrealistic to remove all AAM's in general, but in order to use AAM's in a realistic manner they will need to be mounted on the proper pylons. Although the Apache is still using the proper configuration, removal of their AAM's temporarily would be the best solution in order to balance things out until the other aircraft can be modified.

chrisweb89 wrote:Yay!! Hopefully now helicopters can worry about their main role of attacking ground targets without worrying about air carried AA weapons that barely give you a chance. Do you think you will completely remove them where required or on certain maps make one attack chopper air centered and the other one ground attack?

Unfortunately, I don't think it's going to have a serious impact on people using helicopters as an alternative anti-air platform. The problem isn't with the aircraft or loadouts, it's about how players are using those aircraft. It has already been mentioned before that helicopter crews are still capable of engaging other helicopters with their ATGM's and cannons, it just requires more work and skill.

The only thing that might deter players from participating in helicopter-vs-helicopter combat is the fact that every ATGM or cannon burst you fire at an enemy helicopter is less munitions you have to perform your job as CAS. I don't think it will fully deter players from doing it, but it should decrease the volume.


I'm sure that eventually, depending on how their initial removal works out, that helicopters might end up with alternate configurations in order to carry AAM's. By removing AAM's from helicopters you are leaving them more susceptible to enemy fixed-wing aircraft, as ATGM's and autocannons are nearly useless against a fast mover. And because the ground-based anti-air systems are unable to engage targets at altitude, the only way I see fixing the issue is to ensure each team has an air superiority aircraft on station to fill that role.

It'll take some thought and trial runs, but what really needs to happen is that players learn to focus more on their primary roles and not try to exploit what they think their assets are capable of. That means learning that attack helicopters and ground-attack fighters are provided AAM's for defense only, not intended as offensive counter-air weapons.

[R-DEV]Ninja2dan wrote: It'll take some thought and trial runs, but what really needs to happen is that players learn to focus more on their primary roles and not try to exploit what they think their assets are capable of. That means learning that attack helicopters and ground-attack fighters are provided AAM's for defense only, not intended as offensive counter-air weapons.

This is a problem with the view distance and confining them to a small space really. View distance isn?t fixable on most maps I guess.

Ideally you have attack helicopters only on one team (unless view distances and ranges can be increased, and the terrain is like that of qinling offering low cover). Works better on Muttrah and such maps for this reason.

As long as there is a possibility of another aircraft in the sky that can kill you, it becomes a priority threat really, that won?t change with AA or without AA.

Mixing jets with helicopters I fear won?t fix the problem either, it will just make the helicopters useless with any competent jet pilot (as shown on qinling) and would, as is always the excuse, take another guy "off" the battlefield to fly something that can only be useful every 20 mins.

Alex6714 wrote:As long as there is a possibility of another aircraft in the sky that can kill you, it becomes a priority threat really, that won?t change with AA or without AA.

That sort of agreed with my point. As long as helicopter pilots view other helicopter pilots as a direct threat, there will always be someone out there trying to engage the other helicopter with their own instead of focusing on their intended primary role of providing ground support. Even without AAM's for defense, air crews would simply revert to comical dogfights using their cannons or try surprising opposing helicopters with ATGM fire.

This is one reason why I recommend leaving air superiority roles to specific aircraft, letting helicopters focus on their own primary roles instead.

Mixing jets with helicopters I fear won?t fix the problem either, it will just make the helicopters useless with any competent jet pilot (as shown on qinling) and would, as is always the excuse, take another guy "off" the battlefield to fly something that can only be useful every 20 mins.

I don't see how it would make helicopters useless. I'm not talking about mixing attack helicopters with multi-role attack jets, I'm talking about having air superiority aircraft armed only with AAM's to focus solely on engaging enemy air assets. Under no circumstances should those air superiority aircraft attempt engaging ground assets.

This would mean helicopters crews are still the only air support assets capable of engaging ground forces (on maps that are using attack helicopters instead of attack jets), which will retain their usefulness. On maps where you have multi-role attack jets such as the F-16 or ground-attack jets such as the A-10 and Su-25, then I would agree it's pointless to mix them with attack helicopters.


And I honestly don't see a problem with throwing one player per team up in the air strictly to combat enemy aircraft every few minutes. That's just one player not participating in other forms of combat, compared to the consequences of having your own helicopters downed before they can even complete their mission. When you lose your own attack helicopters you now have 2 players sitting on their asses waiting for a respawn. You also have the initial ticket loss from the aircraft itself and the loss of the crew. And the icing on the cake is the fact that their CAS mission is likely failed or delayed, resulting in residual ticket loss of those killed due to not having necessary fire support.

As you can imagine, "losing" that one player from the ground mission in order for them to fly that F-15 or what ever for the duration of the round is a lot less painful than the overall losses a team sustains every time their attack helicopters are brought down by enemy fire or from not actively doing their assigned job.


Integrating such a change obviously won't fully remove the chance that your helicopters will be shot down, but what it will mean is that the helicopter crews will be concerning themselves more with doing their jobs in the CAS role than spending half of their flight time chasing other helicopters. It will also keep the air superiority aircraft busy hunting each other down, with the attack helicopters only being shot at as a secondary task.

I don?t disagree, except if jets are added to maps with attack helicopters, it will nullify the attack helicopters role, because it can shoot it down extremely easily. The helicopter won?t be able to provide cas, because it will be shot down almost inmediately after each spaw, if the jet pilot is somewhat competent and the team is ok.

Alex6714 wrote:I don?t disagree, except if jets are added to maps with attack helicopters, it will nullify the attack helicopters role, because it can shoot it down extremely easily. The helicopter won?t be able to provide cas, because it will be shot down almost inmediately after each spaw, if the jet pilot is somewhat competent and the team is ok.

I understand what you are trying to say, but that is no more a problem than it is right now. Helicopters are able to shoot each other down just as much, all this will do is change their threat from other helicopters to enemy jets.

There are several ways that might help counter it though. Limiting the munitions that each air superiority aircraft carries and spreading airfields out to the furthest edges of the maps for example. By limiting their payloads, jets will need to decide whether to expend the majority of their ordnance on opposing fighters or on opposing helicopters. Because opposing fighters pose more of a threat than the helicopters, in theory most jet pilots will be hunting for and shooting at enemy jets as a priority over enemy helicopters.

It also means that the jet pilots should be more concerned with locating and defeating enemy jets instead of hunting down enemy helicopters. If a team's air superiority aircraft has been knocked out, their helicopters would be better off spending the time between respawns by sticking closer to friendly SAM units or troops with MANPADS.

And by extending the distance between the airfield and the front lines, air superiority aircraft will take longer to rearm and return to the fight, meaning they need to pay close attention to what they shoot at and when. Using up all of your AAM's against a helicopter, only to run out when the opposing fighter jet shows up would be a costly mistake.


I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, and I'm sure it would take some good planning to come up with useful doctrines. But the overall fact remains that the current helicopter configurations are unrealistic, and until their loadouts are adjusted to a more realistic configuration the AAM's should be removed. Unless someone has a better suggestion, I can't think of any better choice.

Basically, problems like this arise simply because players are not using assets correctly.

It sounds good in theory, maybe its worth a try, though in practice I think it won?t end up so much better than now. At least after the attack helicopters have had their scrap they can return to CAS, if a jet has shot them all down, then the just flies around doing little and there is no CAS. The main problem is a good air crew will know exactly when each asset spawns, and will note down exactly when it is shot down and when it will spawn next. What ends up happening is a good pilot can effectively wipe out the enemy air superiority shortly after spawn, and there is little left for the next 20 mins (because it is always 20 mins) and then can repeat the same after that time is up.

Though maybe its time for a change, regarding a variation in helicopter loadouts (some dedicated to ground, some with AA, rockets etc (in fact, I believe the kiowa can be equipped with sidewinders or stingers, and could be used as such), a variation in spawn time depending on the assets worth and the map "situation" and a bit more asymmetrical balance.

I do agree that we should have more maps where one side has CAS and the other relies on deterring it with ground based AA. I really wish there were versions of Burning Sands and Iron Eagle where this was the setup.

As for maps with attack helicopters on both sides, without AAM's I will personally feel much more confident doing CAS. It'll be much so easier to bank away when confronted by the enemy chopper and avoid a fight.

In future, sure we can look at AA mounts. But personally I'd rather die than give up 8 x ATGM's on my Havok

'[R-DEV wrote:Ninja2dan;1522795']Helicopters are able to shoot each other down just as much, all this will do is change their threat from other helicopters to enemy jets.
[...]
Because opposing fighters pose more of a threat than the helicopters, in theory most jet pilots will be hunting for and shooting at enemy jets as a priority over enemy helicopters.
[...]
It also means that the jet pilots should be more concerned with locating and defeating enemy jets instead of hunting down enemy helicopters. If a team's air superiority aircraft has been knocked out, their helicopters would be better off spending the time between respawns by sticking closer to friendly SAM units or troops with MANPADS.
[...]
Using up all of your AAM's against a helicopter, only to run out when the opposing fighter jet shows up would be a costly mistake.
[...]
But the overall fact remains that the current helicopter configurations are unrealistic, and until their loadouts are adjusted to a more realistic configuration the AAM's should be removed. Unless someone has a better suggestion, I can't think of any better choice.

Basically, problems like this arise simply because players are not using assets correctly.

i fully i agree with you in those points

not sticking to the team which will always have at least one AA emplacement at some fob is one of the biggest mistakes CAS pilots do right now. imo they only have to worry about the enemy CAS because they are fyling somewhere where its more likely to meet some unknown enemy vehicle than friendly ground support. thats mostly happening if the cas squad has its own spotter who is usually not positioned at the main objective. this leads to CAS squads going somewhere where they have no friendly support close and where theyre not needed at all. its not called CAS for nothing.

Players really need to learn the "Combat Triangle" and how/when to call in support assets.

For example, you NEVER call in air support unless you are certain the enemy doesn't have counter-air assets in the area. If they do, you're pulling a knife on someone armed with a gun and just asking to lose more tickets.

Teams should use scouts/recon to confirm what assets the enemy has in the area, and call in support as needed. If they see SAM units or anti-air emplacements, call in the armor first or use proper infantry/combined-arms forces to knock out the AA threat.

If the enemy is smart and protecting their AA units with a wall of armored support, the team needs to use other assets instead. If fixed-wing attack aircraft are available, you can always try SEAD strikes. If that isn't an option, maybe use JDAM or artillery assets. As long as a team is working together and using their heads, there almost always should be a way to counter the enemy.


And by using the proper tactics yourself, you can utilize AA assets to create your own "safe zone" for friendly aircraft to loiter in safety against other aircraft. You just need to out-think your enemy and use your assets accordingly.

yes but since we dont have jets with SEAD payload and we wont ever have players use assets accordingly (unfortunately :/) there will always be a certain risk when doing CAS flights.

but... tbh, no risk no fun

I would just like to say whenever i fly cas (Rarley) I always forget about the AA missiles we have.
It seams like sometimes they do to (not on kashan though...)

But The gunship to gunship yelling at the gunner "SHOOT THAT GUN AT HIM!!!" and trying to dodge the hydras and gun turret is quite fun. The way to beat the turret is to climb altitude, Then either they climb with you and you roll to the side, go under and behind them so they cant find you, Or the "look" up sending them backwards, then when they flatten back out, Strafe them and if they are smart they will roll to the side.
It gets entertaining and stressful because if both pilots are smart, Then they last for a while =P
One time i used that tacktic where we strafed them from above after they pulled up to shoot us, And he almost destroyed one of our own tanks in the area because of the angle =P

Those damn hydras hitting my own team!

I think a suggestion like this one would be unrealistic sure, But the fun value added would surpass the un-realism.
Thats just my 2 cents though.

Zoddom wrote:yes but since we dont have jets with SEAD payload and we wont ever have players use assets accordingly (unfortunately :/) there will always be a certain risk when doing CAS flights.

The scale of SEAD operations is not something we portray in PR. We have a hard enough time fitting our current vehicle system into such a small area.

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:The scale of SEAD operations is not something we portray in PR. We have a hard enough time fitting our current vehicle system into such a small area.

ofc i understand this, didnt mean you should add agm88 and Kh58

Yo dawg, I don't see the problem with helis hunting helis.

If one does so it will not provide CAS, I understand that, but if it manages to find the other heli, then the enemy won't have CAS and your team will, or vice versa. I mean its only a choice of the team.
Also, your heli can fly low(if your team has lots of AA up) and only jump on lazes, so a fast moving chopper at like 300m that mostly sits safely around main and helps with lazes. If your chopper is flying low then the enemy one will have to do just that. Its a matter of personal choice. Also, if you fly too low you might get owned by tanks and BMPs, even though tanks are more likely to kill you(1 shot, kaput, while BMP needs a couple of shots, time in which you can change course and all that). I think that we should keep it as it is, because then we will have LBs raping CAS, I mean its fast, it has static guns, its just like a fighter plane only with a vertical rotor. Just keep it as it is...

Bazul14 wrote:Yo dawg, I don't see the problem with helis hunting helis.

If one does so it will not provide CAS, I understand that, but if it manages to find the other heli, then the enemy won't have CAS and your team will, or vice versa. I mean its only a choice of the team.
Also, your heli can fly low(if your team has lots of AA up) and only jump on lazes, so a fast moving chopper at like 300m that mostly sits safely around main and helps with lazes. If your chopper is flying low then the enemy one will have to do just that. Its a matter of personal choice. Also, if you fly too low you might get owned by tanks and BMPs, even though tanks are more likely to kill you(1 shot, kaput, while BMP needs a couple of shots, time in which you can change course and all that). I think that we should keep it as it is, because then we will have LBs raping CAS, I mean its fast, it has static guns, its just like a fighter plane only with a vertical rotor. Just keep it as it is...

no the point is just because its a matter of personal choice, most people will keep hunting helis which is not wanted as you may have noticed.

Zoddom wrote:no the point is just because its a matter of personal choice, most people will keep hunting helis which is not wanted as you may have noticed.

unwanted by some, i would personally prefer having no CAS available for a few minutes at the beginning of the game if it meant my team wasnt going to be raped by the enemy's CAS later. And so on repeated every 20 minutes.

Sure we can say sit closer to AA and manpads, but have you ever seen someone succesfully use one of those things? it's near impossible to hit a chopper with either with the amount of flares they get. The only useful AA are the ones with a canon or machine gun on it.