General suggestions

[Longfire]

Hi. This is my first post of this forum, and as my first post, I would like to thank Team PR for the concept of this mod in the first place and wish the luck with it . Please discuss ^_^

My suggestions

Forces in the game.
There have been about 3 or 4 other threads relating to this, but I just want to summarise my view along with all my other points here. Right, I believe that firstly, about 5-6 armies should be included in the game. These armies should take vehicles/weapons from major forces around the globe, that use there own technology, and have perhaps the widest array of vehicles/weapons individual to there force. So , for example, Kenya and South Korea shouldn't really be included as the only technology individual to both, is perhaps a single assault rifle, or modification of an already excisting weapon/vehicle, as opposed to Germany or the U.S who produce most of there own technology and have a massive individual armory to choose from.

Based on this, I think the following forces should be included in game.
U.S.A Make there own technology, major global super power, should of course be included.
Great Britain Already being included, but also make most of there own technology, including the modified apache (Rolls Royce engine, Vickers armament).
France or Germany Both use the PAH-2 Tiger attack helicopter, plus make there own MBT's assault rifles, assault rifle variants, helicopters (Dauphin 2, Cougar) and jets (Eurofighter)
Middle eastern force or Russia Basically a force with Russian technology.
China or North Korea Not really individual, but major political force.

Another point about the armies, is that in the vanilla version of Battlefield 2, there is only really cosmetic difference between forces. Something needs to be done about this big style.

choppers
Even in this version of BF2, where we were all promised good balanced choppers.I still think they are are imbalanced. Not because there weapons are too powerful this time, but they are still far too heavily armoured, and there weapons are way too weak. In the real world of war, there have been stories, where AH-64 choppers have been shot down with AK-47 fire in the gulf and around the world. These things are statistically resistant to 30mm fire. Obviously not. I did a test the other day, and it took me 4 clips of SAW M2490 fire to make a cobra smoke. That is not realistic and it is pathetic. Another test, I did, I figure you need to get the chopper standard 70mm missiles, within 3 feet of the target to make the shot count, and when it does, the damage is low and in-significant. This is how I believe choppers should be made realisticly.

In real life, choppers are lightly armoured fast strike units, that hide behind hills, static objects and pop-up, massacre everything before the enemy has time to react, usually working in squads. An organised force of choppers, of course works well. In order to get that nice balance, that currently doesn't excist, resistance on choppers, versus small arms should be almost removed, this thing should be a flying jeep, not a flying tank. On the other hand, weapons should have the blast radius increased and a slight damage increase. This is not a problem however, as they are not really mobile enough to camp with, and must make passes, so if they are stupid enough to camp right above the base, 2 clips of assault rifle fire and they die. Of course, choppers need to use the terrain to hide and fly as low as possible to dodge this new threat, but when they do attack, they are a force to be recknoned with,
Second point about choppers, I think that the carry capacity of choppers on transport models is not quite enough. 6 people, where 1 is the pilot, 2 are the gunners, is not enough to capture a hot spot. What I think should be done, is transport choppers should be split into 2 classes. Transport/Assault hybrid, and troop transport. So, a transport/assault model, would have slightly heavier armour, but might work on the following model.
Lynx, AH-7
Pilot, Co-pilot, 4 passengers. The advantage here, is that the pilot and co-pilot give the cover fire, meaning a full 4 troops can attack the position which is a moderate fire-team.

Puma
Pilot, 2 door gunners, 6 passengers. A full fire-team is available here, meaning that a base can easily be captured, if the chopper gets them to a safe landing zone not far away, or if the pilot is skilled, quickly drops them into the base them flies off at high speed.

So, for each army, here are the choppers for Transport/Assault (T/A), Troop transport (TT)
USMC (T/A)Huey (yeah I know it's old, but this is war), or UH-60C with hell-fires, 70mm pods. (TT)UH-60 sea hawk.
G.B (T/A)Lynx AH-7 with 8 TOW missiles, controlled by Co-pilot, 2x 7.62mm GPMG for pilot. (TT)Puma
MEC (T/A)mi-35 Hind F (god please) or a KA-xx series navy chopper, rocket pods, 2 guided AT missiles, 30mm cannon, etc.
China (T/A)WZ-9 a.k.a dauphin 2. (TT)Zhisheng-8
France or Germany (T/A)Dauphin 2 for France, Cougar with missile pods for Germany (TT)Cougar

Okay, I think that's everything. These are just suggestions, which I think would make the game enjoyable, but still has the realistic factors required.

[Wolfmaster]

i have to say that i enjoyed reading and that i agree with all your points. welcome to the community!

[GABBA]

I can see that you have out allot of work into this.


But i don't think you should be putting games in based on their weapon's. PR shoould have a wide range of different countries regardless of what weapon's they have.,

US, GB, and a middle eastern force. should be the main forces. But i also think a middle european countrie should be put in ( germnay perhaps )...there is a wide variety of weapons in those countries.....

I think a mixed british/Australian force should be added. I would love to see the SAS, RAR and SASR in action. .

[Longfire]

Australia *could* be included, as it is in the Oceanic, next to the Pacific, not far off the coast of China, which could make it a target especially if Great Britain are involved in the war. Thing is, I understand your patriotism for wanting Australia involved, however, they do not really provide anything significant to the game, as they have no unique technology. However, being strategically close to China, it means the U.K could potentially use Australian forces, providing them with arms, etc. to strike China, so basically you bring in pacific/oceanic battle environments by bringing Australia into the game, and that I like the sound of.


The most important thing is of course the choppers however, and realistic difference between the forces, other than just cosmetic. Thanks for the welcome by the way

[Eddie Baker]

Second point about choppers, I think that the carry capacity of choppers on transport models is not quite enough. 6 people, where 1 is the pilot, 2 are the gunners, is not enough to capture a hot spot.

Welcome aboard.

We're going to see what we can do about that. I haven't played the game yet (my computer isn't up to spec for me to really enjoy it), but someone on the forums here said (I can't remember who, sorry) that there are keys mapped for more than six positions in the options menu. In the meantime, we are planning to have larger transport helicopters with ramped troop compartments, so capacity won't be as limited by numbered seat positions.

So, for each army, here are the choppers for Transport/Assault (T/A), Troop transport (TT)
USMC (T/A)Huey (yeah I know it's old, but this is war), or UH-60C with hell-fires, 70mm pods. (TT)UH-60 sea hawk.
G.B (T/A)Lynx AH-7 with 8 TOW missiles, controlled by Co-pilot, 2x 7.62mm GPMG for pilot. (TT)Puma
MEC (T/A)mi-35 Hind F (god please) or a KA-xx series navy chopper, rocket pods, 2 guided AT missiles, 30mm cannon, etc.
China (T/A)WZ-9 a.k.a dauphin 2. (TT)Zhisheng-8
France or Germany (T/A)Dauphin 2 for France, Cougar with missile pods for Germany (TT)Cougar

I think you mean "transport/attack" since most transport helicopters can be used in the air assault role to land troops to seize an objective.

Glad that you recognized the WZ-9, as that is China's principal attack helicopter along with some armed Mi-8/17s and a small squadron (I think 8 or so) of Gazelles. The SA-321 Super Frelon, the basis for the Chinese produced Z-8 variants, can also be used for anti-submarine and anti-surface unit warfare; in the latter role, it can carry two Exocet missiles(:! .

As for the USMC, their principal light transport / utility helicopter is the UH-1N (to be phased out by the UH-1Y in the future). When properly equipped, the UH-1N is also used for scout/target designation support, command and control and light attack. No need to worry about flak from the devs for suggesting older equipment if it's still widely used.

The only variant of the H-60 used by the Marines is the VH-60N, which is used for executive transport (president, vice-president and visiting heads of state). However, the Marines do use the CH-46E Sea Knight or "Frog" medium lift deathtrap- er, helo and CH-53E Super Stallion heavy lift helo for assault-transport.

We do wish to include the US Army as a map alternating faction (and the USAF and Navy use them) so the H-60 variants will be sticking around.

[BrokenArrow]

as far as including countries, i think more realistically is how they fit into the conflict rather than what different weapons systems they bring in. you cant really say china or north korea because while they may use similar weapons, they are certainly two different political powers, same with russia or a middle eastern force, they dont see eye to eye on things and definitely cant replace each other as powers in game because they would (in my opinion) fight on two different sides. as far as australia goes i think they should be put in because if china were to attack into the pacific they would need to attack australia and take it otherwise theyd get harrassed by air and ground raids from allied forces in australia.

I like your ideas for helicopters though, i think they should be implemented in more of a squad fasion, im pretty sure attack helicopters dont normally work solo. i tend to agree with solodude as to how they react to small arms fire, while not invulnerable it is not like a lone AK rifleman can take one down.

[Psycho_Sam]

Small arms fire isnt doing to do much to a helicopter at all. Unless you are an extremely good aim or lucky and hit a vital part of the chopper such as the pilot Most bullets would hit the main chassis and make a hole and thats it. You would have to hit a fuel cable or something to do much. I doubt that PR can make damage effects that realistically so i think leave it as it is.

Also helicopters have a hard enough time for stationary and mobile aa as well as jets already. Being able to take out choppers with small arms is going to make a heli pretty vulnerable and needing repairs every 2 minutes.

[BrokenArrow]

also choppers are able to move ALOT faster than they can in the game, regardless of what your speed gauge is reading.

[Longfire]

Also helicopters have a hard enough time for stationary and mobile aa as well as jets already. Being able to take out choppers with small arms is going to make a heli pretty vulnerable and needing repairs every 2 minutes.

But alternatively, they have there weapons vamped up too, meaning they perform sudden strikes on an area before anyone has a clue what the hell hit them. As a benefit for armor loss, you can also have more choppers ( I think it's 1 attack chopper per team at the moment, sometimes 2) If there were say 2-3 with low armor, but heavy armament, that would be a fine balance.

Yeah, speed was another problem as well. The choppers have gone from one extreme to the other, from the super agile, super armored, super equipped hueys of BFV, to the super slow, super weak yet with more than enough armour to go around of BF2. The perfect balance is a chopper which just can't hover in the same area for a full hour without taking some serious damage, but something fast and decisively powerful, popping up and murdering the enemy from 500 yards. ^_^

Eddie Baker]As for the USMC, their principal light transport / utility helicopter is the UH-1N (to be phased out by the UH-1Y in the future).

If the modders put in a hybrid huey (attack/transport combined) I will give everything I own to them in an ecstatic move of joy and love.

[TerribleOne]

choppers
Even in this version of BF2, where we were all promised good balanced choppers.I still think they are are imbalanced. Not because there weapons are too powerful this time, but they are still far too heavily armoured, and there weapons are way too weak. In the real world of war, there have been stories, where AH-64 choppers have been shot down with AK-47 fire in the gulf and around the world. These things are statistically resistant to 30mm fire. Obviously not. I did a test the other day, and it took me 4 clips of SAW M2490 fire to make a cobra smoke. That is not realistic and it is pathetic. Another test, I did, I figure you need to get the chopper standard 70mm missiles, within 3 feet of the target to make the shot count, and when it does, the damage is low and in-significant. This is how I believe choppers should be made realisticly.

I do definantly agree with you on how they can take too much damage, but its not like you fire a clip from your AK-47 and down the Apache goes. However you can get very lucky on the ground, very lucky. I don't remember the exact story but something like 6 Apache helicopteres were heading ofer a city in the Middle East heading out on a mission. They could hear the AA going off all around them. Suddenly, the entire cities lights shut off, and quickly were turned back on, where everyone in the city with a gun fired up at the sky towards the Apaches. Whether it was a AA fire or it was a pistol, everyone with a gun came out and fired towards them. This was the way to let everyone know what they need to do. Rounds were clipping all over the choppers as they kept on their mission. It goes on and on for im not sure how long, and finally one of the Apache gunners I think is hit so they pull out to safty and he is ok after a while no Apaches were damaged excapt for that one in this assault. And thats damage only as in a hole to the gunner. No systems, engines, etc was disabled as far as I can remember.

Apaches are more invulnerable to small amrs than you may thing. Like I said, its not goung to take just one magazine to take one down from an AK. Not two, not 3, and who knows how much. However I have also heard other stories where some Apache is hit by only little small arms and some of the main systems are damage. One time a fuel tank got hit so it had to leave as fast as possible to the safest landing spot to get it fixed. Overall, I think it would be more wise to assume int not extremly vulnerable to small arms. I would take most specifications of armor for example.

Some Info:

"The Apache's first line of defense against attack is keeping out of range. As we saw earlier, the helicopter is specifically designed to fly low to the ground, hiding behind cover whenever possible. The Apache is also designed to evade enemy radar scanning. If the pilots pick up radar signals with the onboard scanner, they can activate a radar jammer to confuse the enemy.

The Apache is also designed to evade heat-seeking missiles by reducing its infrared signature (the heat energy it releases). The Black Hole infrared suppression system dissipates the heat of the engine exhaust by mixing it with air flowing around the helicopter. The cooled exhaust then passes through a special filter, which absorbs more heat. The Longbow also has an infrared jammer, which generates infrared energy of varying frequencies to confuse heat-seeking missiles.

The Apache is heavily armored on all sides. Some areas are also surrounded by Kevlar soft armor for extra protection. The cockpit is protected by layers of reinforced armor and bulletproof glass. According to Boeing, every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds, and vital engine and rotor components can withstand 23-mm fire.

The area surrounding the cockpit is designed to deform during collision, but the cockpit canopy is extremely rigid. In a crash, the deformation areas work like the crumple zones in a car -- they absorb a lot of the impact force, so the collision isn't as hard on the crew. The pilot and gunner seats are outfitted with heavy Kevlar armor, which also absorbs the force of impact. With these advanced systems, the crew has an excellent chance of surviving a crash. "

From http://www.howstuffworks.com

What I do think needs to be changed in PR is systems that match the real systems of an Apache. Or close to them as they can get. Some are listed below:

-Night Vision
-Thermal vision
-Radar jammers
-Chaff dispensers
-Radio Frequency Countermeasures
-Systems which spread out heat in the air to prevent Heat-seeking missiles
-Laseer-guided Hellfires, with range up to 8 Kilometers
-Many many other targeting systems
-Many spotting/tracking systems
-A ton more spotting/tracking systems on the AH-64D Longbow

that would be all very cool. but if th egame was made with such detail on everything then it wouldent be a realisticish game it would be true war througha screen. but i think it would get too confusing and cancel out allot of things put in. what i mean by this is if you spec every vehicle as it is.
the problem would be that just like the apache has all them features a tank like the challenger also has a long list of features and god forbid airplanes specifications.

point being i dont think the game should be overcomplicated because it might take away some of the fun.

[TerribleOne]

that wasent my point anyway ^ but like you say some people do get lucky just like some people get unlucky with weapon jams.

my point was if every vehicle has a medium selection of specifications from the real life counterpart then its balanced. if an apache was fully specced up to every detail then the rest of the vehicles would also need the same attention. Yea youd be left with the most realistic game ever but possibly a bit too realistic. turn the planes in to a full on flight simulator type realismn.

[Longfire]

So in summary
-Choppers need to be- slightly less armored, *slightly* less resistant to small arms fire, but much more vulnerable versus heavy machine gun rounds, LMG rounds, high callibre weapons, and Anti-tank rounds. A pilot that stays in the open for too long, basically gets hammered.

-Increased splash damage, and blast radius on standard missile weapons and the co-pilot cannon, plus give the full capacity giving the ability to unload everything in the first few seconds, no more reloads, if you want to unleash at everything at once; be my guest.

-Realistic and diverse features, such as jammers, radar, flares, etc. etc.

-Differences between choppers being more significant than mere appearance.

-General increase in speed, allowing for quick strikes.

-Transport/Attack hybrids, meaning attack choppers serve the dual purpose of getting troops to the front line and participating in the assault and general purpose transport choppers, to deploy entire fire-teams inside bases without the heavy armor required by an assault chopper.

I think thats everything.

[Figisaacnewton]

One of the main reasons DICE did this (balance the helos all retarded) is that, for every map with a helo, the enemy has to have a helo. Almost every map with a helo, each side has a couple jets.

They had to make everything work so that its all even between all these things.

What PR can do, is more realistic map design, and then make the vehicles themselves more realistic, so they do what they should.

BTW, how to you kill a heli IRL? Main thing that kills them would be stingers, right? followed by RPGs, then small arms. Are jets ever used to kill helis?

I tottally agree with that last post Longfire.

[BrokenArrow]

jets can be used to kill helis but now since conflicts are becoming more one sided its usually the stronger powers air assets against the weaker nations anti air, ex vietnam, afghanistan(soviet invasion) and iraq(both times)

A few years back an AWACs radar operator directed an F-15 (i think) to attack a couple of helis over iraq, they helis were shot down, unfortunately they were friendlies