Feedback for v0.7 aircraft

Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Feedback for v0.7 aircraft

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

Since it is now known that v0.7 is going to really change the dynamics of the aircraft, I thought I would put my 2 cents in on the issue. Feel free to add your own.

Before I begin, I have logged quite a few hours flying in v0.6 and enjoyed it tremendously, but I believe there is still a lot of room for improvement yet. I will break my suggestions down into 4 categories for clarity:

1.) Immediately Needed Changes

2.) Tweaks (hard code alert)

3.) Realism Issues

4.) "Would be nice" suggestions


Immediately needed changes

1.) Air to air missiles need some serious improvement. I know this is a well known issue but it is currently a major problem. As of now, they are nothing short of useless unless your objective is to get accidental teamkills and I personally, have never scored a kill with them. The guns however, are nothing short of perfect.

2.) CAS aircraft currently fly too fast and are too maneuverable for their role. The A10 tends to dominate other aircraft and so does the Frogfoot to a lesser extent. The cannon should remain just as effective rewarding any fighter that makes the mistake of flying in a predictable pattern with a tailpipe full of 30mm DU rounds.

3.) When fully zoomed in, the AAV cannons kick like mules and are horribly inaccurate. While I can live with the inaccuracy, the recoil in addition makes it ridiculously hard to hit a stagnant target let alone something moving at 1800KPH. I've never to my knowledge even been winged by one of those things never mind shot down.


Tweaks

1.) Increase gravities effects on jets ie. decrease in speed when going vertical and drastic increase in speed when diving. (Hard coded?)

2.) Increase range of radar guided missiles. Decrease accuracy to nil at close range. (Minimum locking distance?)

3.) Increase range of heat seeking missiles. Currently far too short at the speeds jets now fly at.

Reasoning: Currently there is very little distinction between RGMs, HSMs and the cannon. RGMs should only work at long ranges, HSMs at medium ranges, and the cannon only at the shortest possible range creating 3 separate spheres and would force the pilot to learn to distinguish between the three to be successful.

4.) Increase spread of fighter mounted auto cannons as they are too much like lasers right now.

5.) Decrease initial acceleration of fighters to prevent them from flying out of the hanger and hopping over the barrier, thus forcing them to taxi onto the runway.

6.) Afterburners should cause a steady increase in speed and should not immediately bleed away when deactivated. Turns should become much wider as a result. Rumble when in use is imperceptible and should be much louder.

7.) Activating the rudder (A and D keys) should cause the tail to slide a little more than it does already to make dogfighting a little more complex. (hardcoded?)

8.) Remove rear cam from CAS aircraft and replace it with a 2/4x zoom. My reasoning for this is that the frogfoot is a "razorback" aircraft meaning the pilot cannot simply turn around and look behind him. The A-10 pilots can do this but for the sake of simplicity in balance I would leave it as a zoom function for both aircraft.


Realism Issues

1.) Both the F-16 and Mig-29 only carry 6 missiles rather than 8 so if I would be so bold as to suggest mounting two heat seeking missiles on the wing tips and 2 radar guided missiles under each wing. This would help to make air to air combat at longer ranges (thus more realistic) and use their secondary armaments only in last resort.
F-16 specs

Image
Note how there are only 6 missiles mounted as opposed to 8.

2.) A-10 can break 1500KPH in a dive in game but its maximum speed is 700-750KPH in reality. I personally think the faster speed feels better, but I'm just throwing that out there.

Image

3.) USMC does not use M6 Linebacker but rather the Avenger. Just pointing that out.


The Wish List

1.) Two seater aircraft are something many of us would be glad to see make a comeback. Since they are multi-role fighter/bombers, there are many different directions you could go with them.

The Su-30MKK would also be right at home with the MEC as an air dominance fighter assuming a new skin is placed on it besides the "china white." (MKK is actually a China specific export version, but I doubt anybody would be able to tell the difference between it and the regular Su-30MK export version, this includes EA.)

2.) Although I'm not sure of the work involved in modifying the loadout of aircraft, the fighters and especially the two seater jets would benefit from having different abilities rather than the same old vanilla loadout. The PoE team already proved that TV guided bombs are possible so really the sky is the limit here.

Cluster bombs anyone?

3.) I'm not sure how possible this is but as far as I know, aircraft cannons are not filled entirely with just one type of round but are a mixture of HE-I and AP rounds, at least for the fighters anyway. Like I said, I have no idea how feasible this is.

4.) Tornado, Eurofighter, and Harrier. Yep. I don't need to say anything else.


If you read all this, you deserve a cookie. I mean it.

And feel free to post your own. Depending upon this threads popularity I will update it as I go along.
Last edited by BetterDeadThanRed on 2007-08-14 21:39, edited 1 time in total.
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

You're providing feed back for something thats not out yet? Have you been travelling in time again?

Cluster bombs is something the devs are already working on.

I think the afterburner shouldn't recharge.

EDIT; Oh and don't base the speeds on the speedometer ingame, they are dodgy.
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
eddie
Posts: 5495
Joined: 2005-05-09 20:42

Post by eddie »

The in-game ASI is inaccurate. It does not represent the speed it's actually doing. Two seater jets are gradually being phased out of most modern air forces tbh, especially as avionics get more advanced.
Image
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

El_Vikingo wrote:You're providing feed back for something thats not out yet? Have you been travelling in time again?

Cluster bombs is something the devs are already working on.

I think the afterburner shouldn't recharge.

EDIT; Oh and don't base the speeds on the speedometer ingame, they are dodgy.
Ahhh quit nitpicking, the title is supposed to mean what I think should be done for the v0.7 release.

On your second point, that is very good to hear.

And I have no idea what the you mean by after burner recharging, I'm just saying that the volume should be increased and that the speed shouldn't be immediate but gradual increase and decline. Maybe I should work on my wording a little bit more.

And in regards to the edit, that is also good to know.

Edit: I'm also not sure what you mean eddie that 2 seater aircraft are being phased out. The Su-30, Su-34, F-15E, and Gr.4s are all going to remain in service for quite a while. I think you are refering to two seater fighters, not F/Bers.
ImageLeMazing.
Reddish Red
Posts: 545
Joined: 2007-08-02 10:56

Post by Reddish Red »

Cluster Bombs will be fun.

Now only if it had Carpet Bombing ;-)
101 bassdrive
Posts: 514
Joined: 2007-02-20 15:04

Post by 101 bassdrive »

when those clusterbombs come I hope the commander or some other maybe designated person can take over the rolle of the tower, gets radar and is able to to warn squads to take cover from em.
epoch
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 4091
Joined: 2007-04-07 14:16

Post by epoch »

Reddish Red wrote:Cluster Bombs will be fun.

Now only if it had Carpet Bombing ;-)

Does that mean those on the receiving end get carpet burns?

Ouch :roll:


[R-MOD]Cp: epoch if I wasn't dancing right now I'd shoot you.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

Or a full scale base rape.

AS for the After burner, the afterburner would last as long as the fuel would last, but using the after burner burns a huge amount of fuel, there lasting only minutes.

As for acceleration and decelartion, I'm sure the DEVs, as they said, are working on the aircraft, to provide a more realistic experience.
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
eddie
Posts: 5495
Joined: 2005-05-09 20:42

Post by eddie »

epoch wrote:Does that mean those on the receiving end get carpet burns?

Ouch :roll:
Ow! That was BAD!
Image
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

Hmm... surprised nobody has commented on the zoom for CAS aircraft. I thought that was a really innovative idea. I guess everyone is too preoccupied with the cluster bombs.
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

Zoom? What zoom?
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

BetterDeadThanRed wrote: 8.) Remove rear cam from CAS aircraft and replace it with a 2/4x zoom. My reasoning for this is that the frogfoot is a "razorback" aircraft meaning the pilot cannot simply turn around and look behind him. The A-10 pilots can do this but for the sake of simplicity in balance I would leave it as a zoom function for both aircraft.
Happy?
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

I meant in real life.
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
MAINERROR
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 1873
Joined: 2007-07-22 17:54

Post by MAINERROR »

1. The twoseated machines are just trainings machines. The F15 has a very highly developed radar and comabat system. Its a BVR (beyond visual range) fighter and dont need two pilots to operate!

2. The AIM 120 rockets are rada-guided in rearlity but the AIM-120 has a extremely wide operating-range ... at BF2 map-sizes i can blow you up direct after you've took of ... thats not good for the gameplay. If you want to code radar-guided missiles you have to include also the altitude of your plane and of the target, your target can fly under radar-level and you cant lock it cause of the ground-clutter. Then another example. your plane is very high, your missiles have also a higher range ... its direct proportional. And another example. If you have a radar which is a active system, this means, that you send a signal which will be received be your systems, then the enemy can also see you, cause he can also receive the radar-signal.

That are just a few examples for you to imagine what a coding-expenditure it would be.

3. the best speeds in a dog-fight are between 350 and 450 knots per hour and its also not a very good idea to fly a permanent s-line cause in reality you bleed speed ... speed you cant regain as easy in a dog-fight.
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

At vikingo, CAS aircraft have optics. In PR currently, to acquire a target visually they will only have enough time to fire and kill it then graze the trees before shooting back up into the sky. Hardly a realistic tactic. The whole point of adding a zoom is to make up for the limitations of the range that vehicles will render at.

Happier?
MAINERROR wrote:1. The twoseated machines are just trainings machines. The F15 has a very highly developed radar and comabat system. Its a BVR (beyond visual range) fighter and dont need two pilots to operate!

2. The AIM 120 rockets are rada-guided in rearlity but the AIM-120 has a extremely wide operating-range ... at BF2 map-sizes i can blow you up direct after you've took of ... thats not good for the gameplay. If you want to code radar-guided missiles you have to include also the altitude of your plane and of the target, your target can fly under radar-level and you cant lock it cause of the ground-clutter. Then another example. your plane is very high, your missiles have also a higher range ... its direct proportional. And another example. If you have a radar which is a active system, this means, that you send a signal which will be received be your systems, then the enemy can also see you, cause he can also receive the radar-signal.

That are just a few examples for you to imagine what a coding-expenditure it would be.

3. the best speeds in a dog-fight are between 350 and 450 knots per hour and its also not a very good idea to fly a permanent s-line cause in reality you bleed speed ... speed you cant regain as easy in a dog-fight.
On your first count, you sir could not be more wrong as I was talking about ground attack aircraft, not fighters. FOR GOD SAKE PEOPLE READ!

F-15E
Image
That is not a trainer, F-15 strike eagles are two seat and fully combat capable.

Su-34
Image
Note the side by side cockpit.

Su-30
Image

Gr.4
Image

Your point is no more! It has ceased to be.

Number 2 is completely irrelevant to the issue as it is way beyond the capabilities of BF2. Project reality is to as closely as possible replicate combat within their given limitations of the engine.

I honestly have no idea what 3 has to do with my points.
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

Maybe PR took out the 2 seatrer planes for a reason?
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

Considering how the IDS was listed in the wiki as being "in the works" I thought I had some ground to stand on. And cmon, what is the RAF going to consist of without the IDS? The Harrier is hardly a worthy adversary for a monster like the frogfoot.

Anything else before we stagnate on the two seater jets?
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

Does the US Army or marine use any double seater aircraft?
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
BetterDeadThanRed
Posts: 1728
Joined: 2007-02-12 02:30

Post by BetterDeadThanRed »

F-18 E/F is used by both the Navy and the Marines to my knowledge.
Image

When the US Army needs an airstrike, they call the air force.

Edit: Perhaps this thread should be moved to the .6 feedback subforum. Wasn't really thinking when I forgot about that.
ImageLeMazing.
El_Vikingo
Posts: 4877
Joined: 2006-11-27 01:50

Post by El_Vikingo »

F-18 E or F-18 F? They are two different versions.
Image

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 Suggestions”