Project Reality Forums

I don't understand why we are crippling the Attack Helo's with old school technology. Here's some stats on why the Longbow system is the way to go.

http://http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ah-64d.htm

1 - Are 400 percent more lethal (hitting more targets) than the AH-64A, already the most capable and advanced armed helicopter in the world to enter service.
2 - Are 720 percent more survivable than the AH-64A.
3 - Meet or exceed Army requirements for both target engagement range and for probability of acquiring a seleted target. The specific requirements and results are classified.
4 - Easily can hit moving and stationary tanks on an obscured, dirty battlefield from a range of more than 7 kilometers, when optical systems are rendered ineffective.
5 - Can use either its Target Acquisition Designation Sight or fire control radar as a targeting sight, offering increased battlefield flexibility.
6 - Have the ability to initiate the radar scan, detect and classify more than 128 targets, prioritize the 16 most dangerous targets, transmit the information to other aircraft, and initiate a precision attack -- all in 30 seconds or less.
7 - Require one third less maintenance man hours (3.4) per flight hour than the requirement.
8 - Are able to fly 91 percent of the time -- 11 percent more than the requirement


So the actual RL Longbow system is still VASTLY more powerful than the previous human guided rockets....and now we go and dumb them down even FURTHER to use older laser technology thats not even on the Cobra Z version. We don't have any of the gunner stabilization to give manual laser targeting it's deserved capabilities as well.

Why do the choppers need to be weakened. Sure you can aquire targets in-flight...well the Longbow system can do that as well. Sure you can recon with rockets...well the Longbow system already knows and prioritizes everything in less than 30 seconds. Sure you can take down other heli's with Human guided hellfires...well the longbow system can already lockon to heli's with MUCH greater accuracy than the lowly human guided rocket. Sure you can fire hellfires from behind terrian with the longbow, well you can as well with the Human Guided rockets once again. They better simulate the effectivity of the longbow system.

So why do we go from one unrealistic weapon system to another? The Attack Helo's already are nerfed without longbows, why go and unrealistically nerf them more. Why not use the human guided system, which is fun and can sorta simulate having a radar guided rocket (though less effective), and then ALSO have the laser guided rockets to painted targets.

Sure no solution is perfect and both are unrealistic, but if we should be taking the lesser of two evils here. Lets at least take the option that puts us closests to the Choppers RL effectivity in this Near-Future war game. Similar to giving the minigun splash damage to simulate higher rates of fire instead of replacing the mini-guns with M60's.

Balance is one issue. So is implementation. So is the accurate reflection of reality.

Every time someone mentions the apache longbow system they tout its greatness. I won't state that it's super ****, but the reality is we have no specs on it, and we can only take what the army says about it. The reality is that the vast majority of AH-64 attacks against armored targets use laser guided hellfires fired from within range of the firing AH-64's infrared camera.
Also, the longbow radar system doesn't support Air-to-Air missiles. The longbows can be equipped with stinger missiles, which are infrared guided by their own internal warheads. Even so, most AH-64Ds are not equipped with these regularly, as their job is anti-tank and infantry, not anti-air. That's why we bought some neat F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, F-22s, and F-35s.

I can understand your concerns. I also have the feeling the attack choppers may be getting the short end of the stick, at least from all the info I've seen posted so far. But I'm taking the wait and see approach. I have yet to see how it plays out ingame. Have a little faith.

BloodBane611 wrote:Balance is one issue. So is implementation. So is the accurate reflection of reality.

Every time someone mentions the apache longbow system they tout its greatness. I won't state that it's super ****, but the reality is we have no specs on it, and we can only take what the army says about it. The reality is that the vast majority of AH-64 attacks against armored targets use laser guided hellfires fired from within range of the firing AH-64's infrared camera.
Also, the longbow radar system doesn't support Air-to-Air missiles. The longbows can be equipped with stinger missiles, which are infrared guided by their own internal warheads. Even so, most AH-64Ds are not equipped with these regularly, as their job is anti-tank and infantry, not anti-air. That's why we bought some neat F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, F-22s, and F-35s.

If you do some research you'll see that its stated that the Longbow system can in-fact lockon to other helicopters and fire hellfires at them. I didn't say anything about their AA missiles.

BloodBane611 wrote:Balance is one issue.

...and the most important one.

A mod based on reality doesn't mean anything if the gameplay is not balanced. This is exactly why the Javelin anti-tank weapon is not in the game; it's codable, it's realistic, but is overpowered.

Another issue is "fishing", the process by which chopper pilots and his gunner would fire a TV-guided missile and "fish" for a target beyond the fog of war. Kinda gamey.

There's also the issue with good ol' teamwork. There's something rewarding about ground and air crews working together to defeat rather than one air crew going it alone. It also makes it more challenging and requires more team skill.

Realism is important in a "realism" mod, but takes 4th place behind fun, balanced, and teamwork-oriented gameplay. Version .7 has taken a HUGE leap towards that end. Bravo.

Several things you're not considering here,

1. Relative realism as opposed to absolute realism. We can't portray half of that shit in game.

2. We originally had it as the gunner painting his own targets (like RL) but it was switched to wire-guided for the stabilization reason you mentioned.

3. What kind of similar systems would MEC/China use?

4. Not being cheeky or anything but you haven't even used the new system yet.

I can't argue with the wolfman but I do think the fishing part kinda simulated the longbows radar abilities. Eitherway, I guess it is what it is...never really thought the choppers were an issue needing changing though. I sure do like the upcoming teamwork opportunities though.

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:Several things you're not considering here,

1. Relative realism as opposed to absolute realism. We can't portray half of that shit in game.

2. We originally had it as the gunner painting his own targets (like RL) but it was switched to wire-guided for the stabilization reason you mentioned.

3. What kind of similar systems would MEC/China use?

4. Not being cheeky or anything but you haven't even used the new system yet.

Thanks for the heads up Jaymz...amazing sound work!!

So if I'm reading this correctly...the original Human_Guided system (Wired-Guided) is infact still present? I think I read conflicting info previously...but eitherway thats great!

this new system is the death of attack choppers. they are the kings of the battlefield not the L3tz0R tank snipers. Now that choppers have to stand still you might aswell remove them from the game.

also i got a question. The target painting was switched due to stabilization issues? and this one is going to be wireguided with zoom from a helicopter? sounds like the same stabilization problem.

also this is not real. The missiles on the apache (hellfires) are fire and forget. This is possible with the bf2 engine instead you put a system that has never been heard of. wire guided missiles from a chopper. atleast i haven't heard of it.

Why not wait and see how it works in game before passing judgment???

Ablack77 wrote:Why not wait and see how it works in game before passing judgment???

I totally hear you on that. I was just hoping that maybe some good community input/discussion could clear up some of the finer points incase there is something that needs to be adjusted for final release. It doesn't hurt to ask anyways, might as well error on the side of caution.

Balance.. AAVs can lockon an aircraft with less then a second with a extremely high range means choppers are dead.

Choppers has Laser-Guided system (human controlled) with is really hard to use and takes forever means dead by a tank shell/AA/HAT/etc.

Laser-Target needs a lockon source manually placed by inf/recon choppers or your self. they devs says its hard to do it in choppers and you also need to be in visual range. it could only work when infantry takes out his soflam.. and only squad leaders, commanders and spec-ops has it. this could work but only when infantry puts the marker.. and 4:10 does this + they need to see it with is also 4:10 or so.. conclusion choppers are dead

AAVs doesn't need inf with a soflam they just lock and shoot why does choppers need inf with a soflam their RL system doesn't need it.. just lock and shoot. now this sounds unbalanced but if the AAVs and tanks work together choppers don't have a chance to get a lock because they are locked.. THIS requires team work!

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:
3. What kind of similar systems would MEC/China use?

atakas are loaded in mi28s , and they are capable of shot at grpund troops and air vehicles , they are almos the same as a hellfire .

the chinise thing is not even in production , so nobody know what they hve loaded

personatly , i will prefer a system like the POE2 choppers , point at the target , wait 2-3 sec , and fire .

i just feel that the choppers are gonna be at an extreme dissadvantage as of 0.7 but we'll just have to wait and see i guess.

markonymous wrote:this new system is the death of attack choppers. they are the kings of the battlefield not the L3tz0R tank snipers. Now that choppers have to stand still you might aswell remove them from the game.

also i got a question. The target painting was switched due to stabilization issues? and this one is going to be wireguided with zoom from a helicopter? sounds like the same stabilization problem.

also this is not real. The missiles on the apache (hellfires) are fire and forget. This is possible with the bf2 engine instead you put a system that has never been heard of. wire guided missiles from a chopper. atleast i haven't heard of it.

Yes yes we all know you can fire and forget the weapon. But there is the fact that that Attack choppers, or Gunships as they are correctly called do have to sit still to fire there weapons. I have never seen a video, or picture of an Apache shooting a target and moveing at the same time. I have seen this done with Cobras many times though. The Apache is what is known as a tank killer man. It's not a close air support chopper it dose not have the armor, or the weapons platform capability to fill that roll nor is it intended too.

IE the US Army built the Apache to defeat the cold war scare of millions of Russian T-72s russing across the German Boarder into Europe. It's a stand off weapon made to kill one thing: Tanks. Not close air support like you see it used so incorrectly in COD4, or BF2. It stands off from a good 4 miles out and then shoots at the enemy so they don't know what hit em. You can tell me even a Hellfire missle can be shot from a moveing Apache Longbow and still hit it's intended target with out any deveation from the force placed on the weapon by the turning of the chopper the rotor blades, as well as the engine of the missle not loseing it's tracting systems mid flight.

All of witch we can't simulate in the BF2 engine. BTW before the HellFire there was the Wire Guided TOW missile. In fact only the LongBow model of Apaches can use the HellFire. And we only have one per Apache platoon in combat. Thats 5 AH-64As, and 1 AH-64D. Why is it this way? becuase the real life Longbow is made for advance targeting and acqusition. It links to the other choppers in the troop formation taging both friendly and non frendly targets. IE that way we can cut down the frendly fire issues we had in the Gulf War.

This is agian another thing we can not simulate in the Bf2 Engine. Sorry to burst your bubble but your way outa your touch with your military tech info.

Gunwing wrote:Yes yes we all know you can fire and forget the weapon. But there is the fact that that Attack choppers, or Gunships as they are correctly called do have to sit still to fire there weapons. I have never seen a video, or picture of an Apache shooting a target and moveing at the same time. I have seen this done with Cobras many times though. The Apache is what is known as a tank killer man. It's not a close air support chopper it dose not have the armor, or the weapons platform capability to fill that roll nor is it intended too.

IE the US Army built the Apache to defeat the cold war scare of millions of Russian T-72s russing across the German Boarder into Europe. It's a stand off weapon made to kill one thing: Tanks. Not close air support like you see it used so incorrectly in COD4, or BF2. It stands off from a good 4 miles out and then shoots at the enemy so they don't know what hit em. You can tell me even a Hellfire missle can be shot from a moveing Apache Longbow and still hit it's intended target with out any deveation from the force placed on the weapon by the turning of the chopper the rotor blades, as well as the engine of the missle not loseing it's tracting systems mid flight.

All of witch we can't simulate in the BF2 engine. BTW before the HellFire there was the Wire Guided TOW missile. In fact only the LongBow model of Apaches can use the HellFire. And we only have one per Apache platoon in combat. Thats 5 AH-64As, and 1 AH-64D. Why is it this way? becuase the real life Longbow is made for advance targeting and acqusition. It links to the other choppers in the troop formation taging both friendly and non frendly targets. IE that way we can cut down the frendly fire issues we had in the Gulf War.

This is agian another thing we can not simulate in the Bf2 Engine. Sorry to burst your bubble but your way outa your touch with your military tech info.

The Hellfire is also used for other things. Most notably light/unarmored vehicles, houses/bunker complexes, or tactical targets such as the Radar Camp they were used on along with Flechette rockets in the opening engagement of ODS.

hellfire's are made to destroy everything houses bunkers tanks apcs trucks cars etc. not only for tanks and other armor

well .7 will tell...

Dev's? I'm just interested in the engagement ranges of these guys on an average game.

1 -With a Lased target?

2 -Without a lased target?

3 -What piloting is required to do so?