Project Reality Forums

I don't believe this has been suggested before, but how about giving the LT Hellfires the ability to fire onto a lase and have it lock on to the laze after launch? If the time to live for the missile is increased to the point where it can be as effective as BVR cannon fire, it would simulate the fact that Missiles outrange MANPADs.

It just seems like a logical decision, allows the attack helicopter to do take out armor and other things, if there is a spotter that can really coordinate this. Means that there is far more use for spotters then before.

It's the same concept as how fixed wing in PR does CAS by dropping Mk82s that LOAL.

Like.

Though they should also get Top-down attack to be able to fire behind terrain

McLuv wrote:Like.

Though they should also get Top-down attack to be able to fire behind terrain

Combined Arms coding here we come

LOAL Is epic Please and ty add

McLuv wrote:Though they should also get Top-down attack to be able to fire behind terrain

I think this is going to take longer to get done, less likely to be implemented?

IMO I'd just be happy with just implementing LOAL-Direct right now.

This DOES seem extremly cool and would bring in the use of spotters alot more. Although i can see Attack heli's becoming long range bombardment platforms

It's an extremely good idea, but there's just to many glitches or other things that can and will be exploited

In reality, attack helicopters are pretty much long range standoff bombardment platforms... armor is much harder to fit to helicopters due to the fact that they are extremely sensitive to weight increases.

Think about this for a second. If an Apache can fire what, 8km right, this means that the chopper can simply go to very high altitude above main and simply spam fire hitting lases, with no way for the enemy to destroy the chopper.

Same thing would happen with the Cobra on Muttrah, the MEC simply wouldn't be able to touch it.

And then people could just throw lases down wherever they wanted, forcing teamkills. Hellfires could end up locking onto enemy lases that are on the way.

'= wrote:H[=Rissien;1365764']And then people could just throw lases down wherever they wanted, forcing teamkills. Hellfires could end up locking onto enemy lases that are on the way.

Thats true. Science knows how many glitches and exploits could come up due to this.

Imagine that.

we are lazed, what to do
ok, so let laze them, we see who will get shot

I think i dont want lazes working like that.

Damian(>>>PL wrote:Imagine that.

we are lazed, what to do
ok, so let laze them, we see who will get shot

I think i dont want lazes working like that.

its the way it works for jets, so why not for helis?

Yeah, this really just forces people to actually pay attention as spotters.

I didn't say that we should give Hellfires 8km range, in fact I was saying that it should be maybe more like the range of the cannon and possibly a bit more.

Hunt3r wrote:Yeah, this really just forces people to actually pay attention as spotters.

I didn't say that we should give Hellfires 8km range, in fact I was saying that it should be maybe more like the range of the cannon and possibly a bit more.

I belive that the max range for ingame hellfires (which are renamed TOWs?) is 1000m.

Elektro wrote:I belive that the max range for ingame hellfires (which are renamed TOWs?) is 1000m.

How about a range of 1800m-2400m?

Well there are several ways to do this.

You could have a very wide scan area for the missile which will cause locks to be more likely but you face problems with the missile seeking the closest target all the time which may be undesirable. This also makes it easy for the helicopter to just hide in the corner of the map and spam missiles.

You could have a narrower scan area for the missile which will cause locks to be less likely but so long as it is aimed in the proper direction Kentucky windage style then it should hit the desired lock albeit the failure rate might be higher than what you'd expect.

Hunt3r wrote:How about a range of 1800m-2400m?

How about checking numbers before jumping in with suggestion?
I dont have certain knowledge on this, but about 110% sure that is not correct and missile can fly through whole map.

Solid Knight wrote:Well there are several ways to do this.

You could have a very wide scan area for the missile which will cause locks to be more likely but you face problems with the missile seeking the closest target all the time which may be undesirable. This also makes it easy for the helicopter to just hide in the corner of the map and spam missiles.

You could have a narrower scan area for the missile which will cause locks to be less likely but so long as it is aimed in the proper direction Kentucky windage style then it should hit the desired lock albeit the failure rate might be higher than what you'd expect.

I think we should have a missile with a scan area wide enough to make it so that you can shoot at a marker where the lase is supposed to be, and if you were in direct LOS (Assuming the VD was unlimited), it should be able to hit, if the missile can go far enough.

However it shouldn't be so wide that you can just spam and hope for kills.

Hunt3r wrote:I think we should have a missile with a scan area wide enough to make it so that you can shoot at a marker where the lase is supposed to be, and if you were in direct LOS (Assuming the VD was unlimited), it should be able to hit, if the missile can go far enough.

However it shouldn't be so wide that you can just spam and hope for kills.

I spoke a bit too soon. I forgot that when I attempted this a long time ago I found a bit of stupidity in the BF2 engine. You see, the angle of the lock needs to coincide with angle of the camera's rotation otherwise you'd end up looking left or right a bit firing the missile and having it go straight despite having the HUD indicate a lock.

The missile constantly tries to maintain the locks. So if the lock angle is 30 degrees but the camera is at 45 degrees the HUD will lock, the missile will fire, but since its out of range of the missile's lock angle the lock is instantly broken and the missile looks for another target.

You're screwed either way. Making the lock angle work with the camera means the missile will be highly spammable. Making the lock angle narrower to avoid the above problems gives it a high chance of hitting nothing or makes it confusing to the user. None of these are desirable.

This is the kind of **** that caused me to settle on the TV missiles used in Combined Arms.