Eng. AA

**RocketChild** · 05-17-2006, 08:21 PM

Re: Eng. AA

Originally posted by RobertSMiller

I was reading a few of the jet issue posts and I thought of somthing (I'm sure I'm not the first), and I'd like to hear some opinions. Would it 'balance' Engineers and help with the jet problem (which most players agree is just that, a problem) if Engineers could set up an AA station?

One per spawn and no refills I'd hope, but you could pack it up and move it. Somthing simple, a kit an engineer 'drops' and perhaps 15-25 seconds later you have an AA station, single shot and perhaps 3-6 rounds. It would make engineer a [more] usefull class as well as deal with those pesky pilots.

Of course choppers would have a tough time with five or six random death zones scattered about. Thoughts? Comments?

Stuff like that would be cool, but I am sure there are serious engine limitations. THere is already an unlock memory limitation. Maybe a MOD will do something like Team Fortress.

**Heavy552 AWG** · 05-17-2006, 08:23 PM

Re: Eng. AA

The AA needs to be tweaked BACK to 1.2 levels and pilots need to learn how to deal with them.

I did think that a Humvee could carry a TOW package that can be deployed anywhere on the map with x number of rounds. But AA is something that is kind of set in stone in the game.

Maybe in the future of military online games like BF2 we will see deployable assets of a variety of missions. But I dont think the game developers are quite ready to give us the freedom we crave in placement of heavy weapons. Imagine driving right up to the end of the enemy run way and pwning the aircraft as they spawn.

**RocketChild** · 05-17-2006, 08:28 PM

Re: Eng. AA

Ya, future BF games might have this flexibility. Seems logical, since system performance and memory will continue to increase.

**bitvomit** · 05-17-2006, 08:35 PM

Re: Eng. AA

There's nothing in terms of memory limitations that would stop this from being a reality. What's so special about an AA placement? Just a few thousand more polygons that have to be rendered is all it amounts to. However, I think that the amount of AA placements now is just fine and any type of mobile AA that is controllable solely by infantry would severely unbalance the game. Imagine a squad of engies planting stingers at the USMC carrier to swat down any aircraft. Hell, just one stinger would be annoying as hell. Nope, it would ruin gameplay for the pilots I'm afraid. I know alot of the ground pounders hate aircraft with a passion but I think the current aircraft-ground pounder balance is perfect when you factor out the J-10.

**the_waffler** · 05-17-2006, 08:49 PM

Re: Eng. AA

Engies should get a few small SAM missles, just like the Anti-Tank class had in DC.

**Deadeye313** · 05-17-2006, 08:53 PM

Re: Eng. AA

It's not even an engine limitation. BF2142 is using the same engine but they're giving troops automatic stationary turrets like the Team Fortress turret, and even giving squad leaders a drone that flies next to them and shoots at ppl.

If they wanted to they could have did it and we may see it in BF2142.

**Heavy552 AWG** · 05-17-2006, 11:36 PM

Re: Eng. AA

I do advocate letting troops establish proper weapons like TOW and AA where they think will do the most good.

If it sticks into the pilots and they have a cow over it, then they need to work it more with thier minds instead of infantile "Look I fly thus I pwn all"

Bleah.