Solution to Jets

Re: Solution to Jets

aa IS the problem with the j10, it has no other gameplay inbalances!

I had no problem taking down the PLA jets to get my expert AA.

Re: Solution to Jets

This thread is not about balancing jets, its about fixing AA. And I do like the idea behind TV guided anti air, that would be sweet. I didnt really understand your idea at first but it seems good now that you carified. Think EA can make it work though?

[Roger Smith]

Re: Solution to Jets

I have no idea what you just said.

what i said is that you arent realising that the handeling characteristics of the j10 are fine, as well as all its other properties, its the way a2a/g2a missiles seem to fly right up to it and miss that is the problem! thus, the problem of the j10, is a problem of aa misisles

Either way, AA is different from A2A.... AA = anti-air. A2A = Air-to-Air (missles).

catagory = anti air (AA)
sub catagory = ground to air (g2a)
sub catagory = air to air (a2a)

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Solution to Jets

I have no idea what you just said.

Either way, AA is different from A2A.... AA = anti-air. A2A = Air-to-Air (missles).

Metallica, right now AA is under discussion. Im sure most of us would gladly take J10 apart ourselves. Your post was just as on topic as guys jumping in with bunnyhopping issues :laugh:

[XmetallicaXguitarstX]

Re: Solution to Jets

aa IS the problem with the j10, it has no other gameplay inbalances!

I have no idea what you just said.

Either way, AA is different from A2A.... AA = anti-air. A2A = Air-to-Air (missles).

[Roger Smith]

Re: Solution to Jets

How bout you don't touch the AA and fix the ****ing J-10 first... then worry about AA...

aa IS the problem with the j10, it has no other gameplay inbalances!

[XmetallicaXguitarstX]

Re: Solution to Jets

How bout you don't touch the AA and fix the ****ing J-10 first... then worry about AA...

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Solution to Jets

not sure i understand, but the reason i said turn radius is because if aa missiles did work on every airframe, they would all be like the f35, no chance no matter what you do.

heres the theory behind lowering the turn radius. if i am pulling hard with a guy on my tail, he shouldnt be able to get me unless he leads his target, by that same token, if hes got a lock on me and i flip over, completly changing direction, he should be able to trail his target to get me.

Its simple and complex in the same time.

Heres how the missile works (from what I remember, Wargimp knows this stuff more than I do), from what Gimp told. The missile "refreshes" the picture every X time. Its measured in milliseconds. It refreshes the picture, and corrects the course. Imagine a TV missile screen with an aimbot, the click-correction works ever X milliseconds. I hope youre with me now.

Now theres the view radius, how much it "sees".

Then missile travel speed.

So if its fast, and its click-correction interval is insanely small, and it sees sh!tload, the jet has no escape, unless it goes after the flares.

What if we lowered the speed so that the missile actually gains on the jet with slower speed. Lets say about 1500-2000 knots, more towards 1500. Also, what if we set a lag time between the "tick" itsself and the motion, the move it makes, the correction.

"tick" time "correction", just enough to match the turn radius of a jet with an afterburner, but also enough to lose the jet if its making multiple turns in succession. Heres a picture-

The more turns a jet makes, the more the missile goes "off" the turn track. Of course the tracking screen the missile has, has to be adjusted, so does the missile speed.

One way to evade missiles would be to speed off to above 800. Which becomes a good, usable tactic, and also keeps the jets off the ground, and off bombing the infantry.

Re: Solution to Jets

Id rather just have flak then.. I dont want something aiming for me unless its 100%. Thats why i dislike using things with uber splash damage like APC and the helicopter gun.

[Roger Smith]

Re: Solution to Jets

Now thats what a "AA boosting" post should look like! God damn! Learn from that!

ty :)

Turn radius isnt the key here. Key is speed and reaction time after the "tick".

not sure i understand, but the reason i said turn radius is because if aa missiles did work on every airframe, they would all be like the f35, no chance no matter what you do.

heres the theory behind lowering the turn radius. if i am pulling hard with a guy on my tail, he shouldnt be able to get me unless he leads his target, by that same token, if hes got a lock on me and i flip over, completly changing direction, he should be able to trail his target to get me.

[troybob]

Re: Solution to Jets

my solution was to give the mobile AA vehicles a bit of an auto aim of like 5 degrees in all axis so that you could be 5 degrees off but it will still fire where the jet will be. doesn't work if the jet turns - which is normal, and is about the same solution we had in bf42 (flak)

Re: Solution to Jets

i got an idea:)
why not remove the AA **** and give the Anti-Tank class a stinger?
or make a new class...the AA Soldier?

Re: Solution to Jets

Someone said that stingers are for choppers, so why bother? Your best defense for jets is mobile AA or friendly pilots. If neither can support your team by taking out the enemy jets then it's their fault.

Mobile AA is as good of a defense as any...
Considering the ESSEX's AA guns will often shoot the jets down better then the missles... the carrier always has a better "chance" with the jets...


Ground mounted AA is a JOKE....

Im in favor of mobile AA... :)

Re: Solution to Jets

Someone said that stingers are for choppers, so why bother? Your best defense for jets is mobile AA or friendly pilots. If neither can support your team by taking out the enemy jets then it's their fault.


So your just screwed if you dont have good pilots on your team is what your saying, this way Im proposing jets would be screwed if they didnt have a good team as well. And it all amounts to teamwork between ground and air, in total harmony.

How about more details, more constructive ideas, and less "kill the jetwhores" attitude. Maybe then youll be taken seriously.

I dont have a bad mentality Im just sharing my ideas, the reason I said the thing about teamwork is that its the thing most pilots say "use teamwork to down jets", and Im sure they wouldnt have a problem if it worked both ways. Theres nothing wrong with saying that is there? Theres no way they would have a problem with having to rely on ground troops like we have to rely on them, its a you scratch my back ill scratch yours mentality.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Solution to Jets

heres my solution to jets:

-anti air missiles that are properly lead and are on target should not deviate on some airframes.

-flares should be intercepted by anti air missiles when the flares are in the anti air missiles flight path

-anti air missiles range should be just out of max visual range (for all platforms)
this is the major change, as it would give g2a a fair chance going head to head with a jet. this combine with the other changes would force jets to opperate at higher altitudes.

-the laser guide on the bomber should be able to lock onto targets above visual range

-instead of blowing up when the tv guided missile runs out of time, it should keep flying forward unguided. if bombers and attack helis could attack beyond visual range, it wouldnt be fair, but its not supposed to be fair, thats the whole point. while i think jets should be scared of g2a i also think g2a should be scared of jets.

-a lowered turn radius on anti air missiles
so that they can be intelligently dodged

-radar on all anti air based weapons except stinger.
given the role that air/aa is supposed to play, i definitly think radar would help things

Now thats what a "AA boosting" post should look like! God damn! Learn from that!

"-a lowered turn radius on anti air missile
so that they can be intelliently dodged"

Turn radius isnt the key here. Key is speed and reaction time after the "tick".