Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

    [I posted this in another thread, but it's already lost in the 75 mini-conversations going on]

    I flew pretty heavily in BF 1942, and even more in DC. Now that I've logged a little time in BF2, here's my perspective - like it or not:

    There are some pretty alarming advancements in the capabilities of the fighter jets in BF 2 that, in relation to the aircraft in 42/DC, put them far ahead of their respective counter-elements.
    BF 1942:
    BF 1942 fighters had guns and one bomb. The guns were the only choice for air engagements, and the single bomb was for ground targets. Strafing soft ground targets also worked if you could lead them properly. Rearming meant making a relatively slow flight back to the base.

    Landbound countermeasures included mobile and static flak cannons that required a proximity hit to register damage, but the actual damage wasn't substantial enough to drop planes super fast. It did do well in making a point and driving aircraft away to repair.

    All targets were sight spotted, or identified from teammates.
    Desert Combat:
    In DC, fighters didn't have bombs at all. They had air to air missiles and cannons. This made pilots less inclined to attack ground targets (though most of us could use the twin guns on the Mirage to wax everything short of an MBT), and more inclined to hunt helicopters and the real ground threat, bombers/attack aircraft.

    DC jets had an easier time rearming since flight speeds became significantly faster than in 42.

    Landbound countermeasures included static AA sites, be it flak or ZPU, but also mobile AA units in the Shilka and Vulcan. Infantry also had handheld stingers. Further, most fighter pilots hunted other aircraft, since the fighter equipment and armament were geared for that specific purpose.

    Air targets could be picked up on the airborne radar, but only if you were above the target. Pilots could also sight spot, or receive spots from teammates.
    Battlefield 2:
    In BF 2 the fighter jets are far more well-equipped to kill everything. Each fighter has two bombs, increasing the sheer explosive power of a run, but also making it easier to get kills since the extra bomb means a bombing run can be looser than in 42, where you had to bullseye targets.

    The BF2 fighter cannons are effective against everything short of a main battle tank, and put out an amazing amount of bullets and damage - making hitting infantry a proximity affair, ala the Blackhawk minigun.

    BF 2 jets also have AA missiles to address helicopters and other air targets.

    Rearming happens far more quickly in BF2 given the fighters' increased speed.

    Landbound counters to BF2 fighters include static 2-shot stinger sites, and the occasional mobile AA vehicles that rely on the same stingers to take out jets. The stingers are difficult to use for all but the most well-versed anti-AA players, and often hit friendly targets. Ground AA also gets confused by the burning oil towers, where applicable, but the fighter jets' ground radar remains unaffected under the same circumstances. Jets can also use flares to break AA lock.

    There are no handheld AA weapons.

    Fighters jets include both air and ground radar, meaning that finding targets is as easy as making a broad overflight and noticing the little squares and diamonds. Often the ground radar targeting squares will show targets before the geometry resolves, making target recognition and attack approachs a lot easier (and safer) than in DC or 42.

    Further, the ground radar picks up everything that isn't infantry. This includes tanks, APCs, Jeeps, mobile AA, AA sites, and probably even static TOW launchers (though I'm not sure about that last one). It's also important to note that there are no countermeasures to confuse ground radar, like flares or vehicles with reduced radar profiles.

    It seems to me that BF2 fighters have evolved - and rightly so - but the other aspects of the game that typically balance fighters were hastily designed or totally immasculated.

  • #2
    Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

    Jets are made to kill everything. Thats why the U.S. invests so much in new technologies for aircraft. If you have the better Airforce, chances are you will win the war.

    Yes jets have been evolved in BF2, but if you know how to handle them, you can eaily take care of them. Every vehicle and class has a weakness, you just need to know what it is and attack it.

    Just my thoughts.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

      Good post. How do you feel about the mobile AA? Is it more effective? Should we have more mobile AA on the maps?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

        Originally posted by KingOfKhaos
        Yes jets have been evolved in BF2, but if you know how to handle them, you can eaily take care of them. Every vehicle and class has a weakness, you just need to know what it is and attack it.
        Every vehicle/class has numerous weaknesses, except jets. Every vehicle/class is vulnerable to NUMEROUS other vehicles/classes, except jets. This whitewash that people try to pull to cover the fact that jets have ONLY one weakness (OTHER jets) is bull-****.

        In my opinion, they should take out the jets' radar system (no more highlighting targets) and make the AA missiles equally effective from in front of the jets as they are from the back (sacrifice realism for balance). This would make it more difficult for jets to just destroy everything on the ground, and would make the AA beefier without making it overpowering versus choppers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

          i think hand held anti -air (stingers) will even it up nicely like the game should ov had at the start!!!!!!!!like POE high tec jets, tanks but infantry dont get a 20 yr old weapon:hmm: AT should have three ground and three air missiles

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

            I dont mind the planes attack being strong.
            I dont mind the AA been useless against them.
            But the flying over the base at mach2 to rearm and repair. I can just imagine some guy tossing a 2000lb bomb upto an F15 and it lands right on the rack.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

              Originally posted by I_M_Weasel0r
              I dont mind the planes attack being strong.
              I dont mind the AA been useless against them.
              But the flying over the base at mach2 to rearm and repair. I can just imagine some guy tossing a 2000lb bomb upto an F15 and it lands right on the rack.
              Blame Velcro.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                Good post. I never played DC, but you basically summed up my issues with jets. The counter system for jets is BROKEN. People deal with helos all the time, even BHs, but jets are just luck. I suck at flying and was still able to get the aerial combat ribbon pretty easily.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                  someone should make DC with shiny new graphics, better physics, new maps/vehicles/weapons and some new kit options. It would waste BF2

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                    The SA-18 which is one of the best Soviet AA systems has a 24% to 30% success ratio against a jet with counter measures. Which is about on par with BF2. The larger long range AA systems like the PATRIOT are unstoppable. Maybe that could be added as a commander asset or one time asset??

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                      Meh. It's my belief that the fixing of the AA missiles will level this issue out. It's no secret that the logic on those missiles is borked.

                      I am having trouble understanding what the big deal is. I haven't had huge problems with aircraft... and I've seen some pilots do some amazing things! Still, fighters can't cap. They can't camp. They can't be reliable when it comes to support. They are random elements at best and not too hard to avoid (duck and cover folks! Find a roof to hide under!).

                      That said (here I go standing on the line again), air supiriourity does play a factor in the ultimat outcome of a battle. Even though you can't count on aricraft to take out the ground targets you need delt with, they can limit mobility by supressing helocopters and making ground armor afraid to move in the open.

                      Var has a point, but I think the evolution of the aircraft has been matched by the intended implementation of anti-air. It's unfortunat that someone made a boo-boo in their seeking math.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                        Originally posted by Wild_Wokman
                        The SA-18 which is one of the best Soviet AA systems has a 24% to 30% success ratio against a jet with counter measures. Which is about on par with BF2. The larger long range AA systems like the PATRIOT are unstoppable. Maybe that could be added as a commander asset or one time asset??
                        If that's the case then I'm cool with that. But what about taking two hits to take it down? I wonder what the stats are there. These missile aren't delivering flowers, they are carrying explosives and jets aren't exactly heavily armored. And once damaged, how flight worthy are they? Basically, if you take a hit from a stinger and keep on going, you were blessed at birth.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                          I really don't have a problem with any weapon, kit, or vehicle in the game being unbalanced. Jets are no different. What I don't like is the resulting behavior that results when the unbalance exists without certain restrictions. In this case, the result is that half your team sits around waiting for jets. That doesn't make for a fun game for the people waiting or the people who choose to go out in the field alone.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                            Originally posted by Wild_Wokman
                            The larger long range AA systems like the PATRIOT are unstoppable.
                            Hmm... so you believed the propaganda, eh?
                            Actual numbers on the patriot are less than steller. It's main issue is that the system requires impact to detonate and the weight of the HE warhead makes the missile rather unmanuverable. This is a poor way to go.

                            The new PAC-3 missile completely mystifies me. It's based on "Hit-to-kill" and doesn't even HAVE a warhead! It's a kinetic weapon. Ie, it's a solid lump that smacks into a target hard enough to break it. Unfortunatly, hit-to-kill missiles have been long discredited as being even remotely as effective as proximaty fuses. The only upside is that the new missiles are a lot cheeper... thus easier to sell.

                            Sorry for the aside, but the Patriot system's glorification in mass media irks me. If you are interested in some facts on the subject, check out this link:
                            Since POGO was founded in 1981, we have taken on new programs and entered into partnerships as we’ve grown our effort to build a more accountable government.

                            "The results of these studies are disturbing. They suggest that the Patriot's intercept rate during the Gulf War was very low. The evidence from these preliminary studies indicates that Patriot's intercept rate could be much lower than ten percent, possibly even zero." (Statement of Theodore A. Postol before the U.S. House Of Representatives Committee on Government Operations, April 7, 1992)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

                              Patriot was poor in gulf war 1, but it wasnt designed to shoot down missiles.

                              Its much improved now and shot down a UK tornado, with no problems.

                              Now if they could just improve the "americans killing friendly troops" thing.

                              I don't mean any offence to our US allies - happens in war.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X