The core causes behind BF 2's jet situation.

[=CKA= Noncog]

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

Don't like ground-pounding when the enemy has a good pilot or two? Play SF. That's what I do, anyway.

[Why?!]

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

Actually, there is a code that makes stingers and such a reliable weapon. It was done by a modder. http://www.totalbf2.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36102
So basically it has been done already. These babies follow your aircraft around no matter what.

EDIT: Forgot to add that these are air to air missles. If it can be done on these things it can probably be done for ground anti air missles.

Haven't posted here on these forums for a very long time :laugh:

As a side effect to my changes, I did notice that I was shot down almost 100% of the time I passed above the Tunguska on Clean Sweep if I did nothing to prevent it (flares). Whereas before I could just fly straight and be all right.

AA works perfectly in single player mode. Rockets never loose target unless pilot drops a flare. It's actually fun to use them. I don't understand why they can't code it the same way in MP.

Interesting notes there. The thing about singleplayer is that there is no netcode to transfer. While BF2 does not have a bad netcode, it simply cannot handle an object moving that fast trying to smash into one point. That was part of the problem that was fixed in my mod. I slowed down the missiles so they were more accurate, but I did a neat trick so it still looks like they are fast

You know I should actually finish that mod up some day...

[iflabs]

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

Jets can camp CPs and base. This is very very easy on Gulf of Oman. One thing that makes it easy for Jets is that the map is flat which makes it more maneuverable between CPs and an easier time with aiming. In fact I play Gulf of Oman exclusively just for the fact that Jets can easily take out everything on the map.

AA are no threats to Jets on the map. Just circle around and fly towards the AA whilist gunning it down and dropping flares to divert fired AA missles.

I love taking everything out at the MEC airstrip. I could just fly around all day and never let anyone take off. This is an easy task for the F-35 as it is loaded with 500 bullets for its cannon; splash damage to those infantries!

[hollowpoint367]

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

The stingers are difficult to use for all but the most well-versed anti-AA players, and often hit friendly targets.

lol.

1. Target acquisition shiould be faster because the aircraft travel much faster.
2. You should be glad aircraft carry Mk-82's and not Maverick missiles or LGB's.
3. When was the last time an aircraft SPECIFICALLY killed a lone soldier (that is, you were not the 'collateral' of being in the radius of a tank while it was bombed)?


Maranello is so right, F4AF would dominate any of you. I love that game.

[konquerer]

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

Dice bought the dc team so there would be no more dc hhahaaa.

[konquerer]

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

lol.

1. Target acquisition shiould be faster because the aircraft travel much faster.
2. You should be glad aircraft carry Mk-82's and not Maverick missiles or LGB's.
3. When was the last time an aircraft SPECIFICALLY killed a lone soldier (that is, you were not the 'collateral' of being in the radius of a tank while it was bombed)?


Maranello is so right, F4AF would dominate any of you. I love that game.

3. When was the last time an aircraft SPECIFICALLY killed a lone soldier (that is, you were not the 'collateral' of being in the radius of a tank while it was bombed)?

Look in Iraq and you'll see 3 insurgents get blown up by an airstrike frequently though its not a "lone soldier" 64/32/16 ppl in real life doesn't even count as a battlefield

[imported_bigpappa]

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

in a "game" u can do anything

[triumph]

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

The level of flight that the 42 planes usualy stayed around seemed reasonible from my understanding of that era and it's preuberjetpowered planes. It really seems to me that BF2/V tryed to use jet powered aircraft in the wrong way and BFV was somewhat close because that era still saw uber low bombing but for a modern plane to be able to dive, slow down to where it is ready to land, not stall, drop its huge pay load with only a miss or two and than automaticaly blast off like Team Rocket from that pokemon kids show is just very annoying to me even with hard counter AA and an AA missile for inf it would still really bug me because thinking somewhat realisticaly the planes shouldn't be able to almost stop in mid air and than blast off like a cartoon rocket ship or some kind of VTOL aircraft.

I wouldn't mind having a huge view range for an aircraft as long as the AF had to travel a long distance, take a hell of a long time to load/reload/repair and such. Huge maps may not be fun for inf but since they have out of bounds i don't see why a plane couldn't just be on some huge map where the center of action is detailed and the rest is just blah so the plane users could have some semirealistic movie like action fun while the air strikes of death wouldn't be coming in every 20-30 seconds but instead every few min and the chopper can be the support of much 30 second death lol. Seriously hard counter for the chopper but make the chopper uber leathal yay heh.

[IVfluids]

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

If the noobtube, spawn camping, and C4 chucking have taught us anything, it's that players will do whatever they're allowed to do - regardless of how boring, lame, or repetative it may be.

One of the reasons I stopped concentrating on bombing, it was boring as **** and took no skill for me, so it drove me to want to do something a bit more beneficial to my team. It is more of a challenge to step up to the plate and try to shoot everything down. And if you do a good enough job of it, they won't bother coming up in the air anymore and you will find yourself doing bombing things to all hell anyways. Hell, I know one guy on this board (not in this thread) that leaves the server when I show up lol.

One of the other reasons I don't play this game much anymore either boring, lame, or repetitive

People always do what they feel rewards them most, only way your going to change that, is to take choices away from them. They could do it on their own, but they choose not to. And your right, people always do as much as they could get away with, that has been in any game I have ever played on-line. I'm not saying it is right, that is just the way it is until it gets taken away from them.

[hollowpoint367]

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

3. When was the last time an aircraft SPECIFICALLY killed a lone soldier (that is, you were not the 'collateral' of being in the radius of a tank while it was bombed)?

Look in Iraq and you'll see 3 insurgents get blown up by an airstrike frequently though its not a "lone soldier" 64/32/16 ppl in real life doesn't even count as a battlefield

Hey idiot, I was talking about the game. Good try though.

[SK]

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

Maranello is so right, F4AF would dominate any of you. I love that game.

I played a lot of Falcon 4.0 back in the days. I could not just roam around shooting stuff without ever fearing enemy AA, which I can in BF2.

Because even though most of you don't realize, your suggestions are relating to realism, and planes + realism != BF2 engine, this is as simple as 2 x 2 = 4.

Sorry but that´s not quite correct. tanks + semirealism works in BF2, infantry + semirealisim works in BF2, and helis + semirealism works in BF2 too. There is absolutely no reason like the one you artificially want to fabricate here not to change the planes in a direction that makes it harder for the pilots to stay alive.
It actually is just a side effect that the suggestion in a realistic direction, in any multiplayer game with huge imbalances you´ll have complaints about that. If BF2 would play in the Star Wars universe and the starfighters were as invulnerable like the jets in BF2 there would still be complaints.
No matter how you slice it, from a "I want realism" to a "I want a balanced game" perspective, it just makes sense to change the fast mover gameplay, and there is absolutely no reason this couldn´t be done (like some planes + yadda yadda != BF2 engine rule someone just invented) .

[konquerer]

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

Hey idiot, I was talking about the game. Good try though.

O well in that case every time some one gets in the plane...Whats your point...useless

[Boojie]

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.

So damn funny...some of you guys kill me.

Awesome.

[hollowpoint367]

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

O well in that case every time some one gets in the plane...Whats your point...useless

Wow you obviously have no understanding of what I'm trying to say. Hell, my IQ dropped reading your post. Go back to 'reading comprehension 101' and then try this post again.

[BigBadBob]

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

I always reload so I can drop 1 bomb, turn around and drop another on them. Too inaccurate with both at once.