We were hacked. Several times over the past two weeks, in fact.
While all passwords are encrypted and salted, it's recommended that you change your password here when you can.
no seriously that is the best idea, how hard would it be for DICE to create this new eqpt and deploy in the spring of 2006...i am getting a chubby just thinking about it..
Sorry Var, I wasn't adressing you. I was yammering at Pappa since we had already covered that issue.
(edit: and apparently he still doesn't get it!!)
Bigger importance on the mobile AA vehicles seems like a good thing ta me. That extra layer of stratigic flow and countering assets with assets (as opposed to countering assets with spawn gear).
Yeah, they might need to add a few more to existing maps... but that's not additional content. That's just map tweeks.
Sorry Var, I wasn't adressing you. I was yammering at Pappa since we had already covered that issue.
(edit: and apparently he still doesn't get it!!)
Bigger importance on the mobile AA vehicles seems like a good thing ta me. That extra layer of stratigic flow and countering assets with assets (as opposed to countering assets with spawn gear).
Yeah, they might need to add a few more to existing maps... but that's not additional content. That's just map tweeks.
I just don't believe that game balance should be as simplistic as one piece of firepower trumping another. That makes for a pretty 2-dimensional experience, where each threat is addressed by just shooting it with the right gun.
Ah... but that's where the coolness is.
AA vehicles > Planes > ground forces (especialy tanks) > AA vehicles.
Rock, paper, sissors.
3D!
Then you have the vairaince in that fighter are also better at killing planes, bombers have a chance to kill AA, and some dude on foot can waste an AA vehicle with their AT kit.
To look at the broader picture, imagine each AA vehicle as having a big arse kill zone around it. Good use of it means moving that kill zone to where it becomes most effective, but also defendable. This would give some good meaning to the "move to this location" command. Talented commanders could view that big picture and order AA vehicles to where they'd be most effective. Because those things are limited, they become more important.
True, there'd have to be some major changes in player awareness of how to USE AA vehicles, but that's the same with any aspect of the game. If something is used poorly, it's gonna suck and hurt the team.
Yes indeed.
Unfortunatly, it seems like there may be an engine limitation coming into play here. Thus why I looked to the prox fuse thing to help mitigate that aspect. Lock issues involving friendly fire and how locks break are what needs tweeking. The actual seeking code would be fine if the missiles blew at proximaty.
(BTW, seeking code is exactly why most real AA Missiles use prox warheads. "Hit to Kill" weapons just aren't reliable when trying to take down fast moving targets)
That's the money spot. Missiles need to have a narrow cone line of sight that would have to be crossed by another heat source. Presently they can break from the pylon and immediately go after a source 90 degrees to the right /left.
Something like a 15 degree forward looking cone that the missile will be able to break lock from.
6 to 9 feet? Well, that prolly would still improve things. I suspect it's something that would need to be played with by the devs in order to find the magic happy point.
Agreed. Also the blast radius and damage... it would not be fair for the pilot to have no way to evade the blast(s) at all. And when there is a volley of 4 or more missiles, I'm not sure how prox detection would work out. Would it be fair? Would the sheer number of blasts in a small area be overkill? More flares could help that. Or perhaps a solution could be to put a few seconds of delay in being able to fire missiles in succession.
Last night I managed to get 4 rockets from an attack chopper into a F35. It didn't die.
I did mention that it might require that cannons be toned down just a little to help re-balance dogfighting. The main thing here is that it would be exciting to have the variable damage from those prox AAs occasionally knocking you down to almost nothing with a close hit. The "OOOOOOH S:censored:T!!" factor, ya know? The idea is to make pilots really scared of those lock tones. Ramp up the tension. Yeah, its kinda a nerf, but it's one that could make things more interesting, not less. Additonally, it would help make mobile AA gunfire more effective without ramping up it's damage (and thus not exasberating AA's ability to own ground targets).
I missed the part about the cannons, thanks. That said, I still feel this is more of an issue with being able to hit a jet vs the amount of armor they have.
Fix the tracking and hit detection, then if the jets armor needs tweaking have at it.
I suspect that with improved Air to air missiles, you'd see this happen anturally. Fighters aren't going to want to head back to base for more bombs when there's enemy bombers to blow outta the sky.
True... I for one would be all over em. :)
Maybe it could require a "weapons free" order before bombs could be released? It definatly sounds like something hard to get going... and is starting to wander into the bluesky, so let's back burner it for now.
Interesting thought tho.
I was thinking more along the lines of the SL being able to "paint" the target with some binoculars or something, and while the target is painted... jets could release thier payloads, with a timer on how long you could paint one target and a delay on when you could paint another. Makes the jets fight each other and helos, limiting them to being only able to cannon ground targets ... unless their team calls them in of course.
I'd love to go on but its way past my bedtime! and work tommorrow
Nice to see some good discussion here.
Pressed for time ATM, but wanted to adress this:
Originally posted by RingMasTeR
That's the money spot. Missiles need to have a narrow cone line of sight that would have to be crossed by another heat source. Presently they can break from the pylon and immediately go after a source 90 degrees to the right /left.
Something like a 15 degree forward looking cone that the missile will be able to break lock from.
Yeah, very good point. The lock breaking at rediculous angles is something that needs looking at for sure. I'd love to know how the internal locking code works... then I'd be able to present some real solutions.
Folks, please note that locking and tracking are 2 seperate issues.
Locking: Finding a target and maintaining it.
Tracking: Finding a path to the target.
DC had stingers kits that were able to shoot down planes with one shot or sometimes two. this made the game fair. the planes of BF2 are similar to the VSS of DC...
DC had stingers kits that were able to shoot down planes with one shot or sometimes two. this made the game fair. the planes of BF2 are similar to the VSS of DC...
Yes, but 80% of the team also tended to choose that kit since your had both AT and AA weapons and on maps like El Al. what else would u need? The shoulder fired stingers in DC weren't tracking either, they were dumb fired and blew on proximity, and at first they had a huge 1-hit kill radius that was later patched down to a smaller less powerful kill zone. Having tracking AA missiles and guided AT rockets in one kit would make the AT class the standard in kit selection. I'd rather not see a server full of rocket launchers, flashbacks of quake are no thanks.
I like the mix of kits that gets played in BF2 and would hate to see the kit ratio on a server all skewed because ppl want to be able to kill both air and ground armor. A completely seperate kit would have to be developed and I don't see that happening.
In Iron Gator I have been having good luck playing MEC taking the AA vehicle to the shore and fighting the US Choppers. When I'm Commander and can keep 2 supply crates next to me, I've been winning about 75% of the engagements.
I see the reason that I can do so well with AA here, and not on any other map, is that I don't have to worry about friendly aircraft. Friendly choppers are just busses to get the troops to the carrier as fast as they can; it the friendly attack chopper tries to fight it has to take on the 2 AA stations on the carrier and scores of Support/AT players on deck and doesn't last long.
The skill of the chopper pilot plays into it alot, and that is just the way it should be. One game I wasted their pilot every time he took off, and in another I lost over half of the time. Sometimes they land troops just to get rid of me. This is how the game is supposed to be played, action and reaction, Pock-Paper-Scissors. If we can just fix the friendly-fire incidents I think most of the rest will fix itself.
In real life, I believe that some missles can interrogate a plane's IFF transponder and know not to attack that plane. This might be a simple fix for BF2: AA missles can't detonate next to friendly aircraft.
people who can bomb tanks with one run with enemy jets and AA shooting at them deserve the points
Then they need to at least beef up the bombs a little. I score kills on tanks all the time with the fighters, but the bombs are INCREDIBLY weak. Unless you land both bombs directly on the tank you're hosed. I'm pretty damn accurate with bombs and I still miss occasionally.
Then they need to at least beef up the bombs a little. I score kills on tanks all the time with the fighters, but the bombs are INCREDIBLY weak. Unless you land both bombs directly on the tank you're hosed. I'm pretty damn accurate with bombs and I still miss occasionally.
actually one direct hit will knock a tank out... drop one bomb at a time and you'll see
Since there's a patch confirmed to be on it's way, I wanna comment that I still haven't seen any better solution than the one outlined at the begining of this thread.
something that you may find useful is the fact that on a lan game missles work flawlessly internet lag throws them off dramticly. as a side note i seet his alot with the TV missles 2 i can accualy see my tv rockets go in to the cockpits of other chopers or tanks and go out the ohter side with no bang bang
I would agree that the helo armor especially needs to be reduced on the gunships. When the hell is it even close to believable that lobbing a 120mm HEAT shell from a tank doesn't even make the damn thing smoke?
In that regard, if you are hovering stupidly and get hit by a tank shot, you should be a mishap.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment