Fix air defense

[AxeeLSkyHawK]

Hello Rhino ! , Here are some suggestions for the air defense of PR: F.

Okay, first I begin with the missiles AA, the speed of the missile will be able to change in order that it is slower and more realistic and that the missile does prosecution with the plane before striking to the plane.

Here a video of the missiles AA of the MOD BF2:AIX Expansion, which has a few missiles very good AA compared with those of the PR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teWywGJt ... el&list=UL


To be equal or to simulate the quantity of avoided and impressed shots, in the war since it was in the reality, to simulate the statistics (since it it was in the war).


( Fact in 1985 after the war for Argentine and British historians of war)


This one was a statistics that there realized the Argentine and British historians of war, on the systems of anti-aircraft defense (since it is possible to see this is much more different that the PR, that the probabilities of impact in the PR are almost 100 % and those of the reality much lower.

It is possible to put in the normal PR also, since scarcely it sounds the alarm of missile has not time to do anything.

[Rhino]

Hello Rhino ! , Here are some suggestions for the air defense of PR: F.

Okay, first I begin with the missiles AA, the speed of the missile will be able to change in order that it is slower and more realistic and that the missile does prosecution with the plane before striking to the plane.

Here a video of the missiles AA of the MOD BF2:AIX Expansion, which has a few missiles very good AA compared with those of the PR.

AA TEST ( AIX2 "extended minimod") - YouTube

Humm, interesting idea on slowing down the AA missiles a bit, tbh not something we have really thought of. Will talk to Jafar on it next time I see him and see what he thinks but the example you have in the above video is just lolz

To be equal or to simulate the quantity of avoided and impressed shots, in the war since it was in the reality, to simulate the statistics (since it it was in the war).


( Fact in 1985 after the war for Argentine and British historians of war)


This one was a statistics that there realized the Argentine and British historians of war, on the systems of anti-aircraft defense (since it is possible to see this is much more different that the PR, that the probabilities of impact in the PR are almost 100 % and those of the reality much lower.

It is possible to put in the normal PR also, since scarcely it sounds the alarm of missile has not time to do anything.

Although this doesn't give anything like the amount of missiles of the above, and only ship AA weapons, this is a far better and from what I can tell, far more accurate too, your one doesn't even have the Sea Slug which the only time it was fired in anger was during the Falklands War:


From what I can tell from multiple sources, your data is not accurate at all, although the above pic is also not totally accurate either, its much closer (on the Sea Dart its about 2 off from the total fired etc). It is well known that the AIM-9L scored 17 to 19 (2 where shared kills with other AA weapons) during the war, not 10 and with a kill ratio of around 80% where your source says 15%...

Also while not directly related to the missiles, this is also some interesting stats on the aircraft:



As for making the missiles far less accurate, that is something very hard to archive to an exact ratio like your asking even if I was convinced it should be done, which I'm not. Most players already think most of the AA missiles ingame are too inaccurate, although IMO most are about right.

One thing I may consider in the future is trying out Command to Line-Of-Sight (CLOS) system for AA weapons such as the Blowpipe MANPAD (when its done), Tigercat and Rapier SAMs (MIM-23 is current place holder (PH) for both) where you have to physically guide the missile into the target much like the real weapons but this is unlikely as 1, this made the AA weapons pretty much useless in r/l, something I don't really want to have ingame and 2, due to lag, it will be even harder than r/l to get a good hit. But still need to try it out to see what its like but in all likelihood we will stick with the bf2 heat target tracking like it is currently.

[AxeeLSkyHawK]

Rhino;1828623']Humm, interesting idea on slowing down the AA missiles a bit, tbh not something we have really thought of. Will talk to Jafar on it next time I see him and see what he thinks but the example you have in the above video is just lolz




Although this doesn't give anything like the amount of missiles of the above, and only ship AA weapons, this is a far better and from what I can tell, far more accurate too, your one doesn't even have the Sea Slug which the only time it was fired in anger was during the Falklands War:


From what I can tell from multiple sources, your data is not accurate at all, although the above pic is also not totally accurate either, its much closer (on the Sea Dart its about 2 off from the total fired etc). It is well known that the AIM-9L scored 17 to 19 (2 where shared kills with other AA weapons) during the war, not 10 and with a kill ratio of around 80% where your source says 15%...

Also while not directly related to the missiles, this is also some interesting stats on the aircraft:



As for making the missiles far less accurate, that is something very hard to archive to an exact ratio like your asking even if I was convinced it should be done, which I'm not. Most players already think most of the AA missiles ingame are too inaccurate, although IMO most are about right.

One thing I may consider in the future is trying out Command to Line-Of-Sight (CLOS) system for AA weapons such as the Blowpipe MANPAD (when its done), Tigercat and Rapier SAMs (MIM-23 is current place holder (PH) for both) where you have to physically guide the missile into the target much like the real weapons but this is unlikely as 1, this made the AA weapons pretty much useless in r/l, something I don't really want to have ingame and 2, due to lag, it will be even harder than r/l to get a good hit. But still need to try it out to see what its like but in all likelihood we will stick with the bf2 heat target tracking like it is currently.

On the missiles it might put like in the AIX Expansion adding a bit more of speed.
And it of system AA, it is a suggestion of a friend... But I believe that what wants that the bullets are more realistic... That are late in coming, that have more fallen... Since to shoot with an AAA is too easy to knock down a plane. (Bearing in mind that in this epoch was not easy).


Look the MOD AIX Expansion has many things that could serve for PR:F. As the kit AT that can arm the MILAN in any part, etc. I hope that it serves something you.

[Rhino]

On the missiles it might put like in the AIX Expansion adding a bit more of speed.

More like a lot more speed considering that the planes are vBF2 speeds there...

On the speed issue, if changed will be in scale of ingame speeds of planes, to there r/l speeds, and missile will then come down to that same scale, if they are not already. Not going to make a missile unrealistic as chances are its just Hollywood that's making you believe that a missile chases a plane like that.

Considering that the max speed of an IAI Dagger is Mach 2.1 and and AIM-9L is Mach 2.5+ and a Dagger in the Falklands hardly ever got to its top speed as that would seriously drain its range to the point it wouldn't make it back to base since Mach 0.9 is the Mirage?s ?economical? cruise speed so I can't see it taking very long to catch up, even at max speed, let alone if we start talking about aircraft like the A-4

And it of system AA, it is a suggestion of a friend... But I believe that what wants that the bullets are more realistic... That are late in coming, that have more fallen... Since to shoot with an AAA is too easy to knock down a plane. (Bearing in mind that in this epoch was not easy).

Look the MOD AIX Expansion has many things that could serve for PR:F. As the kit AT that can arm the MILAN in any part, etc. I hope that it serves something you.

Sorry but I can't work out what your saying here, care to rephrase?

[40mmrain]

I think OP just wants the SAMs nerfed, but theyre pretty shitty as it stands. I actually see no good reason to nerf SAMs, his assertion that they have a "100% kill rate" is.. absurd

I dont really mind that, but they need no nerfing, at all, I even think theyre a little too shitty. In fact, because of the low missile counts, long draw distance, short ranges, and long RTB times AAMs seems to be a lot less of an "instakill" weapon now, too. In any case, missiles are less of an overwhelming weapon, and more of a deterrent at best. I'd like medium AA cannons being deployable with 3+ crates, to be honest, the buildable AA is usually insufficient for stopping a somewhat daring pilot, anyways.

The Falklands overcomes a lot of issues we had with fixed wings in the past, and I really don't think it needs any changing, other than some better way for ground foot mobiles to mark CAS targets.

In the modern PR, you can just dump 4 AIM-9s and with a lock you will be guaranteed a kill, however only 2 isnt a sure thing, nor would you want to use both on one plane if it need not be. I think modern PR jets ought to have a more ground attack oriented loadout with AGMs, and such, and less AAMs, but im getting off topic it seems.

[lucky.BOY]

And it of system AA, it is a suggestion of a friend... But I believe that what wants that the bullets are more realistic... That are late in coming, that have more fallen... Since to shoot with an AAA is too easy to knock down a plane. (Bearing in mind that in this epoch was not easy).

I think what he wants to say here is to give AA guns bullet drop and possibly air drag (velocity lose - i know it hasnt been done anywhere in yet, though that "wind affects bullets" project might be close to doing this thing. Anyway, we could simulate that with AA guns by somewhat lowering their bullet velocity, where even if it would be somewhat too slow in close range, it will get closer to real flight times in longer ranges.)

TL;DR, more bullet drop and longer flight times would make AA guns harder to use, which is probably what OP wants.

[Rhino]

For the AAA, tbh I think its fine as it is, seeing as pretty much all jets lost in the conflict from ground to air fire was from AAA (both from ground based and ship based AAA).

And while yes, taking out jets up close with AAA is pretty damn easy, taking them out from afar is not. At range not only is it much, much, much harder to hit a target due to it being much smaller and spread of bullets etc, but also even if you do hit your target, the rounds do less damage at range, so by 3km if you even do manage to hit the target, its doing 1/2 its normal damage per round hit.

I have seen very few people use AAA effectively at range, I myself can manage to make a plane smoke at range but can't recall a time I've actually killed one beyond 1.5km and I would class myself well above average on using them at range

But tbh as an AAA gunner you really want to wait until they get nice and close

Bullet drop however is something we possibly could consider.