Game balance air vs ground

[ewan 0]

ANyone else think that air power is too effective to be balanced in multiplay games? guided missiles can easily take out ZSUs and vulcans form outside thier effective range and SAMs only partialy damage helos. The most dangerous thing to a helo pilot i have found is 50 caliber machinegun emplacements, as they dont show up on the radar, are hard to spot and keep plugging away at you while your trying to drop off troops or give supporting fire or whatever.

I would like to see

Less effective radar, ground based targets shouldnt show up untill they are much closer. low flying helos should also be more stealthy

more effective SAMs you should be able to take out a helo in one shot. atm RPGs are more effective than SAMs and you get more shots!

AI infantry should target helos with thier small arms. A bunch of guys all shooting at a helo with thier M60s and M16s will take it down easy, but the AI wont open fire unless it lands!

aircraft should be supplied with some anti aircraft weapons, nose cannons should be able to target other aircraft. atm the best way to take down another helo is with dumb fire rockets!

I dont know if this would make the game more realistic or less but it would mean that you could put attack helos into a MP game without it turning into, whoever has the last helo alive wins the game

[Eviscerator 0]

yeah but the only sam out so far, the m109 adats, is far too powerful it gets you before you have half a chance of knowing its there or a split second after you stealthily pop up over a hill/bush to shoot off them atgm's way too good

[Kermit 0]

Your pathetic opinion has been noted.

Try fighting an aircraft from the ground in real life. I'll see you from the air.

[dayglow 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ July 11 2002,18:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Your pathetic opinion has been noted.

Try fighting an aircraft from the ground in real life.  I'll see you from the air.<span id='postcolor'>

And so is your bitter one

Anyways I don't think systems should be tweaked for play balance for multi. If the system performs a certain way, then it should perform that way. A maverick has a longer range than a Zoo, but I do agree that the all-seeing radar is anoying.

What would be nice is a short range IR sam system such as the SA-13. That way the ground would have a way to reach out and strike the aircraft. Handhelds wouldn't do it and I think they are reflected well in the sim.

COLINMAN

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ July 12 2002,02:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Your pathetic opinion has been noted.<span id='postcolor'>

Watch your attitude son.

[sn1per 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ July 12 2002,04:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Your pathetic opinion has been noted.

Try fighting an aircraft from the ground in real life.  I'll see you from the air.<span id='postcolor'>

Try spotting infantry, armor and AA equipment from an aircraft without the OF "quake" radar. That thing should be removed, shilkas should have real radars with automatic targeting (as in real life), then things would be equal.

[Kermit 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DayGlow @ July 11 2002,22:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What would be nice is a short range IR sam system such as the SA-13. That way the ground would have a way to reach out and strike the aircraft. Handhelds wouldn't do it and I think they are reflected well in the sim.<span id='postcolor'>

I agree.

Sniper, that is true. However, in other realistic aerial combat games, the radar isn't that much less effective. Real life radars are pretty effective. The only thing that's really wrong is that Operation Flashpoint's radar can detect things it shouldn't be able to, like Jeeps and trucks. Me, I use my eyes, for the most part.

[HellToupee 0]

well play modern flight sims and see how easy it is to see and target things on radar, it cant see around things but it can see thru things untill it hits metal, if the plane is flyin low it wont see as far this is modeled in ofp a bit as if u go higher more things pop onto radar the problem is the ease of targeting and it tellin u whats targeted.

[dayglow 2]

I guess it would be really hard to impliment a releastic radar. I mean a GMT that would pick up targets that are moving would be more releastic, but the Su-25 or A-10 wouldn't even have that. It's all eyeball and FAC. That's the problem, both sides can see each other and the air units can reach farther right now. Don't know how you would fix that and still will be workable within the sim.

COLINMAN

[BoonieRat 0]

If OFP was inclined only too air/ground combat I'd agree, but as its trying to cover so many different aspects i think they've done damn well to get where they have. the only other game i've ever played that i was able to get lost in was Project IGI. which would probly of crumpled up, stuttered, and died if the veiw perspective had been raised to 300metres off the ground ...

It would be nice to see the Radar coverage increase as you pop up. don't know how difficult it'd be to implement though??...

[ewan 0]

I think the simplest solution would be just to turn off helecopter and plane radar in veteran mode.

But i still think:

1: SAMs should take out aircraft in one hit

2: AI soldiers should shoot at aircraft with thier guns

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">shilkas should have real radars with automatic targeting (as in real life), then things would be equal.<span id='postcolor'>

Exactly.

[jimz0rz 0]

Well the aircraft should have two types of radar to make it more challenging. An Air radar and a ground radar, so you can't target ground targets using the air radar and vice versa.

Radar's should be realisticly modelled too. First of all , having a radar on will icrease you 'visibility level' to enemy air/ground units. So when you don't need them, you should be able to turn them off. They should also be prone to clutter and jamming/interference... i.e not being able to spot an enemy unit it built up areas (towns, city's).

When not using the radar you should be able use some sort of EOS (electro-optical system) like FLIR or DTV to manually lock air/ground targets within visual distance. Kinda like what we have now when you press 'v' in some choppers. The Jets need some sort of EOS too.

Maybe an option for verteran mode maybe? So cadets get the normal radar.

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

One thing that makes choppers so uber is their ability to lock targets so easily. Just press TAB to lock a target, its too easy, you should only be able to lock targets by right clicking them. Not sure how this is in RL though.

[dayglow 2]

The problem is that to do all this we would have to have a realistic flight sim built into the game. I don't think that would be possible, but we could always dream.

COLINMAN

[moerty 0]

i think the flight model is pretty good in ofp, considering it's made to be closer to an arcade level. you just have to take some slight evasive actions when you're in an armored vehicle, if you put it between trees it can spoof the radar unless the chopper gets really close, making long-range invisible guided missile kills very difficult. still i do believe we should have a mounted SAM system or that the shilka/vulcan should have an automated lock and fire option. my favourite public server dosen't run maps with snakes because effective counter-measures are either not in the game or not entirely understood.

[Kermit 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (moerty @ July 13 2002,15:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the flight model is pretty good in Operation Flashpoint, considering it's made to be closer to an arcade level.<span id='postcolor'>

The flight model is terrible on the fixed wing aircraft. Even if we are not talking about realism, you cannot hit anything with the cannon.

As for the arcade aspect, don't you think that Operation Flashpoint should have a realistic flight model, considering that none of the other parts of the game are arcade? Operation Flashpoint is currently the most realistic game in existence. Keep it that way, please.

[dayglow 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ July 13 2002,16:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">7--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (moerty @ July 13 2002,157)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the flight model is pretty good in Operation Flashpoint, considering it's made to be closer to an arcade level.<span id='postcolor'>

The flight model is terrible on the fixed wing aircraft.  Even if we are not talking about realism, you cannot hit anything with the cannon.

As for the arcade aspect, don't you think that Operation Flashpoint should have a realistic flight model, considering that none of the other parts of the game are arcade?  Operation Flashpoint is currently the most realistic game in existence.  Keep it that way, please.<span id='postcolor'>

While I would agree that it is one of the most releastic infantry sim that includes combined arms, once you step into a vehicle, the releasim is lost. The tanks don't fight right and the aircraft aren't even close, so it would be amazing to see all these parts come together Guess that's what OFP2 is for.

COLINMAN

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

Another thing that makes jets a bit useless in OFP is the small view distance compared to flight sims. Yes you can set viewdistance in OPF now but it'll make game run slowly if you wan't to set it to flight sim level 4000m >. Only fighter planes that would work would be WW2 and WW1 planes.

[EBass 0]

Well when battlefield 1942 gets done we'll see (damn I hope it does get done)

[dayglow 2]

When was the SA-19 introduced? Maybe that system with the guns and missiles would be more of a threat for the aircraft. Maybe a modder could do it. Take the Zoo's cannons and add a modded TOW to fire at aircraft and add it to a new model.

COLINMAN

[NavyEEL 0]

i say the air/ground is balanced in ofp. stinger missiles are subsonic and therefore can be dodged *fairly* easily by helicopters, all they have to do is make a last second flight adjustment and the missile will miss. in addition, in real life aircraft have chaff and flare to help them avoid seeking missiles. now how easily does an aircraft go down in ofp? one rpg? MAYBE two? you can take down a helo with your machine guns? now THAT'S unrealistic. most aircraft would be killed by an rpg i admit, but it still depends on where the aircraft is hit. the chances of small arms fire taking out a helo are slim to none, especially when referring to the blackhawk or apache. not sure how much you REALLY know about these aircraft but they are tough and can withstand a LOT of abuse, even rpg strikes. as for the radar, i feel it's realistic. and as you gain elevation, new targets DO pop up on your radar. not sure what game the rest of you have been playing but elevation does play a role in ofp's radar. as for not being able to hit anything with the cannon on the jets, i suggest you practice because i know a lot of people who can take out a fast moving uaz in one pass with the a10's cannon. i admit that the vehicles in this game aren't "perfect", but then again half of you don't know what the vehicles are really like. sure you can look up stuff on the internet but who can't? rather than posting common knowledge and statistics id like to see some personal experiences come into play when referring to the inaccuracy of weapons and vehicles in flashpoint. thanks.

[ewan 0]

I my origonal post i did say that I wasnt so much concered about the realism but the game balance. at the momenet you cant realy put attack helos on mp senarios because they dominate the game too much. small arms allready damage helos but the AI wont open fire on an airborn helo. If they did then you would have to be alot more carefull how you flew them. the radar is unrealistic at the moment. it picks up everything, even out of sight ground targets, which makes flying low and map of the earth allthough still usefull for other reasons not so good. additional an infantry man with a SAM launcher and a maximun on one huge missle can only paritaly damage a helo. now ive seen footage of stingers completely blowing up all sorts of aeroplanes. If the infantry had this sort of weapon a helo pilot would have to be alot more carfull

To say a black hawk can survive a RPG hit that will take out a BMP and still keep flying is ridiculous. OK they may be pretty much armoured against small arms but then they do very little damage with each hit. There is allways the chance of hitting somthing vital which i think is fairly represented by the chipping away of its hit points by bullets

[EBass 0]

I agree that small arms fire would do no damage to a Helicopter yet I do believe an RPG would amost certainly take down a chopper no matter where it hit. Those things are designed to take out tanks. They would easily punch through a helos armour and the hole it would make would almost certainly make the helo uncontrollable. Thats if the blast does not kill the pilot as portable rockets are mostly explosive (HEAT) rounds not SABOT so the rocket would create an explosion not just pass through as a SABOT round would

[Major Fubar 0]

Small arms fire can definitely bring down a chopper...admitted, it's a fairly rare occurence with heavily armoured choppers like the Hind, but it happens.