Landing a helo vs. jumping

[sgtvor 0]

I've seen a lot of arguments about helicopters in MP games.  A LOT of players seem to just snag them right away and leave their team behind.  Even more just pile on in, fly over an objective, and bail out, leaving the helo to plummet from the sky like a bomb.  Stoners server even abides by a set of chopper "ettiquete" regarding there use that encourages such action. (Love the server, just not so fond of the rule...but I'll live )

My question is this....does ANYONE out there use helicopters like they're supposed to be used anymore?  

I used to see quality pilots set their teams down right next to their objectives faster, and much more accurate than any parachute could manage, yet because of respawning vehicles it's so rare in MP games these days that I'm beginning to wonder if anyone ever does it anymore.

Helos seem to have become one way rockets over various flags and objectives.  

On a tactical level, flashpoint is probably one of the most realistic games ever made....but because mission makers are making vehicles respawn almost instantly, one of the greatest tools availible to an infantryman is abused and wasted like a spent magazine.

Maybe if BIS made players vulnerable while in parachutes things would change  

Personally, I'd love to see more missions where vehicle respawn incurs a decent time penalty...up to 3-5 minutes for some vehicles maybe.  This 10 second respawn thing is....eh.  Maybe even a script that removes parachutes altogether?  Too much random uncoordinated carnage, not enough thinking in my opinion.

What do the rest of you think?

[DarkSpawn 0]

I think jumping out in parachutes is both cool and realistic. Shooting down an infantryman in a parachute should be very difficult but possible. (Even though its against most conventions of war:p) What sounds rather stupid however is the pilot jumping out as well, so a bit longer respawn time might be good. But to be honest I havent encountered this kind of problem very often. Usually the pilot stays in the chopper while the rest bail out. As for landing the chopper, well not all spots are good for landing. Especially not if there are infantry or tanks around.

What does annoy me with choppers however is how hard it is to shoot them down. Especially the fact that shooting them down with a vulcan or shilka, is nearly impossible. In my opinion if a chopper pilot comes within a few hundred meters of a shilka or vulcan he should get blotted out of the sky. Problem is that the chopper can take so many hits that he has plenty of time to launch rockets or just fly away. Even under continuous fire.

[suchey 0]

respawning vehicles kills the feel of the game in my oppinion. Everyone wants vehicles, but they also want the freedom to be able to run to the side of a hill and blast away carelessly until they are destroyed without having to worry about how the game is going to progres without that heavy armor. In my oppinion, respawning vehicles does a good deal to destroy the atmosphere of the game. It caters to the run-and gun style of play and lowers the need to use tactics and budget your equipment carefully. As mentioned above, it propogates the use of vehicles in the game in a fashion which is more suitable to quake and other run and gun type games. Of course this all only my oppinion, Im sure there are plenty of people that prefer vehicle respawn...but for me, the adrenaline rush of running back to a repair truck under heavy fire in the hope that you can salvage your heavy armor before it gets toasted or the satisfaction of destroying the enemies attack chopper knowing that it will not be in the air agian in 5 minutes is part of the fun of OFP.

[moerty 0]

you know as pretty as it sounds, landing a helo is much more dangerous than paradropping your troops, and it's very diffcult and as much as people like to think they can do it flawlessly they really can't. even people who can actually land fast and flawlessly have problems occassionaly. the biggest problem is that people spend what seems like hours hovering and it gives everyone a chance to find the chopper, shoulder an rpg and blow it to hell.

personally i don't mind if someone decides to land a chopper right on an objective as long as he lets me paradrop out first.

what really pisses me off is when some dork takes a chopper as his personal ride and lands it where he wants then when he gets bored goes to another place with it. blow one of these people's choppers up so it goes back to spawn and they'll probably shoot you since you destroyed "their" chopper.

[Kep Kelagin 1]

Yes, it can be a real pain in the ass when the game starts, and some ass takes the Chinook or UH-60 all for himself, leaving the rest of the team out of decent transport...Flashpoint is a tactic game, and needs teamwork.Too bad though, that that on most servers u join, most people just run to the nearest vehicle, and leave the rest behind....I recently joined a clan, with all teamplayers in it, and it makes the game 100000 times more fun ! We usually play Conquer the Town style maps, and the chopper makes a good transporter then! But, as u already said it yourself, most people just mess up...

[sgtvor 0]

Eh well, between instant vehicle respawns, and the ease (and unrealistic perfect safety) of parachute drops it just cheapens Helicopters to a ridiculous level.

"you know as pretty as it sounds, landing a helo is much more dangerous than paradropping your troops," -moerty

I suppose this is true in flashpoint, but not in real life. In fact, I'd imagine it's precisely the opposite. I suppose that pretty much sums up why it all bugs me.

I would be quite pleased if they restricted parachutes to only pilot and black ops. Or maybe some new kind of "airborne" class soldier.

[NEO -PZ- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you know as pretty as it sounds, landing a helo is much more dangerous than paradropping your troops," -moerty

<span id='postcolor'>

My guess is that this is because in OFP most people land the chopper on silly places. You should decide where to land before you enclose the hot area. And land where there's less chance that someone would spot you and engage, i.e. behind a forest. That way, landing would be more safe than paradropping in OFP (depends on the mission too).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would be quite pleased if they restricted parachutes to only pilot and black ops.  Or maybe some new kind of "airborne" class soldier.<span id='postcolor'>

Personally I don't like that idea, partly because the parachutes are "old and simple" in OFP... You cannot manouver it, you just bail and a little later you land on the ground.

Neo

[Turkish 0]

You know, it's too bad they don't have a "fast rope" option. Then you wouldn't have to set down, you could insert your troops with more precision than paradropping, and you could even turn so your crew chief could cover the rapelling soldiers with the helo's .50 cal. That would be much more realistic for helos than parachuting.

Plus it would look supercool.

[Warin 0]

I have been practicing fast combat landings and NOE flight with the Blackhawk and Mi-17 helos.

The problem becomes in MP that I usually get chewed out if I also hop out of the helo to help the team..and get killed. Then the helo doesnt respawn . The best time I ever had is when I worked with two other guys on a CTF map. I'd fly low..pop up and para drop them... then zip around trying to lay down minimally effective cover fire with my cannon until they got the flag, then drop in and pick them up.

It rarely worked...but if I'd had a decent (ha! gunner it would have been amazing.

Perhaps we need to have mission makers turn off vehicle respawning a little more and make the vehicles therefore far more valuable.

[NavyEEL 0]

It all depends on your personal preference. Airborne ops usually work better for one or two people whereas if you have an entire squad you're trying to land, I'd recommend using air assault tactics. That way, as soon as you land, your entire team is together and in full force. They don't have to run around trying to link up and regroup because the helo landed them all together. In addition, they are able to provide covering fire to allow the helo to depart. I'd love to see fast roping implemented on the uh-60, ch-47, and mi-17, as i think it would increase the use of transport choppers. maybe make it where the gunner has to use the action menu to lower the rope once the helo has slowed down enough and if the pilot is going too fast then the people fall off or if he's too high then they fall off the bottom of the rope. then once they're in, the gunner either retracts the rope or drops it. that would make flying transport choppers so much more fun.

[ct!! 0]

We created a night raid mission on Everon near the coastal town of Lenitin (sp?). We had a similar issue of using the chopper as a one way rocket since we wanted a parachute insertion for the mission.

Here's what we did to keep the realism in check. Since this is mission #5 of a 7 mission campaign that's focusing from the airbase up north, we have a small Spec Op group in one of the southern region towns with a few ammo crates and a few hummmers for ambieant effect. I have a blackhawk start at the airbase with a standard move command (and a fly height of 100m) to the town, with a get out command and a 45 second delay. Then a get in command and move commands that head us over towards the insertion point. The helicopter simply passes past this point with a couple of close move points with limited speed. Slow enough to garner a good parachute jump. We are out and the helo runs back to base. At this point, if you want a continous multiplayer, you can have the helo do a cycle command (or even doing multiple chopper runs).

They effectively become "buses".

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (sgtvor @ July 22 2002,13:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My question is this....does ANYONE out there use helicopters like they're supposed to be used anymore?  

I used to see quality pilots set their teams down right next to their objectives faster, and much more accurate than any parachute could manage, yet because of respawning vehicles it's so rare in MP games these days that I'm beginning to wonder if anyone ever does it anymore.<span id='postcolor'>

Im one of [uSMC]'s close air support specialists, and I am capable of putting you wherever you want. but on Stoners, most people arent as good with helos- I hate having to wait for some idiot (who thinks he can fly) to land an Mi17. It gets ugly. The reason Stoner has instituted that etiquette is because of all the problems that occur when there are wannabe Air Taxis filling the skies. They put a helo down a little too slow or a little too close, and bang, its RPG bait, as is every single grunt in the back of the helo.

The point is, well executed helo insertion requires tight comms and coordination between the grunts and the pilots, and thats something that doesnt exist on public servers, period. Now, if you want to be a part of a team that works like that, join a squad that plays in the Wargames tourney (www.virtual-wars.com). One of the maps in rotation in the tourney has parachutes disabled, so that what you suggest is not just a good idea, its the law.

So, to review- Dont expect intelligence or teamplay on public servers, look for a good squad to join or start one yourself that is based on teamplay.

[Harnu 0]

I can do fast landings in a blackhawk, but not in an Mi17... well not yet.  I don't mind repsawning vehicles that much because theres always some idiot who will crash it cause he "thought he could fly".  And parachuting is good.  I like it no way i want them removed.

EDIT: BTW Tex, have you ever flown with me on stoners?

[sgtvor 0]

"So, to review- Dont expect intelligence or teamplay on public servers, " -Tex[uSMC]

I don't think just saying "people suck" is a good enough fix honestly.  People will play based on the dynamics of the game (in this case, the mission).  I mean, if it's all about getting to the battlefield fast, then map makers need to just put the respawn points closer to the action, not make thousands of expendible helos.

But yeah Tex, I understand what you're saying, some people just can't fly, and those that can sometimes don't get access to the helos.  I just think it's the current generation of missions that have cheapened things beyond reason.  People simply don't care anymore.

[Kermit 0]

Teamwork is almost nonexistant outside of clans and squads.

I don't use transport helicopters because I've not yet seen a mission where you use them, but I do wait for someone else to be my gunner before I take off in an attack chopper. I've gotten partnered with one or two very good gunners doing this, although the majority of them just shoot at whatever they feel like, which is usually out of their range and reach, and they ignore the real threats. I go through a great deal of effort to place the chopper in a position where the gunner can shoot effectively at the best targets, but most people just act stupid because they know that when they die they can grab another respawned chopper and die again.

[Harnu 0]

I hate having gunners. Unless they are AI. Or if its a Uh-60MG or chinook. But I will never let people gun for me when I'm in an attack chopper. Since you are at 2 different pings you may see things at different places. Rendering FFAR's basically useless. I just don't like em.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (sgtvor @ July 23 2002,01:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"So, to review- Dont expect intelligence or teamplay on public servers, " -Tex[uSMC]

I don't think just saying "people suck" is a good enough fix honestly<span id='postcolor'>

Try telling that to my teammates that are constantly TKing me, the teammate crashing the helo at spawn and blowing up our (non-respawning) ammo crates, the teammate taking a helo, landing it 2 klicks from the combat zone, and humping it in to the battlefield- minus the helicopter, which is left out in the middle of nowhere, crippling our teams transport ability. Hehe, Im not bitter.

But yes, in my experience, people are stupid, and my new philosophy on public servers is "If you want it done right, do it yourself or ICQ some of your squadmates to hop on the server and help out". Why? Because almost every single time I put my virtual life in the hands of one of my 'teammates', I usually end up dead.

And that is why Tactician makes the maps the way he does, and thats why Stoner has his rules.

[sgtvor 0]

Well, I'd much rather see no helicopters at all than see them used as one way flying bombs.

I agree that most people have massive issues when it comes to flying helos, but providing MORE of them seems like a rather strange solution.

This whole thing is just a preference issue...but it just really bugs me when I'm playing one of the most realistic combined arms simulations ever made, and I see 4 blackhawks ditched at 150 meters up, simply because they'll be replaced before the pilots hit the ground.

Some people feel that incompetant helo pilots ruin the game.  Others feel that dozens of helicopters falling from the sky ruin it even more.

As far as TKing, I've witnessed regular players on my own team TK their own helo pilots if they even attempt to land....and then play it off like that's the way it should always be.  That's ridiculous.  TKing a player (just because he's not falling in with your own master plan) who had good intentions is a great way to shrink the community.  That kind of activity should be frowned upon, heavily.  If you don't want to play nice, stay the hell off public servers and stick to your "serious" squad games.  

Again, this is just a rant based entirely on personal preference here.  I play on numerous servers and respect all their individual rules and guidelines when I do, and I always will.  I have no desire to put down any specific servers, as I really can't thank those admins enough for keeping them up and running.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

I know where youre coming from, but thats just the way it is. Occasionally, I do decide Im feeling patient, and I fly helos for my team on public servers. Usually, it is a great boost to the team effort that people can be placed where they need to be with a minimum delay.

Unfortunately, I dont do it all the time, and even when I do, some people decide that they dont want to play along, and they either shoot me out of the cockpit (not for the reason you listed, but just for fun), or they satchel charge my helo, or they use a BMP/BRDM/Bradley to knock my helo end over end, usually resulting in the death of myself and my passengers (I have had all these things happen to me at one point or another).

But when it works out and everybody behaves like good children, it elevates OFP to a level just under transcendent. Like I said, I totally sympathize with your feelings about 'helo-waste'- I feel sorta sad when I see people dumping perfectly good birds all over the place also. But thats just how it works, because, as I already stated (sing it with me now): People are stupid. And if they arent stupid they are in the minority.

[HellToupee 0]

missions with out vechile respawn often get boring fast as one team gets an advantage and then wipes out the other team, happened to my team once we were in t80s and came across a m1a1 well we put like 8 shells each into it but we were wasted and then with there other m1a1s they wiped us out we would respawn no ammo crates no vechiles and basically we would just hide. In my missions like montiac attack in my map pack over at opflashpoint.org i have respawn for the tanks both teams get an unarmed transport helo which dosnt respawn so in the first half of the came the sides use there tanks and also paradrop there guys on the town eventually both helos r taken out mostly but people dont abuse them cause they cant. I think the best helos in mp r transport ones attack ones r too powerful but transport ones serve a purpose.

[sgtvor 0]

Heh, yeah Tex, I won't deny that people are stupid...

If anything, I think "Americas Army" did a great job of weeding out the random usless players with theie whole "No MP until you finish our training" deal. Harsh, but it worked pretty well for the most part. At least players know what's up when they hit the battlefield.

Maybe OFP needs a prerequisete flight school before you can hope in a helo

[Tex -USMC- 0]

sigh... some things one can only wish for

[Guest]

Iv'e played several good games, that had a relatively good working teamwork, on public servers. The missions were however exclusivly smaller city maps. Playing on larger maps however usually results in no or very limited teamwork.

I think that one importrant aspect of OFP multiplayer is that OFP's open design requires a certain discipline and organization to fully utilize OFP's multiplayer potential. This is also due to the fact that on average there are very few people/m^2 in OFP. Even if you have 64 players online, it is still nothing you consider the size of the islands. On public servers, where you have no coordination it easily becomes a very 'empty' experience. *Sigh* Perhaps one should join a clan, but I'm not sure I'm ready to sacrefice so much time on it

[sgtvor 0]

"*Sigh* Perhaps one should join a clan, but I'm not sure I'm ready to sacrefice so much time on it " -Denoir

I second that....

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (sgtvor @ July 23 2002,11:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"*Sigh* Perhaps one should join a clan, but I'm not sure I'm ready to sacrefice so much time on it " -Denoir

I second that....<span id='postcolor'>

If you used the quote function, you could save some effort