AH-99 Blackfoot upgrade/second variant

[cancan69 2]

Pretty good idea, never knew that the Comanche had pylons that could be taken off for stealth operations.

Hopefully, if John Spartan and Saul's FA18X black wasp wins MANW in the addons category, then Bohemia could use the service menu on all of it's aircraft? Now THAT would be quite something.

Maybe we better call Saul, and just tell him to put the service menu on every aircraft as well...

I'm pretty sure that a lot of people, if not the GAME DEVELOPERS THEMSELVES, didn't know about a possible combination of RAH-66 and External Pylons; that's why we are trying to let them hear us

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

It's simply ridiculous being able to kill 24 main battle tanks without having to rearm. I have yet to see a mission where 24 main battle tanks are even used by one side. As much as I hate to say this, it's not at all fun or fair for this to happen, and some balancing (yes, I know..) has to occur. Imagine if you drive a tank half way across altis, slaughtering the enemy, only to get killed from 2km away by a weapon that you have absolutely no defence against.

This.

It takes quite a bit of extra work fiddling with scripts to manage the overpowered air platforms, what with their omniscience radar system and unlimited-range 1-shot-kill rockets.

There is quite a huge loss in mission design flexibility when -- short of fiddly scripting -- I have to decide between having an AH-99 or enemy armored vehicles anywhere on Altis.

It is one or the other. There simply isn't a point in having a vanilla AH-99 and enemy armored vehicles in the same mission. A vanilla AH-99 without its Omniscience Radar System, and with the ability to equip limited-range DAGR HE (rather than DAGR HE-AT) suddenly re-balances the entire scenario and a mission can accommodate both AH-99 and opposing vehicles.

Currently, all an AH-99 crew has to do is extend view distance to 12km, rise to 1km altitude and suddenly there is no point for opposing force to use ground vehicles.

Edited September 29, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[cancan69 2]

This.

It takes quite a bit of extra work fiddling with scripts to manage the overpowered air platforms, what with their omniscience radar system and unlimited-range 1-shot-kill rockets.

There is quite a huge loss in mission design flexibility when -- short of fiddly scripting -- I have to decide between having an AH-99 or enemy armored vehicles anywhere on Altis.

It is one or the other. There simply isn't a point in having a vanilla AH-99 and enemy armored vehicles in the same mission. A vanilla AH-99 without its Omniscience Radar System, and with the ability to equip limited-range DAGR HE (rather than DAGR HE-AT) suddenly re-balances the entire scenario and a mission can accommodate both AH-99 and opposing vehicles.

Currently, all an AH-99 crew has to do is extend view distance to 12km, rise to 1km altitude and suddenly there is no point for opposing force to use ground vehicles.

I don't quite understand what you mean... do you think that the AH-99 is overpowered?

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

I don't quite understand what you mean... do you think that the AH-99 is overpowered?

In context of realism it is hard to say. It is enjoyable vehicle to fly.

In context of designing a scenario with variety, my opinion is yes, the vanilla AH-99 is quite overpowered. I can and have scripted some solutions (removeweapon, setvehicleammo, fired event), but that is fiddly. What separates the AH-99 from the other air platforms is the quantity of HE-AT it possesses. 24 is a huge number and represents potentially 24 disabled MBTs or 24 destroyed lighter vehicles. All this can be done with very little risk to the operators.

I stand corrected re the unlimited range. Seems it is limited to ~5km for DAGR HE-AT.

To break the issue down re AH-99:

- A lot of low-risk vehicle-killing power, perhaps the most in the vanilla game.

- Radar system. Depending on view distance, potentially all vehicles in the scenario are visible to the AH-99 crew.

- Radar system again ... The only solutions to 'hide' vehicles from it is urban area or increase noise by putting more vehicles in the scenario simply to spoof the radar.

I cannot find the idc of the radar in order to manipulate it.

...

Solutions?

- 4-8 DAGR HE-AT and 16-20 DAGR HE, instead of 24 DAGR HE-AT.

- The ability to manipulate the vehicle radar, to protect scenario vehicles from the all-seeing eye.

- vehicle camo nets should hide vehicles underneath from radar (example: "CamoNet_BLUFOR_big_Curator_F")

On testing I think the range of the missiles is fine.

Personally, I would like more risk for the operators, since 5km range represents a 25km area around a target in which to introduce risk for the operators. That is too big an area to adequately simulate risk to the operators in a scenario, given engine/network/cpu constraints. There are cheeky ways (spawning stuff under/near them) but that sort of scripting turns players away from a scenario. The 2km ceiling for shoulder-fired AA limits ground-based risk to AA vehicles which are 1-shot-kills for the AH-99 and can't practicably hide anywhere from the all-seeing eye. Only real threat to the AH-99 is another air vehicle, but that is outside the scope of this post.

Edited September 30, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[the_demongod 31]

In context of realism it is hard to say. It is enjoyable vehicle to fly.

In context of designing a scenario with variety, my opinion is yes, the vanilla AH-99 is quite overpowered. I can and have scripted some solutions (removeweapon, setvehicleammo, fired event), but that is fiddly. What separates the AH-99 from the other air platforms is the quantity of HE-AT it possesses. 24 is a huge number and represents potentially 24 disabled MBTs or 24 destroyed lighter vehicles. All this can be done with very little risk to the operators.

I stand corrected re the unlimited range. Seems it is limited to ~5km for DAGR HE-AT.

To break the issue down re AH-99:

- A lot of low-risk vehicle-killing power, perhaps the most in the vanilla game.

- Radar system. Depending on view distance, potentially all vehicles in the scenario are visible to the AH-99 crew.

- Radar system again ... The only solutions to 'hide' vehicles from it is urban area or increase noise by putting more vehicles in the scenario simply to spoof the radar.

I cannot find the idc of the radar in order to manipulate it.

...

Solutions?

- 4-8 DAGR HE-AT and 16-20 DAGR HE, instead of 24 DAGR HE-AT.

- The ability to manipulate the vehicle radar, to protect scenario vehicles from the all-seeing eye.

- vehicle camo nets should hide vehicles underneath from radar (example: "CamoNet_BLUFOR_big_Curator_F")

On testing I think the range of the missiles is fine.

Personally, I would like more risk for the operators, since 5km range represents a 25km area around a target in which to introduce risk for the operators. That is too big an area to adequately simulate risk to the operators in a scenario, given engine/network/cpu constraints. There are cheeky ways (spawning stuff under/near them) but that sort of scripting turns players away from a scenario. The 2km ceiling for shoulder-fired AA limits ground-based risk to AA vehicles which are 1-shot-kills for the AH-99 and can't practicably hide anywhere from the all-seeing eye. Only real threat to the AH-99 is another air vehicle, but that is outside the scope of this post.

One thing that is not simulated very well is the idea of motor burn time. The way it is right now is that the rocket gets launched and slows down over time, whereas in real life the rocket will accelerate (past the speed of sound might I add) and then once their motor has burnt out, slow down. In real life, Hydra 70 rockets have a maximum effective range of 2 nautical miles (~4km), and so the DAGRs should have a similar maximum range. Hydra's motor burn time is quite short, most of the time of flight is ballistic, so the maximum range should be much less for DAGRs.

I think instead of trading some DAGRs for HE-AT, just keep all the DAGRs plain HE (but make them behave like actual HE missiles, not AT ones), or change one half into FAT (Flechette Anti-Tank, a shotgun-like warhead for disabling MRAPs and light APCs) to make them weak against heavy armor. Once that's done, all we'll need is a variant carrying 4-8 proper AT missiles.

Edited September 30, 2014 by the_Demongod

[cancan69 2]

In context of realism it is hard to say. It is enjoyable vehicle to fly.

In context of designing a scenario with variety, my opinion is yes, the vanilla AH-99 is quite overpowered. I can and have scripted some solutions (removeweapon, setvehicleammo, fired event), but that is fiddly. What separates the AH-99 from the other air platforms is the quantity of HE-AT it possesses. 24 is a huge number and represents potentially 24 disabled MBTs or 24 destroyed lighter vehicles. All this can be done with very little risk to the operators.

I stand corrected re the unlimited range. Seems it is limited to ~5km for DAGR HE-AT.

To break the issue down re AH-99:

- A lot of low-risk vehicle-killing power, perhaps the most in the vanilla game.

- Radar system. Depending on view distance, potentially all vehicles in the scenario are visible to the AH-99 crew.

- Radar system again ... The only solutions to 'hide' vehicles from it is urban area or increase noise by putting more vehicles in the scenario simply to spoof the radar.

I cannot find the idc of the radar in order to manipulate it.

...

Solutions?

- 4-8 DAGR HE-AT and 16-20 DAGR HE, instead of 24 DAGR HE-AT.

- The ability to manipulate the vehicle radar, to protect scenario vehicles from the all-seeing eye.

- vehicle camo nets should hide vehicles underneath from radar (example: "CamoNet_BLUFOR_big_Curator_F")

On testing I think the range of the missiles is fine.

Personally, I would like more risk for the operators, since 5km range represents a 25km area around a target in which to introduce risk for the operators. That is too big an area to adequately simulate risk to the operators in a scenario, given engine/network/cpu constraints. There are cheeky ways (spawning stuff under/near them) but that sort of scripting turns players away from a scenario. The 2km ceiling for shoulder-fired AA limits ground-based risk to AA vehicles which are 1-shot-kills for the AH-99 and can't practicably hide anywhere from the all-seeing eye. Only real threat to the AH-99 is another air vehicle, but that is outside the scope of this post.

If you seriously think that the AH-99 is OP against tanks you should just forget what the MI-48 is able to do with:

8 AT MISSILES

AP-HE 30 mm turret

38 FFAR Rockets

It's WAY more a tank hunter than his NATO counterpart

So I assume you are whining about the whole "helicopters" game, even though I have to say, well not the AH but the MI48 in particular, it's called TANK HUNTER and that's not just a combination, don't you think?

I agree that they should give us more different DAGR (IF we want)

But currently, considering the 20mm front cannon that is NOT comparable to the 30 one of the Mil-48, considering that you need 5-6 rockets to kill a MBT if you are lucky

This makes

- the Comanche able to destroy totally 4-5 tanks with the only DAGR

- the Mi-48 able to destroy 8 tanks with missiles + 6-7 with rocket pods + Few more tanks with the 30 mm so let's say 14-15+ tanks

So what is op? The AH-99 or the MI-48?

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

If you seriously think that the AH-99 is OP against tanks you should just forget what the MI-48 is able to do with:

8 AT MISSILES

AP-HE 30 mm turret

38 FFAR Rockets

It's WAY more a tank hunter than his NATO counterpart

So I assume you are whining about the whole "helicopters" game, even though I have to say, well not the AH but the MI48 in particular, it's called TANK HUNTER and that's not just a combination, don't you think?

I agree that they should give us more different DAGR (IF we want)

But currently, considering the 20mm front cannon that is NOT comparable to the 30 one of the Mil-48, considering that you need 5-6 rockets to kill a MBT if you are lucky

This makes

- the Comanche able to destroy totally 4-5 tanks with the only DAGR

- the Mi-48 able to destroy 8 tanks with missiles + 6-7 with rocket pods + Few more tanks with the 30 mm so let's say 14-15+ tanks

So what is op? The AH-99 or the MI-48?

By all means, point me to a balanced scenario (IE one side does not have complete dominance over the other) in which there are AH-99.

I eagerly await.

[mistyronin 1181]

So what is op? The AH-99 or the MI-48?

The thing would be if the AH99 had some Stealth function as its looks suggest. That would balance them ( as the Mi48 is logically better armed, as its mean to be a full gunship not a stealth/recon helo ).

[cancan69 2]

The thing would be if the AH99 had some Stealth function as its looks suggest. That would balance them ( as the Mi48 is logically better armed, as its mean to be a full gunship not a stealth/recon helo ).

All right I can understand, but what's the sense if Stealth is not changing anything Ingame?

And also, the hypothetical external pylons would reduce the stealth capability, and this would bring the AH at the same level of the Mi (not counting of course the transport capability)

[spanishsurfer 58]

Is it me or are there others who think a second variant of the AH-99 Blackfoot should be made for more forward engagements?

The first would be lighter, great for quick gun runs and reconnaissance. The second would be heavier with better armor AND the addition of anti tank abilities. This would be made possible by adding two pylons as seen in the picture below.

http://s30.postimg.org/schq99jsh/image.jpg (138 kB)

With the current AH-99 as the "lighter" variant.

I'm confused...currently the Blackfoot is the deadliest helicopter in the game. Fully loaded, it can take out the Kajman with it's AA missiles and pops the heaviest of armor with 3-4 AT DAGR missiles at a distance of 4-5km. Gun runs with the Blackfoot are often suicide tactics as it makes you very vulnurable to shoulder fired AA. I'm not really sure why we need another "variant."

[mistyronin 1181]

All right I can understand, but what's the sense if Stealth is not changing anything Ingame?

That's a good question. That IMO, BI should answer eventually.

[cancan69 2]

I'm confused...currently the Blackfoot is the deadliest helicopter in the game. Fully loaded, it can take out the Kajman with it's AA missiles and pops the heaviest of armor with 3-4 AT DAGR missiles at a distance of 4-5km. Gun runs with the Blackfoot are often suicide tactics as it makes you very vulnurable to shoulder fired AA. I'm not really sure why we need another "variant."

The Blackfoot is not overpowered at all.. It becomes overpowered only when engaging ground targets from up close BUT engaging a ground target at close range means getting destroyed instantly (everything on the ground will start shooting you, armor is very weak on the AH, so you get quickly destroyed)

You need 5-6 DAGR rockets to kill an enemy tank from a decent distance, without being seen / engaged, so it makes a total of 4-5 tanks that you can destroy. The AA missiles are a good defense, but that makes the AH-99 "good" at everything and "specialized" in nothing... also don't forget the Kajman has flares like every other thing that flies...

The Anti-tank Kajman helicopter has

- 8 AT Missiles

- 38 FFARS

- 30 mm machine gun

Not counting the ammo piecing machine gun that makes at least 15+ enemy heavy tanks destroyed.

All right, no Air defense BUT, we are looking for a NATO tank hunter, not an "omnipurpose-not-good-at-anything-specially" understand what I mean?

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

The Blackfoot is not overpowered at all.. It becomes overpowered only when engaging ground targets from up close BUT engaging a ground target at close range means getting destroyed instantly (everything on the ground will start shooting you, armor is very weak on the AH, so you get quickly destroyed)

You need 5-6 DAGR rockets to kill an enemy tank from a decent distance, without being seen / engaged, so it makes a total of 4-5 tanks that you can destroy. The AA missiles are a good defense, but that makes the AH-99 "good" at everything and "specialized" in nothing... also don't forget the Kajman has flares like every other thing that flies...

The Anti-tank Kajman helicopter has

- 8 AT Missiles

- 38 FFARS

- 30 mm machine gun

Not counting the ammo piecing machine gun that makes at least 15+ enemy heavy tanks destroyed.

All right, no Air defense BUT, we are looking for a NATO tank hunter, not an "omnipurpose-not-good-at-anything-specially" understand what I mean?

Go park your Mi-48 out 4.9km from targets and tell me how many tanks you take out with it at that range :)

Also, a 'kill' is not required to disable a tank. Vanilla unscripted crew will disembark from a T-100 after one rocket from an AH-99 at 5km.

That makes 24 'disabled' MBTs with one AH-99, all done 5km from the target(s). Any type of APC is a kill, so it makes 24 APC kills from 5km.

Mi-48 only has 8 rockets effective at that range, so stuck at 8 vehicle kills from 5km, compared to 24 by AH-99 ... 30mm cannon is good but there is a much greater element of risk in its use, in that the operator must be reasonably close to the target to have any effect. The 38 FFARS you keep mentioning are pretty much useless against MBT beyond 500m, I have to wonder if you are trolling.

Total firepower is irrelevant to me, as I clearly stated it is relative to risk in using the system.

AH-99 is incredibly low-risk in every mission that doesn't have huge numbers of AA infantry or stacks of jets.

Mi-48 considerably higher risk if it wants to use the 30mm or your precious FFARS.

Oh, here I go again, whining ;)

---------- Post added at 19:02 ---------- Previous post was at 18:57 ----------

I'm confused...currently the Blackfoot is the deadliest helicopter in the game. Fully loaded, it can take out the Kajman with it's AA missiles and pops the heaviest of armor with 3-4 AT DAGR missiles at a distance of 4-5km. Gun runs with the Blackfoot are often suicide tactics as it makes you very vulnurable to shoulder fired AA. I'm not really sure why we need another "variant."

He is trolling, I would suggest disregard.

[cancan69 2]

Go park your Mi-48 out 4.9km from targets and tell me how many tanks you take out with it at that range :)

Also, a 'kill' is not required to disable a tank. Vanilla unscripted crew will disembark from a T-100 after one rocket from an AH-99 at 5km.

That makes 24 'disabled' MBTs with one AH-99, all done 5km from the target(s). Any type of APC is a kill, so it makes 24 APC kills from 5km.

Mi-48 only has 8 rockets effective at that range, so stuck at 8 vehicle kills from 5km, compared to 24 by AH-99 ... 30mm cannon is good but there is a much greater element of risk in its use, in that the operator must be reasonably close to the target to have any effect. The 38 FFARS you keep mentioning are pretty much useless against MBT beyond 500m, I have to wonder if you are trolling.

Total firepower is irrelevant to me, as I clearly stated it is relative to risk in using the system.

AH-99 is incredibly low-risk in every mission that doesn't have huge numbers of AA infantry or stacks of jets.

Mi-48 considerably higher risk if it wants to use the 30mm or your precious FFARS.

Oh, here I go again, whining ;)

---------- Post added at 19:02 ---------- Previous post was at 18:57 ----------

He is trolling, I would suggest disregard.

24 DAGR For 24 MBTs? Show me then

Post here a video, I want to see you "disabling" 24 T-100s with 24 rockets on an AH-99

Go ahead

Edited October 2, 2014 by cancan69

[spanishsurfer 58]

MDCC, I'm trolling? Why would you say that....Everything I said is a fact about the blackfoot. I play mostly BECTI which is one of the most demanding mission modes on heli pilots and the blackfoot is king. Only way to take it down is by an ambush from a shoulder fired aa or buy a jet. Like I said the heli is a tank buster, aircraft buster, and infantry buster (given they don't have AA). These are facts about the blackfoot and frankly if you feel different you're just not using the heli correctly.

Edited October 2, 2014 by SpanishSurfer

[cancan69 2]

MDCC, I'm trolling? Why would you say that....Everything I said is a fact about the blackfoot. I play mostly BECTI which is one of the most demanding mission modes on heli pilots and the blackfoot is king. Only way to take it down is by an ambush from a shoulder fired aa or buy a jet. Like I said the heli is a tank buster, aircraft buster, and infantry buster (given they don't have AA). These are facts about the blackfoot and frankly if you feel different you're just not using the heli correctly.

I think he was referring to me...

Yes the AH-99 is an omnipurpose helicopter BUT it's not specialized at ANYTHING, it's good for everything but specialized in nothing. An other version of the AH-99 would make it specialized in something (just like the Mil-48)

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

MDCC, I'm trolling? Why would you say that....Everything I said is a fact about the blackfoot. I play mostly BECTI which is one of the most demanding mission modes on heli pilots and the blackfoot is king. Only way to take it down is by an ambush from a shoulder fired aa or buy a jet. Like I said the heli is a tank buster, aircraft buster, and infantry buster (given they don't have AA). These are facts about the blackfoot and frankly if you feel different you're just not using the heli correctly.

Sorry was referring to the other gentleman.

[spanishsurfer 58]

Sorry was referring to the other gentleman.

My bad as well :o I missread....Cancan you troll! :)

[cancan69 2]

My bad as well :o I missread....Cancan you troll! :)

Yeah well I understand... If they ever add an attack version of the AH-99 a good solution would be give it simple FFAR, this would balance things and give the AH the ability to shoot AGM Hellfires, looks like a good compromise ay?

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

I just tested one Blackfoot, me flying, off the western coast of Stratis with 48 T-100s lined up on the runway with good spacing, all facing straight at me, minimal chance of hitting the sides, etc. and I *think* that the DAGR goes straight out from your altitude then comes down in an arc, striking the vehicle directly on the top, in this case on the top of the turret. While one DAGR is not sufficient to blow up the tank, one DAGR caused the crew of every tank it hit to bail out. (It took between 2 and 6 DAGR to blow up a tank. I think that's probably based on where it hits, and luck, etc.)

So, assuming you have a Blackfoot pilot that knows this little bit of information, with one Blackfoot you could, theoretically, disable 24 tanks and damage if not destroy 4 aircraft, assuming no countermeasures are taken.

I know that it's 2035 or 203-whatever, but shit, a DAGR is supposed to be a guided FFAR. It's a 2.75in guided rocket. We're talking a 2-3 pound charge with a total weight of 10 pounds. Even at the heaviest, it's 5 pounds of explosives and 12 pounds of rocket. Compare that to a Hellfire, the AT weapon used in Armed Assault, ArmA II and Operation Arrowhead. 20 pounds of explosives, 80 pounds of missile, 100 pounds total. How in the flying **** is a 10 pound rocket doing the work of a missile? A single guided 10-17lb FFAR can disable Russia's top of the line MBT? Jesus christ!

[roberthammer 582]

Yep , DAGR could only disable a regular APC max , BIS did the DAGR stronger on purpose to be effective against tanks but it looks and feels wrong

I would rather have a proper attack variant with Hellfires or some futuristic version of it with loadout like this:

8 Hellfires on stub wings , 24 FFAR in the internal bays and keep 2 AA missiles?

after that i would "nerf" the DAGR by half its current damage - atm 1 DAGR does 600 damage and 1 Scalpel missile on Mi48 does 1400 damage

Edited October 4, 2014 by RobertHammer

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

24 DAGR For 24 MBTs? Show me then

Post here a video, I want to see you "disabling" 24 T-100s with 24 rockets on an AH-99

Go ahead

All you have to do is spawn a T-100 and an AH-99 4km from it within LOS.

Elevate to 300m and fire DAGR at T-100. Crew will dismount and T-100 will be out of the fight, in a vanilla scenario.

Causing a crew to dismount is categorized in military terms as a mission kill*.

Next, get out your trusty calculator and multiply that outcome by the number of DAGR the helicopter has.

Hint: 24.

Not going to waste my time demonstrating something so obvious.

I was also quite clear that my concern was that this can all be done from up to 5km away, not that it can be done at all.

* http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mission_kill

mission kill (plural mission kills)

(military, slang) An attack or damage inflicted by a weapon that does not destroy a military vehicle but results in it taking no further part in its intended mission.

Edited October 6, 2014 by MDCCLXXVI

[cancan69 2]

All you have to do is spawn a T-100 and an AH-99 4km from it within LOS.

Elevate to 300m and fire DAGR at T-100. Crew will dismount and T-100 will be out of the fight, in a vanilla scenario.

Causing a crew to dismount is categorized in military terms as a mission kill*.

Next, get out your trusty calculator and multiply that outcome by the number of DAGR the helicopter has.

Hint: 24.

Not going to waste my time demonstrating something so obvious.

I was also quite clear that my concern was that this can all be done from up to 5km away, not that it can be done at all.

* http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mission_kill

mission kill (plural mission kills)

(military, slang) An attack or damage inflicted by a weapon that does not destroy a military vehicle but results in it taking no further part in its intended mission.

Military Kill or not, if DAGR are op you should whine about it to BIS Developers, not here.

Of course an HE rockets shouldn't be able to tickle an heavy well protected tank, but HEY, THAT'S THE GAME, can I do something against it? no! Go and type to some developers.

We are talking about an attack variant and maybe we can solve your problem about "editing missions" and stuff like that, by simply giving to the attack version the FFAR and actually nerf the DAGR so that the recon version will only be able to take down light targets.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

...you should whine about it to BIS Developers, not here...

...but HEY, THAT'S THE GAME, can I do something against it? no! Go and type to some developers...

You are the one who asked me if I think it is OP. I merely explained the basis for that opinion, and somehow you got upset. If you don't want someones opinion, don't ask for it. ;)

I don't quite understand what you mean... do you think that the AH-99 is overpowered?

[cancan69 2]

You are the one who asked me if I think it is OP. I merely explained the basis for that opinion, and somehow you got upset. If you don't want someones opinion, don't ask for it. ;)

I didn't ask your OPINION but a clarification of what you previously wrote, the fact that, using the AH-99 is difficult in order to create a balanced mission; that question came from your speech as a clarification.

""Currently, all an AH-99 crew has to do is extend view distance to 12km, rise to 1km altitude and suddenly there is no point for opposing force to use ground vehicles.""

And again, if you want to tell BIS how the AH-99 Makes "NO POINT" for opposing force to use ground vehicles then you should pretty much send a ticket to them and discuss about it there and not here.

The title says "upgrade - second variant" of the AH-99, it doesn't say anything like "make it stronger", the point is "upgrade", "second variant", of course a so called "second variant" will be BALANCED together with other factors, or, at least, we PRESUME it will be balanced since we presume that every factor in that game can be balanced in order to ensure a good and substantial game experience.

Edited October 8, 2014 by cancan69