Warlords

[CaptainDawson 93]

Hi, player Kestrel here. I am a regular player, and many on Warlords probably have seen me at least once or twice. I often accumulate large killstreaks and am AFK a lot, but I DO NOT use scripting or any kind of hacks. I simply use imbalances in the gamemode to my advantage in a attempt to counter the enemy's jet spam. When one team spams, it's only reasonable to expect someone on the other team to spam back. I do not regularly attempt to gain an advantage for my team by glitching, when I see a glitch I only seek to find out what is going on. If that means giving any players 20k CP or free aircraft without paying anything to test a theory then so be it. Fix the game, I shouldn't be able to do that. For you guys that were whining at me as "kiddie scripter", real hackers and scripters who use game deficiencies to their advantage are rampant on the servers, don't complain at me for trying to find problems for reporting and having a little fun in the process. For those who play Warlords regularly, you know the current meta is pretty unbalanced even without the glitches.

 

Here are just a few of the issues I've encountered. I have not personally seen these mentioned yet so I post them here.

 

1. Stand up in closed cockpit aircraft/land vehicle glitch.

Seems innocent? Imagine someone hovering a M320 sniper over your spawn. I have not tested that yet, so as not to incur the wrath of the Opfor whiners. But you can definitely gain an advantage by using this in a jet with HUD, now you have much greater FOV plus your player can withstand a mach 2 airstream to the face, which is incredibly epic. (NO, I have never used this to my advantage, unless you consider laughing uncontrollably an advantage.) It is 100% reproducible. Not saying how to reproduce cause I know people will take advantage.

 

2. Parachute glitch still persists.

Parachutes move on ground, freeze in the sky, and more. Its annoying to see these refuse to despawn and litter the map. I did not personally see this issue when Warlords was released, only started to see it worsen in the last month or so.

 

3. Glitched control points.

Sometimes points appear an incorrect color, or show an incorrect selected sector. I know I am not the only one this has happened to after talking with others. Yesterday, I helped capture Anthrakia as a Blufor. I airdropped a Rhino there. Got in, and started driving. The game lagged, then the point turned green (AAF), gave the alarm, and my tank and player exploded for being in a "non contested sector". This is AFTER the sector turning Blue and verbal cue of Anthrakia being capped by Blufor. Sorry no video evidence.

 

4. CP transfer glitch.

I spawn in with default 500CP. Go AFK for short period of time. Ask a guy can I have 5000 CP transfer please cause I am poor. He types in the box "5000" but I receive 500,000CP. The game hadnt been going for that long, it is unreasonable to assume he accumulated that much. He was not hacking nor was I. Free CP for everyone I say, blame the game, what do you expect me to do? Leave and waste all that CP? Only happened once so far.

 

5. "Scalar NaN" CP glitch:

Just saw first today, this is a glitch where I have essentially "infinite" CP. Cannot spawn any land vehicle, only air assets. I am still bound by max asset limiter. Can enter ANY number of CP into CP transfer without greying out the send button, but when I click send they will not actually receive any CP I found after testing. I bought a bunch of units to see what I can spawn in, then play around with the vehicles for a little while cause I've NEVER been able to fly in a BlackFish VTOL before in Warlords due to the usual jet spam. It was a big moment for me to actually be in a non-BlackWasp aircraft in an Opfor dominated game and exist for more than 1 second.

 

I have no clue how to reproduce this I literally just ALT-TABed back and its there.

Video:

10PM EST 4/5/2019 US Warlords server

As you can see, I can request Blackwasps without losing anything forever, until the unit limiter kicks in. Take note that I had just joined the game, and should have had almost NO CP. Certainly not tens of thousands. I destroy these Blackwasps that are glitched so my team does not get an advantage, even though in this game Opfor already had massive incredibly unbalanced advantage of having non-TKing players. Don't say I'm "ruining the game", game was pointless at this time anyways since the game was already ruined at this point by the obligatory Blufor TKer. People immediately me accuse of "scripting" and whine on Global. I did nothing to cause this glitch, and team was not given any lasting advantage since all those units were presumably deleted when I left shortly after. Again, I did not DO anything in order to get this glitch, it literally just happened.

 

I encounter a ridiculous amount of glitches and hackers, and I'm very tired of it. I am not really interested in playing anymore at least until something is done about TK and hacking at a minimum. Warlords has a lot of potential and is in my opinion, the best official gamemode. I really appreciate all the work that has been done and continues to be done on the game. I have a dream that one day we can play Warlords fairly and without TKers. Hope this report can be of help to you.

 

Thanks,

Kestrel

[Anthony Mackiw 0]

again hacker today !!! 

[HellhoundF 6]

I'll be surprised when an entire day plays okay without any TKs, glitches or script kiddies ruining the fun.

[damsous 329]

12 hours ago, CaptainDawson said:

I encounter a ridiculous amount of glitches and hackers, and I'm very tired of it. I am not really interested in playing anymore at least until something is done about TK and hacking at a minimum. Warlords has a lot of potential and is in my opinion, the best official gamemode. I really appreciate all the work that has been done and continues to be done on the game. I have a dream that one day we can play Warlords fairly and without TKers. Hope this report can be of help to you.

Just avoid BI server play on private server with active admin.

[Pendramon3 5]

To expand further on the Scalar NaN situation, it happens very rarely only twice to me and i play warlords A LOT. It happens when you are loading, when the Points system initializes quite possibly due to low server performance.
 

17 hours ago, CaptainDawson said:

1. Stand up in closed cockpit aircraft/land vehicle glitch.

Seems innocent? Imagine someone hovering a M320 sniper over your spawn. I have not tested that yet, so as not to incur the wrath of the Opfor whiners. But you can definitely gain an advantage by using this in a jet with HUD, now you have much greater FOV plus your player can withstand a mach 2 airstream to the face, which is incredibly epic. (NO, I have never used this to my advantage, unless you consider laughing uncontrollably an advantage.) It is 100% reproducible. Not saying how to reproduce cause I know people will take advantage.

This happens when you open arsenal in a vehicle isn't really a warlords thing but i guess it can be avoided by adding a check if in vehicle when you request arsenal. You cannot pull out your gun in vehicles/seats where you shouldn't be able to do normally. This exposes you to gunfire and doesn't give you any protection advantage as far as i know of. Hard to test in jets as the explosions usually hit the back of the jet.

 

17 hours ago, CaptainDawson said:

I encounter a ridiculous amount of glitches and hackers, and I'm very tired of it. I am not really interested in playing anymore at least until something is done about TK and hacking at a minimum. Warlords has a lot of potential and is in my opinion, the best official gamemode. I really appreciate all the work that has been done and continues to be done on the game. I have a dream that one day we can play Warlords fairly and without TKers.

Next update some of the ITW exploits will hopefully be fixed and hopefully with this less cheaters, as for the teamkillers Jezuro has added some protection methods in the next update(read further back in the topic).


No matter what is done to combat the griefers, they will always exist. What i want to know is if some of the developers will take action on those that have been repeatedly doing it for the past month without any stop. I guess what i am really asking for is a ban from all of the official warlords servers. You guys removed our vote admin privileges(as far as i have been told Warlords used to have it) so at least now do something about the still remaining problem. And i am mostly talking about Big Nup (Constant Team killer and griefer, acts as if he is unstoppable), GravelSmith (Constant team killer and griefer, acts as if he is innocent every time even though he has been exposed) and recently this new guy ROTC_MIKI (Teamkills most of the time but recently due to the black screen for teamkilling he started spawn camping the enemies with a Tigris and a Ammo truck not letting them have a second to teleport away after they spawn).

[CaptainDawson 93]

5 hours ago, Pendramon3 said:

No matter what is done to combat the griefers, they will always exist. What i want to know is if some of the developers will take action on those that have been repeatedly doing it for the past month without any stop. I guess what i am really asking for is a ban from all of the official warlords servers. You guys removed our vote admin privileges(as far as i have been told Warlords used to have it) so at least now do something about the still remaining problem. And i am mostly talking about Big Nup (Constant Team killer and griefer, acts as if he is unstoppable), GravelSmith (Constant team killer and griefer, acts as if he is innocent every time even though he has been exposed) and recently this new guy ROTC_MIKI (Teamkills most of the time but recently due to the black screen for teamkilling he started spawn camping the enemies with a Tigris and a Ammo truck not letting them have a second to teleport away after they spawn).

Yes. Please for the love of God just ban these players. When we have a consensus agreeing on toxic players, they should just be banned.

 

I do have to disagree with you on one thing though. There will always be the occasional griefers, but the issue of TKing could honestly be almost completely solved by changing one thing. Just DISABLE teamkilling and all friendly fire in the Base Sector. For that matter, maybe even just disable it completely! Yes, friendly fire happens in real life. But do we need it in this gamemode? NO. Warlords is not a milsim-spec realistic gamemode. Seriously, how often do decent players accidentally kill a friendly WITH the player icons on him that we have in warlords? The only time I do is when I'm using thermals and being careless about checking the map, and it almost never happens. Currently a single griefer can ruin the entire game for both factions. A LARGE PORTION of these griefers will simply leave if they cannot have the instant gratification of TKing in the spawn area. Teamkilling is a serious issue in this game. If we aren't going to be allowed useful vote kicking or voting our own admins, sacrificing a little realism is worth it to make the game playable.

[Beagle 684]

I disagree with friendly fire incidents and taking it out of the equation

 

Warlords is a combined arms milsim mission, not fast paced capture the flag.

Friendly fire is a factor whenever both enemy and friendly forces are in an AO.

It means you can not simply bombard and rocket an area with both forces present. With FF off, you can without any risk.

[.kju 3244]

WW2 version hosted Armaverse Nordic: 

 

[CaptainDawson 93]

1 hour ago, Beagle said:

I disagree with friendly fire incidents and taking it out of the equation

 

Warlords is a combined arms milsim mission, not fast paced capture the flag.

Friendly fire is a factor whenever both enemy and friendly forces are in an AO.

It means you can not simply bombard and rocket an area with both forces present. With FF off, you can without any risk.

 

I would completely agree with you, were it not for the fact that Blufor friendlies routinely bombard and rocket areas with both forces present regardless of my urgent pleas to "GUYS CHECK YOUR TARGETS WE HAVE PLAYER ICONS FOR A REASON". The current Blufor meta mostly consists of newer players who are not using text OR voice chat, and do not care about coordinating or working with other players. Often, the only people who care about friendly fire are serious players, which lately there has been a serious lack of if you haven't noticed from the incessant griefing and TKing especially on Blufor. From my experiences in Warlords, it seems many experienced players have either migrated to Opfor because they got tired of the griefing and lack of coordination on Blufor, or simply just don't play Warlords anymore. Just since the release of Warlords, I have seen a shift in win rate to Opfor side, primarily for this very reason. Lately, I've found it very hard to find more than a couple Blufor players at a time willing to talk on voice and coordinate/plan offensives and defenses. In fact, I often end up chatting on global with Opfor to complain about their jet spam!

 

Also lets not pretend that Warlords is milsim realistic. Tens of thousands of pounds aircraft can land and take off of an unpaved ultrashort runway? Pilot who is shot down can instantly teleport back to airport and spawn another air superiority jet with no repercussions except a little CP loss? Blufor can use Viper helmets in Arsenal and Opfor can use full NATO Carrier Special Rig and MX loadout with exception of uniform, which is difficult to recognize at night?

 

Yes, I agree that friendly fire is an important and realistic factor of Arma. I just see the case for disabling it in some situations to deter griefers, that's all.

[crs24 33]

The change log for 1.90 had the blufor/opfor base sector listed as supposed to have a up to 60 second invulnerability for players while inside that sector after spawning there regardless of faction or friendly fire I believe until the base is unlocked and under attack by the enemy team,which obviously this system isn’t working.

If that’s fixed, I wouldn’t be opposed to this system having a tweak for friendly fire only protection essentially lasting forever while inside the base. Just need to make sure it’s not easily abusable. Like teammates running over other teammates forever.

[crs24 33]

 @CaptainDawson

The blufor woes can just as easily apply to opfor or any team depending on who’s playing and if they work together,and how many of those players buy jets vs the other teams jet pilot ratio along with how much anti-vehicle camping there is at the airfields,although there are some geographical and equipment advantages and disadvantages for each team.

I often prefer opfor myself due to preferring certain things (MI-48 Kajman),although I have certain preferences on both teams. I eagerly await the long range AA (sounds funny considering kajman doesn’t it) so the number of pilots and fighter jets you have isn’t the main deciding factor in the game if both teams have decent ground forces,since air superiority that can’t be contested without your own jet tends to mean one team destroys everything on the ground with their own aircraft while the other team is stuck on said ground.

 

The current ground based AA is often ineffective for supersonic aircraft,and getting in the air with a jet of your own can be nearly impossible if the enemy already has one,although a team with air superiority can still lose if everybody is playing pilot or waiting to,and nobody focuses on defending anything important while on the ground. 

 

@Jezuro

The plane prices probably won’t need much or possibly any increase if the long range AA is made similarly affordable considering the current systems that I assume are the ones your adding that exist for both teams,but aren’t in warlords have a 16km range not limited by view distance and with how hard dodging the LR missiles can be compared to the IR ones are much more effective.It should however cost enough that buying both the SAM and it’s radar costs as much and probably more putting the 2 together, as buying a fighter jet does considering it can lock down a large chunk of the map from enemy aircraft as long as it’s resupplied and active.

[CaptainDawson 93]

5 hours ago, crs24 said:

 

The plane prices probably won’t need much or possibly any increase if the long range AA is made similarly affordable considering the current systems that I assume are the ones your adding that exist for both teams,but aren’t in warlords have a 16km range not limited by view distance and with how hard dodging the LR missiles can be compared to the IR ones are much more effective.It should however cost enough that buying both the SAM and it’s radar costs as much and probably more putting the 2 together, as buying a fighter jet does considering it can lock down a large chunk of the map from enemy aircraft as long as it’s resupplied and active.

 

On that note, @Jezuro will the new radar and SAM objects be movable from their spawn locations? Obviously, they are not drivable vehicles like most of the other units are, so should I assume that they can't be moved from where they paradrop? This could create problems, as some of the current air drop locations in close proximity to buildings would cause problems for the new AA to operate properly...

[crs24 33]

15 minutes ago, CaptainDawson said:

 

On that note, @Jezuro will the new radar and SAM objects be movable from their spawn locations? Obviously, they are not drivable vehicles like most of the other units are, so should I assume that they can't be moved from where they paradrop? This could create problems, as some of the current air drop locations in close proximity to buildings would cause problems for the new AA to operate properly...

I saw @Jezuro say that the SAM and radar will be static defenses on a previous post. So you pick where to place them in a sector your team controls like the turrets.

 

[crs24 33]

On 3/13/2019 at 11:50 AM, Jezuro said:

I've started experimenting with some more features:

• Autonomous radar & SAM sites under Defences (10.000CP for radar, 7.500CP for SAM)
  • Introducing limit to max autonomous turrets per player to 3, this also affects autonomous MGs
• Planes cost increase (12.000CP for CAS planes, 17.500CP for fighters)
• Vehicles are locked by default when requested
  • Can be unlocked/locked directly via Action menu or you can lock/unlock all your vehicles globally via Request menu
• Requested assets are immune to FRIENDLY fire for 3 minutes
• Limit for maximum CP
  • The value can be modified under Parameters so flexible testing can be done on retail

Please keep in mind that this is not final and might not eventually make it to live.

 

On 3/13/2019 at 2:24 PM, Jezuro said:

@HellhoundF

SAM sites are placeablw like other static defenses. Custom offsets have also been introduced for this.

The costs are of course not necessarily final.

Ramming will have to be tested yet.

 

[crs24 33]

And since I can’t figure out how to edit in quotes

On 3/25/2019 at 4:19 AM, Jezuro said:

Not at this moment. I can give you a WIP changelog though:

 

Changed: Subordinates limit increased to 3 for the 64-player Altis scenario
Added: Long-range AA defense assets (SAM sites, radars)
Added: Autonomous defences are now limited to 3 per player
Tweaked: Cost of planes increased
Changed: Most requested assets are now locked by default and can be unlocked either directly via Action menu or through the Strategy tab in the Request menu
Added: Parameter for maximum Command Points
Fixed: Various script errors
Added: Custom offset parameter for Defences
Added: Friendly fire protection for requested assets (first 3 minutes after being requested)

Added: Unless their base is under attack, all playable units are now invulnerable after respawn until they leave the base (60 seconds maximum). - Iteration

 

On 3/26/2019 at 7:49 AM, Jezuro said:

Another bit of WIP changelog:

 

Changed: Increased cost of repair and ammo trucks as well as the Rhino
Added: Team balance parameter

 

[Jezuro 452]

Players will be invulnerable after spawn for 60 seconds or until they leave their base.

@snipska You will be able to change individual asset and strategic feature costs via CfgWLAssetCostOverride in the scenario's description.ext file.

[Tex_Actual 5]

Been reading peoples responses and replies about the new sams, radar and the new asset shields. I will throw out two statements on the topic.

Hopefully the 10k radar wont spontaneously combust because a rock was unfortunately in the way of my radar placement.

Also on the asset TK problems we're facing, if I were a troll and the invulnerable asset fix were implemented. I would use the good old truck ramming to fling the assets into space which is

unfortunately a part of the Arma 3 experience.

 

Finally off topic. Could Blufor please get MTP Altis camo for their CTRG stealth gear?

[CaptainDawson 93]

1 hour ago, Tex_Actual said:

Been reading peoples responses and replies about the new sams, radar and the new asset shields. I will throw out two statements on the topic.

Hopefully the 10k radar wont spontaneously combust because a rock was unfortunately in the way of my radar placement.

Also on the asset TK problems we're facing, if I were a troll and the invulnerable asset fix were implemented. I would use the good old truck ramming to fling the assets into space which is

unfortunately a part of the Arma 3 experience.

 

Finally off topic. Could Blufor please get MTP Altis camo for their CTRG stealth gear?

 

I wholeheartedly agree with everything you just said. Having 3 variants like the Ghillie suits, Arid, Semi-Arid, and Lush perhaps with different patterns would be even better. We have Arid Viper gear, why not CTRG...

 

Back to radars though, is it just me or does 10K sound like a lot for an object that can be killed without any way of defending itself without the SAM units? I mean, your radar gets destroyed and it can render all of your SAMs useless. That's a big CP loss that is difficult to replace unless your team has the CP advantage. You'll want those increased-price Ammo trucks for the SAMs of course, since the SAM launchers can waste all their ammo on one target. Unless players coordinate, how will a player be able to afford to set up a whole SAM/Radar system? Couldn't the cost be prohibitively expensive for a faction that is being ground down by jet spamming?

[Beagle 684]

1 hour ago, CaptainDawson said:

 

I wholeheartedly agree with everything you just said. Having 3 variants like the Ghillie suits, Arid, Semi-Arid, and Lush perhaps with different patterns would be even better. We have Arid Viper gear, why not CTRG...

 

Back to radars though, is it just me or does 10K sound like a lot for an object that can be killed without any way of defending itself without the SAM units? I mean, your radar gets destroyed and it can render all of your SAMs useless. That's a big CP loss that is difficult to replace unless your team has the CP advantage. You'll want those increased-price Ammo trucks for the SAMs of course, since the SAM launchers can waste all their ammo on one target. Unless players coordinate, how will a player be able to afford to set up a whole SAM/Radar system? Couldn't the cost be prohibitively expensive for a faction that is being ground down by jet spamming?

Thats Radar + Sam +ammoTruck asset cann establish a 8-10km² no fly zone. To kill it, someone has to actually go there, not just strafe he place.There are players liek me who recently started to maintain their little AA Squadron lately, operating outside of capture zones exclusivly. Also, when controlled by player via Drone terminal, the SAM is t that dumb anmore. additonally does 2 things.

 

1. It creates a safe zone aroudn airstrips where own forces can actualyl land and take off before becoming shot down

2. it generates an high value target outside te zones for the opposing force, and you can preare for a defence (same as with the ATGM Rhino, already)

    this would actually generate an valid reason to use a low flying Helicopter for ground troop insertion, or low (-10m) flying and terrain contour flight profiles at all.

 

Basically, SAM site manager and artillery emplacement manager is a job some players (like me) really like in this kind of mission when you're tired of zig zagging around in towns. Would be nore "fun" with more AI but 3 AI buddies will do.

as for the price, im quite confident that the survival time of an SAM Site wil be longer than those of a Fighter inside opposing forces airspace. ( I exspect it to last 2-3 kills or 20 minutes)

 

CAVEAT: The fun will be over as soon as someone cheat spawns SEAD fighters with ARMs from there on it's pointless.

[Beagle 684]

3 hours ago, Tex_Actual said:

Been reading peoples responses and replies about the new sams, radar and the new asset shields. I will throw out two statements on the topic.

Hopefully the 10k radar wont spontaneously combust because a rock was unfortunately in the way of my radar placement.

Also on the asset TK problems we're facing, if I were a troll and the invulnerable asset fix were implemented. I would use the good old truck ramming to fling the assets into space which is

unfortunately a part of the Arma 3 experience.

 

Finally off topic. Could Blufor please get MTP Altis camo for their CTRG stealth gear?

Another issue for BLUFOR already is, that our MTP uniforms are to bright, and our Rifles glow in the dark when you set gamma and brightnes up..

That's a relict was not not thoroughly thought off when the lighing engine was changed, but the old, now much to bright textures, were kept.

[crs24 33]

My opinion on the LR AA costs depends on how the planes are priced in the next update. If you have the fighter jet at 10000 cp like it is now,I’d expect the radar and Sam when bought together to cost a total of maybe 11000-12000 but possibly just 10000 as well considering whatever new cost ammo trucks have,and the individual Sam and radar cost to be around 1/2 to 2/3 of that total when bought by themselves,just like the wip cost for fighter jets was being upped to 17500 and the radar and Sam added exactly to that put together.

 

Like I said before if the LR AA is added planes probably don’t need to be more than 10000 cp since it will possibly kill the chances of anyone who’s not playing long term or joins when the games already long underway has at getting to use them if their team doesn’t have a large income,so long as the Sam and radar are added at the aforementioned similar price due to the enhanced lethality it brings. And having the combined Sam and radar cost be too much over 10000 will probably hinder a team that needs it.The subsonic jets can also be shot down more reliably than supersonic even with manpads except when the neophron is at its top speed of slightly over 900 km/h,as apparently the handheld titan aa and tripod mounted titan aa can’t hit aircraft going over 900 km/h as that is the missiles top speed,while the titan missile on the cheetah/tigris is an enhanced version that goes 1800km/h.

 

One thing I’m sort of worried about is the rhino atgms ability to kill the new AA from 8km with a laser designation in warlords. I could of sworn I’ve seen a method in some custom missions to remove single ammo types like just the laser guided atgms from a vehicle in a way that’s not rearmable from an ammo truck, but maybe that required customized scripting. I really don’t want to call to nerf anything and I’m not calling and I don’t want to see the rhino removed, but getting rid of the drones or something is even worse, and the rhino when it has atgms gives blufor a unique ability to kill the stationary Sam and radar notably because the rhino is on the ground,fires indirectly often out of sight,and from a distance that opfor can’t match or often detect it. But if removing the atgm from the rhino isn’t an option I’d prefer to just see how it goes with the planned changes like the rhinos price increase (hopefully still 4 digit) before trying something else.

 

I also wonder why the mim-145 defender can turn 360 degrees,but the s-750 rhea can’t aim directly behind itself. But that’s not a warlords issue.

[Beagle 684]

I actually dont exspect Rhino and Rhea+Cronus to meet in the same range spheres. You do so, but usually the Rhons stay way back into their territory... as will the SAM sites. The is no good reason to have them close to the middle of the ISland or even the airbvase tince that area switches the owener 4 times in a single hour. You are free to do so, but its a waste of CP just like flying too deep into the SAMs range.

 

But here is also another point for the Radars... datalink for the fighters. THose radars work like EWR Systems and allow Fighters to intercept targets without their own radar on.

This is particularly good for BLUFOR sincd the Baclwasp is a bit harder to detect, but lacks AA the number of missiles the Shikra has.

With datalink you can get closer to a target and fire inside the kinetical "no escape range" of your missiles. Launches at maximum range never tend to hit an Player enganged into evasive manouvers.

Usually flying at 700kmh and choosing a vector perpendicular to the missile launch is enough, since ArmA missiles only follow targets like missiles from the 70's, but can''t intercept them by flying to a intercept point in front of the targets computed path. Hence all air combat we have in ArmA is basically in visual range if we take the measures of DCS or RL. Our long range missiles are actually all short range like late Siderwinders. ArmA makes no difference in air density so the range at sealevel is the same as at 10.000m The only difference seems to be that missiles that go up lose energy faster then those that fly down.

[HellhoundF 6]

I don't know why still the Rhino's ATGMs discussion is still brought up. It should be removed. Might as well add mortars back, am I right? if a laser guided artillery is allowed, why not mortars? That's the logic.

[CaptainDawson 93]

I agree with Beagle, while the Rhino does have a unique ability to strike at longer range, that doesn't really threaten the CSAT's radars unless they put them foolishly close to the front. The Radars and SAMs have much farther range than the Rhino. So unless you're trying to put Radars in hostile territory or too close to the front line, you can just place them far enough back to be out of range of the Rhino.

 

As for the LR AAs, I just hope that they can present some form of reasonable deterrent to jets. Jets on either team should not be able to bomb the enemy spawn, and deny aircraft from taking of without being contested.

[Beagle 684]

22 hours ago, CaptainDawson said:

I agree with Beagle, while the Rhino does have a unique ability to strike at longer range, that doesn't really threaten the CSAT's radars unless they put them foolishly close to the front. The Radars and SAMs have much farther range than the Rhino. So unless you're trying to put Radars in hostile territory or too close to the front line, you can just place them far enough back to be out of range of the Rhino.

 

As for the LR AAs, I just hope that they can present some form of reasonable deterrent to jets. Jets on either team should not be able to bomb the enemy spawn, and deny aircraft from taking of without being contested.

But the assets will need player attention or they cease to work pretty quickly... only 4 missile in the SAM Laucher and it tends to fire all of them simultaniously in ripples. If noone attends to the SAM site it will go useless in seconds, only acting as EWR. So it is not like the remote cannons, that are also uverused to play the old "whack a mole" all over the map. It escapes me why the opposing force should be able to capture an area with no effort even if it has no more connection to, just because it was once theirs. Best example are Pyrgos and Neochori...i Usually capture them back from under water using an SDV to play "whack a mole" over and over and over again, when im in the mood.