Realist, Maybe, Balanced? You Decide.

[kocrachon 2]

I made a couple of videos here part of a series I am gonna make about balance with this game.

These two videos show the weakness of each helicopter and the strength, and you guys tell me if this game is Realistic AND Balanced for both teams. Because while realism is a nice thing, they also need to balance it out a bit to make the game fun.

[Mogadon 0]

So we should ditch realism for balance?

[opteryx 1562]

I'll take realism over balance any day thank you very much.

If anything, ArmA lacks too much realism.

[monty67t 0]

If I want balance I'll play BF2. I'm for realism all the way.

[kocrachon 2]

But its not realistic. It would not take 30 some .50 rounds to take down that Mi-17. And the fact that the Pilot is invisible from the right on the Ka-50, and the fact that the glass is bullet proof. No glass, or armor for that matter, can withstand that many .50 rounds.

Its not realistic or balanced, its BS right now.

[frederf 0]

The only goofy thing I see is how many hit the Mi-17 can take a lot of punishment. It's noted that the Mi-17 is a two engine helicopter and should suffer a complete engine failure non-catastrophically.

Now that you mention it the AH-1Z is twin-engine so should be more survivable because of it. I do know they are notoriously fragile though. The assumption is also that shooting the engine is any different than shooting any other part of the helicopter, which may not be the case.

Relative armor performance doesn't bother me. The Ka-50 is supposed to be a flying tank. Mi-17 is twin engine. UH-60 takes a fair deal of punishment (although it could stand a bit more survivability). AH-1Z is a tin can... we know this. Overall I'd be happier if all helicopters got an armor boost across the board.

As far as seats and number of armaments.... that's how many they have. They should have as many as they have, no more, no less.

I don't know the specifics about the AH-1Z's rockets and the KA-50's rockets so I don't know if they should be that desperate in terms of damage. Same with the cannon.

Overall your presentation seems to hint at a "If they have 10 rockets, we should have 10 rockets" form of balance, which I hesitate to say is very 'gamey' or 'BF2-ish.' The skill of pilots, form of support, and numbers of combatants affect the outcome of combat far, far more than +/-2 rockets or +/-30% in armor.

I would be curious to see the same "Snipe the pilot" attempt using 7.62mm, which should be impossible in all cases using a M24 for example. 0.50 cal should be stopped by some of the windshields some of the time, but not reliably. It seems that ArmA is too unsophisticated for "5.56mm is stopped but 0.50cal goes through" for windshields. Which I should say that all windshields should be armored totally instead of not at all in light of how "snipery" the AI is.

[kocrachon 2]

Well Im not saying the attack helicopters are Unbalanced in terms of fire power, it was merely to show the difference. I feel the AH-1 has the advantage in terms of combat awareness and range since the Gunner can move his head around and can shoot from different angles in a hover.

However, what really bothers me is I know for a fact that neither of the Opfor helicopters should have survived that many 50 cal rounds to a single engine. Especially the Mi-17. It should have gone down long before hand. And the Ka-50 should take a few less rounds.

And what bothers me the most out of all of that is the Ka-50 pilot can be shot out, period. Unless that glass was 6 feet thick, he should have eventually died. The glass wasn't damaged at all, and in a test with my friend, shooting the glass only does damage to the over all aircraft, so it doesn't even register as glass and a pilot.

As long as the pilot can be sniped out of it, I will be happy.

And I am going to quickly make a video of me using the M-24 to snipe them out, and I will even try with the SPR. We will see how the glass works on all of these. However I know the 7.62 can go through the UH-60 and the AH-1, because I have been sniped out of my cockpits many times when I go against MGs. And yes sniped out. Because the helo was still operational and landed (took about 75% damage but was still operational while in the air)

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]

And what bothers me the most out of all of that is the Ka-50 pilot can be shot out, period. Unless that glass was 6 feet thick, he should have eventually died. The glass wasn't damaged at all, and in a test with my friend, shooting the glass only does damage to the over all aircraft, so it doesn't even register as glass and a pilot.

As long as the pilot can be sniped out of it, I will be happy.

Ka-50's glass should protect against 12.7mm. So unless you have 20mm gun then you aren't going to be sniping any Ka-50 pilots anytime soon. And about the pilot not being visible.. that's true, he isn't. That's the survivability/visibility trade off that Mil Design chose when designing the helicopter. I can tell you that visibility sucks in the Ka50 and it completely lacks all the high tech avionics that it relies on so heavily.

Ka-50 is twin engine as well and could probably run fine on one engine. Again "shooting in the engine" is probably the same thing as "shooting it in the fuselage." Do you notice a difference in the number of bullets it takes to down a helicopter depending on where you hit it?

[kocrachon 2]

I shot the weak point of each aircraft.

And yes the KA-50 can withstand a couple of .50 cal rounds. But it would still show signs of damage, and it would still eventually be shattered. Same thing with Bullet Resistant armor on the Humvee, it can withstand 3-6 7.62 rounds. But after a while the glass will still shatter.

Any Bullet Resistant glass will eventually shatter to the round its made to resist. A .50 AP round will go through armor on a M1A2 or a Challenger 2. It only takes so many rounds to finally get through. And that Ka-50 would not be able to take 10-20 rounds of a 50. The glass would eventually give.

Anyways I have the video of the different ballistics created, just gotta upload it.

[dreday 1]

That's the survivability/visibility trade off that Mil Design chose when designing the helicopter. I can tell you that visibility sucks in the Ka50 and it completely lacks all the high tech avionics that it relies on so heavily.

Just a small note - KA-50 was designed by the Kamov Design Berau, not Mil (hence the name).

I also agree with HavocDemon that its glass should be able take a few 12.7 rounds, but probably no more than a dozen (even less if they hit close to each other).

Peace,

DreDay

[Whargod 0]

A couple of things. First, sniping a helicopter cockpit is not exactly easy, think of the air currents around it. It's probably next to impossible in real life.

As for the realism of the game, you have two options:

1) absolute realism at the cost of not being able to actually play the game since no computer exists that can cover "realism"

2) play the current game and love it!

Sure, there are a few problems and inconsistencies but it was that way with OFP for the first while until the patches sorted it out. And then the mod makers started turning out all kindsa great stuff like ECP and things got ever better.

You can't have everything in a game, so just focus on the good points. Besides, probably almost no one here is qualified to say what truly "realistic" is anyhow. Anything can happen in real life.

[kocrachon 2]

Ok more on my finds. I walked up to each helicopter and I could shot a 9mm pistol round, 1 shot through the glass and kill the pilots. I will have it up.

Now, still think this is realistic or balanced?

[Whargod 0]

That's the problem with controlled tests, they never mirror reality. Try this test:

There's an enemy helo above you and a squad of guys attacking you. Try it then and see if it still works.

[kocrachon 2]

Right now the controlled test is testing the glass structure of the aircraft. and the overall quality of armor on the engine. But I will also do a recording of them shooting me from the bottom and see who lasts how long.

[Whargod 0]

I know, I'm just playing devil's advocate here, sorry. It can be a little unrealistic at times but I find it hard to notice in pitched battles myself.

I'm sure someone will make a mod or something to address these issues though, I want to see ECP ported over at some point but that's just a personal wish.

Good on ya for running the engine through it's paces though!

[kocrachon 2]

Video 3 in the first post now, with the pistol killing.

[recoill 0]

O no not the dreaded B word again.

Ask WW2 Poland about balance .

Theres no such thing as "balance" in war (shit the hole idea is to get an OVERMATCH on the enemy).

IMHO there shouldn't be any "Balance" in a Military Sim either.

Theres only pros and cons, as in real life. You have to use your advantages to offset your weaknesses.

[Chris Death 0]

I will never understand why people put the two things:

realism and simulation always into one cup.

Realism means exactly like reality or at least close to,

while simulation means that the end result should mirror

the end result of reality or at least make people think

that the outcome could be same in real.

So if you can't destroy a choppers glasses in ArmA with

a .50, it is just simulating the real life thingy:

you won't take the chopper down due to pilot's skills and

flying technique.

A simulation can tell you: this dot on the map represents

a whole army, while for realism you would have to have

a real army there - otherwise it wouldn't be realistic.

IMHO it's (forgive me the word) balancing between realism

and simulation - if you can't do it in real life, but you could

in ArmA because the pilots aren't trained like in real life,

you need to find a way to simulate it.

~S~ CD

[kocrachon 2]

but at the same time my 3rd video shows its not realistic or simulated. The fact that the Ka-50 is invincible. While the other helicopters were sniped through with a freaking 9mm pistol. Which is not real at all either.

In real life a KA-50 would take a couple of .50 cals, but then shatter. In real life, a UH-60 and AH-1 can take 7.62 mm rounds and be fine.

This game either needs to make the KA-50 able to be easily sniped through or up the armor on all other helicopters. Because its neither realistic nor balanced. Its just BS.

[frederf 0]

I appreciate the investigation HavocDemon is attempting here. Neither blind fanboyism nor forgone conclusion hating will help the progress of the game any.

Taking the one issue of armored glass aside. I believe HavocDemon has stumbled across a limitation in ArmA. Armored glass does not degrade in its protection with damage. Thus any armor protection provided by glass will persist as long as the vehicle is alive. Furthermore it's apparent that BIS has chosen to make the KA-50's glass fully bullet proof and the AH-1Z's not at all. It also appears that the game makes no distinction between 9mm and 50cal when it comes to the armor protection of the glass.

This decision about armored glass has simultaneously overestimated the properties of the KA-50 by a small margin and vastly underestimated the AH-1Z's. It is my opinion that does to the accuracy of AI's with hand held weaponry, it would be best to overestimate all armored glass than to underestimate its effectiveness. Keeping in mind that anything that would truly "slice through it" will down the entire chopper in no time and the glass's armor level will be moot.

I think the use of the word "balance" is not helpful in gaining support but merely in attracting flames. Also the concepts of balance need not even be invoked to provide argument for change. Clearly realism is being violated and realism will get you a of friends when it comes to discussing ArmA.

Please don't dismiss HavocDemon's tests because they are single shots against stationary helicopters. He is testing the terminal effects which apply regardless of how bullet and helicopter come together.

------

On the topic of bullet damage against helicopters. This subject I have even less of a clear opinion on what behavior is correct. Bullet proof glass, sure, 5-10 rounds and the glass degrades. Penetration is trivial.

Hitting the engine with 5.56, 7.62? Does the game even care where you hit it? Engine, underside, rotor? I know tanks have compartmentalized damage. I assume helicopters do too, but I don't know.

Overall I think what must be kept in mind is the results of the simulation put into practice are more important than the fine-grain behavior. Only when every single element of a simulation is realistic can you blindly assume the end result reflects reality. Two realistic things and one unrealistic thing combined can easily produce a ridiculous outcome.

Overall I find the AI's ability to hit a moving helicopter (or pilot of same! too great, so I would suggest erring on the side of too much armor for the helicopters to get a final result that more resembles reality.

[kocrachon 2]

Exactly, and the part of the game mechanic imbalance in all of this is the fact that the AI Machine gunners aim for the cockpit, not for the center mass. So in the long run this will give the Opfor an unrealistic, unbalanced, unfair advantage in combat. I have no problem with the AH-1 having weaker armor, and that being the cause of the helicopter going down. But when it comes to a game mechanic issue, then it needs to be changed.

While the AH-1 does have the Pilot / Gunner combo to make attacking easier and the KA-50 has terrible vision, that doesn't really give reason for them to make the pilot invincible.

Plus doesn't anyone else find it odd that this 3rd world country who has outdated Tanks, APCs, Weaponry, and vehicles, has an extremely sophisticated air assets?

[frederf 0]

Quote[/b] ]While the AH-1 does have the Pilot / Gunner combo to make attacking easier and the KA-50 has terrible vision, that doesn't really give reason for them to make the pilot invincible.

Plus doesn't anyone else find it odd that this 3rd world country who has outdated Tanks, APCs, Weaponry, and vehicles, has an extremely sophisticated air assets?

To be fair the armored glass on the KA-50 is the best of the bunch in real life. What BIS did is "rounded up" the KA-50's glass to "impenetrable" and "rounded down" everything else to "penetrable."

The odd mix of gear in terms of sophistication is mainly to appease the players who would complain a lot if the SLA were in the stone age. It all comes down to the mission. If you want the SLA to have 300 KA-50s, you give them 300. If you want them to have sticks and stones you give them sticks and stones.

[apex_predator 0]

I agree that there are specific things all over the game that lack realism, I also acknowledge that there needs to be a balance between realism and gameplay (though I'd argue for tipping the scale heavily in favor of realism).

My biggest gripe in the realism of the game, though, has little to do with the underlying specifics of individual units. Those can and will be modded and adjusted. My biggest gripe is with mission design. Most missions --especially the stock BIS ones-- are just horribly unrealistic. They are the digital equivalent of Rambo II. A single soldier is never going to be sent out to destroy an entire convoy. A squad leader is never going to issue a FRAGO with "Kill 'em all!" anywhere in it.

So I would urge responsible mission design that emphasizes realism and also works to mitigate the limitations of certain hardware until realistic replacements are available. If the KA-50 is overarmored design missions that put it at a disadvantage if you use it; start it out in a predamaged state or use radio calls to AA battery assets to mitigate it.

But please, please, no more missions where two man teams take on an entire armored company. Realistic mission design goes a long way toward balancing the scales even when unit design has unrealistic features built in.

[Lor 0]

Good lord, another topic questioning one tiny specific detail of 'realism' in the game. With the word 'balance' in the title no less!

ArmA doesn't model the precise macroscopic material qualities of glass and bullet proof polycarbonate thermoplastic! What a huge surprise!

Dude, the way glass behaves at the moment is good enough for a simulation-game. Seriously.

And honestly, when has a helicopter pilot ever been sniped out of the cockpit in real life, in any helicopter?

[whisper 0]

Solution needed : Have a "cockpit" P3D model selection with differentiated hitpoints and rendering pilot snipable on destruction.