Lock-on Missiles (AA & Jets)

[Snazz]

What is it actually rewarding? Using AA is one of the easiest and least skilled aspects of PR, you just have to look in the general direction of an enemy aircraft and you've spotted them at range before you've even made visual contact. Shooting them down isn't a worthy challenge as you can fire lock-on missiles before they know about it, or let them try and flare and evade for a little while until their often-inevitable-death.

I am against lock on weapons in general, whether on anti-air or jets they just don't result in fun game play IMO. I get quickly tired of alarm noises and playing the flare timing game every time someone looks my way with AA or is glued to my six in a jet.

I was a massive fan of CE+BF1942+DC+DCon for their accuracy-rewarding dogfighting/AA, I was what you'd call a complete flyboy. In PR I tend to not even bother using aircraft anymore unless asked or if circumstances allow me to avoid AA/dogfights.

I know lock on missiles are a real life weapon and this mod is called Project Reality, but how realistic today is having manned aircraft (without radar or sensors) flying low around the same 16km2 that AA or enemy jets are present. To be fair we could question various other aspects of PR, I just wanted to point out that the 'realism' argument in this case isn't as solid as some would think.

Besides the questionable realism of the weapon in the scale of PR, there's plenty of real-life things that are left out of PR for game play reasons. This is one of those aspects that I think PR would be more enjoyable and balanced without.

Instead: Cannons & heavy machine guns, maybe 'dumb missiles' with/without close-proximity fuses.

[jbgeezer]

I can say I do agree with almost everything you say here, especially this

Originally Posted by Snazz

Instead: Cannons & heavy machine guns, maybe 'dumb missiles' with/without close-proximity fuses.

[Nimise]

If they took out all lock on aa missiles it would just be stupid, on maps like kashan it would be almost impossible to shoot down a jet. I don't think shooting inf with a apc is very "skilled" does that mean they should make it impossible for apcs to kill inf?

[Spieler]

Absolutely agree with Snazz. The air defence in PR must consist of cannons and mashine guns like ZU-23 on different platforms (ural etc.), 12.7 guns, Shilkas, vulcans & etc. I understand that it dosent look like modern warfire but there are lot of things in PR that arent realistic. Such air defense (without missiles) just will make PR much more intereting in aviation and operating air defence systems. Having atack chopper (Muttrah US) is very great advantage (must be so) but not now in PR. I dont even know word in english to discribe what atack chopper or jet is against PR air defense systems (avenger, strela, stingers, iglas). But it is realy bad word ))

[Snazz]

Originally Posted by Nimise

on maps like kashan it would be almost impossible to shoot down a jet.

I don't believe the majority of skilled PR players are actually incapable of hitting a jet without using lock-on weapons.

Originally Posted by Nimise

I don't think shooting inf with a apc is very "skilled"

Very circumstantial, but in any case the APC still has to aim at the infantry and does not get HUD boxes drawn around them for guidance.

It's also usually very obvious where the APC is firing from so an infantry squad can either avoid it or use anti-tank or request other support. Unlike when you're in an aircraft and you get a lock-on alarm that could be coming from anywhere around you.

[joethepro36]

I disagree massively with this.

There is a reason cannons and the like are used far less for anti-air duty these days and that is because cannons are not as effective as missiles. With cannons as you are preposing, we will have to lead a target travelling several hundred miles an hour that changes height and direction quickly in an engagement window of about 10 seconds.

Furthermore, with fast jets being so hard to shoot down, it gives them carte blanche to fly at low altitude and spot + engage targets independently. I realise in real life aircraft do this, but having aircraft be immune/have no aa missiles opposing them ruins things on a map like kashan.

I believe it was .6 (.7?) where I saw multiple times in the same round of an a-10 strafing mec main with 2 tungukas and two static aa launchers firing at it in each pass. As I said previously, leading a target that changes direction quickly at high speed is insanely difficult or impossible to do reilably. We tried using the cannons and got a few hits over time but a few hits isn't a kill which the missiles can do now, almost everytime.

Aircraft should be afraid of missiles at low alititude, they have immunity to them when flying above 1200m. And they can still drop bombs from up there.

[Snazz]

Originally Posted by joethepro36

There is a reason cannons and the like are used far less for anti-air duty these days and that is because cannons are not as effective as missiles.

As I mentioned in my OP this isn't really about what is in real-life, it's about balance between ground and air in PR's game play. You can't just say "this is effective IRL, therefore it should be in PR."

Originally Posted by joethepro36

With cannons as you are preposing, we will have to lead a target travelling several hundred miles an hour that changes height and direction quickly in an engagement window of about 10 seconds.

Furthermore, with fast jets being so hard to shoot down, it gives them carte blanche to fly at low altitude and spot + engage targets independently. I realise in real life aircraft do this, but having aircraft be immune/have no aa missiles opposing them ruins things on a map like kashan

Well you seem to be focusing on jet fighters, which are quick and agile but so is your mouse. If you hit it you'll be more satisfied having actually aimed the weapon.

Jet fighters are not immune because you have to actually lead them, they're just relatively more challenging to hit. I doubt pilots will survive long flying low and spotting on their own, as usual their situational awareness and accuracy will depend on spotters below.

Originally Posted by joethepro36

Aircraft should be afraid of missiles at low alititude

Pilots would be cautious of being torn to pieces by explosive rounds or non lock-on missiles.

[Garmax]

i do believe AA is extremely effortless to use atm their always shooting down choppers and jets a lot easier then it should be im not saying to remove it but something has to be done MEC cant even get air transport because AA and the choppers are so slow and big

[joethepro36]

You're ignoring an important part of my post. I've basically played pr without effective aa missiles and it's horrible (although without the proxy rounds you're suggesting). Sure powerful proxy rounds would help but it's not effective aa. An aa emplacement or a vehicle with cannon alone cannot hit fast moving targets that are not pointing directly at you. In order for proxy rounds to hit, the proximity would have to be 10-15m at the very least to compensate for gunnery.

From what I've seen in combined arms they have an automatic aiming system/ If that was implemented into pr then by all means we should have more cannon available alongside missles.

And aside from this, aa missiles are not going to be removed from pr regardless.

[Snazz]

Originally Posted by Garmax

i do believe AA is extremely effortless to use atm their always shooting down choppers and jets a lot easier then it should be im not saying to remove it but something has to be done

It would be nice to boost the survivability and capability of aircraft to counter the relative effortlessness of shooting them down, but apart from some of the CA mod features (radar for eg.) I don't think the engine can really deliver on that.

It just seems far more simple to remove the lock-on system, which I see no value in game play wise.

Originally Posted by joethepro36

You're ignoring an important part of my post.

I read it but I didn't find it important as you're retelling some story from an old version of PR that still involved lock-on missiles.

Originally Posted by joethepro36

I've basically played pr without effective aa missiles and it's horrible

If lock-on weapons don't lock on properly of course they're going to be horrible. It kind of defeats the point of them locking on if you could aim them more accurately yourself.

Originally Posted by joethepro36

(although without the proxy rounds you're suggesting). Sure powerful proxy rounds would help but it's not effective aa. An aa emplacement or a vehicle with cannon alone cannot hit fast moving targets that are not pointing directly at you. In order for proxy rounds to hit, the proximity would have to be 10-15m at the very least to compensate for gunnery.

You're still making the presumption that we can't hit fast moving targets with cannons and missiles if there's no lock on system doing it for us.

It's like you've never played another BF game/mod or have been playing vBF2/PR so long that you can't get your mind around aiming yourself.