The utility chopper designation I'd like to see in game

[Solid Knight]

It's not exactly nerfing the HIND per say, it's emphasizing the differences between it and modern attack helicopters. I've been playing around with various weapon load outs for the HIND in the my personal mod. I like making helicopters different. Not just in weapon load out but in the HUDs, camera, and flight characteristics. Makes it far more interesting when each craft feels and functions almost completely different from each other. This leads to different tactics used between each. For example, my AH-1Z focuses on AA and armor whilst not being as effective against infantry as, say the HIND. The HIND does high spead runs on infantry and light armor but can also engage armor if need be but not as easily as the other attack helicopters. The AH-64D is a good general purpose attack helicopter but lacks AA. The MI-28 is similar to the AH-64D in function but still has a different feel.

The KA-50 is pretty interesting if done right in BF2. The interesting aspect about the KA-50 is that the ATGMs are laser guided but instead of relying on a painted target it tracks where the launch-craft is and continues forward. So the missile will hit where ever the launch craft is pointed. You can simulate this by using wire-guided missiles. Since it is a single seater the pilot will have to keep his nose pointed at the target to score a hit.

[gclark03]

For balance's sake, give the co-pilot seat crate control. The 30-second warmup time, combined with the attractive ground target of a utility helo, should be incentive enough to bring a co-pilot.

[General Dragosh]

Originally Posted by Tannhauser

No need to nerf the HIND honnestly, it's already weak compared to the new dedicated attack helos out today (KA-50, Apache, Cobra, Tiger...) and like said, is not so manoeuvrable as them. I think for the sake of asymmetrical gameplay HINDs are a great idea as a secondary role transport helo for MEC and as a primary role transport helo for militia. And IMO, the BH owns the Mi17 because they aren't meant for the same job. the BH is more comparable to Hind as a faster and less armed counterpart than it is to the Mi17. The Mi17 is big and weak, and more comparable to the Chinook so I think giving some Hinds to MEC is logical and adds to gameplay a lot!

He didnt say give them a Mil MI-35 but a MI-24D, i couldnt call that nurf, its more like burf...lol

And the mi 24 wasnt made ingame so it can engage cobras or AH-64's face to face, and if the militia get them then they will be the only one having a multipurpose helo on the map to even out the odds by not having modern equipment

[Blakeman]

I wouldn't mind the phrog (sea knight CH-46) being represented by the chinook if nobody is ever going to do a model of the phrog as it is better than representing the USMC with so many hueys.

If we could get the sea stallion though (CH-53) with two crates though, I think it would be better than the phrog since the 53s are still in service and the phrogs are being phased out by the osprey. The 53s are still a heavy lifter aircraft so the 2 crates isn't unrealistic at all (I've unloaded 3 airforce load pallets from one 53).

[moj]

Originally Posted by .:iGi:.Hitman.2.5

TBQH it holds around 44 fully equipped soldiers and can be increased to 55 in an emergency and the Ch-53 can carry 50 battle ready soldiers.

Nice research though man

I was lead to believe those kind of numbers were for standing troops or for when a middle bench is fitted in the Sea Stallion. Not that it really makes any difference in the game with the 8-troop limit.

[Tirak]

Originally Posted by Blakeman

I wouldn't mind the phrog (sea knight CH-46) being represented by the chinook if nobody is ever going to do a model of the phrog as it is better than representing the USMC with so many hueys.

If we could get the sea stallion though (CH-53) with two crates though, I think it would be better than the phrog since the 53s are still in service and the phrogs are being phased out by the osprey. The 53s are still a heavy lifter aircraft so the 2 crates isn't unrealistic at all (I've unloaded 3 airforce load pallets from one 53).

The Sea Knight is not a Chinook, they bear a superficial resemblance and have very different sizes. Please do not make this comparison as too many people think this.

[Scot]

Sea Knight Specs:

• Length: 45 ft 8 in fuselage (13.92 m
• Rotor diameter: 51 ft (16 m)
• Height: 16 ft 8.5 in (5.1 m)

Chinook Specs:

• Length: 98 ft 10 in (30.1 m)
• Rotor diameter: 60 ft 0 in (18.3 m)
• Height: 18 ft 11 in (5.7 m)

The chinook is far larger

[smee]

Would like to see the lynx have a supply crate, seems strange it doesn't

[Excavus]

Originally Posted by smee

Would like to see the lynx have a supply crate, seems strange it doesn't

It's too small to carry a lot of supplies. AIX has a pretty nice CH-53E Super Stallion model, maybe if you got permission to use it, then you could have a large transport helicopter for the USMC that carries 2 crates.

[gclark03]

For the large supply helos, explain the lack of seats by adding a vehicle drop to the co-pilot controls.