PDA

View Full Version : AIM-90 are just to dam good. (Air to Air)


Oddsodz
2010-03-31, 15:49
Now I know this was discussed in .87 And back then I said I was happy with it. But I have come around to the point that it is just no fun at all. I Feel it is time to re open this issue and again ask for "Flairs/Counter measures" that work.

Now it was stated back in .87 that it was realistic with even a video to prove it. But I have always said that it was to much. There is no chance for dog fighting of any kind. And even if you see a jet on your tail and you start to flairs/Counter measure to stop a lock in the 1st place. The boogie on your tail can just "Snap shot/Spam" all 4 AIM-90s at you and 1 will hit %100 of the time. %80 of the time that I get shot down. I Have seen the boogie and I am already flaring and trying to dodge and get out of the kill zone. I Can last up 15 seconds before I am dead again a good pilot that knows how to "Snap-Shot". A Noobish pilot I may even get away. But if I get behind a jet. %90 of the time, the jet is dead in 2 seconds. My fastest kills was (and I am guessing) was 1/4 of a second. He was on my screen for only that long.

Again. This maybe realistic. But there is no fun in it. There is no satisfaction. There is no thrill in the chase. I Would like to ask that the DEVs tweak the AIM-90s so that they will %100 of the time always go for flairs if they are in the missiles flight path. This will have the knock on effect of making CAS work with ground crew AA-Stingers/AAVs. Because if your flares work. Then you have time to fly to a zone that may have friendly AA. Right now. You just don't have that time.

Alex6714
2010-03-31, 17:25
I Would like to ask that the DEVs tweak the AIM-90s so that they will %100 of the time always go for flairs if they are in the missiles flight path.

Not possible really, though you can tweak other things.


Last time I was in a jet I only ever saw 1 for half a second, yet I shot down 4, all by just hearing tone and firing blindly.

Its not just the missiles at fault here but there is no point in going over it again.

Rissien
2010-03-31, 21:20
Yeah, I about gave up flying because if I even so much as here a tone on me I know im dead even if i spam flares. Ive had times im not even in the air for more than 10 seconds and ive gained a tail and find myself staring at the dead screen.

Hunt3r
2010-04-02, 05:18
Combined Arms, anyone?

fubar++
2010-04-02, 07:18
AA missiles might be realistic but the maps are far from it on jet operation perspective. 4x4x4km with under 1km visibility is just too little for realistic jet and AA models, hence there is no fun in jet fighting anymore.

PLODDITHANLEY
2010-04-02, 07:54
If a player can be bothered to sit in an AA I think it's correct that aircraft are 'wary' to overfly. Most of the time AA are manned for five minutes until the player gets bored.
If as a pilot you're getting locked ask, beg or order some infantry to get a laze on the AA position before you do anything else.
If you are getting 'hassle' from enemy aircraft ask, beg or order your friendlies to man an AA and draw him into the kill zone. Or get a spotter/sniper to target the guy in the AA.

This is another reason why building and manning the most forward FOB is vital for effective teamwork.

For example on Muttrah I and my squad will perma man the AA positions until the Attack Huey and Cobra are down, it can get dull if the pilots are good but IRL soldiers would not advance unprotected into a zone patrolled by these two.

I often man AA pads and I have a hard time shooting down a good pilot.

fubar++
2010-04-02, 08:52
Combined Arms, anyone?

Back on the topic, how is CA doing nowdays?

Hunt3r
2010-04-02, 09:58
Back on the topic, how is CA doing nowdays?

Combined Arms Forums (http://www.combinedarmsmod.com/forum/index.php)

Rissien
2010-04-02, 11:16
If you are getting 'hassle' from enemy aircraft ask, beg or order your friendlies to man an AA and draw him into the kill zone. Or get a spotter/sniper to target the guy in the AA.

This is another reason why building and manning the most forward FOB is vital for effective teamwork.

For example on Muttrah I and my squad will perma man the AA positions until the Attack Huey and Cobra are down, it can get dull if the pilots are good but IRL soldiers would not advance unprotected into a zone patrolled by these two.

I often man AA pads and I have a hard time shooting down a good pilot.

Getting locked on with Jets and Choppers are two different worlds entirely. Choppers pop six flares at once for starters, not to mention most can take a beating wheres a jet can go down even from a near miss. Jets get locked and are dead within seconds. Its near impossible to lure a tailing jet into aa coverage because despite spamming flares you still dead long before you get anywhere near. I can stay up and laugh at AA all round in choppers, but in jets your just in a time bomb waiting to go off.

Dont get me wrong I can still bomb ground targets accurately even in hot zones with known AA and never once come in range but an enmy jet gets on your tail and its over.

Oddsodz
2010-04-02, 22:15
Here is an idea. How about making the AIM-90 Missiles have a low destructive force. So as to say that it would take 2 AIM-90 Missiles to destroy at jet and not just 1. In my experience. When I snap-shot/Spam my AIM-90s at a enemy jet. Only 1 out of the 4 will hit. Sometimes maybe 2 will hit but not every time. But that is all that is needed. Now, If we was to lower the damage that a AIM-90 Missile can do. This would mean that you would have to wait and make sure you get a good lock before firing. Snap-shooting/spaming all 4 AIM-90 Missiles will still work. But it would not be a %100 kill every time. This would then have the knock on effect of making Air to Air engagements last a bit longer and again as I have said. Give time for a pilot to run home to some (hopefully) manned AA-Stinger/AAv for help.

I Would like to point out that I am not talking about ground based AA-Stingers or AAV's missiles. I like them just as they are. What I am looking for is a way to make Air to Air engagements last a bit longer and not just be a case of "Who sees who 1st". Which is a bit to much down to luck only. And I must point out also that the AIM-120s (Which are the long range ones) are not so good for snap-shooting with and so I don't think need to be looked at.

Rissien
2010-04-02, 22:52
Here is an idea. How about making the AIM-90 Missiles have a low destructive force. So as to say that it would take 2 AIM-90 Missiles to destroy at jet and not just 1. In my experience. When I snap-shot/Spam my AIM-90s at a enemy jet. Only 1 out of the 4 will hit. Sometimes maybe 2 will hit but not every time. But that is all that is needed. Now, If we was to lower the damage that a AIM-90 Missile can do. This would mean that you would have to wait and make sure you get a good lock before firing. Snap-shooting/spaming all 4 AIM-90 Missiles will still work. But it would not be a %100 kill every time. This would then have the knock on effect of making Air to Air engagements last a bit longer and again as I have said. Give time for a pilot to run home to some (hopefully) manned AA-Stinger/AAv for help.

I Would like to point out that I am not talking about ground based AA-Stingers or AAV's missiles. I like them just as they are. What I am looking for is a way to make Air to Air engagements last a bit longer and not just be a case of "Who sees who 1st". Which is a bit to much down to luck only. And I must point out also that the AIM-120s (Which are the long range ones) are not so good for snap-shooting with and so I don't think need to be looked at.

I second this suggestion whole heartedly.

Pirate
2010-04-02, 22:54
If the damage from those missiles is lessened, I wouldn't mind seeing them incapacitate other jets a lot more rather than outright blo them up. Whether people manage to land their barely working wreck or if they parachute out, both make for great stories.

AaronFraher
2010-04-02, 22:57
FYI, its an AIM-9M. No such thing as an AIM-90. ;)

Dev1200
2010-04-02, 23:26
Finding an enemy jet is, 80% of the time, luck. The 20% is sometimes a squad will call out an enemy jet on mumble/ts channel. You go there, and hopefully tail him. Spamming all your missiles kills a jet, if you aim correctly.


We should make it so you need a positive tone to fire your missiles so they're not used as air-ground missiles or area-of-effect flak guns =\

Rudd
2010-04-02, 23:29
We should make it so you need a positive tone to fire your missiles so they're not used as air-ground missiles or area-of-effect flak guns =\

imo for all lock on munitions there should be a 1.5s hold down click time before it fires to compensate for the somewhat random nature of missles that are blind fired.

Hitman.2.5
2010-04-03, 00:04
M163 PIVADS anyone?

Hunt3r
2010-04-03, 02:25
How about we give the jets radar, and make the missiles all automatically go "dumb" if fired without lock, and additionally, flares should block the heat target of the jet. Also, WVR combat should mean that even if someone gets on your tail, you should still be able to maneuver so that you can still win.

Hitman.2.5
2010-04-04, 01:03
or at least get away, but getting em is better XD

Oddsodz
2010-04-05, 09:06
You know what? I had a brain fart last night. and it dawned on me that one of the reasons the "Snap-shot" is so good maybe due to the fact the the flairs "Drop" out the back and not "Fire" out the back. If they was to "fire" out the back. Then maybe they would work better. As the spread should lead the missile away. Ideas anyone?

Kim Jong ill
2010-04-06, 02:05
Standard procedure for deploying countermeasures is usually to pop flares and/or chaff and then perform a major evasive manoeuvre, you're not supposed to just pop them and then think everything will be fine and dandy...

Oddsodz
2010-04-06, 02:48
Standard procedure for deploying countermeasures is usually to pop flares and/or chaff and then perform a major evasive manoeuvre, you're not supposed to just pop them and then think everything will be fine and dandy...


Oh dear. Looks like somebody did not read all the posts in this thread.

Kim Jong ill
2010-04-06, 02:57
Oh dear looks like some noob pilot is looking for a way out of a situation he shouldn't be in, in real life flares don't go shooting out. You deploy them then manoeuvre, if someone has got the jump on you and you don't have time to flare AND manoeuvre then too bad. You're lucky enough to even get a warning that you're being locked onto, in RL you don't know an IR missile is targeting you until either you see it or your aircraft has equipment to detect it's launch.

Fact is at close ranges flares are even less effective then they are in game, especically against advance AAMs like the AIM-9X and the R-73. There are always going to be problems with air combat in PR because that combat theatres are simple too small. In the case of PR it's real so learn to deal with it, if it ain't fun then don't play the game.

Edit - One more thing; if you were being engaged at ranges this close in RL your optimum reaction wouldn't be to pop flares, it would be to eject before you die in a fireball of death.

Colonelcool125
2010-04-06, 03:11
Oh dear looks like some noob pilot is looking for a way out of a situation he shouldn't be in

HA!

No.

Calling Oddsodz a noob pilot is akin to calling Einstein retarded.

And Kim, you didn't read the OP close enough, or you'd see that Oddz was asking for the AIM-9s to be tweaked in order to increase the fun of dogfighting, not because it's particularly realistic.

Hunt3r
2010-04-06, 03:35
Oh dear looks like some noob pilot is looking for a way out of a situation he shouldn't be in, in real life flares don't go shooting out. You deploy them then manoeuvre, if someone has got the jump on you and you don't have time to flare AND manoeuvre then too bad. You're lucky enough to even get a warning that you're being locked onto, in RL you don't know an IR missile is targeting you until either you see it or your aircraft has equipment to detect it's launch.

Fact is at close ranges flares are even less effective then they are in game, especically against advance AAMs like the AIM-9X and the R-73. There are always going to be problems with air combat in PR because that combat theatres are simple too small. In the case of PR it's real so learn to deal with it, if it ain't fun then don't play the game.

Edit - One more thing; if you were being engaged at ranges this close in RL your optimum reaction wouldn't be to pop flares, it would be to eject before you die in a fireball of death.

Oh dear god someone hasn't heard of RWR before.

Kim Jong ill
2010-04-06, 03:40
Are you kidding me? A RWR is a radar warning receiver, I guess they didn't teach you in wannabe pilot school that IR missiles don't need radar to launch. Oh and by the way, modern aircraft have a TWS which is more comprehensive then a RWR but of course you know this?

A Su-35 can sneak up to you using EOTS at ranges up to 40kms and then fire an IR guided R-27 into your fat arse without so much as a warning unless you have a missile launch detection system.

Hunt3r
2010-04-06, 03:54
Then you get Bitchin' Betty screaming at you, as you pop flares, and kinematically evade it....

Kim Jong ill
2010-04-06, 04:18
Oh dear looks like some noob pilot is looking for a way out of a situation he shouldn't be in, in real life flares don't go shooting out. You deploy them then manoeuvre, if someone has got the jump on you and you don't have time to flare AND manoeuvre then too bad. You're lucky enough to even get a warning that you're being locked onto, in RL you don't know an IR missile is targeting you until either you see it or your aircraft has equipment to detect it's launch.

Fact is at close ranges flares are even less effective then they are in game, especically against advance AAMs like the AIM-9X and the R-73. There are always going to be problems with air combat in PR because that combat theatres are simple too small. In the case of PR it's real so learn to deal with it, if it ain't fun then don't play the game.

Edit - One more thing; if you were being engaged at ranges this close in RL your optimum reaction wouldn't be to pop flares, it would be to eject before you die in a fireball of death.

It seems that you were too busy being a smart arse that you didn't read my post in it's entirety. In ranges found in PR even with all the technology in the world you would at best have time to eject before you aircraft explodes in a fiery ball.

Colonelcool125
2010-04-06, 05:59
It seems that you were too busy being a smart arse that you didn't read my post in it's entirety. In ranges found in PR even with all the technology in the world you would at best have time to eject before you aircraft explodes in a fiery ball.

Everything in PR is not meant to be taken literally.

Armies do not engage each other from staging areas 4km away from each other.

Planes are not restricted to 16 km^2 to fly in.

If you want PR to take planes realistically, they shouldn't be in the air in the first place. If it's not to be taken literally, why not make it more fun and complex than "enemy plane! Spam fire button and pray!"?

Hunt3r
2010-04-06, 06:02
It seems that you were too busy being a smart arse that you didn't read my post in it's entirety. In ranges found in PR even with all the technology in the world you would at best have time to eject before you aircraft explodes in a fiery ball.

Yes, but we scale the distances and stuff down so that suddenly you can save your sorry arse with some flares and hard turns.

IMO, having PRSP's bot planes being the basis for the flight model for the normal jets would be great for dogfights, especially with unlimited flares. AAVs would have a tough time though...

Anyhow, if you really wanted semi-realistic aerial combat (Well, at least closer then PR's aerial combat.), then just find out exactly what the very best the BF2 engine can offer in dogfights.

CA mod.

Kim Jong ill
2010-04-06, 06:58
Everything in PR is not meant to be taken literally.

Armies do not engage each other from staging areas 4km away from each other.

Planes are not restricted to 16 km^2 to fly in.

If you want PR to take planes realistically, they shouldn't be in the air in the first place. If it's not to be taken literally, why not make it more fun and complex than "enemy plane! Spam fire button and pray!"?

I've already addressed your first point in prior posts, in regard to your second post I'd honestly rather not have jets in PR at all TBH. I'd must rather an AI system controlled by officer requests to provide interdiction, CAS and CAP then the current system in game but no doubt that would be beyond the BF2 engine.

Saobh
2010-04-06, 09:13
Guys, take 2 steps back and refocus your conversation the elements of this thread then getting into a heated & personal "what he said she said" fest.

Drunkenup
2010-04-06, 21:47
Look, the short range missiles in PR are IR guided, and in most aircraft requiring a signature lock by maneuvering for a good tone and lock. The previous suggestion to allow AIM-9s (and I'm assuming their R-73 counterpart) to allow kill in two shots, NOW, I would support, this, only if the damage varies between the aircraft it is shot at, leaving very high damage on dedicated fighters, F-16, Eurofighter, and MiG-29, allowing seconds and very high bleed speed to blow up. And higher with Attack aircraft (A-10, SU-25, Tornado, SU-30MKK), 3/4s damage, with a relatively high bleed speed, allowing the aircraft to escape, but not survive to complete another sortie, requiring a immediate landing. Give or take the damage given to Tornado GR4 and the Flanker.

My other idea to enhance air to air combat is to make IR seeking missiles to be locked on by targeting the enemy aircraft in the middle crosshairs (I mean, within that small less than a centimeter box) for a few seconds to allow lock, and reduce missile spam that people do in hopes the splash damage will finish the aircraft by having a firerate cap on the missiles. Make missiles less agile as well, allowing them to be outmaneuvered, and a lower velocity. Now, the Radar guided missiles, the R-77 and AIM-120 AMRAAM are a different story, basically what we have now, but seek far longer. Have those fly at a lower velocity, achieve far more damage, 100% if hit, then killed (as the R-77 and AMRAAM have far larger warheads than their short range IR seeking brothers). Less Maneuverable, same firerate cap. This may seem ridiculous, but I'd like to see the integration of Chaffs to be used against those radar seeking missiles, firing off a different button toggle.

Hunt3r
2010-04-06, 23:01
This may seem ridiculous, but I'd like to see the integration of Chaffs to be used against those radar seeking missiles, firing off a different button toggle.

Would be a great idea, but there can only be two types of "heat targets" in PR. Currently there's one from GLTDs and others, the other is embedded on aircraft. The BF2 engine only allows two. If there wasn't a cap on it, then it would be interesting to see how SEAD would work.

Chaff would still just be a retextured flare and achieve the exact same effect, in the BF2 engine.

Anyhow, it's going to be tough revising aerial combat to be more realistic and fun.

Drunkenup
2010-04-06, 23:09
Would be a great idea, but there can only be two types of "heat targets" in PR. Currently there's one from GLTDs and others, the other is embedded on aircraft. The BF2 engine only allows two. If there wasn't a cap on it, then it would be interesting to see how SEAD would work.

Chaff would still just be a retextured flare and achieve the exact same effect, in the BF2 engine.

Anyhow, it's going to be tough revising aerial combat to be more realistic and fun.

Wait, so a third seek isn't possible? Damn. I was planning to post a proof of concept within the next month or so showcasing realistic physics. Doesn't necessary have to be a heat target?

Hunt3r
2010-04-06, 23:16
Wait, so a third seek isn't possible? Damn. I was planning to post a proof of concept within the next month or so showcasing realistic physics. Doesn't necessary have to be a heat target?

Heat targets are what allows aircraft to be targeted in this game. The way to sort of simulate this is to have specific ranges or times that the missiles will continue to fly until it either disappears or explodes, and also different lock ranges. Additionally, giving it a radar HUD that will show aircraft heat targets only, that would lock and fire using the AMRAAAMs.

It doesn't need a heat target, but this means you have to shoot it down with guns.

Drunkenup
2010-04-08, 20:08
Heat targets are what allows aircraft to be targeted in this game. The way to sort of simulate this is to have specific ranges or times that the missiles will continue to fly until it either disappears or explodes, and also different lock ranges. Additionally, giving it a radar HUD that will show aircraft heat targets only, that would lock and fire using the AMRAAAMs.

It doesn't need a heat target, but this means you have to shoot it down with guns.

I think if we recoded everything so that we could have a certain weapon seek a certain aircraft with a certain object deviating it, then I think it might work. Rather than a heat object, the thing attached to the vehicle would be something that indicates that its "there" and at a certain range. I'll see if I can get somebody to help me. Plan was to originally integrate a separate tone or HUD contact for the seeking of radar intercepting missiles like the AMRAAM, as well as a separate chaff button. I'll see if its possible, I'll have to ask someone.

DeltaFart
2010-04-08, 20:28
I always thought the reason IR guided was so effective now was because teh guidance system also picks up the heat of friction from the air and fuselage(at least I heard this somewhere awhile ago)

Alex6714
2010-04-08, 21:35
I think if we recoded everything so that we could have a certain weapon seek a certain aircraft with a certain object deviating it, then I think it might work. Rather than a heat object, the thing attached to the vehicle would be something that indicates that its "there" and at a certain range. I'll see if I can get somebody to help me. Plan was to originally integrate a separate tone or HUD contact for the seeking of radar intercepting missiles like the AMRAAM, as well as a separate chaff button. I'll see if its possible, I'll have to ask someone.

System seems to be highly hardcoded.. I very much doubt its possible, unless mosquill comes along and divides it by 0.:smile:

Oddsodz
2010-04-08, 22:36
Lets not over complicate things here. As some of you may know. The DEV team don't have anybody working on Jets right now. So for the sake of making it a relative easy job to fix/change. May I suggest that we lower the destructive force of the AIM-9 (ok I got the name right I think) so that it takes 2 Missiles to kill a jet. And not just 1.

What I am trying to achieve is a scenario where luck is not the key factor (IE: Who sees who 1st) on how an enemy jet is killed. I Wish to see skill in flying be the key factor.


I Also would not be opposed to different jet caricaturists like what vBF2 patch 1.41 had with the F-35B and the J-10. The J-10 could out turn the F-35B. But the F-35B could out run the J-10 in a straight line at 820 vBF2 hight.

As seen in this video. This Video was made when vBF2 was at patch 1.42. Not 1.50

jRHlvFgU-4k

Drunkenup
2010-04-08, 23:03
Lets not over complicate things here. As some of you may know. The DEV team don't have anybody working on Jets right now. So for the sake of making it a relative easy job to fix/change. May I suggest that we lower the destructive force of the AIM-9 (ok I got the name right I think) so that it takes 2 Missiles to kill a jet. And not just 1.

What I am trying to achieve is a scenario where luck is not the key factor (IE: Who sees who 1st) on how an enemy jet is killed. I Wish to see skill in flying be the key factor.


I Also would not be opposed to different jet caricaturists like what vBF2 patch 1.41 had with the F-35B and the J-10. The J-10 could out turn the F-35B. But the F-35B could out run the J-10 in a straight line at 820 vBF2 hight.

As seen in this video. this Video was when vBF2 was at patch 1.42. Not 1.50

jRHlvFgU-4k

IMO, only as low for the aircraft struck to give a short time to get back to base/eject. The AIM-9 and the R-27 (AA-11) would be lowered as much to attack aircraft like the Tornado, Warthog, Flanker, and Frogfoot (more or less for the Tornado and Flanker) to let the aircraft return to base with 80% health lost, with a relatively slow bleed allowing the aircraft to live for a good few minutes. The Short AAMs in PR have a relatively light warhead, so I wouldn't expect a explosion as big as a AMRAAM.

DeltaFart
2010-04-09, 01:25
I thought luck was indeed part of dogfighting?

Hunt3r
2010-04-09, 01:29
But so is exploiting your advantages in turn rate and energy?

Oddsodz
2010-04-09, 05:36
I thought luck was indeed part of dogfighting?

It is (I think). But it should not be the "KEY" factor. I Am trying to get a system that lets the dogfight or Chase last a bit longer so that some form of team work can be archived by working with ground based anti aircraft. This is why I wish to see the destructive be lower. It gives you just a bit more time in the sky to get away. Right now. Due to snap-shots. You can't get away. If you do. You are very Very VERY lucky. I Can count on one hand how many enemy jets have escaped from me in the last 12 months once I have seen them in front or to the side of me. I Do need more fingers to count how many times I have escaped from a enemy jet. But not that many. Again. This is down to the Snap-shot. There is no time to do anything. For most players its "Fly>Hear locked tone for .0.5 seconds>Boom dead". In my case is "fly>See jet on my tail>flair/turn>now hear locked tone>Boom Dead".

It's to easy

If we had more time. We have the chance to get some team work with the ground based AA (if you can get somebody willing enough to sit in it). It's would promote more teamwork I think. And give some extra fun in the air.

mati140
2010-05-30, 11:12
3 things:
- make air-to-air rockets reloading after each shot to force 3+ s delay between shots and avoid missile-spaming - in real no one is launching all missiles in 1 second;
- missiles should take about 75% damage instead of 100%, to give pilot chance for emergency landing or at least ejecting;
- make realistic RWR instead of deleting it - there should be warning tone everytime when s1 is behind and trying to lock and - if possible - RWR screen on HUD (until s1 makes in-cockpit RWR screen useable) under 1st slot that shows direction to enemy trying to lock-on us.

EDIT: and in my opinion there should be second fighter everytime for wingman role - you can LOL me but in dogfight it is crucial to have at least one wingman to cover back when leader is attacking. Same thing for attack planes (Thunderbolt & Frogfoot) and strike planes (Tornado & Flanker) - they need second, same class plane for cover. It's impossible to make even a bit realism and teamwork for jets on solo fights. And if you think it will make too much bombing from the sky - delete bombs from fighters. They will do their proper job than - covering strike planes.

Drunkenup
2010-05-30, 15:22
I'm actually in the middle of making a implementable system to help dogfights. It consists of-
-Eliminating the High off Boresight locking we have, i.e. locking on a missile when the aircraft is only a small bit in view
-Decreasing Missile agility, velocity, and explosion radius
-Making aircraft true to their ability, i.e. F-16 having very low drag, nearly no energy bleed (speed loss), Su-30MKK having higher agility with its TVC, MiG-29 having a considerable higher cruise speed, F/A-18 having a higher agility effect at lower speeds and lower alt.
-Higher lock on times for BVR missiles
-IR Missiles requiring more difficult system to lock on
-Decreasing missile count, more reliant on guns
-Higher Flare count (Dependant on real life counterpart, F-16 able to carry 90 Flares)
-Other things I'll announce.

Basically I'm making tactics play a role in this, not blind luck.

Gammlgandalf13
2010-06-05, 23:10
I thought luck was indeed part of dogfighting?

Not really, I had a really long dogfight with another pilot on kashan, the F16 was behind me... I took all 6 missles even 2 without having flares by rolling until I could twarth him, and then he really took all MY 6 bloody missles!!! Most thrilling dogfight I ever had, trust me.

I got to say they are not overpowered, if you got 2 good pilots in the air dogfights can last for about 5 Minutes.

In our Worldcup Training match between Great Britain and Germany, our Jet pilots had 2 long and thrilling dogfights.

I even escaped from F16 and MiG several times, just pop loads of flares (<0,5 sec after you get locked) and the missles won't hit you, trust me. If you aren't fully there when piloting an aircraft in PR you're history!

But honestly, there could be more flares, each time I engage a target which is covered by AA i need to reload flares
because I spread my flares all over the goddamn sky to escape the AA lock.
What about 60 flares, or at least 45. I'd love this :>

greets [NEW] Gammlgandalf13

Oddsodz
2010-06-06, 01:13
I got to say they are not overpowered, if you got 2 good pilots in the air dogfights can last for about 5 Minutes.

But honestly, there could be more flares, each time I engage a target which is covered by AA i need to reload flares
because I spread my flares all over the goddamn sky to escape the AA lock.
What about 60 flares, or at least 45. I'd love this :>

greets [NEW] Gammlgandalf13


You have to be joking right? A 5 Minute dogfight? What would I pay for that????

When I fly. If I get behind a OP4 jet. It is dead within 5 to 10 seconds. The same can be said for most of the PR pilots that know what they are doing. Air to Air combat is a very short in PR. Again. I Know that in real life it is very short also. But this is a game. We don't need the missiles to be that good.

Tim270
2010-06-06, 01:45
You have to be joking right? A 5 Minute dogfight? What would I pay for that????

When I fly. If I get behind a OP4 jet. It is dead within 5 to 10 seconds. The same can be said for most of the PR pilots that know what they are doing. Air to Air combat is a very short in PR. Again. I Know that in real life it is very short also. But this is a game. We don't need the missiles to be that good.

Agreed, as soon as that lock tone goes I spam everything I have and its an easy kill.

I would have to agree that dogfighting (gameplay) would be much more interesting than the current (somewhat) realistic current balance.

XxxGrANdmA
2010-06-06, 01:53
I'd say give the jets 90 flares and when you pop flares, it would shoot out 4 flares, 2 to the left and 2 to the right. This would hopefully make the aa missile go for the flares instead. Maybe also tweak the missles to make them abit less aggressive.

Elektro
2010-06-09, 22:50
I'd say give the jets 90 flares and when you pop flares, it would shoot out 4 flares, 2 to the left and 2 to the right. This would hopefully make the aa missile go for the flares instead. Maybe also tweak the missles to make them abit less aggressive.

Why on earth would flares help? When someone spots you on their hud they immidiatly snap shoot from a rediculous possition and by the time you manage to flare the missile is just a few feet from impact.

Hotrod525
2010-06-09, 23:19
AIM90 is RADAR HOMING, Flare wont have any effect on it... well i think so lol.

Teek
2010-06-09, 23:32
AIM90 is RADAR HOMING, Flare wont have any effect on it... well i think so lol.

Flares are also often used in conjucion with Chaff, little radar reflecting metal spagetti

AaronFraher
2010-06-09, 23:35
AIM90 is RADAR HOMING, Flare wont have any effect on it... well i think so lol.

Its an AIM-9M, and its IR guided.

Hotrod525
2010-06-10, 00:17
oh, i tought it was an AIM-90, and i mistake it for the AIM-120 :D LOL!

chrisweb89
2010-06-10, 01:11
And the way it had to be done for PR is that all AA misles lock onto the same thing, no difference between radar and IR. So the flares we pop are kind of a combination of both.