imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX
Welcome to a fourth in what I hope will be a series of connected posts proposing improvements and changes to what bf2 could be.  I call it BF2 squared, or just BF4.  Feel free to repost anywhere you like, just please give me and BF2S some credit.  I hope you are not all getting bored yet.

This is the third post in what I hope to be a series.  I am talking about ideas from the first two posts in here as well, so I hope it does not confuse you.  You can find the other posts here:
First post: (kits) http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=34806
Second post: (unlocks) http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=34809
Third post: (maps) http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=35011

And this is it.  This is the post that I am betting will draw the most fire and criticism.  I have thought long and hard about this, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.  I am going to mostly concentrate on US equipment, since I know it best, but will stray into MEC for certain systems.  If you have ideas on comparable equipment for the EU and the PLA, post it on here; I would be glad to gather more info.

Also, I barely play any SF, and do not have AF or EF.  I do not know the details on the configuration of the current A-10, but I will show here what I think it should be for game balance.  Likewise on the Apache and the Hind from SF. 

First of all, gather all of the equipment from all of the current BF2s.  It should all be available in the same game.  Expansions should have additional maps, but everything should play from the same game instead of having several different programs.  Now, less talky-talk, more vehicles!

First, jets.  As currently, the primary jet should be the Multi-Purpose Fighter (MPF).  Same as it is in this game, 6 air-to-air missiles and 2 bombs; no reloads.  The F-35B and F/A 18 are great examples/  Likewise, the Fighter/Bomber (F/B), like the F-15E, remains the same, except loses one set of reloads from the LGMs.

Now, to introduce the 2 new classes of jets.  The first is the Close Air Support jet, or CAS jet.  The greatest example for this is, of course, the A-10.  I like some things I have seen from the A-10 vids, but here is my idea.  5 bombs, no reloads, as it is now.  The alternate weapon would be 4 LGMs,  just like from the F-15, but no reloads.  The pilot does not dump into a different view.  Instead, the box and crosshair appear on his HUD.  This means the plane still has to point to the target; cannot shoot odd angles like the F/B can.  The thing that allows the A-10 to get away from this?  The plane is SLOW.  Speed is lucky to hit 600 kph. That allows the missile to shoot out and gives the pilot a chance to pull out.  Remember, 4 LGMs, no reloads.

Notice something missing?  That is right, no air-to-air missiles.  The A-10 will be sorely lacking in a dogfight, using only his cannon.  That is where teamwork comes in.

The second new jet can be considered the diametric opposite of the A-10.  It is the Air Superiority fighter.  I am using the F-22 As my US demo.  weapons?  The always present cannon, of course.  Primaries are 6 air-to-air missiles, just like the other fighers use, but with 2 reloads.  This is a fighter that stays up and chews on other fighters the way the F/B chews on tanks.  The secondary weapon are also air-to-air missiles, but slightly different.  They are AMRAAMs (advanced medium range air to air missile).  They can lock on and shoot further (past visual distance, even), but an a narrower cone in front of the plane.  They are much less likely to be misdirected by flares, but are also less manueverable, so they can be outflown.  the F-22 only has 4 of these missiles, with no reloads on board.   Also notice, no bombs.  You wanna kill ground troops, good luck with your cannon. 

That covers Jets.  I will continue with Helicopters on the next post down.
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX
Okay, that first post was getting too long, and helicopters should be its own post alltogether.  Ia m not going to post all that initial crud I have been; still in the same topic.  All right, now to Helicotpers.

First thing is to return the Blackhawk to its former glory.  Give it back its guns.  The way it stands now, the current blackhawk would be mincemeat in BF4, what with all the AA men running around; give it its guns back.  But you say that makes it so much stronger than the Hip?  I have a solution for that too.

For the Hip, it is one simple fix.  Slide away from realism for just one second and let playability take charge.  2 changes.  The first is to make its 2 door guns more accurate.  They should be just as accurate as the Vodniks gun.  This will increase its effectiveness.  The other little item is to add a light MG post to the f6 position, facing straight back.  That gives it guns on 3 sides, covering an area that even the fabled blackhawk cannot cover.  So, it may still be slow and turn like a dead whale, but it can defend itself better.

Okay, that does not go all the way to balancing out the helicopters, but I have one more trick up my sleeve in that direction, and that is the HIND/D.  Pulled from SF and corrected.  I was very dissapointed when I saw the HIND in SF.  Why?  Because in addition to being an attack helicopter, it was also a troop transport.  So, I am bringing back the HIND/D as a full attack helicopter, and giving it 4 spaces in back to carry troops; 2 posts with door guns, even.  Well, it still moves like a caudalplegic whale (paralyzed tail), but it is a much tougher nut to crack, and it is the only helicopter that can do the usual transprt chopper tricks.  And if you get cocky in a Cobra and try to take it, remember those door gunners, and that the HIND might also be carrying AA missilemen!

Well, just as I bring the HIND back from the dead, I am going to mess up the Ah-64, Z-10, and Mi-28 on you all.  We now have jets on both sides that have cannon and TV missiles.... if I am going to justify the new Attack helicopters, they need something new.

These three (and the one from EU, whatever it is) will be roughly comparable.  I am calling them Modern Attack helicopters (AHm).  They have cannon like the Mi-28, and instead of TV missiles, they have LGMs.  The same blast as the TV missiles (smaller than the LGMs from the jets), but still laser guided.  The advantage is that they can do serious damage to any armor they can lock on, and they can fire on targets painted by scouts.  The bad news is range.  The missiles may fly just as far, but the system cannot see targets that far out.  and since the gunner's view stays with the helicopter, the TV missile wins out on a distance shot.  I think that should equal them out, just about. 

If you have other, better, ideas, or want to tweak mine, feel free!

And now, the next post is about Armor.
l41e
Member
+677|7090

The guns on the Mi-17 already are as accurate as the ones on the Vodnik...
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX
And now, armor.

I don't really have much issue with the current armor situation.  However, I want to add a new armor class; light armor.
The examples I have for this is the AAV (LVT-7) from the USMC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_Assault_Vehicle , and the PT-76 for the MEC http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/de … rmor_id=19 and http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/pt-76.htm

These vehicles are armored (barely), about as much as AA guns.  They are also NOT up to fighting tanks or LAVs.  They have no anti-armor capability.  What they are is battle taxis.  They can carry 6 personnel, and they are faster in water than an LAV, although still slower than the boats.

They also have anti-infantry weapons.  The AAV has a Mk-19.  For those that missed it in the maps post, the Mark 19 Mod 4 40mm machine gun.   Also known as a fully automatic grenade launcher.  Not with an unlimited ammo like the current MGs, but fires a string of 12 grenades, then an 8 second reload.  The vehicle version would have 7 reloads.  That would make it a bit more effective, and worth learning to use effectively.   The warhead would be the same as an M203 grenade.  The AAV also has a coax machine gun, just like on the tank.

The PT-76, on the other hand, has a 76mm gun and a MG.  The 76mm gun is not effective against armor, really, but would be great for busting infantry.  Nice damage and burst, and reloads in about 1.5 seconds.  and the MG for other stuff.   The PT-76 would carry 50 rounds.

Granted, these two post a real danger for spawn camping, but remember they are realatively fragile, and any LAV or tank would eat them alive.  Not to mention they light up for the planes.  I am jsut hoping they are not TOO weak. 

My basic idea for this was to have the carrier in Wake Island to have two AAVs under the ship, in that cavity they never seem to put boats in.

I am especially interested in posts on this idea!

And now, on to AA vehicles.
{edited to correct a bad place to have an extra 's'}

Last edited by imortal (2006-07-15 22:16:37)

2tuff
Positive Karma Here!
+357|7218
Wow, good posting....you put alotta work into that.

Tuff
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX
Finally, the last of my vehicle posts.  Just a few ideas for AA vehicles.

The main idea is that the vehicles do not have to be nearly identical, just be balanced.  I like the chinese AA system, but it seems that the guns are weaker than even 4 .50 cals would be.

The MEC AA vehicle has two cannon.  Those two cannon should have bursting Ammo, and thier ROF should be adjusted until both cannon shoot about half again as fast as the 25mm from the LAV.

The Linebacker is just about right, but does not fit in with the rest of the Marine equipment too well.  I would like to add the Avenger to the mix.  A 1 seater only, the avenger would have a turret with a .50 cal (unlimited ammo) and 4 shots for the stingers, with the usual 2 reloads.)  The Avenger would have less armor than the rest of the systems, barely more than a normal HMMWv, if any.  However, the Avenger is faster and able to get places the other AA systems cannot reach.  I feel that is a fair trade off.  Any comments would be welcome.

Someone posted a picture in here of waht appeared to be an LAV with a mini gun and a stinger box.  I think that would be great for the EU.  a blackhawk minigun (with LIMITED ammo), and the usual missiles on a LAV body.

There!  I will be posting soon about Commanders Assets.  I hope you all keep going right along with me.  Commanders Assets should be the last of this series, and I will be able to get back to actually playing this game.
Longbow
Member
+163|7088|Odessa, Ukraine
I disagree with  "and instead of TV missiles, they have LGMs" . This will completely ruin the role of good gunner in helo vs helo combat . Live TV guided missile as it is , it is one of the greatest features in BF2 .

edit : I flyed with such LGM's in chopper in USI mod . It was really hard and Mi24 has NO chances against apache . btw , PBASydney ( if you would read this ) -  why you convert TGM's to LGM's in your mod ? I didn't understood.

First of all , advantage of TV guided missile is 1 hit = 1 kill against chopers .
Second , you may just shoot and retreat , while with LGM's you must wait untill it will lock on .
Third - TV guided missile balances chopers , such as Mi24 & apache , AH-1Z & Mi28 . They have different size and manuerobless , but they instantly explode from one hit with  TV guided missile .

Last edited by Longbow (2006-07-15 17:33:28)

imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

Longbow wrote:

I disagree with  "and instead of TV missiles, they have LGMs" . This will completely ruin the role of good gunner in helo vs helo combat . Live TV guided as it is , it is one of the greatest features in BF2 .
I am not really objectionable to that.  I mainly wanted different abilities for different helicopters, and give another platform for scouts to get missiles.  But I am not in love with the LGM on choppers myself.
Jbrar
rawr
+86|6983|Winterpeg, Canada
TV missiles also require a great deal of practice and skill to master if solo flying, even a bit if gunning
Longbow
Member
+163|7088|Odessa, Ukraine

imortal wrote:

Longbow wrote:

I disagree with  "and instead of TV missiles, they have LGMs" . This will completely ruin the role of good gunner in helo vs helo combat . Live TV guided as it is , it is one of the greatest features in BF2 .
I am not really objectionable to that.  I mainly wanted different abilities for different helicopters, and give another platform for scouts to get missiles.  But I am not in love with the LGM on choppers myself.
You may add "switch option" , same as between missiles and bombs in Jets . So choper will still carry 8 missiles , but gunner may choose what kind of fireing sistem to use .
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

Longbow wrote:

imortal wrote:

Longbow wrote:

I disagree with  "and instead of TV missiles, they have LGMs" . This will completely ruin the role of good gunner in helo vs helo combat . Live TV guided as it is , it is one of the greatest features in BF2 .
I am not really objectionable to that.  I mainly wanted different abilities for different helicopters, and give another platform for scouts to get missiles.  But I am not in love with the LGM on choppers myself.
You may add "switch option" , same as between missiles and bombs in Jets . So choper will still carry 8 missiles , but gunner may choose what kind of fireing sistem to use .
The switch idea... seems too complex.  I would prefer one or the other.  Maybe the choppers are alright with the TV missiles, but out of all of that noone had anything to say about my idea for the HIND?  OR have I missed the boat by some months?
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX
Almost forgot one last vehicle.  The Artillery piece. No longer is the artillery dependant on the commander.  They artillery vehicle will be a vehicle that has a simple turret with nothing but a .50 cal.  but when you right click, the driver sees a map.  outside, everyone else sees the tube come out of travel lock and point skyward.  The driver has three shots before his reload.  he looks at the map.  There is a limited, though considerable range for the cannon, so his effective area is lit while out of range areas are dark.  The driver plants his target icons where he wants his shells to land.  The good news is that the artillery is pretty accurate, and the driver can zoon in close on the map to see his area.  The bad news is that on his firing map, the driver cannot see any enemy, even if they are highlighted.  no, he cannot see any friendly, either.  It is like looking at a blank map.  He can. however, see the artillery requests sent in by the commander and platoon leaders.  He can also see where the other artillery drivers are placing their rounds, as well as see the target area the commander chooses for his cruise missiles.  Yes, the driver gets full credit for kills, but also gets all the TKs  noone said it was easy.

On maps with support ships, the carrier group has no on land spawn points.  In this case, each support ship has 2 manable artillery turrets. the driver has a machinegun he can use to fight off boarders in between fire missions.   Unfortunately, the commander is in charge of moving the support ships around.  Hoever, remember there is also an Essex-style AA battery on the support ship if you need to that instead of the artillery.

With 64 people on a team, someone has to be support players.
Havok
Nymphomaniac Treatment Specialist
+302|7117|Florida, United States

imortal wrote:

I would like to add the Avenger to the mix.  A 1 seater only, the avenger would have a turret with a .50 cal (unlimited ammo) and 4 shots for the stingers, with the usual 2 reloads.)
I say make it a 2 seater (one driver and one gunner) to balance a little so its not quite as good as the other stronger AA vehicles.  It would also encourage teamwork....somewhat.
HCSkorpio
Hind Secks
+8|6978|California
Nice ideas

Regarding mobile AA vehicles.  mobile AA vehicles should have their own UAV for aircraft only.  They have a radar dome.

Regarding accuracy on the other transport helicopers.
I dont believe its accuracy.  Its the spash damage.

all .50 cal machine guns should have increased splash damage. 

I think the Bradley M3 (BFV) (not linebacker) should be included in the game.
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

HCSkorpio wrote:

Nice ideas

Regarding mobile AA vehicles.  mobile AA vehicles should have their own UAV for aircraft only.  They have a radar dome.

Regarding accuracy on the other transport helicopers.
I dont believe its accuracy.  Its the spash damage.

all .50 cal machine guns should have increased splash damage. 

I think the Bradley M3 (BFV) (not linebacker) should be included in the game.
Actually.... that radome idea is pretty good.  well, the linebacker and avenger systems don't have one, but the chinese and the MEC surely do!

AS for the bradley.  I thought about it, but the LAV 25 forms the same basic function, and keeps it more marine oriented.  Also, then there is the rush to try to balance.  Maybe make it an APC, tracked, that can't float?  maybe a bit tougher than the LAV 25.  MEC would have the BMP-3, and get someone else to figure out the PLA and EU.  AS for the .50, I don't have a problem with them. Thanks for the ideas, though!
HCSkorpio
Hind Secks
+8|6978|California
The linebacker probably has its advanced electronics internally probably so it doesnt get damaged.

Yeah the LAV-25 does,  but I think it would be interesting if there was a variety of vehicles, maps, and weapons to keep BF2 interesting.
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

HCSkorpio wrote:

The linebacker probably has its advanced electronics internally probably so it doesnt get damaged.

Yeah the LAV-25 does,  but I think it would be interesting if there was a variety of vehicles, maps, and weapons to keep BF2 interesting.
Well, that is one of my map ideas.  I like the idea of being able to change armies on a map.  So that if you had a Karkand 24/7 server, the games could look like this:

Game 1: Team 1, USMC  Team 2, MEC
Game 2: Team 1, MEC     Team 2, PLA
Game 3: Team 1, PLA      Team 2, EU
Game 3: Team 1, EU        Team 2, USMC
Game 4: Team 1, USMC   Team 2, PLA
Game 5: Team 1, PLA       Team 2, MEC
Game 6: Team 1, MEC       Team 2, EU
Game 7: Team 1, EU         Team 2, MEC
Game 8: Team 1, MEC      Team 2, USMC
Game 9: Team 1, USMC     Team 2, EU
Game 10: Team 1, EU        Team 2, PLA
Game 11: Team 1, PLA      Team 2, USMC

See?  doing nothing more than varying which army fights who, and who get the uncappable bases, even a 24/7 map server get 11 games before the teams repeat.

As to not letting a server choose vehicles, there are LOTS AND LOTS of servers.  A nice way to tell them apart could be by vehicles allowed.
Snorkelfarsan
Soup Boy
+32|7048|Stockholm, Sweden

imortal wrote:

The second new jet can be considered the diametric opposite of the A-10.  It is the Air Superiority fighter.  I am using the F-22 As my US demo.  weapons?  The always present cannon, of course.  Primaries are 6 air-to-air missiles, just like the other fighers use, but with 2 reloads.  This is a fighter that stays up and chews on other fighters the way the F/B chews on tanks.  The secondary weapon are also air-to-air missiles, but slightly different.  They are AMRAAMs (advanced medium range air to air missile).  They can lock on and shoot further (past visual distance, even), but an a narrower cone in front of the plane.  They are much less likely to be misdirected by flares, but are also less manueverable, so they can be outflown.  the F-22 only has 4 of these missiles, with no reloads on board.   Also notice, no bombs.  You wanna kill ground troops, good luck with your cannon.
The F-22 would be SO awesome to fly! Love the plane, i think it's the most advanced fighter in the whole world. (Not the cheapest though ) Hope we will see that plane next time around.
MorbidFetus
Member
+76|6993|Ohio
BF4 should include "X" projects that are still/were dropped from development. F-23, OICW, "Aurora" spy plane, Commanche Attack variant, Steel Rain (not the MLRS or CBU), rail gun tanks...

*Also newer items such as the Stryker, a better selection of main battle tanks (Leclerc, Leopard II, Challenger II, Merkava), Sukhois, replace fixed artillery with mobile elements like HIMARS....

Last edited by MorbidFetus (2006-07-18 12:43:47)

daffytag
cheese-it!
+104|7017
can someone please summarise this topic
travisb05
bullseye (+)
+58|7141|U.S
LGM's and not missles they are like the .50 cal guns on tanks and transports
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

daffytag wrote:

can someone please summarise this topic
Summerize?  It took me 5 posts just to get it all out there.  New vehicles. 

Jets.  4 types.  Air superiority fighter kicks butt in the air but no air-to-ground capability.  Multi purpose fighters, like F35 and J10 unchanged.  Fighter/bomber unchanged, but maybe 1 less reload for LGM.  Close Air Support, bombs and 4 LGMs, but no air-to-air capability.

Choppers.  HIND-D attack helicopter, but with 4 transport spaces, including 2 door gunners, cobra style cannon.  Apache, Z-10 to change to Mi-28 style cannon.  HIP gerts light MG in back space (f6) facing to the back.

Armor.  New armor concept.  AAV and PT-76.  Light armor, but with only anti infantry weapons.  Have to find the actual post for that. great at killing grunts, suck at killing armor.  Amphibious, faster than LAV, slower than boats.

AA vehicles.  Revamp MEC and PLA AA vehicles with more effective guns and limited radar capability against aircraft.  Add the Avenger to the US side.  EU gets LAV style with a minigun for a cannon.

Artillery vehicles.  Manned vehicles, 4 to a side, range about 1/3  of the screen.  uses map to aim.  3 shots, then 30 second reload.

Gee, I think that is about it.  If any of that intrests you, page up and try to find that post for more details!
GR34
Member
+215|6987|ALBERTA> CANADA
i would like to c an m1a2 abrams wow that tnak is so sweet
imortal
Member
+240|7107|Austin, TX

GR34 wrote:

i would like to c an m1a2 abrams wow that tnak is so sweet
Yes, but gamewise, it would not be too different from the current, which IS an M1A2, if memory serves.
HCSkorpio
Hind Secks
+8|6978|California

imortal wrote:

HCSkorpio wrote:

The linebacker probably has its advanced electronics internally probably so it doesnt get damaged.

Yeah the LAV-25 does,  but I think it would be interesting if there was a variety of vehicles, maps, and weapons to keep BF2 interesting.
Well, that is one of my map ideas.  I like the idea of being able to change armies on a map.  So that if you had a Karkand 24/7 server, the games could look like this:

Game 1: Team 1, USMC  Team 2, MEC
Game 2: Team 1, MEC     Team 2, PLA
Game 3: Team 1, PLA      Team 2, EU
Game 3: Team 1, EU        Team 2, USMC
Game 4: Team 1, USMC   Team 2, PLA
Game 5: Team 1, PLA       Team 2, MEC
Game 6: Team 1, MEC       Team 2, EU
Game 7: Team 1, EU         Team 2, MEC
Game 8: Team 1, MEC      Team 2, USMC
Game 9: Team 1, USMC     Team 2, EU
Game 10: Team 1, EU        Team 2, PLA
Game 11: Team 1, PLA      Team 2, USMC

See?  doing nothing more than varying which army fights who, and who get the uncappable bases, even a 24/7 map server get 11 games before the teams repeat.

As to not letting a server choose vehicles, there are LOTS AND LOTS of servers.  A nice way to tell them apart could be by vehicles allowed.
I think what would be a cool idea would be with maps,  like do campaigns.  Like connect the maps to one campaign.  Like if the US wins on Oman,  the next round it moveson to like Mash.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard