CAS/FAC SOPs - Page 2

Slick_nor · 06-09-2009, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lhowon

As I understand it jets can lock on to any vehicle with its engine on with certain missiles, but Laser Guided Bombs do not lock on to targets without a ground-based laser guiding them. I might be wrong though.

The problem is it is extremely easy to lock on to and hit targets with jets in ArmA (and ArmA 2) and the missiles are virtually guaranteed to hit. So a jet carrying say 4-8 anti-armour missiles can basically clear out an area of enemy vehicles in a matter of seconds.

My hope is that the very nice AA vehicles along with man-portable and static AA launchers added in ArmA 2 will mean that flying a jet won't be anywhere near as easy and risk-free as it sometimes can be in ArmA. Hopefully mission designers take this into account.

I hope mods like ACE will adress this issue, because I can imagine that tards will just go bananas with a jet that can target everything on it's own... Actually a huge turnoff for me with regard to the MP aspect of the game.

Apocal · 06-09-2009, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparks50

Sounds like a problem with the SOPs then IMO

It's not a problem, it's a tradoff. Side was overloaded. Now it's under control.

**socomseal93** · 06-09-2009, 08:29 PM

It is possible for mission makers to add custom load outs to aircraft. This means its possible for mission designers to remove all insta lock weapons from aircraft. Hopefully mission designers will start to do that in ArmA2.

**Inkompetent** · 06-12-2009, 09:39 AM

Well, hopefully in the end we get a working Ground Target and Moving Ground Target radar, and properly working Mavericks. Will be a completely other thing if the pilots will first have to make a ground lock with the missile, then lock onto a target, and then fire. Now that will get hectic, even during well prepared runs.

OAC_Rattler · 06-12-2009, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHOPPER JR

Holy-Abbreviating-Batman!

Excuse Me Sir. Seeing as How the VP Is Such a VIP, Shouldn't We Keep the PC on the QT, Because if It Leaks to the VC, You Could End Up an MIA, and Then We'd All Be Put on KP

Kaiza · 06-12-2009, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkompetent

Well, hopefully in the end we get a working Ground Target and Moving Ground Target radar, and properly working Mavericks. Will be a completely other thing if the pilots will first have to make a ground lock with the missile, then lock onto a target, and then fire. Now that will get hectic, even during well prepared runs.

True, especially with the size of the maps, this could not be simulated. However we do need some kind of balance. Perhaps a TV pciture that displays the general area of an auto locked target, then the pilot just needs to adjust it to the centre of the target and then launch. Anything that uses up time, requires coordination/skill and loosely simulates what is actually required of a pilot. At the end of the day this is an infantry sim, not an aircraft sim, so the result needs to make it more realistic for the troops primarily.

**Inkompetent** · 06-12-2009, 10:16 PM

Well, to have 'ground lock -> slew cursor on target -> lock on target -> fire' looks like a quick enough procedure to me. Just got to skip the real life delay for the missile to get a solid lock, since ArmA maps aren't really big enough for that.

Dslyecxi · 06-13-2009, 03:13 AM

A2 provides a new Harrier that's pretty fun for CAS work. The non-GBU harrier has, IIRC, 14 FFARs, six 500lb bombs, a cannon, aaaand... something else? AA missiles?

Anyhow, point is - none of them are really 'fire and forget' insta-kill type weapons. The only real way to get good effects from a single load of ordnance from that Harrier is to have a good FAC and pilot working together. It's a refreshing change from the A1 A-10, as well as the GBU-equipped craft.

Of course, if you allow rearming, 6x 500lbs delivered every few minutes can become rather unbalancing in short order.

Slick_nor · 06-22-2009, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dslyecxi

A2 provides a new Harrier that's pretty fun for CAS work. The non-GBU harrier has, IIRC, 14 FFARs, six 500lb bombs, a cannon, aaaand... something else? AA missiles?

Anyhow, point is - none of them are really 'fire and forget' insta-kill type weapons. The only real way to get good effects from a single load of ordnance from that Harrier is to have a good FAC and pilot working together. It's a refreshing change from the A1 A-10, as well as the GBU-equipped craft.

Of course, if you allow rearming, 6x 500lbs delivered every few minutes can become rather unbalancing in short order.

That sounds promising! By the way Dslyecxi, do you know anything about the direction ACE2 will take with regard to jets and CAS?

Dslyecxi · 06-22-2009, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slick_nor

That sounds promising! By the way Dslyecxi, do you know anything about the direction ACE2 will take with regard to jets and CAS?

It would be up to the project management to make those kinds of announcements, sorry. Is there something specific you're hoping to see?

**Blackdog1** · 06-22-2009, 04:31 AM

Slick nor,

I'll have a chat with a cople of the ACE guys for ya and see where the are heading on jets.

BD1

Dslyecxi · 06-22-2009, 10:13 AM

Another easy option for anyone who has questions about ACE2 is to ask them here, in the official BIS forum thread about ACE2:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73531

They're open to talking about the mod as they feel ready about any given aspect. The team is motivated about what they do, and happy to share it with anyone who asks nicely. You don't need any sort of special status to get an answer out of them - that's one of the nice things about the way the team is structured.

**Blackdog1** · 06-22-2009, 02:07 PM

Indeed, but as I have been working with a couple of guys recently on some ideas, I'll raise the subject anyway.

Slick_nor · 06-25-2009, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkompetent

Well, hopefully in the end we get a working Ground Target and Moving Ground Target radar, and properly working Mavericks. Will be a completely other thing if the pilots will first have to make a ground lock with the missile, then lock onto a target, and then fire. Now that will get hectic, even during well prepared runs.

Wouldn't this be achieved simply by removing the ident of the target? In Arma2 the target gets tracked by aircraft and automatically locks with an ident description of target name and distance. If the target is tracked as an unknown target until you the pilot assigns it as hostile or friendly, and the name of the target is removed, wouldn't that be pretty realistic?

Apocal · 06-26-2009, 04:53 AM

Agm-65e LMAV