Re: Aircraft landing in quinling and kashan!

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 11-30-2009, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by daveyjonesjr

But i get it, Im flying way too much these times, ill stop flying for a few weeks, Im sorry!

Stop with the pity party, please. No one said you're flying too much. The only problem is that you bring a problem up that only 3 other people can identify with at any given time on 2 maps in the whole maplist available in PR. Those 4 pilot positions are usually taken up by a very small subset of the overall TG population on a regular basis. This reduces the number of sympathetic ears dramatically, so playing the "Woe is me" card doesn't work. Stop it.

This is the OP:

Originally Posted by daveyjonesjr

Just a few things I noticed, On quinling when the british flag is on 181 ,
right at the end of the runway about 1000 meters, its makes it hard to land safely, is it possible but you get locked 80% of the time and unless you come in from a high angle you most likely get shot down while reducing speed, the only way to do it is come in when no aa ennemy is there (rarely) or you came in from a high angle and pray you dont hit a fence in the way..... Ive should post this on the project reality forum but i lost my account and too lazy to search it lol...

First point is about a flag that is randomly activated being too close to the landing area used by jets.

I realize that this first point is just a rant, but what is expected from the other members of TG to this point? Those that fly will sympathize, those that do not fly won't. I think the most important thing to remember is that the flag is a valid place for anything to be at any time, friendly or hostile. The fact that it is too close to the landing area used by one team is only the fault of those developing the game, not the players playing the game. Bottom line: We're sorry it's too close, but don't expect anyone to not shoot because they feel sorry for the jets.

Originally Posted by daveyjonesjr

Another thing, about 1 hour ago on kashan, i got killed while trying to land , i had lost a lot of my speed and was 5-10 sec away from landing, therefor a very easy target to shot down, even if i flares 15 times at least my speed was too low to avoid those aa, what i dont understand is why they did that? there is no flag there, and there was no one there as well, If i would have been close to south outpost i would have understood, but i was 100 meter away from the main, there is no way you can land and take off when a AAV is 1000 or 1500 meters south of us mains, only because the AAV knows exactly from where the aircraft is coming. Im sorry man buit that was pretty lame, even if it was not against the rules....

Again, the OP clearly states what happened to him was not against the rules, nor is he even asking for a rule change. He's just griping because he felt he was killed in an unsporting way. Maybe, but it wasn't a violation of the rules so at this point it is just frustration being expressed.

A lot of PR is unfair, depending on your perspective. Armor killing infantry is unfair. SAWs being a more effective counter-sniper than an actual sniper kit is unfair (did I just say that?). Having incendiary grenades kill your APC or tank is unfair. Getting killed by a prone-diver is unfair. Getting killed by players who have their graphic settings on low so they aren't affected by smoke or shadows is unfair. Having the enemy go behind your lines to flags nowhere near being in play to destroy your FOs is considered unfair by some. Should I continue?

So now we have this thread going that started as a player ranting about something that happens to a very, very small percentage of the regular PR population, and in neither case did anything occur against the rules, and suddenly it has blossomed into...this.

What was the point again?

**Startrekern** · 11-30-2009, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by d1sp0sabl3H3r0

Love to, but it's always the same names in the CAS squads before we can get a chance....]

I'm sorry, and I know you were kind of trying to calm the thread down, but I have to call bull**** on this one.

If you really wanted to fly a jet, (or use any other asset for that matter) you'd easily be able to. The CAS squads aren't started THAT quick, nor are they instantly full.

I hate it when people who are 'oh so sacrificial' to their team and 'go infantry all the time' and 'never have any fun' say things like that. It's your choice.

So, uh.. "Stop playing the pity card".

And anyway, back on topic, the real limitation is in the game engine/map size. It's a valid tactic to use AAVs in that area -- if you don't like it, you should have armor keep it clear/seal the avenues of entry for the AAV. Coordination is key.

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 11-30-2009, 02:34 PM

As one of our resident asset whores, your point is lost on me Star

**Celestial1** · 11-30-2009, 02:37 PM

The thing I have against having an AAV sitting 100m from main is that the bases would in no way be that close to the battle, IRL.

I'm all for dying in the air (which usually will happen ala my fighter wingman flying around the map doing barrel rolls or something stupid and then getting killed as I bargain with the enemy fighter up my tailpipe), but since we can't have an off-map landing strip, it can be annoying to land only to receive a barrage of AA (because going that low, and with a slow enough airspeed to land, it's extremely easy to hit even with flares).

Now, that said, I tend to not land if the area isn't clear. However, if I just got in a fight with the enemy fighter, and I've not got a flare left, I've got no choice but to either land and risk an AAV being there, or float about in the air while the enemy fighter continues looking for me, while hoping that someone will actually heed my call to go check out the runway approach. I think I'll take the risk of landing, since no one EVER goes to check out the approach, but it sucks that I have to see that as a risk rather than the fighter on my tail, or the fact that I'm landing 300m away from a war.

Overall, it's unrealistic due to the fact that those circumstances wouldn't occur in real life. But it can be avoided (especially if you have flares for landing), and I think there's no way to fairly discriminate against it, and should be left alone, no matter how upset you may get over it.

**Startrekern** · 11-30-2009, 02:38 PM

Maybe you should put on a pilot's helmet or pick up a crewman's gun more often. You're missing out.

9/10 rounds you see me there with an 'Evil Inf' squad. But this isn't an argument over who is the most self-sacrificial to their team, who is oh-so-bold and teamwork-oriented.

Right?

**Googol** · 11-30-2009, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Namebot

Perhaps we should not play maps with jets anymore to avoid the issues imposed on them by the game limits

Jets have no place in PR. In almost every aspect they are unrealistic, ranging from flight model, to operating area, to loadouts, to numbers. 4KM is simply too small, as is 64 players. Frankly, the two (tells you something about the asset) jet maps are terrible and lack any kind of proper infantry play.

Also...

Originally Posted by Startrekern

Maybe you should put on a pilot's helmet or pick up a crewman's gun more often. You're missing out.

Originally Posted by d1sp0sabl3H3r0

Love to, but it's always the same names in the CAS squads before we can get a chance....]

**Buflak** · 11-30-2009, 02:42 PM

One thing i never understood is why someone who prefers vehicles is being called an asset whore by those who prefer infantry.
Whats wrong with the fact that some people like vehicles more than infantry combat, isn't this supposed to be a combined arms game?
By this logic we should start using the term medic whore, saw whore or even shovel whore.

I just really dont see where all this hate is coming from, thats all.

**snooggums** · 11-30-2009, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by Celestial1

The thing I have against having an AAV sitting 100m from main is that the bases would in no way be that close to the battle, IRL.

I've only seen distances in the thousands of meters in this thread. If they are 100m someone spawning at base should see them easily, but I'm guessing from your 300m from battle comment you are probably exaggerating.

Now, that said, I tend to not land if the area isn't clear. However, if I just got in a fight with the enemy fighter, and I've not got a flare left, I've got no choice but to either land and risk an AAV being there, or float about in the air while the enemy fighter continues looking for me, while hoping that someone will actually heed my call to go check out the runway approach. I think I'll take the risk of landing, since no one EVER goes to check out the approach, but it sucks that I have to see that as a risk rather than the fighter on my tail, or the fact that I'm landing 300m away from a war.

Why should air assets only be killed when making bombing runs or air combat? If I have a tank that is damaged and I try to return to main I might get ambushed on the way. If a wounded soldier goes down and I need to revive I will probably have to rely on my fellow soldiers to cover for a revive, just like you require them to help with your landing. If they don't help and there is no commander to relay orders, too bad.

I also fail to see this as a common problem. How often does this really happen? Maybe you should have an extra person in the CAS squad who checks the runway to make the other members more useful due to the jet staying in the air?

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 11-30-2009, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by Buflak

...shovel whore.

If you're going to talk about Bullseye at least be decent enough to use his name.

**daveyjonesjr** · 11-30-2009, 02:46 PM

Startrekern is right, Like I said before sometimes I join the server late and there is just no CAS squad to be seen, sometimes its an unknow CAS squad wich arent regular on the TG servers and when they fail the team just simply yell at them that they are loosing assets and they are bad pilots.

Back in the days , people were fighting over air assets its true, those days are over, its just too hard for a single person to reunite a good CAS squad together with good spotters, and good pilots/gunners. I mean the people who do Armor on kashan every single time could be labelled as asset whore as well, though theres is a lot of more armor then theres aircraft....

I didnt went directly into aircraft when i started playing PR, i did months and months of Infantry grunt, learning medics, specialist at or any other kits, i went to armor after then i stated training choppers on empty servers and now here i am being able to fly anything or drive anything.... Its been a long learning curves but i did it, Should I stop flying aircraft because im starting to get effective with it? Anyone used to fly aircraft will alwways tell you that you need at least some experience to get a least a few kills and help the team.

Anyway im getting out topic here and the first original post should have been posted on the project reality forum but i doubt they really listen to people who almost never posted on their forum...

I guess i should have formulate my request and question better but my grammars and grasp of english is pretty limited im sorry....

**Startrekern** · 11-30-2009, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by Buflak

I just really dont see where all this hate is coming from, thats all.

It's just that I don't like it when people go with that sarcastic tone, 'I'd LOVE to, but it's always the same people in the CAS squads every time.......' and end it with that niiice long ellipses.

That is bull. Freaking. ****. If they wanted to get in to one or make one, it'd be as easy as pushing a button. CAS/Armor/Etc squads are RARELY insta-full, insta-locked.

**snooggums** · 11-30-2009, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Buflak

One thing i never understood is why someone who prefers vehicles is being called an asset whore by those who prefer infantry.
Whats wrong with the fact that some people like vehicles more than infantry combat, isn't this supposed to be a combined arms game?
By this logic we should start using the term medic whore, saw whore or even shovel whore.

I just really dont see where all this hate is coming from, thats all.

Because there are only so many vehicles and jets (and fewer maps they reside in), while you can pick up an infantry kit at any time. They are the asset equivalent of the sniper kit whore because who is running/participating in CAS is pretty easy to guess.

I'm an APC whore when MEC on Muttrah. I do this so that the assets get used effectively (shoot own multiple choppers and do rear attacks on enemy FoBs. I'm a TOW whore on Ejod/Fool's. If the pilots are confident they aren't whoring or are doing it to help the team there is no reason to take a comment about being an asset whore negatively even if it is intended as such.

**daveyjonesjr** · 11-30-2009, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by snooggums

I've only seen distances in the thousands of meters in this thread. If they are 100m someone spawning at base should see them easily, but I'm guessing from your 300m from battle comment you are probably exaggerating.

Why should air assets only be killed when making bombing runs or air combat? If I have a tank that is damaged and I try to return to main I might get ambushed on the way. If a wounded soldier goes down and I need to revive I will probably have to rely on my fellow soldiers to cover for a revive, just like you require them to help with your landing. If they don't help and there is no commander to relay orders, too bad.

I also fail to see this as a common problem. How often does this really happen? Maybe you should have an extra person in the CAS squad who checks the runway to make the other members more useful due to the jet staying in the air?

Again you didnt read my post correctly, what im saying is the AAV was about 1000 to 1500 meter from main, I wasnt ......i was barely 100 meters from main going at a speed of around 800 lining up with the runway, I even had it in sight........ WHen you take off or land in aircraft you need to pass this way, you cant land on the side and its just too dangerous to go out of bound....... LIKE I SAID BEFORE, if they would have waited at us outpost I would understand and didnt said a thing but they werent there, they were in open space where nobody can see them at the base of the mountain..

**Celestial1** · 11-30-2009, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Celestial1

But it can be avoided (especially if you have flares for landing), and I think there's no way to fairly discriminate against it, and should be left alone, no matter how upset you may get over it.

Originally Posted by snooggums

I've only seen distances in the thousands of meters in this thread. If they are 100m someone spawning at base should see them easily, but I'm guessing from your 300m from battle comment you are probably exaggerating.

Yes, it is an exaggeration. I forget what the exact distance from the US end runway barrier on Kashan to the tip of the hill south of the base is, but it's not that far at all. Not even 300m. They can be as close to the tip of the hill as they want, and they will be unseen from the base and have the perfect vantage point for killing the jet, every time. I have been literally killed by a missile fired 20m from the nose of the craft.

Why should air assets only be killed when making bombing runs or air combat? If I have a tank that is damaged and I try to return to main I might get ambushed on the way. If a wounded soldier goes down and I need to revive I will probably have to rely on my fellow soldiers to cover for a revive, just like you require them to help with your landing. If they don't help and there is no commander to relay orders, too bad.

I also fail to see this as a common problem. How often does this really happen? Maybe you should have an extra person in the CAS squad who checks the runway to make the other members more useful due to the jet staying in the air?

It's become less and less common. Apparently, it's become a problem on Quinling, but I wouldn't know. I couldn't tell you whether it's become as common as it used to be on Kashan, but I would figure it still happens every now and then.

Now, you're asking why air assets should only be killed when attacking ground targets or during air combat, it's because that's how it truly is IRL.

Now, IRL, AA is actually much more potent than it is, and I wish that it was reflected in PR, because it would be ALL the more risky to be doing anything in the air but flying up at +3000 altitude. At that kind of height, they are useless to fight ground targets (excluding dropping a bomb), and would have to descend to do so, making them prime targets for AA.

Unfortunately, these things aren't realistically portrayed, and make it even more of "Well, here comes the A-10, we're boned".

Again, as much as it may upset some, I have learned to let it go, because as annoying as it may be at times, I'd rather risk dying by their hands, than be relying on the same people I've been taking out targets for to check the base, while I get torn up by an enemy fighter.

And let me reiterate: While it may not be realistic, I have no qualms against people using these kinds of tactics, and may they do so every round from now on.

**thegreatnardini** · 11-30-2009, 03:02 PM

Coming from a Squad Leader whore who used to fly jets and tank quite often but got sick of rushing for the assets every round...

Yes jets are overpowered. They basically let four good people dominate the map. Did you hear they're even considering arming the jets with full-fledged j-dams...

All in all the 64 version of Kashan just doesn't work any more. The overpowering of the jets combined with lack of spawn points that aren't immediately blown to hell just makes it miserable for the 58 other people on the team. The 32 player version works much better, and until things change we probably won't see much of it on rotation.

Thread Tools

Display