Countermeasures for fighters

[FIREk]

This is one of the things that Higby mentioned in one of his recent posts. This suggests we will once again have fire-and-forget weapons like the Striker.

Personally I thought they would go with BFBC2-like skill-based weapons (dumb-fire or laser/wire-guided).
On the other hand, it's hard enough to hit a Blackhawk with an AT4 in BFBC2, let alone hitting a small, fast-moving jet like a speed-customized Mosquito.
Plus, heat-seeking fire-and-forget weapons make a lot of sense in air combat.

I also wonder if all factions will have access to all forms of AV/AA weapons (dumbfire, laser-guided, fire-and-forget etc.), or if it will once again be different for all empires...

Discuss. ;)

[Xyntech]

Well even with it's similarities to BFBC2, I think it's a safe bet to assume that a lot of stuff will be quite different. Maybe the guided missile mechanic will be similarly more modern, but I agree that there is still a lot of room for fire and forget missiles.

I am actually assuming that some AA customization options for the fighters will give them A2A rockets. Despite the fact that I love nailing a mossy or reaver with my own reavers rockets in PS1, it isn't usually the most effective tactic on an alert pilot, even less so when they beef of the flight system in PS2.

Didn't the devs say something somewhere about an empire specific variant on the chain gun for all 3 empires? If I'm remembering this correctly, it would tend to make me think they are wanting to avoid the balance nightmare of MCG vs Jackhammer vs Lasher to some degree. On that note, I would assume that all empires will get similar styles of weapon available to them with some slight variation to accentuate their empires characteristics and a lot of empire specific customization options to further differentiate them.

[Tapman]

When it comes to air-to-air combat, I want to be able to do this as my countermeasure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto&feature=player_embedded

[Aractain]

Just BTW, striker was manualy guided not fire and forget, Sparrow was. Remember when the striker was able to fire 3 missiles and THEN lock a target? You know, back when it was effective. :P

[Redshift]

I'd like to see all AA platforms with a choice of flak or missiles, and aircraft with a choice of countermeasures.

I'd like to see all AV weapons designed along the lines of the lancer, direct fire. maybe give the VS a constant beam weapon, the NC very fast missiles dumbfire missiles and the TR a kind of heavy autocannon

[Aractain]

Flak or Missiles is such a boring option.

Direct fire, Damage Clouds (Sky area denial), manualy guided, fire and forget and air mines are all options for dealing with flying targets.

I really hope the devs get this; Anti-Aircraft gameplay needs to be FUN. In PS1 it was terrible. Aircraft and AA need to have a back and forth gameplay style that resolves around aircraft trying to out manouver AA while trying to do what their role is (Anti-tank, bombing, shooting other aircraft etc).

If aircraft afterburn away at the first sign of lock-on the design is flawed. If flak kills bad pilots only its a failed design.

Direct fire such as the Zsu-23 give you the best skill based options. They allow you to lead the target with little warrning but give your position away with large tracers. (See Battelfeild europe for this kind of system working really well).

Area denial would be like a sky radiator gun, large clouds of badness that planes have to avoid. Probably a shotgun like weapon that fires 10 or so bubbles at different detonation ranges. If friendlys could fly through them it would make "air terrain" for enemies. More of a harrassment tool, a good secondary weapon type.

Fire and forget and manually guided missiles are obvious in design but timing the launch of the missiles and how the warnning sound was generated could make it interesting. I.e. a fire and forget system could make the target know they are locked on from the painting section where as the manually guided system could only let them know if there is a missile in flight etc.

Air mines are obivous and COOL. Probably blinking lights on them to show thier position.


Countermesures would then have to be a choice, a trade off to which AA type you want to be most resistant to.
Against direct fire/flak system you could have a jamming device that puts multiple copies of your plane (with same direction etc) on their screen so they don't know which one is real.
Against close range missiles/mines you could have EMP blast which knocks them out (100% chance). Very effective but timing intensive.
Obiovusly the classic flare/chaff (flares are heat sources to defeat IR seekers and chaff is bits of metal that confuse radar guided systems so these are just 'countermesures' in games) that has a chance to lure missiles in range.
Then theres the "ECM" which would stop AA systems from fireing for a couple of seconds (which wouldn't be able to be stacked by multiple aircraft).


So apparently there was some text there so this is the TL;DR: Make the AA and dealing with AA as aircraft fun this time plz.

[Redshift]

I would hate to be the dev in charge of trying to balance that lot :p

[Xyntech]

Make the AA and dealing with AA as aircraft fun this time plz.

That sounds like it could also give some interesting sidegrade unlockables for AA equipment.

It does kinda suck a bit when flying is either a matter of being completely safe or just turns into getting out of dodge, with no real gameplay in between aside from dog fighting.

Some interesting ideas.

[Senyu]

I dont mind terribly forget me not missles. But as the pilot I would like it if there was ways to still avoid them, such as very good piloting skills around objects(bases, forests, cliffs) that your pretty much cant fight because ur so busy trying to lose the missle on your butt.

[Traak]

We could deploy barrage balloons for "airea" denial. The cables would be hazardous, too. Or the Laser Tractor Beam Glowing Anchor Things, if cables are just too low-tech.

I like the idea of air mines. Nice thing to put in clouds.

[2coolforu]

Flares should be in the game because it looks awesome during dogfights and people expect to see them. I think missiles should be blocked by terrain though, nothing like the sparrow and its magical ability to phase through mountains.

Perhaps a balancing factor for countermeasures would be for infantry to be able to carry a MANPADS style AA weapon?

[Baron]

The Skyguard WAS/IS a very fun vehicle, the 12mm/AA was a great balance.

Back on topic, I believe present day air countermeasures (even some ground ones, like tanks making a smoke screen) can be updated to the Planetside world with relative ease.

[Bags]

VS countermeasures should be purple and teal confetti.

[Talek Krell]

Reflective confetti is an actual countermeasure... >_>

[Bags]

Do they include streamers? I meant to imply confetti and streamers when I said confetti.

[CrystalViolet]

VS countermeasures should be purple and teal confetti.

Perfect countermeasure to the TR cupcake launching max.

[Sirisian]

One thing I would like to see is if AA rockets could lock onto enemy rockets. Like if flak could detonate rockets or an aircraft's rockets could shoot down other enemy air rockets. It would make the flight combat really entertaining with multiple people.

[2coolforu]

What would be cool is to litter heat sources around the map A'la BF2 that rockets lock onto to allow experienced pilots to use them to shake an infrared lock. I'm thinking the overflow gas burners on Oman etc.

[Aractain]

Perfect countermeasure to the TR cupcake launching max.

What about the balloons? Can't have a party without balloons!

[CutterJohn]

It does kinda suck a bit when flying is either a matter of being completely safe or just turns into getting out of dodge, with no real gameplay in between aside from dog fighting.

Thats why direct fire is so superior to lock on and, to a lesser extent, flak. You can introduce damage degradation if needed, and shots are more difficult to hit with at range, meaning the danger the AA represents gradually escalates as you near it. In PS1, the lock on AA was 100% effective at range, and the flak based only slightly less effective due to the huge aoe on the blasts. It made them far too effective at covering far too large an area.

[Brusi]

Air to ground missiles that counter-lock-on to whoever/whatever is currently targeting and locked on to you.

[CutterJohn]

Oooh.. Wild Weasels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Weasel). Nice idea. :D

[NapalmEnima]

Lots of potential fun here with different kinds of detectors, jammers, suppressors, decoys, and so forth.

Things that could be detected:

Various sections of the EM spectrum (radar, IR, visible light, etc)
Target's mass
Different particle emissions (subatomic or otherwise) released by sci fi engines, comms, etc.
Acoustic tracking (not so good if your target can exceed the speed of sound)
Pull a "Predator 2" and hunt for their trail (exhaust) instead of them.

Each type could have different kinds of "stealth" systems, jammers, decoys and so on. Each type could be used for tracking systems for missiles, proximity detectors for flack, or Magically Attract Funky Energy Projectiles.

A stealth system that masked your gluons, mesons, and quarks might be useless against good ol RADAR (thanks to the return signal from that spiffy hyper-alloy armor you just unlocked). An EM holo decoy projector won't help at all if they're tracking your mass using gravitic distortion detectors.

[Traak]

Yeah, and all the jammer systems would be defeated by good ol' unguided flak. :D

[NapalmEnima]

Yeah, and all the jammer systems would be defeated by good ol' unguided flak. :D

Flak still needs some sort of proximity detector to know when to go boom.

Active jamming makes you much more detectable, but precision goes out the window. Of course if your jammer is designed to overload-n-fry their sensors, that fried gear isn't gonna care, but all the other sensors of that type will know RIGHT where you are.

[Kouza]

Aircraft should be able to avoid most if not all AA at very high altitudes but, as it gets lower it should be VERY vulnerable to ground fire. It does not take much to take down an aircraft.

[Xyntech]

Aircraft should be able to avoid most if not all AA at very high altitudes but, as it gets lower it should be VERY vulnerable to ground fire. It does not take much to take down an aircraft.

I support this mentality because at high altitudes, aircraft shouldn't be as able to do damage to ground troops either. The only real exception would be a liberator bombing from extreme altitude, but you could avoid this by either giving libs a lower flight ceiling, or making bombs (maybe along with air to ground missiles) self detonate after traveling a certain distance.

Speaking of flight ceilings, I really hope they get it right and put in a soft ceiling where you start climbing slower and slower until you can't gain any lift and start stalling out. So much more fun and dynamic than having an invisible roof that you run into. I'm not worried though, they would be crazy to take inspiration for so many other things from other games but leave in the PS1 flight ceiling.

I like the idea of safer high altitude skies because it would leave more room open for uninterrupted dogfights. An aircraft who was starting to lose a dogfight could still duck lower to hide behind friendly AA units if they were below, but only if the pilot was a yellow bellied coward.

[Brusi]

I like the idea of bombers being less useful at higher altitudes (bombs drifting off target?) but i wouldn't want them entirely limited to mid-low altitude bombing.

It might negatively affect game play to have libs safe from AA damage, carpet bombing them... but i do think that leaving the upper atmosphere for fighters hunting bombers and dogfighting other fighters sounds like it could create an awesome aerial gameplay element and work really well.

[Traak]

Aircraft should be able to avoid most if not all AA at very high altitudes but, as it gets lower it should be VERY vulnerable to ground fire. It does not take much to take down an aircraft.

That altitude will have to be very high. Which would open up a new category of weapons: the high-altitude dual-stage interceptor surface-to-air missile (SAM).

I would gladly man a SAM site. The satisfaction level of shooting down high-altitude aircraft would be similarly high. :D

I would also like to see, if very high altitudes are available, AA artillery, like the Skysweeper of the WWII era. Flak at 10,000 feet or SAM at 20,000. With that much altitude available, the air war becomes far more amazing, and a whole entity unto itself, with pilots able to find plenty of combat up in the clouds.

Best countermeasure for surface-to-air fire? Altitude, baby! Lots and lots of altitude!

[CutterJohn]

Flak still needs some sort of proximity detector to know when to go boom.

Most flak is timed. Manually set long ago, now they have systems with rangefinders that do so automatically before the shell is fired. Making it adjust for the motion of the craft would just be a small bit of additional programming so that it explodes at the range the aircraft will be when its fired.

If you can see it, something can track it.

[Traak]

Yeah, flak in the real world was largely timed. The Skysweeper did that automatically, setting the timed fuse before the round was fired, based on radar-determined anticipated positional data.

However, I vastly prefer proximity-fused flak.

[Kouza]

Most people just got mad when they got cought off gaurd in PS1.. I always found it funny when I pulled my chaingun, and blew up a Mossy that was hovering trying to kill me. Aircraft in PS1 are like paper but, they deal a lot of damage.

[Traak]

Aircraft without cheats, maybe. As I said, I was amazed how many full-clip bursts I put into Reavers to see them fly away. If I shoot at you, see the yellow COF bloom thing to tell me I got a hit, your computer should not be able to say "Oh, no, I'm not hearing this, lalalalalalaaaa!" through use of cheats.

[Shogun]

time to necro this ;-)

so can we get a little more info on countermeasures now?
in the pc gamer article it was mentioned that even the vanguard can be equipped with countermeasures!

so what kind of missiles will there be, which of them can be countered, and what units will be able to equip countermeasures beside the MBTs?

[Ailos]

Must confess to not bothering to read all of the comments above me, and this may have already been mentioned, but

I would love for all basic AA weapons to start out as dumb-fire, ES types. In other words, everyone starts out with a basic AA weapon - TR with flak, NC with a fast-travel missle, and VS with some plasma bullshit. And then as you progress you can pick what kind of addons you get for your weapons that modify their functionality. For instance, the NC might have access to a wire-guided missle head that has a shorter range, the TR might add heat-seeking projectiles that do slightly less damage (because some of what used to be ordinance space is taken up by electronics), and the VS can add some fancy magnets on the side to actively guide their balls of plasma, but that cause damage degradation with distance. In such a scenario, there will be situations where you'll be better off using just the standard AA weapon, and in other cases, such as when aircraft are slow or closer to the ground.

[Grognard]

When it comes to air-to-air combat, I want to be able to do this as my countermeasure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto&feature=player_embedded

LOL...WTF??? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

[jakaul]

I just hope aircraft have reasonable countermeasures. "Flying away" as was the case against most AA in PS1 isn't what I would consider reasonable.

[ArcIyte]

The only AA that was actually fun to use was the Burster. Everything else was incredibly boring and easy.

Hopefully they go in that direction.