Should aircraft be able to see infantry on radar?

[Infektion]

Standard equipped, definitely not, but a scout modulated aircraft. YES. What did Higby choose?

[CutterJohn]

I see no reason they shouldn't see infantry on radar, so long as it follows the same rules as every other unit. Aircraft are combat vehicles. Part of their job is to kill stuff on the ground. Infantry are also on the ground.

If you're worried about aircav killing infantry, ask for infantry to be able to fight back effectively. Infantry AA, EMP nades that are proximity fused vs aircav, and small arms that do respectable damage to them within a certain distance if they decide to hover.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

I see no reason they shouldn't see infantry on radar, so long as it follows the same rules as every other unit. Aircraft are combat vehicles. Part of their job is to kill stuff on the ground. Infantry are also on the ground.

If you're worried about aircav killing infantry, ask for infantry to be able to fight back effectively. Infantry AA, EMP nades that are proximity fused vs aircav, and small arms that do respectable damage to them within a certain distance if they decide to hover.

No, aircraft simply should not be empowered to see infantry. You either have aircraft raping infantry, or infantry all choosing AA and raping aircraft. There is no winner when doing it that way.

[Erendil]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Implants are buffs now so its entirely possible for them to have an implant that makes one immune to vehicle&structure-based detection. It could also have limitations like PS1 where you are only immune if you are stationary or walking/crouch-walking.

I wonder if we can have advanced implants which have pre-requisites. For example if we have 4 implant slots, perhaps we can spend 1 slot on "basic radar immunity" which only works if you are stationary or walking. Then you have a second implant slot which requires that implant and allows immunity even while running. So we can be fully immune if we want but it costs us 2 implant slots. That could be a significant benefit for a significant cost.

It doesn't even need to be the same implant, it could simply be an sort of stacking-buff where one stack gets you walk/stationary immunity while two stacks gets you complete immunity. When one implant wears off (they are timer-based) you simply go down to one stack.

Same could be true for xp boosts and that sort of thing. Spend one implant slot for a moderate xp boost. Spend two for twice the effect. It's purely additive but the tradeoff is that you aren't using that implant slot for some other benefits (like radar immunity).

Hrm, I should probably put this in the idea vault

Yeah the Sensor Shield mechanic in PS1 worked quite well for lettign you be hidden from detection systems.

And I like the idea of implant stacking. Like you said they could be simple amplitude increases that do things like boost the range of darklight/Audio Amp, increase Melee boosted damage, etc.

They could even modify qualitative aspects of a currently-installed base-level implant, like a Sensor Shield dome implant that extended your existing SS out in a 5 foot radius, so you and 5 of your buddies could all benefit if you huddled together.

[JHendy]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

BUT - squad leaders should be able to place STATIC air support request markers.

Absolutely superb idea. Infantry should only be engaged by aircraft when squad leaders start calling for close air support. They shouldn't be farmable fodder, nor should they be easily spottable from above, when a pilot is cruising along at 300+ mph. Beef the main cannons up a shed load, chuck some hefty splash damage in there, but make it VERY difficult for a pilot to bring the full power of his aircraft to bear without targets being allocated by infantry on the ground.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by JHendy

Absolutely superb idea. Infantry should only be engaged by aircraft when squad leaders start calling for close air support. They shouldn't be farmable fodder, nor should they be easily spottable from above, when a pilot is cruising along at 300+ mph. Beef the main cannons up a shed load, chuck some hefty splash damage in there, but make it VERY difficult for a pilot to bring the full power of his aircraft to bear without targets being allocated by infantry on the ground.

Can you imagine the immersive teamwork that would bring?

And here's something else: Basically, an air support marker could be a static 3D marker that aircraft see(and squad leaders, not sure if all infantry should be able to see it) and it could even give, say, the number of enemy infantry within a 40m radius of it, perhaps even the number of friendly infantry, and it would last up to 90 seconds or until placed elsewhere by that squad leader(the number of infantry data visible by pilots would update every 10 seconds). That's not an omniscient spot, but it DOES give friendly aircraft need-to-know info.

Note: For this idea, ONLY friendly aircraft should see the data on enemy infantry numbers, not the squad leader or other infantry, and it can only be placed outdoors, for obvious reasons.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

No, aircraft simply should not be empowered to see infantry. You either have aircraft raping infantry, or infantry all choosing AA and raping aircraft. There is no winner when doing it that way.

Yes. Balance is impossible.

[Erendil]

Wow, the amount of Air Cav hate and misinformation in this thread is just astounding. No ground units at all appearing on radar for aircraft, no minmap autospotting of infantry, no AB available for an aircraft that's hovering, aircraft can't engage infantry unless called in by friendly troops, etc, etc.

Seriously people, stop trying to pidgeonhole aircraft into some ultra-limited or ultra-realistic role that you think they should be forced into. Aircraft decked out for an air-to-ground role are perfectly in their right to farm infantry if they so choose. Likewise, infantry armed with AA/AV should be able to shoot aircraft out of the sky if they so choose. PS2 is an open-ended, sandbox-style, combined arms game. As such you damn well should see units of all different types attacking whatever enemy forces they so choose in whatever manner they choose so long as they have a mind to lay some hurt on said forces.

And you can try to slap on all of the arbitrary, nonsensical, prejudicial limitations you want onto aircraft, but even if all of the above-mentioned ridiculous ideas get implemented it will not stop pilots such as Sky or myself one bit from farming infantry over and over and over again if that is what we choose to do. Looking at the GDC footage, picking out infantry in our LOS from the landscape is going to be just as much of a cakewalk in PS2 as it was in PS1, without the aid of minimap spotting, Mossie Overflight Sensors, waypoints, etc. And even with the cockpit enabled.

So, please, just stop it with the stupid arbitrary limitations on aircraft. You're not going to accomplish anything but get the Devs thinking about implementing such ineffective and prejudicial rules, which no doubt will get them thinking about tossing around similar equally stupid rules into other areas of PS2 that might actually do some real harm to the game.

That's not to say the everything in this thread has been a total waste of grey matter. Calling in empire-wide Air strikes via a waypoint marker system only visible to aircraft is brilliant. That I think is an excellent idea so long as it's not a prerequisite that must be met before aircraft can attack infantry at all. It could even be integrated into the Mission system so it could be selected by any pilots in the area. That way all pilots in the air would know if other pilots are already enroute to the target since they presumably would have accepted the mission.


Lastly, at the risk of going slightly off topic... The Mossie Overflight Sensor picks up all enemy forces in a ~30m radius so long as they're moving, attacking, or otherwise making noise and are not hidden by Sensor Shield, Sensor Disruptors, or an enemy RADAR virus. It can detect enemies through walls, multiple floors, etc, so no amount of cover alone will save them from being detected. And it makes these forces visible on the minimap for everybody in your empire that hasn't just been jammed/emp'd.

And yes, it's active all of the time, regardless of what speed the Mossie is flying. Don't believe me? Here's a screenshot for you, taken in-game by me about an hour ago while flying at top speed and taking a sharp left turn during a full AB burn:



If you look in the lower-right corner you will see the "Mossie Overflight Sensor Active" icon displayed in all its glory. That icon has stayed on for me for at least the last 6 years, each and every time I get into a Mossie, regardless of what speed I'm flying at or what crazy maneuvers I might attempt. It may take a split second for it to actually pick up enemy units on the minimap, but it never turns off.

[Baneblade]

There shouldn't even be a minimap.

[ArmedZealot]

There really isn't any good reason to not allow aircraft to see infantry on radar.

If infantry can see enemies on radar then my aircraft, with much more sophisticated sensor equipment and communications, should also.

Infantry farming is a reality that should remain intact. It's realistic in both PS1 and war. Don't travel alone by foot without some sort of AA, grab an ATV instead to duck and weave, hop in an AA lightning. Or you could use teamwork to take it out.

PS2 seems to have a larger number of lock on weapon systems to plague aircraft, this should do enough to limit the farmers.

Taking away an aircraft's ability to see infantry on radar just seems very gimicky to me unless some sort of jamming mechanic were to be implemented. Might as well take away a tanks ability to see infantry, since we all know vanguards will be farming as much as they can as well.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

There really isn't any good reason to not allow aircraft to see infantry on radar.

If infantry can see enemies on radar then my aircraft, with much more sophisticated sensor equipment and communications, should also.

Infantry farming is a reality that should remain intact. It's realistic in both PS1 and war. Don't travel alone by foot without some sort of AA, grab an ATV instead and duck a weave, hop in a lightning.

PS2 seems to have a larger number of lock on weapon systems to plague aircraft, this should do enough to limit the farmers.

There shouldn't be automatic line of sight radar for infantry either. If not manually spotted, a player should not be seen on the minimap.

Infantry farming is not realistic in war because aircraft fly too fast and high to see infantry without exposing themselves to small arms fire and tanks if they slow down, and infantry cannot carry 500 pounds of gear such that they can carry AA weapons on top of everything else.

Fun gameplay>Balance>realism, that's the pecking order, and no-skill infantry farming is neither fun nor balance. Neither is the inability to fight other vehicles because every infantry is a walking arsenal.

[ArmedZealot]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

There shouldn't be automatic line of sight radar for infantry either. If not manually spotted, a player should not be seen on the minimap.

Infantry farming is not realistic in war because aircraft fly too fast and high to see infantry without exposing themselves to small arms fire and tanks if they slow down, and infantry cannot carry 500 pounds of gear such that they can carry AA weapons on top of everything else.

Fun gameplay>Balance>realism, that's the pecking order, and no-skill infantry farming is neither fun nor balance. Neither is the inability to fight other vehicles because every infantry is a walking arsenal.

Perhaps on this point I agree with you. But this seems like an answer to a different question then what is being asked.

That'd be true if aircraft in PS behaved more like fighters than attack helo's.The hover mechanic is what changes things. However if an aircraft is farming it means its slowing down and exposing itself to small arms and AA.

I don't see why this is such a problem on this forum, which spouts that teamwork is the goal of PS, yet this meets resistance on this subject. Travel with groups or in a transport. If you want to walk places solo then your going to have to protect yourself. Or just spawn at your destination.

PS2 has the skyguard equivalent on the lightning, except it can be used solo now too. Infantry have more options for dealing with aircraft as well. Although we don't know what classes can carry the new lock on weapons, it could be safely assumed that at least they will be a much more common then what was seen in PS1. We will have to see what the new gameplay is like in beta before we can choose to argue for fundamentally changing how radar works in the game for aircraft and infantry.

[Metalsheep]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Infantry farming is not realistic in war because aircraft fly too fast and high to see infantry without exposing themselves to small arms fire and tanks if they slow down, and infantry cannot carry 500 pounds of gear such that they can carry AA weapons on top of everything else.

I think this aircraft would like to have a word with you.



In reality this thing "Farms" infantry quite effectively, and takes quite a lot of Small Arms fire. And can detect them on the ground. In planetside, aircraft are a hybrid of Helicopter and Plane.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Metalsheep

I think this aircraft would like to have a word with you.



In reality this thing "Farms" infantry quite effectively, and takes quite a lot of Small Arms fire. And can detect them on the ground. In planetside, aircraft are a hybrid of Helicopter and Plane.

Let's have helicopters then. Planetside's aircraft aren't helicopters, they are able to both hover to rape, and then zip off to escape like jets. As you well point out. Helicopter/jet hybrids aren't realistic.

But Realism is never a good reason to do something, or indeed, not to do something. If we're going to do one thing for realism then why only that one thing? As I say, look to fun gameplay first, then balance, and only then, if fun and balance are satisfied, should something get put in just because it's realistic.

If an argument can only succeed in showing that something is realistic, that should have no bearing on whether it's worthy of being put in the game, unless and until it can be shown that it's fun and balanced. Note that fun for the pilot and not fun for everyone else doesn't count. Of course, aircraft should be able to maul infantry, in no way do I suggest that they shouldn't. But they should not be given the situational awareness necessary to do that for zero effort and risk.

I would rather that they give aircraft infra-red as a customization than allow them to see automatic radar data. And understand that I say "customization" very reluctantly, because I believe that if a vehicle should have a tool like that it should ALWAYS have it. Smoke, coaxial machine gun, infrared view, if these things are going to exist they should always be there. Other more advanced things should be the customizations.

[Metalsheep]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Let's have helicopters then. Planetside's aircraft aren't helicopters, they are able to both hover to rape, and then zip off to escape like jets. As you well point out. Helicopter/jet hybrids aren't realistic.

But Realism is never a good reason to do something, or indeed, not to do something. If we're going to do one thing for realism then why only that one thing? As I say, look to fun gameplay first, then balance, and only then, if fun and balance are satisfied, should something get put in just because it's realistic.

If an argument can only succeed in showing that something is realistic, that should have no bearing on whether it's worthy of being put in the game, unless and until it can be shown that it's fun and balanced. Note that fun for the pilot and not fun for everyone else doesn't count. Of course, aircraft should be able to maul infantry, in no way do I suggest that they shouldn't. But they should not be given the situational awareness necessary to do that for zero effort and risk.

I would rather that they give aircraft infra-red as a customization than allow them to see automatic radar data. And understand that I say "customization" very reluctantly, because I believe that if a vehicle should have a tool like that it should ALWAYS have it. Smoke, coaxial machine gun, infrared view, if these things are going to exist they should always be there. Other more advanced things should be the customizations.

Again, would like to have a word...



I forget the name of that aircraft, but it can Hover just like a Planetside aircraft, see how its jet is pointed downwards? It can then zip off.

But, you are right that Realism doesnt mean it should be in the game. But it was never the aircav in particular that could spot infantry. It was how the Radar system worked in its entirety in Planetside 1. It worked the same regardless if you were in a vehicle or on foot. Infantry could only be seen on radar if you could physically see them in front of you, or if they recently fired their weapon/hacked a door/ ect ect. If your squadmates could see them, then you also could see them. It was like a spotting mechanic that you didnt have to press a button for every 5 seconds to point out enemies.

There was also the Interlink, Watch Towers and Motion trackers to factor into the equation. The mossy was special with a added on Overflight system, it onyl worked at 25%ish throttle and only in a small radius below the aircraft. (I dont know who said it works all the time, it doesnt still. You get a little icon in the bottom corner of your screen when Overflight is active.) Which could be a customization option to the standard fighters that they have to sacrifice for.