AA targeting landed Aircraft?

Neurotoxin · 2012-05-02, 05:00 PM

Greetings PSU Community,

I would like to know how everyone feels about the subject of AA targeting an aircraft that has landed, or is even unoccupied.

For me, this was the most confounding aspect of AA weapons in PlanetSide (particularly flak) because it makes no sense that it would identify aircraft even if they are not airborne. It seemed like flak should explode in proximity of any vehicle regardless of its type, or otherwise that the it should only affect airborne targets that are actually in-flight.

I'd like to know how you all feel about this subject, and whether you'd like to see a change from how it was set up in the original PlanetSide.

Red Beard · 2012-05-02, 05:10 PM

Though ideologically I don't agree with it; that is none the less a very cool avatar!

Otherwise I think it's simply that way as a matter of balancing.

Kipper · 2012-05-02, 05:13 PM

A shell that's designed for 'air-burst' would need some kind of fuse to make it do that.

The possibilities that spring to mind are:

1. Timer fuse, so it bursts after nn seconds regardless of where its going.
2. Proximity fuse, so it would burst near anything (including the terrain).
3. Air pressure/altitude fuse, so it would burst at or above a certain height.

There would be problems with all of these in isolation, either too easy to hit too much stuff making it OP, or too hard to hit anything making it useless.

I'd go with a mix of two - probably altitude and proximity, so as to say that it will burst against aircraft, but only against aircraft flying above 50m (or whatever).

Of course, unlike reality that would be 50m above where you are, not above sea level, otherwise being infantry on a hillside would still be hazardous

DayOne · 2012-05-02, 07:46 PM

AA should be prox fuses (it's the future, who uses a timer?) and heat seekers. No locking on unless the vehicle is turned on!

Obviously it will be tweaked for gameplay purposes.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-02, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by DayOne

AA should be prox fuses (it's the future, who uses a timer?)

Anyone who uses a proximity fuse, since any detection circuitry would involve a computer, however small, and that computer would have a clock. At which point it becomes a small software addition.

DayOne · 2012-05-02, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Anyone who uses a proximity fuse, since any detection circuitry would involve a computer, however small, and that computer would have a clock. At which point it becomes a small software addition.

But it wouldn't be used to actively set off the explosive.

Rabb · 2012-05-03, 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by DayOne

But it wouldn't be used to actively set off the explosive.

Current air burst systems use a timer set by the weapon as it fires to burst at a set range I see no reason why this tech would change much

Kipper · 2012-05-03, 07:56 AM

Purely for purposes of looking cool, I'd like to see WWII style air burst flak, it would certainly add something to the game trying to fly through it.

If Galaxies are big and slow; then this stuff needs to be a threat, but not spell instant death.

For the faster 'gunship' type vehicles, its more about putting up a screen to stop them operating than actually shooting many of them down. But a few lucky hits or someone flying too slowly or dithering should be good XP for the AA player...

It will be tricky - you have to have it so that AA can't farm air, and Air can't farm ground, good luck to the balance team on that one

Unforgiven · 2012-05-02, 08:19 PM

lets not forget how about missiles too, how do they find a target? heat or radar right.... (how can it find a cold jet? or one on the ground)

SKYeXile · 2012-05-02, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

lets not forget how about missiles too, how do they find a target? heat or radar right.... (how can it find a cold jet? or one on the ground)

ITS THE FUTURE!!1

Brusi · 2012-05-02, 08:42 PM

I say Dumb-Fire unless it's above radar clutter or something... basically higher than 6M or 10M smart AA kicks in.

That means flying really low becomes a valid tactic.

Maybe different types of AA would have optimum killzone height?

Sledgecrushr · 2012-05-02, 11:10 PM

I believe at some point in the future nothing will be able to fly over a battlefield without immediately being taken down.

Timealude · 2012-05-02, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

I believe at some point in the future nothing will be able to fly over a battlefield without immediately being taken down.

unless they have more advance flare systems or signal scramblers.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-02, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

I believe at some point in the future nothing will be able to fly over a battlefield without immediately being taken down.

Which will be compensated for by flying so damned many things over its impossible to take them all down, and anyone that opens fire on the air will be immediately targeted by dozens of craft. Drones are cheap and expendable.

Future warfare is going to be both awesome and scary.

Originally Posted by DayOne

But it wouldn't be used to actively set off the explosive.

Could be. Just a programming change and a little math.

headcrab13 · 2012-05-03, 01:29 AM

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

I believe at some point in the future nothing will be able to fly over a battlefield without immediately being taken down.

Yes. When beta starts.