Does EA know what "Lock-On" means?

[Teriander]

The missile system in BF2 just sucks. Period. AA, AG, and SAM, all suck in this game.

When I have a lock-on tone on a aircraft and I fire. My missile should go ONLY for that aircarft (without flares being dropped). Too many time I've had lets say 2 aircarft in the area, I lock on to the enemy, fire a missile, and it goes for the second aircraft that was in the area resulting in a friendly fire. EVEN THOUGH I CLEARLY HAD A LOCK ON THE ENEMY. That's just plain stupid. EA does not know what "locked on" means.

How many times have you shot down a friendly aircarft when you had lock on an enemy? Even if he doesn't flare, at least 1 of your missiles are going to start following another aircraft. And you're going to get punished for a teamkill. It's the last straw with me and this game. So many things piss me off with this game Im going to stop playing till a majority of them are fixed. It's not fun when it's just stupid.

EA should take advice from people in the military who know a thing or 2 about weapons and the way they work. Im not going to list all the problems with the weapons in this game because then you'll be reading a book. But you know how much they all suck or are just plain retarded. Im quiting till this game gets some issues worked out.

[shadow_wolf]

apparently it doesnt mean lock on in as much a literal sense as it means "well...you have a better chance of hitting it now than before...but good luck"

[Yezo]

Well I'm sure the missles in the military are much different, but I think EA did for some maps such as the zatar-wetlands which have burning oil crude towers, in which pilots can utilize to distrupt your lock by making it lock onto the fire instead.

[DeathGiver]

Bye. This game has its problems i agree but its just the love for the BF series that keeps me playing BF2.

[StlouisSniper]

You have to love the fact that the missles have a better shot of hitting your teammates aircraft rather then the enemys that you have locked on. lol

[gx.]

i thinl the bfv f-4 rockets are best

[shadow_wolf]

I find that while stinger missles arent the best, air-to-air rockets from planes are pretty good.

[NoConflict]

you are so right, there will me a smoking airplane commign at my AA, fire 2 missiles while locked on, get out run away, BOOM im dead

[MeatPie]

I think they should purposely allow you to lock on to friendly aircraft only. I think that is the only way to take down enemies with AA :rolleyes:

[UnrealAlex]

Is it just me or are they heat seaking missiles ? Thus if they miss and theres another heat source in front of them they will attract to it I think

[IVfluids]

ive actually rarely ever had it **** up on me unless it literally misses my intended target, as in, he out turns it. that, and i dont rely on the missels as the answer to everything, i use the maingun on it about 70% of the time, maybe more.

if it misses, it will veer off. if you shoot it from a long ways away and there is something closer, it will veer off.

[Shroom420]

Well I'm sure the missles in the military are much different, .
I don't know about that if they are american i wouldn't put it past them

[Handy388]

they are 50's heatseeking missiles, and those FF kill actually happened. one chinese pilot turned so the taiwainese pilot's missile locked onto the engine of another teammate's aircraft.

[Dr-X]

Firstly, yes this is an arcade game, and the missiles are not meant to simulate real missiles - if they did, you'd find it very difficult to even acquire a lock, let alone hit anything. And the missiles in this game are heat seekers - which means that if there's a stronger heat source around (eg, flares, burning oil towers, another air craft using afterburners), the missile will be attracted to the biggest source of heat. So if there's an enemy using idle thrusters, and next to him a friendly using afterburners, it will seek the afterburners.

Besides which, I really dont know where you're coming from. I've NEVER had a missile seek a friendly, in all my time using the stingers.

[dmonkey]

I have the problem with jets, an enemy banks hard on my missile, and a teammate happens to fly by.... Bam, teamkill, punish, BS.

[shortbus408]

i thinl the bfv f-4 rockets are best
agreed i would just launch two rockets and i would destroy a plane.

[SKluck]

You guys not having problems, what do you never use missles? My primary role is AA. It's very rewarding. But there are major problems with the system in place.

It is completely understandable that missles could be overmanuevered and then go after another aircraft. But have you ever noticed how stray missles will NEVER go to another enemy aircraft? They ONLY find their way to friendlies. You will never get a lucky shot with AA.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if missles were equally likely to find enemy air as friendly. But if a missle misses, it will only go after friendlies. That's pretty goddamn stupid. And missles do curve away for no reason at all with no other airplanes/choppers around sometimes. I've had a helo above me flying around within 200m, 3 volleys and not a single hit. And no flares ever went off. What is that? I refuse to believe a chopper can overmanuever a heatseeker, yet it happens often.

All planes have to do is go straight up and they will never get hit. Or do a barrel roll. The range on AA with planes needs to be increased severely. I don't even try for them, I just scare them off. A pilot has to be really stupid to get shot down by AA.

[Yezo]

You guys not having problems, what do you never use missles? My primary role is AA. It's very rewarding. But there are major problems with the system in place.

It is completely understandable that missles could be overmanuevered and then go after another aircraft. But have you ever noticed how stray missles will NEVER go to another enemy aircraft? They ONLY find their way to friendlies. You will never get a lucky shot with AA.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if missles were equally likely to find enemy air as friendly. But if a missle misses, it will only go after friendlies. That's pretty goddamn stupid. And missles do curve away for no reason at all with no other airplanes/choppers around sometimes. I've had a helo above me flying around within 200m, 3 volleys and not a single hit. And no flares ever went off. What is that? I refuse to believe a chopper can overmanuever a heatseeker, yet it happens often.

All planes have to do is go straight up and they will never get hit. Or do a barrel roll. The range on AA with planes needs to be increased severely. I don't even try for them, I just scare them off. A pilot has to be really stupid to get shot down by AA.


I do believe you havent taken relative and physical math's yet have you? Because you wouldn't be posting that if you had. The velocity of a missle (the amount of space it can displace from one point to another in a period of time, and in which direction), determines the outcome. Although most aircraft in real life cant pull a super sharp turn at high velocities neither can missles. And in this game since missles can't make a 360 or a 90 for that matter it allows for dodging. Once the missle overshoots its target with heatseeking, it will lock onto the next source within a given path and range.

In real life a roll wouldn't do much help againsed a heat seeking missile, however various manuvers that could tear your aircraft apart could be attempted, at which point the missle will overshoot hence loosing its lock.

Remember a missle is not aerodynamically designed for control, instead for speed and that speed on impact.

[Atomz618]

If everything in this game was like the actual military then it would be no fun. People would complain about everything on the US being too accurate or something. Tanks would be nearly indestructable.... im not really sure but i think the US would win everytime. People would ***** and fight to get in the AA-guns because everytime they fired and locked onto a target it would hit and get tons of points. There is a big reason this game is not EXACTLY like the military... this game is just for fun.

[Yezo]

If everything in this game was like the actual military then it would be no fun. People would complain about everything on the US being too accurate or something. Tanks would be nearly indestructable.... im not really sure but i think the US would win everytime. People would ***** and fight to get in the AA-guns because everytime they fired and locked onto a target it would hit and get tons of points. There is a big reason this game is not EXACTLY like the military... this game is just for fun.

If it was then you could take a B11 or B18 bomber and volla your enemy is as good as dead. I cant remember there was a stealth bomber which has a nuke in its inventory.

[SKluck]

I do believe you havent taken relative and physical math's yet have you? Because you wouldn't be posting that if you had. The velocity of a missle (the amount of space it can displace from one point to another in a period of time, and in which direction), determines the outcome. Although most aircraft in real life cant pull a super sharp turn at high velocities neither can missles. And in this game since missles can't make a 360 or a 90 for that matter it allows for dodging. Once the missle overshoots its target with heatseeking, it will lock onto the next source within a given path and range.

In real life a roll wouldn't do much help againsed a heat seeking missile, however various manuvers that could tear your aircraft apart could be attempted, at which point the missle will overshoot hence loosing its lock.

Remember a missle is not aerodynamically designed for control, instead for speed and that speed on impact.

I don't see what that has to do with what I said. It's all common sense.

What does it matter what a roll would do in real life? We are talking about BF2 here. And in BF2 it happens to lose the missle fairly successfully.

[Yezo]

I don't see what that has to do with what I said. It's all common sense.

What does it matter what a roll would do in real life? We are talking about BF2 here. And in BF2 it happens to lose the missle fairly successfully.

The point was if at any point the missle overshoots it cannot hit. Please take the time to read. Dont make the older generations right about the nexts generations literacy problems.

[SKluck]

Then why quote me if I never said otherwise?

[imported_Rafterman]

I agree that there has to be balance with playability, but come on -- if I've got a broadside on a hovering helicopter 100 feet in front of me, I get full lock tone, the pilot doesn't move or drop flares or anything, the missles should hit true and no go flying off in different directions. Hell, I'd rather have the unguided missles in DC over this crap -- at least it would be dependant upon my skill as to whether or hit the target or not, not some random coding.

If the pilot doesn't evade or drop flares, he should be dead.

Simple as that.

[Yezo]

Then why quote me if I never said otherwise?

Because of these following passages:


I refuse to believe a chopper can overmanuever a heatseeker, yet it happens often.



All planes have to do is go straight up and they will never get hit. Or do a barrel roll. The range on AA with planes needs to be increased severely. I don't even try for them, I just scare them off. A pilot has to be really stupid to get shot down by AA.

You dont need flares as long as you can manuver to make a missle overshoot.

[NoConflict]

I really hate it when it "locks on" to an enemy aircraft, and the missile just goes stright to a friendly plane

[SKluck]

The assumption was that a missle was locked on and fired behind the target. But I see how that was misunderstood.

[imported_fvbyfv]

They should make it so friendlies dont get attacked or the missle does not damage friendlies. You cant play wingman in this game at all because you become more of a threat than the enemy pilot.

[Teriander]

Firstly, yes this is an arcade game, and the missiles are not meant to simulate real missiles - if they did, you'd find it very difficult to even acquire a lock, let alone hit anything. And the missiles in this game are heat seekers - which means that if there's a stronger heat source around (eg, flares, burning oil towers, another air craft using afterburners), the missile will be attracted to the biggest source of heat. So if there's an enemy using idle thrusters, and next to him a friendly using afterburners, it will seek the afterburners.

First, saying "the missiles aren't meant to simulate real missiles" is just stupid. What are they simulating? Bottle rockets?

Second, saying "if there is a strong heat source around and the missile will be attracted to the biggest heat source" is a bogus statement (excluding flares). If your missile has LOCK on a heat source such as a jet aircarft, it will follow that heat source even if it's sees another heat source in the area. Thats the purpose of LOCK ON, to keep it on the heat source that is selected. So even if you have 20 aircarft in front of you, and you lock on to 1 aircarft it will go for that aircarft UNTIL that aircraft drops flares.. Only then will it be confused and follow the flares or stay on the aircraft.. But no way in hell will it go for another aircraft just randomly. because if it did, then why lock on? What is the purpose of locking on if your missile is going to turn 50 degreees anyway and go for another heat source? Im talking about real world SAMs and AA missiles.

[BirdKiller]

These missles are okay and easy to get used to. I've had some of my missles miss the locked-on target and swing to the next air target which was my enemy.

[Dr-X]

First, saying "the missiles aren't meant to simulate real missiles" is just stupid. What are they simulating? Bottle rockets?

Second, saying "if there is a strong heat source around and the missile will be attracted to the biggest heat source" is a bogus statement (excluding flares). If your missile has LOCK on a heat source such as a jet aircarft, it will follow that heat source even if it's sees another heat source in the area. Thats the purpose of LOCK ON, to keep it on the heat source that is selected. So even if you have 20 aircarft in front of you, and you lock on to 1 aircarft it will go for that aircarft UNTIL that aircraft drops flares.. Only then will it be confused and follow the flares or stay on the aircraft.. But no way in hell will it go for another aircraft just randomly. because if it did, then why lock on? What is the purpose of locking on if your missile is going to turn 50 degreees anyway and go for another heat source? Im talking about real world SAMs and AA missiles.
So, what you're saying is that a missile detects a heat source, and goes straight for that heat source, even if a stronger source is present in it's range? That's what you're saying, right?

But then you go on to say that the missile WILL be confused by flares. The point of flares to to create a larger heat source than the planes engines (hence why in real planes, you drop flares, decrease throttle, and pull away). So where exactly are you coming from with this? I dont think you understand IIR guided missiles very well.

[Tobacco]

How many times have you shot down a friendly aircarft when you had lock on an enemy?


zero


T

[Dr-X]

^^ Ditto. And I've made dozens of STA and ATA kills.

[Teriander]

So, what you're saying is that a missile detects a heat source, and goes straight for that heat source, even if a stronger source is present in it's range? That's what you're saying, right?

But then you go on to say that the missile WILL be confused by flares. The point of flares to to create a larger heat source than the planes engines (hence why in real planes, you drop flares, decrease throttle, and pull away). So where exactly are you coming from with this? I dont think you understand IIR guided missiles very well.

Dude, I know a lot about IR guided missiles. Especially the AIM-9 models, Stinger, and russian SA-7. But you don't quiet get it. I'll explain in detail for you...

When a missile (such as a AIM-9) is fired at a aircraft that it has "lock-on" it will follow that heat source and only that heat source. But when that aircarft flares, the flares are so close to the heat source (just a foot or 2 away at start) the missile gets confused because the heat source it had locked on has split into 2 heat sources and it decides what heat source it should follow. But like I said before, it doesn't matter if a alternative heat source (such as a second aircraft with afterburners) is in the missile's line of sight because it will stay on the LOOKED target. Unless the locked target is so closed to the alternative heat source that it makes the heat source look like a single heat source that splits into two.

It can be confusing explaining in text. If you still don't get it I'll try to draw it out for you. But trust me. I'm right about this. The government would sue Raytheon if they knew their missiles would go for another aircraft when the locked aircraft didn't flare or out maneuver the missile.

[Dr-X]

But here's what you obviously dont understand - these aren't real missiles. They're game missiles. They're not manufactured by Raytheon, they're just graphics and code, made by Dice. This means they can do whatever the hell they want them to do. And this means they're not going to give you a 100% solid lock, or it would suck to fly helicopters. Are you starting to understand? If someone fires a real IIR missile at a helicopter, it has almost no chance of escape. Do you think this would improve gameplay? I dont, and I'm willing to bet my left nut 90% of BF2 players agree with me.

[80083r]

So, what you're saying is that a missile detects a heat source, and goes straight for that heat source, even if a stronger source is present in it's range? That's what you're saying, right?

But then you go on to say that the missile WILL be confused by flares. The point of flares to to create a larger heat source than the planes engines (hence why in real planes, you drop flares, decrease throttle, and pull away). So where exactly are you coming from with this? I dont think you understand IIR guided missiles very well.

Yes - it's confused by flares because they are in the same area as the original heat source.

The same thing happens if you fly past one of the oil burning rigs. If it's between the missile and the heat source, the missile gets confused. It's got very simple software.

The idea of flares is that one heat source is now several heat sources, and the missile can only hit one.

It doesn't go for the strongest heat source, it goes for the one you are pointing at, unless something splits off from it, or something that is indistinguishable from that event.

[Teriander]

But here's what you obviously dont understand - these aren't real missiles. They're game missiles. They're not manufactured by Raytheon, they're just graphics and code, made by Dice. This means they can do whatever the hell they want them to do. And this means they're not going to give you a 100% solid lock, or it would suck to fly helicopters. Are you starting to understand? If someone fires a real IIR missile at a helicopter, it has almost no chance of escape. Do you think this would improve gameplay? I dont, and I'm willing to bet my left nut 90% of BF2 players agree with me.

Well now you're just dodging our discussion. Part of your defense was " I dont think you understand IIR guided missiles very well." and now you're telling me "They're game missiles." What do you want to talk about? Game missiles? Real missiles? Or both? Since I've cleared you up on real missiles, I'll talk about the game missiles...

Sure I know they're just code made by Dice. And I know a real IR missile fired at a helicopter it will have almost no chance to escape. And no Im not expecting this in game. But Im Definitely not expecting it to just go after a friendly aircraft because it feels like it. Thats just plain stupid. And thats what this thread is about.

[Tobacco]

When a missile (such as a AIM-9) is fired at a aircraft that it has "lock-on" it will follow that heat source and only that heat source. But when that aircarft flares....


Or evades your poorly timed missle, you will miss or possibly shot down a Friendly. Dude, if they made it any easer you would be complaining about that to, stop fighting the game and have fun already.


T :confused:

[sumguyhavinfun]

i thought i could email ea and ask but my chances of getting a reply are the same as hitting an enemy air target with their missiles so i thought i would just ask the anagram servant "whats lock on ea" and the reply was:

HEAT LACKS NO OW

or

HEAT SLACK ON OW

and

CLOWNS HEAT AOK

also

HEAT SAW NO LOCK

;)

[tk471138]

Are you starting to understand? If someone fires a real IIR missile at a helicopter, it has almost no chance of escape. Do you think this would improve gameplay? I dont, and I'm willing to bet my left nut 90% of BF2 players agree with me.
you know what else ruins game play those air fortresses bh its now what would improve game play because any thing at this point will improve gameplay

[bballplayafors]

Just go in bomb mode, get right behind the enemy plane while it is firing straight, switch to missles lock on fire 2 he's dead. Even if he flares, it such close range its hard to dodge them. I take out fighters with bombers doing this all the time.

[Death Touch]

I agree 100 %. The AntiAircraft "design" in BF2 SUCKS Horribly!! You CANNOT get a kill EVER. The TV guided Missiles are so hard to control because you're going so fast. And the emplaced "stingers" must be there for show because they don't DO SH*T!
Even the SRAW does not take out a Helo at close distance. I really hope they start to figure how to correct this misguoded attempt at balance, because currently, it stinks.

[Teriander]

Or evades your poorly timed missle, you will miss or possibly shot down a Friendly. Dude, if they made it any easer you would be complaining about that to, stop fighting the game and have fun already.


T :confused:

You're so wrong. If an evade happen because of my poorly timed missiles is 100% ok. Because I know it's my fault I missed and not poor game coding. But that's not the case here and you know it. I don't know why you guys pretend it isn't a problem. I bet you're the kind of guy who would say "Nothing is wrong with BF2 Blackhawks, its just a game it's fine.. leave it like it is." right? And when EA fixes it in a future patch you'll say "I always knew something was up with the Blackhawks, EA read my mind."

Im not fighting the game. I like it.. I just wish they would make it better and get rid of the things that make people say "That's B*ullsh*t!". You know what Im talking about, so stop fighting me.

[Handy388]

I do believe you havent taken relative and physical math's yet have you? Because you wouldn't be posting that if you had. The velocity of a missle (the amount of space it can displace from one point to another in a period of time, and in which direction), determines the outcome. Although most aircraft in real life cant pull a super sharp turn at high velocities neither can missles. And in this game since missles can't make a 360 or a 90 for that matter it allows for dodging. Once the missle overshoots its target with heatseeking, it will lock onto the next source within a given path and range.

In real life a roll wouldn't do much help againsed a heat seeking missile, however various manuvers that could tear your aircraft apart could be attempted, at which point the missle will overshoot hence loosing its lock.

Remember a missle is not aerodynamically designed for control, instead for speed and that speed on impact.


you are gravely wrong, modern missiles have an overload of 40G, and aircraft has an overload of 9G, that means missiles turns WAY BETTER THAN aircraft.

[SilverHawk]

It didn't surprise me how under informed people are about aircraft gear these days. Real Life Missiles (AIM-9L for USMC, AA-11 Archer for MEC, China) operate under a very simple system heat seekers all the more so since it doesn't have to do anything except track down an emission source (Like the AGM-45 Shrike or AGM-88 HARM does for SAM Radars) To put it simply, missiles in BF2 act like Heatseekers that are "Un-Caged" or are allowed to self aquire a target to attack (With no help from the Aircrafts Computer Systems) This is how AIM-9Ls work with A-10A Thunderbolt IIs since they posses no Air Intercept Radar. In this mode, the missile simply chases the largest heat source it sees and explodes when it gets within range. The Problem is, or that EA seems to have is that when your missile meets this source it goes BOOM it doesn't swerve to hit the nearest Solid Object (ALWAYS a friendly it seems) and implode on that which results in a narly amount of team-kills and reduces Emplaced AA to Emergency Anti-Tank Duties and AA Tanks to Anti-Infantry.

EA/DICE simply need to adjust that when your foe drops flares your missiles EXPLODE on them, not reaquire the nearest friendly aircraft (I have been lucky a couple times getting enemies, but only because they were the only things in the sky.) Some might say "Well, we have Lock On Tone so your whole speil is BS!" Well correct you are, but tell that to EA on modeling Missile Behaviour. Since you aquire tone on your HUD, your missile has been programmed to pursue that target to the best of it's abilities, if it misses due to countermeasures it explodes on them, if it's out manuevered it simply goes "dead" and self explodes after it's burn motor runs out (About 9 seconds total).

So, EA/DICE, Get your head out of your asses and FIX IT! :mad:

Edit : Yes, true on the G loads Missiles can take, but planes can make 10G turns, not 9Gs (Though Pilot Endurance is severly shortened). If your CTH Indicator said 100% in your HUD and you foe didn't use countermeasures and only jinked, he would be toast. But Flares and reducing your Thrust increases your Escape Window or your foes Window to being able to evade the missile along with what angle you/he fired at or at what distance/CTH the missile was fired. Air to Air combat had a lot of varables but that's still no excuse on how Missiles Work in this game.

[Teriander]

It didn't surprise me how under informed people are about aircraft gear these days. Real Life Missiles (AIM-9L for USMC, AA-11 Archer for MEC, China) operate under a very simple system heat seekers all the more so since it doesn't have to do anything except track down an emission source (Like the AGM-45 Shrike or AGM-88 HARM does for SAM Radars) To put it simply, missiles in BF2 act like Heatseekers that are "Un-Caged" or are allowed to self aquire a target to attack (With no help from the Aircrafts Computer Systems) This is how AIM-9Ls work with A-10A Thunderbolt IIs since they posses no Air Intercept Radar. In this mode, the missile simply chases the largest heat source it sees and explodes when it gets within range. The Problem is, or that EA seems to have is that when your missile meets this source it goes BOOM it doesn't swerve to hit the nearest Solid Object (ALWAYS a friendly it seems) and implode on that which results in a narly amount of team-kills and reduces Emplaced AA to Emergency Anti-Tank Duties and AA Tanks to Anti-Infantry.

EA/DICE simply need to adjust that when your foe drops flares your missiles EXPLODE on them, not reaquire the nearest friendly aircraft (I have been lucky a couple times getting enemies, but only because they were the only things in the sky.) Some might say "Well, we have Lock On Tone so your whole speil is BS!" Well correct you are, but tell that to EA on modeling Missile Behaviour. Since you aquire tone on your HUD, your missile has been programmed to pursue that target to the best of it's abilities, if it misses due to countermeasures it explodes on them, if it's out manuevered it simply goes "dead" and self explodes after it's burn motor runs out (About 9 seconds total).

So, EA/DICE, Get your head out of your asses and FIX IT! :mad:

Amen brother! Thank god you came along! I thought I was surrounded by morons!

[thingonaspring]

Its a bug, if missiles were to instantly lock onto other aircraft after missing their first locked target, then they wouldn't even need a lock on in the first place and you'd just be able to fire all your missiles 50 km away from the us carrier and destroy all aircraft sitting on it. But the funny thing is even if you do have a lockon to another aircraft on the edge of your view, it actually locks onto the aircraft your facing towards. They won't even get a lockon detecting message. The whole things a bug.

[Teriander]

Its a bug, if missiles were to instantly lock onto other aircraft after missing their first locked target, then they wouldn't even need a lock on in the first place and you'd just be able to fire all your missiles 50 km away from the us carrier and destroy all aircraft sitting on it. But the funny thing is even if you do have a lockon to another aircraft on the edge of your view, it actually locks onto the aircraft your facing towards. They won't even get a lockon detecting message. The whole things a bug.

Well Im glad others are acknowledging that it's a bug. Unlike some people like Dr-X and Tobacco who are trying to defend EA and convince everyone that it's just me and nothing is wrong BF2 missile system.

It would be nice if EA talked about this issue somewhere. I hope they don't think everything is fine with it.

[Fishw0rk]

Umm whoever think the missles "seek" a greater heatsource in BF2 is wrong. I had a situation where I was dogfighting another jet on Dalian Plant. I was behind him, get a solid lock on tone and fire a missle. The missle gets close to him bu then immediately diverts away from him and hits a friendly blackhawk--earning me a bunch of TKs. Neither the jet or the blackhawk popped flares. So tell me does DICE think the blackhawk engines give off more heat than a jet?

These missles work half the time at best. Don't real life missles have a proximity-based explosion anyway? I thought I read that somewhere. I agree the missle should ****ing explode when it hits a flare, not fly acorss the map to kill a friendly.

[ScarySquirrel]

i really have never had any problems with the AA, i dont know why people moan about it so much

[stormwolf]

The missile system in BF2 just sucks. Period. AA, AG, and SAM, all suck in this game.

When I have a lock-on tone on a aircraft and I fire. My missile should go ONLY for that aircarft (without flares being dropped). Too many time I've had lets say 2 aircarft in the area, I lock on to the enemy, fire a missile, and it goes for the second aircraft that was in the area resulting in a friendly fire. EVEN THOUGH I CLEARLY HAD A LOCK ON THE ENEMY. That's just plain stupid. EA does not know what "locked on" means.

How many times have you shot down a friendly aircarft when you had lock on an enemy? Even if he doesn't flare, at least 1 of your missiles are going to start following another aircraft. And you're going to get punished for a teamkill. It's the last straw with me and this game. So many things piss me off with this game Im going to stop playing till a majority of them are fixed. It's not fun when it's just stupid.

EA should take advice from people in the military who know a thing or 2 about weapons and the way they work. Im not going to list all the problems with the weapons in this game because then you'll be reading a book. But you know how much they all suck or are just plain retarded. Im quiting till this game gets some issues worked out.


Game balance. You'll get the question there.
If they wanted to be consistent with real world, they could have armed the jets with the Israeli Python 4 - the first "See and Kill" missile (the updated version of "Fire and forget"). This type of missile has a claimed 97% of hitting the enemy, no matter the angle you shot the missile. It's enough you saw the enemy, got a lock, and pulled the trigger.

But what game play would that be?

[Dloan]

What others have said about lock behaviour and chasing down friendlies, but I would also like to add that I've also watched missiles go through targets and I've also watched them seem to bounce away at the second (as have others). When this happens, the most likely result is a TK through absolutely no fault of your own or countermeasures from the enemy and that really takes the biscuit.

[BigBadBob]

I think they should purposely allow you to lock on to friendly aircraft only. I think that is the only way to take down enemies with AA :rolleyes:

strangely, that just might work.

[Munchies]

Well there is one simple problem and it is all AA missiles from the lockon system to their manuverbility SUCK ASS, i've had my missile miss a chopper by a cm for no reason and veer off and hit a friendly plane half a map away, I can count the number of times i've hit a plane with the stingers on one hand all you have to do is turn either side or just press x, sometimes you can just as well hover about the stinger site with the jsf and it will miss you and get the stinger guy kicked out of the server, the lock on is useless and the missiles are the same as BFV.

They lied to you GI :cry:

[Murtey]

I think the question you should be asking is.

Does the missile know what heat source to goto if theres multiple heat sources? Well the answer is... When the planes are going at the high speed they go at, the missile can be soon disrupted and hit another heat source.

I'm sure its happened in real life before. You're right its not perfect but i think they have done a damn good job of how the planes feel and move.

[Teriander]

Game balance. You'll get the question there.
If they wanted to be consistent with real world, they could have armed the jets with the Israeli Python 4 - the first "See and Kill" missile (the updated version of "Fire and forget"). This type of missile has a claimed 97% of hitting the enemy, no matter the angle you shot the missile. It's enough you saw the enemy, got a lock, and pulled the trigger.

But what game play would that be?

Game balance? You're staying the missiles in BF2 suck for game balance reasons? Thats just stupid. Because everyone knows a good pilot in BF2 owns the game. Period. Nothing is taking down a good pilot except another good pilot so you better pray your team has one. So if you want game balance you better tell EA to fix the Anti-Air system. Then we'll see game balance.

As I said before, Im not expecting the missiles to shot down everything. But if a pilot doesn't flare, and doesn't take evasive action, my missile better hit his a** and not turn for a friendly.

[IVfluids]

i cant believe you guys have that many problems with that stuff. i spend the majority of my time flying in this game, and I rarely get tks from missels. i'm not sure how to answer that one. I've used aa nests before, but I don't recall the odd and bizarre behaviour you guys are describing.

maybe i just chose to fire at a different time and other miscellaneous crap, like the angle the aircraft is firing in relation to the angle my missel has to travel to hit him.

this game isn't based on real life, only thing even remotely similar to life in this game is the models being used.

[Brutus]

Another thing to note about IR missiles is that if they hit a counter-measure they will not explode on contact with the CM. Instead they will go through and try and re-attack a target. If the pilot did not do an s maneuver or some other kind of jink the IR missile would have a good chance to re-acquire.

The Tunguska is one of the best mobile AA equipment around and is command guided AND the missile is semi-active radar guided. The system uses the SA-19 missile.

A lot in this game is not accurate, but I would like to see AA a little more effective.

For those that don't know, a SAM is not intended to hit a target. It is intended to get close and then explode sending a cone of shrapnel out towards its target.

[||Animal||]

Since someone brought up choppers, let's talk about that. Hitting a friggin chopper with a missile is nearly impossible. I've fired more missiles through the open doors on the blackhawk than I care to count. The only way that I can hit a blackhawk is if I'm on the US and fire at an enemy chopper or plane. It's far too easy to avoid enemy missiles in planes but it's even easier to do so in an attack chopper. What the hell were they thinking when they wrote this code? All a chopper has to do is move 4 feet in any direction and you will miss them. You morons that are going to say that you have no trouble with it are full of crap. Just watch when other planes engage enemy choppers. They almost never fire missiles now because they know they won't hit. They just go in with the guns blazing. It's not about balance. These air vehicles come with flares. I can fly around indefinitely without popping flares. I'm a pilot and I want it to be harder to avoid missiles! Previous posters were absolutely correct regarding lock-on. There's no point. It might as well be BFV with heatseekers.

[Super Six Three]

The missile system in BF2 just sucks. Period. AA, AG, and SAM, all suck in this game.

When I have a lock-on tone on a aircraft and I fire. My missile should go ONLY for that aircarft (without flares being dropped). Too many time I've had lets say 2 aircarft in the area, I lock on to the enemy, fire a missile, and it goes for the second aircraft that was in the area resulting in a friendly fire. EVEN THOUGH I CLEARLY HAD A LOCK ON THE ENEMY. That's just plain stupid. EA does not know what "locked on" means.

How many times have you shot down a friendly aircarft when you had lock on an enemy? Even if he doesn't flare, at least 1 of your missiles are going to start following another aircraft. And you're going to get punished for a teamkill. It's the last straw with me and this game. So many things piss me off with this game Im going to stop playing till a majority of them are fixed. It's not fun when it's just stupid.

EA should take advice from people in the military who know a thing or 2 about weapons and the way they work. Im not going to list all the problems with the weapons in this game because then you'll be reading a book. But you know how much they all suck or are just plain retarded. Im quiting till this game gets some issues worked out.

Remember its HEAT SEAKING MISSLE!!!! if it missesmit goes to a another heated target

[bam23]

Remember its HEAT SEAKING MISSLE!!!! if it missesmit goes to a another heated target

The problem here is that they are USELESS even against heat sources... Unless they are friendly.

[imported_Disturbed]

EA doesnt know how to spell EA...

dont ask questions regarding their intelligence... they have none.

any company that leaves out a fav. server list on a sure-to-be popular
Online FPS game are idiots.

EA sucks as a publisher.. EPIC makes them look like a bunch of noobs.

I wish John Madden had signed with EPIC, we'd all be enjoying much
better games right now, with less gestapo control, less bugs, most
importantly better feedback. :)

[Nickel5]

OK what I think we as a community are complaining about is twhat happened to me today;

I'm in a stinger battery locking onto a Helo.
Helicopter getting tone.
Tone received and locked.
Helicopter drops flares.
I hold my fire. Flares drop to the ground.
I now only have helicopter in my sights with lock on.
I fire and missile go at helicopter then veer off into the distance to hit an unseen friendly.

Let me repeat...I'm locked on, no flares, no visibility of any other friendly units and these "LOCKED ON" missiles, fired directly at the "LOCKED ON" target decide to fly off at an absurd angle to hit something else.

I mean I'm all for accidentally hitting a friendly in sight, or a burning tower, but they simply need to increase the chance that a "LOCKED ON" missile hits what it is locked onto.

I'm simply not even caring about lock on anymore...just fire the damn things.

:)

Nickel5

[SilverHawk]

Actually, IR Missiles DO explode on Counter Measures and DO NOT reaquire targets if their intial target is lost, they simply go dead and explode when their burn motor goes out. It's hard-coded into the missile to prevent the very damn thing that is happening on BF2, IR Missiles locking up the next closeset heat source and going after it. Even now that wouldn't happen because all missiles query an enemies IFF Transponder to see if it's friend or foe in the first place.

[TrentasaurusRex]

I don't know about that if they are american i wouldn't put it past them

yeah.. american military technology is the worst... i'm sure its all because of bush's stupidity right?

[Brutus]

Actually, IR Missiles DO explode on Counter Measures and DO NOT reaquire targets if their intial target is lost, they simply go dead and explode when their burn motor goes out. It's hard-coded into the missile to prevent the very damn thing that is happening on BF2, IR Missiles locking up the next closeset heat source and going after it. Even now that wouldn't happen because all missiles query an enemies IFF Transponder to see if it's friend or foe in the first place.

The AIM-9 does not have an IFF interrigator, and it does have counter counter-measures which allow it to re-acquire a target. I'm curious about your background. I was an Air Intercept Control in the Navy and I am now a Project Manager for the Air Force. Part of the test project that I was in charge of was determining the High AoA tolerance for the F-16 with an AIM-9X and Sniper pod, as well as other projects. The AIM-9 IS designed to detonate near the target, not on contact, and will not detonate on a flare, at least as far as I am understanding it. Tomorrow I will ask the weapons guys to make sure.

If you would like to know more unclassified information about missiles I suggest you look here.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/index.html

It is about 90% accurate.

[Flux_69]

i also had some problems with the missles...got the front turret on a carrier and locked on a plane..then the plane came out of range and my missles missed...seconds later i got 5-6 tk's but i dunno why...maybe my missle hit a full BH...but i haven't a chance to say sry or find out what happend..i was kicked...those thing suck big time

[Stripper_Clown]

First of all, for those of you debating the symantics of real life missles, shush. Thats not what this is about. Second, if a helicopter is hovering and its the only aircraft in sight, you get a missle lock from an aa turret and fire the missles, they should NOT swerve away from the helicopter a foot away from it and hit a friendly plane you cannot even see half way across the map. But it does. I'm not saying it should be extremely accurate, but its rediculous how retarded those missles are.

[Lighthammer]

First of all, for those of you debating the symantics of real life missles, shush. Thats not what this is about. Second, if a helicopter is hovering and its the only aircraft in sight, you get a missle lock from an aa turret and fire the missles, they should NOT swerve away from the helicopter a foot away from it and hit a friendly plane you cannot even see half way across the map. But it does. I'm not saying it should be extremely accurate, but its rediculous how retarded those missles are.

Absolutely correct! I find it strange how there are more people who've come into this thread and stated the same thing and then there is the select very few, for whatever reason, have to come out and state that they've never had that happen to them before! Either they are lying off their arse or they've spent maybe a total of 5 minutes ever in a Stinger or GLA.

I can't even begin to explain how many times I've fired at a hovering heli with full lock tone and completely miss the thing! I've had heli pilots fly within a couple hundred meters from my stinger, get full lock on, fire fox 1 and fox 2 and watch them completely miss the thing and fly off either to do nothing or hit a friendly target.

Once I had full lock on an MEC plane on the Clean Sweep map and fired both stingers only to have one hit the enemy plane and kill it and the other hit a nearby friendly plane almost at the same exact time and kill him too! I took alot of pride getting my air defense ribbon but i'd by lying off my arse if I said it wasn't alot of pain in the arse work and a handfull of friendly kills later to get. :mad:

_______________
http://img.tehsig.com/usr_2445/tpl_0/image.jpg
http://images5.theimagehosting.com/bf2scenepurple0dn.jpg

[noobeffect]

The missile system in BF2 just sucks. Period. AA, AG, and SAM, all suck in this game.

When I have a lock-on tone on a aircraft and I fire. My missile should go ONLY for that aircarft (without flares being dropped). Too many time I've had lets say 2 aircarft in the area, I lock on to the enemy, fire a missile, and it goes for the second aircraft that was in the area resulting in a friendly fire. EVEN THOUGH I CLEARLY HAD A LOCK ON THE ENEMY. That's just plain stupid. EA does not know what "locked on" means.

EA should take advice from people in the military who know a thing or 2 about weapons and the way they work.

Someone needs to learn a thing or two about the military themselves because you know nothing about air combat.

[LT_Bootymac]

I've had that happen to me a few times, but generally I've been really successful in the Stingers.. None of that crazy stuff happens to me a lot :P

[Frenchman]

Yet again we seem to have a problem researching stuff. All the IR tracking missles the US (and most other countries) use are extremely resistant to countermeasures. This means they are also highly resistant to losing their lock. Add that to the fact that they all have IFF receivers to prevent them from locking onto friendly aircraft in the first place means these missles should not kill friendlys nearly as much as they do.

[Teriander]

Someone needs to learn a thing or two about the military themselves because you know nothing about air combat.
I don't? Educate me. But before you do make sure you read all of my post about what I said on air combat, because Im sure you'll lose the argument against me.

[Teriander]

I've had that happen to me a few times, but generally I've been really successful in the Stingers.. None of that crazy stuff happens to me a lot :P

It actually happens quiet often. But the scenario is kind of rare. You have to have a friendly aircraft (jet or helo) in the area and a enemy aircraft in the same area for this situation to work. When you lock on the enemy, and a friend is in front or behind the enemy regardless if its to the left, right, up or down. At least 1 of your missiles will go for the friendly... Even if the enemy doesn't flare. Trust me... IT will happen.

[Kleinzeit]

If you could point a TOW upwards, you'd hit a lot more enemies and a lot less friendlies.

As it is, it's obvious that each side had their AA turrets designed by the enemy, so as to spare as many enemy and kill as many friendly as possible. Rather than sit in an AA turret, you'd be better off trying to down enemy aircraft with a shotgun, or maybe by flicking balls of snot at them.

Imagine if every time you opened up with the BH minigun, the bullets magically moved through the air and killed friendlies on the other side of the map.

If you are using a weapon in the way it is intended and racking up more TKs than good kills, something is desperately wrong. The pilots, who are all deluded about their real level of skill, say it is as it should be. I wonder if they would think that if their bombs, bullets and missiles homed on friendlies and missed enemies regardless of range.
What if 3 pistol shots were enough to kill a blackhawk?

Were they regularly finishing rounds with scores in the negative, they'd scream bloody murder.

I don't give a flying **** what AA missiles do or do not do IRL. The fact remains that ingame the only counterweight to aircraft is broken beyond use.

It's obvious that the cretins in beta testing and the coders on the AA couldn't find their ass with both hands.

[Lighthammer]

If you could point a TOW upwards, you'd hit a lot more enemies and a lot less friendlies.

As it is, it's obvious that each side had their AA turrets designed by the enemy, so as to spare as many enemy and kill as many friendly as possible. Rather than sit in an AA turret, you'd be better off trying to down enemy aircraft with a shotgun, or maybe by flicking balls of snot at them.

Imagine if every time you opened up with the BH minigun, the bullets magically moved through the air and killed friendlies on the other side of the map.

If you are using a weapon in the way it is intended and racking up more TKs than good kills, something is desperately wrong. The pilots, who are all deluded about their real level of skill, say it is as it should be. I wonder if they would think that if their bombs, bullets and missiles homed on friendlies and missed enemies regardless of range.
What if 3 pistol shots were enough to kill a blackhawk?

Were they regularly finishing rounds with scores in the negative, they'd scream bloody murder.

I don't give a flying **** what AA missiles do or do not do IRL. The fact remains that ingame the only counterweight to aircraft is broken beyond use.

It's obvious that the cretins in beta testing and the coders on the AA couldn't find their ass with both hands.

LMAO! Well said! :D

[Brutus]

Double post

[Brutus]

Yet again we seem to have a problem researching stuff. All the IR tracking missles the US (and most other countries) use are extremely resistant to countermeasures. This means they are also highly resistant to losing their lock. Add that to the fact that they all have IFF receivers to prevent them from locking onto friendly aircraft in the first place means these missles should not kill friendlys nearly as much as they do.

I'm not sure that this is correct. IFF is kind of a misnomer. IFF does not determine if an A/C, helo, ship, etc is a friend is through mode 4. It does not determine if a target is an enemy. Civilian A/C does not have mode 4.

If an IR missile had an IFF interragator, which I don't think the AIM-9 does, it would only be able to tell if an A/C was a friend, not an enemy.

Another thing to note is that many combat pilots will switch off their IFF when over hostile territory, since it is easier to track IFF than a radar return in certain areas.

If you can show me where it says that A/A missiles use IFF that would be great.

[Brucewillis2]

I don't? Educate me. But before you do make sure you read all of my post about what I said on air combat, because Im sure you'll lose the argument against me.

OMG buddy... I've just read this thread. You make heaps of sense! Because its basic common sense... there's something seriously wrong with the way AA works in this game.

I can't stand the way the stingers spin off to hit a friendly. And the fact a good aircraft pilot dominates in this game without good aircraft competition.

EA and Dice NEED to fix this. At the moment helicopters and aircraft dominate the game, whether it's capping flags, bombing, hellfire attacks on tanks... they need to balance it out by making the AA missiles work and therefore causing pilots to sweat it out a bit more. :evil:

[Frenchman]

The missles don't use IFF, but they lock onto a target and resist switching to a new target. That's the whole point of the ECCM on the missles. The missle doesn't know between a flare, a plane or anything else. It merely knows intensity and what the profile of the original target was.

A IFF system will merely look in the same cone as the missle sees, and see if there is an IFF signal. If there is, the idea is to prevent firing a locked on missle at a known friendly target. No missle has an IFF system ONBOARD, it relies on the targeting aircraft for that information.

The point is, if you want to make the system work in a logical, workable manner, you simply prevent a lock on if there is a friendly target in the viewfinder. And if you fire the missle, it attempts to hit it's original target or will be lured off and detonate on counter measures. One thing that needs to be understood... THESE MISSLES WILL NOT GO INTO A REAQUISITION MODE. If they lose their lock, they safe up and become duds. It'd be pretty damn unusual for a missle to switch it's lock onto another airplane and destroy it. It's also fairly doubtful that a missle would have enough energy left to actually hit and destroy the plane.

The behavior is VERY inconsistant with the way these missles work. The easiest solution is to make them more realistic. If it works in real life, it's gonna work in the game.

[SilverHawk]

Isn't that what I said in my first post in this thread? I swear there must be in echo in these forums! :rolleyes:

[IVfluids]

...I find it strange how there are more people who've come into this thread and stated the same thing and then there is the select very few, for whatever reason, have to come out and state that they've never had that happen to them before! Either they are lying off their arse or they've spent maybe a total of 5 minutes ever in a Stinger or GLA....

Maybe us few have found our own ways to use them and realize what angles we should not exceed when firing missel at a target moving in a certain direction. I can tell you why I know when to fire a missel at a plane and when not to, because 80% of my play time in this game is spent with me flying in a jet, and because of that, I am constantly being fired upon. I rarely ever, ever, get hit by one. Now, I take what I know about my flying, how I ditch missels, and I apply that to when I am the one that is firing missels off.

I find it strange how so many of you have problems, and so few of us don't.

[Brutus]

Isn't that what I said in my first post in this thread? I swear there must be in echo in these forums! :rolleyes:

You sort of said the same thing. You also said that IR missiles have IFF, which they don't. French clarified what he meant stating that the launching platform does the IFF interigation, which it does, the missile has nothing to do with that.

An AIM-9 WILL NOT explode on a CM, IT WILL fly through it and if the A/C does not do an s manuever or some other kind of jinking action the missile has a good chance to still hit the target.

[[13]VisciousDog]

Wow..this thread has a lot of twists in it. Some reply..it is this way. Then..no..no..no..It is that way. You are wrong..it is this way. C'mon guys..get it together. I afraid to state how it is, due to someone will respond, else. Their is a couple of guys who have it straight here; "Silverhawk" and "Teriander" .. Then others twist it up.

I fly a lot in Falcon 4.0, and Lock-On: Modern Air combat. Those are sims. You can out manuaver missiles, and out manuaver the enemy on your tail. Their is problems with the AA vehicles. Everytime I fires AA guns (Like at a enemy Heli), I get punished, also team Vehicle damage. I do see the AA missiles go a stray after I see the flares are used. I say.."Well, he used his defence. Worked ok, but find "Team Vehicle damage" message. So, now I stay away from the AA vehicles, or use em on gound troops. Also take cover from above. Tanks are best on shooting down helis.

If the avionics in BF2 were like Lomac and F4. I would kick butt. Fellow game players say I do awesome in BF2 for flying. I do have problems with the Avionics in BF2. They are cheezy. Also players fighting for aircrafts (like babies), so they can do kamakazi stuff. It is a real mess.

[Teriander]

Maybe us few have found our own ways to use them and realize what angles we should not exceed when firing missel at a target moving in a certain direction. I can tell you why I know when to fire a missel at a plane and when not to, because 80% of my play time in this game is spent with me flying in a jet, and because of that, I am constantly being fired upon. I rarely ever, ever, get hit by one. Now, I take what I know about my flying, how I ditch missels, and I apply that to when I am the one that is firing missels off.

I find it strange how so many of you have problems, and so few of us don't.

Dude, you might not even notice that you scored a team kill. When you're flying and you've got an enemy locked up, you're not paying any attention to the text that's scrolling on the left of your screen, all you're trying to do is shoot down a bandit. So you fire off about 2-6 missiles. I'm willing to bet my unlimited med packs that If you have a friendly who happens to be in front, side, or about to wiz passed you, at least one of your missiles will go for him, especially if it's a helo, and might even kill him. The only way you're going to know is if you got lucky enough to witness it, read the text to the left that you scored a TK, or you just got kick banned.

It easier for you to notice it happen when you're on the ground in a SAM because you have time to do other things like read the text and type "WTF" when you score a teamkill.

[IVfluids]

i dont make stupid shots like that when i see teammates nearby on my minimap. 2-6 missels at a time is laughable, i lite them up with my minigun first, fire a missle and continue to lay down the lead as it chases them, done deal. if they manage to outmaneuver the one missel that i shot and it chases another target down, it will only do one shot of damage. you guys rely on the missels too much for starts, from what i am reading here. i do read the **** in the chatbox also, i like to see if the same idiot i just shot down was the same idiot that keeps getting up in the air after he has been shot down several other times already.

i haven't been booted off a server in a long time for tks, and when i do get tks, 95% of the time it was from me making a bad judgement when dropping bombs and thinking i could thread them inbetween my teammates and on the enemy.

i'll take your unlimited med packs, even thought they don't do me much good in the air. but i guarantee you that every time i shoot a missel off, i make damn sure that the person i am aiming for is going to be the intended target way more often than not. i pay alot of attention to my minimap, mainly because i dont like dropping bombs on my teammates. the same principle, 95% of the time, i wont drop a bomb on a base if i see blue arrows in it, i wont fire missels if there is a friendly in the same grid with me either. just because i get a missel lock, i dont start jamming on the 'fire' button, i wait for them to be at the right angle and travel direction.

[Teriander]

i dont make stupid shots like that when i see teammates nearby on my minimap. 2-6 missels at a time is laughable, i lite them up with my minigun first, fire a missle and continue to lay down the lead as it chases them, done deal. if they manage to outmaneuver the one missel that i shot and it chases another target down, it will only do one shot of damage. you guys rely on the missels too much for starts, from what i am reading here. i do read the **** in the chatbox also, i like to see if the same idiot i just shot down was the same idiot that keeps getting up in the air after he has been shot down several other times already....

Dude, First of all, the word is "missile". Not "missel" or "missle".
Second, you just said "I don't make stupid mistakes like that when I see a teammate nearby." Then you wont understand the issue this thread is about.

This is about the missiles locking onto friendlies when firing at an enemy. Not about how much of an ace you are at flying. So your an amazing pilot. Way to go. That doesn't mean nothing is wrong with the missiles in this game. Light up that bandit with the minigun.. Good job. But we're talking about the crap missile system that gets distracted by friendly aircraft.

[IVfluids]

Wow, breaking out the grammar police mode as a defense for your arguement, nice lol. Hello, I am the Grammar Nazi, please use proper punkshuashun dot your Ts and cross your Eyes, asswad!!! lmao. nice.

it has nothing about me being 'ace', if that is what you want to call me, it has everything to do with firing the **** at the right time and wrong time. I never laid claim to being that, you did, i was just telling you my experience with the missels, but apparantly you believe i am just trying to pimp myself for whatever reason. if i needed a pat on the back to feel better, i'd reach over and do it myself.

now, as I said the MISSILE will **** up if you take a shitty ass shot with it, you expect the ****in thing to hit the target every time just cuz you have a lock? where would the ****in fun be in that?

for the sake of god, i flew my ass off on two maps of oman today and did not get one single team damage or tk as the result of any MISSILE (nazi) i fired, and that included smaktarding a helicopter on the deck of the carrier from maximum lock distance. Why on earth, please enlighten me, is this phenomenom not happening to me anymore?

Believe it or not, if you'd look at my posts about this subject a while back, I had the same opinion as you guys. I just learned how to work around it instead of *****ing about the inferiority of it and learned that alot of the problem was the way I was using it.

Also, to get your panties out of a knot for a while, maybe you should have read the xfire interview on the ea bf2 homepage:



[Xfire] Caracturus: Bl!ZZ4rD asks: Is it planed to add an Anti-Air class?

[EA] DieFledermaus: There are no plans at this time to add an additional kit focused on anti-air...I think we feel we can deal with the current community issues surrounding aircraft with other fixes


dont go all hitler on the poor guy who typed 'planed' either, not everyone uses spellcheck before they hit the reply button.

[[13]VisciousDog]

IVfluids;

Were posting how bad the Ground to air vehicles are getting the team vehicle damage, and punished when hitting enemy targets in the air, with a lock. The enemy doesn't get the message "Punish" or "Not", so their is a timer on these punish messages. When you do not press before the timer runs out. The punish will execute on its own. Enemy doesn't see this, and possibly gain points. I do not know about that though. But the person who is firing on the enemy aircrafts using, ground to air, will get negative points and these messages. I did get them a lot. I do not use ground to air vehicles on flying aircrafts anymore. Only tanks on helis and take cover from jets.

[Super Six Three]

Actually, IR Missiles DO explode on Counter Measures and DO NOT reaquire targets if their intial target is lost, they simply go dead and explode when their burn motor goes out. It's hard-coded into the missile to prevent the very damn thing that is happening on BF2, IR Missiles locking up the next closeset heat source and going after it. Even now that wouldn't happen because all missiles query an enemies IFF Transponder to see if it's friend or foe in the first place.

thats what i said

[IVfluids]

@ Viscious

I'm not trying to sound like an ass, seriously, but I don't see were the 'punish' option was even brought up in the first post. This is about the aa missels in the game, as far as that goes, the ones mounted on the jets are aa missels. guy just mentioned he was pissed that the aa code sucks and he gets punished for hitting his own teammate, it doesnt appear to be a debate about the punish option. even if it were part of the arguement, 99% of the idiots in the servers would punish you right off the bat before even seeing what happened. as far as that is concerned, the punish system should be removed or be 'not punish' by default.

the few times i am actually on the ground using ground aa, i dont park my ass in it the whole time, your just asking to get your ass kicked doing that anyways. if the pilot repeatedly flies over the same base as me in the same manner, i line it up in the direction i know he will be passing by, get out, stand there til he passes over and fire away at his ass, ive had alot of good success with that. i do the same with helos, only i hit them once with an at round, then jump in the aa nest and fire away. it's not always that easy, but i have had alot of success with it.

[Void]

The missile system in BF2 just sucks. Period. AA, AG, and SAM, all suck in this game.

i can't agree more. :)

[-{DFA}-Brak710]

No, I think what EA missed was that a lock on is radar, not Heat seaking, in real life, a pilot whould never have a AA missle lock onto a refineries exaust stack.

SO, the missle finds the heat, not the locked on target, I think they:
A.) Forgot to remove the lock on system
or
B.) accidently programmed/added thr heat seaking properties.

[[13]VisciousDog]

@ Viscious

I'm not trying to sound like an ass, seriously, but I don't see were the 'punish' option was even brought up in the first post. This is about the aa missels in the game, as far as that goes, the ones mounted on the jets are aa missels.......


Oops..sorry..your right...

[IVfluids]

VisciousDog']Oops..sorry..your right...

np lol, it happens

[Piratehead]

zero


T


Off topic, but your handle/sig combo is brilliant.

[SilverHawk]

IR Missiles can lock up targets just like SARH and Active RADAR Missiles. Firing Un-Caged runs the risk on the missile going after a less then wanted target.

Oh, fun story to tell. Almost got Kick-Banned today on my favorite server because I was in a trail position on a Chinese J-10 and fired off all my missile armament. (Chances are you will never get a clear shot again for some time.) Lo and behold all the missiles pull a Matrix move and bend their trajectory paths perfectly around the J-10 and then dash off to smite a FULL BLACK HAWK 2 CPs AWAY! If more people didn't understand how much missiles on this game suck then I wouldn't have a fav server anymore! :cry:

[ISHII[IL]]

nobody was talking about realism.
it a arcade game so not everything realistic.
in that case dont ask too much and just enjoy the game because you look like you chase after stats and not for fun in the game.

[[13]VisciousDog]

I play bf2, and I really dislike playing arcade games. Arcade games are like Pac-Man, car racing for time, FPS shooting for points, Video games, game consoles, pc games. BF2 is a PC game, not arcade. Wish people would get that straight. I get offended when I see "Arcade" used in BF2.

[Brucewillis2]

']nobody was talking about realism.
it a arcade game so not everything realistic.
in that case dont ask too much and just enjoy the game because you look like you chase after stats and not for fun in the game.

yeah it's an arcade game but it's also based loosely around reality, when you fire your gun you want it to go in the right direction and not change course and hit a friendly... that would sux wouldn't it?, well that's what's happening with Ground to Air AA.

And something has to be done about those aircraft, you need some nasty AA to get rid of them. Time will tell what EA plans to do about this... and I believe there is enough of a discussion about air superiority within the Battlefield community to warrant a change.

[Teriander]

Wow, breaking out the grammar police mode as a defense for your arguement, nice lol. Hello, I am the Grammar Nazi, please use proper punkshuashun dot your Ts and cross your Eyes, asswad!!! lmao. nice.

Sorry man, I just hate stupidity. But I've already told you how to spell "missile" and you continue to spell it "missel". I can tell you have a hard time learning. Which explains why all of your explanations and theories behind the AA system sounds more like yappin instead of making sense. I would explain to you again what's going on with the AA system but then Im repeating myself. Not only do you have a hard time spelling, but a hard time reading as well.

So lets just pretend you're right, and nothing is wrong with BF2 missile system, and you're a ace pilot, and yadda yadda yadda.. happy?

[Brucewillis2]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: - well said! :salute:

[unlimitedmp]

They should rename the IGLA/Stinger to the "TK Missile"

[Lighthammer]

I can't believe we're in this thread having heated or spirited discussions about the in-game AA? The realization from most people who play this game is that the AA sucks, period. The only thing now that should be discussed is ways to improve the AA such as using different tactics like that of what IVFluids mentioned earlier (Having the AA pre-set and ready to fire while not camping in the thing and letting lose as aircraft are passing by).

Not a whole lot is getting accomplished about the frackin' horrible AA system within BF2 here atm... :(

[Teriander]

Not a whole lot is getting accomplished about the frackin' horrible AA system within BF2 here atm... :(
Well basically we're talking about how the AA goes for friendlies. Not how the AA sucks in general. You're right, we all know it sucks in general, but the fact that the missiles can go after friendlies unrealistcly is just plain stupid.

So we're talking about if it happens to others, if EA is aware, etc. As for getting it fixed. That's EA's job. Really simple. Don't let the missiles shoot down friendlies when the enemy is locked on.

[IVfluids]

Sorry man, I just hate stupidity. But I've already told you how to spell "missile" and you continue to spell it "missel". I can tell you have a hard time learning. Which explains why all of your explanations and theories behind the AA system sounds more like yappin instead of making sense. I would explain to you again what's going on with the AA system but then Im repeating myself. Not only do you have a hard time spelling, but a hard time reading as well.

So lets just pretend you're right, and nothing is wrong with BF2 missile system, and you're a ace pilot, and yadda yadda yadda.. happy?

Wow, you really are a fuckin net mommy aren't you lol. You realize, that at this point, I am spelling missile 'missel' just to piss you off after you corrected me on it, just because I know you'll get all internet police about it. Next time you bust out the Grammar Police badge, try to sense some sarcasm. Don't go getting all asshurt over it, otherwise I'll make you a nice Net PoPo sig with photochop. If you want to call me an ace pilot, go ahead, your choice, I never made that claim.

Just played another map today on Dalian Plant and flew my ass off, guess what, not a single fuckin enemy damage or tk, why is this shit not happening to me. Instead of yappin about your inefficiencies with the AA MIZZELS, try to work around it until EA noobifies it for you, if you'd have read the link I gave you to the EA XFire conversation, you'd realize that they are well on their way to doing that for you.

Better yet, explain to me how the top 20 guys in air defense have over 1000 kills a piece? Hell, tell me how the first place guy has over 4000 kills. It must be impossible, the AA system is complete shit, right?

[Brucewillis2]

Better yet, explain to me how the top 20 guys in air defense have over 1000 kills a piece? Hell, tell me how the first place guy has over 4000 kills. It must be impossible, the AA system is complete shit, right?

I don't think he's here to explain others AA kills... could be lots of things that contribute to this. He's just pointing out the obvious, which others would agree the AA in BF2 sux and the ridiculous missile behaviour of targeting friendly aircraft after you 'lock on' to an enemy. Your coming from the other side of the argument. Obviously you enjoy being a pilot, flying 'your ass off' and have a ball at the same time, So course you won't complain if your untouchable.

Remember when you in a jet the only thing that can take you out is another jet. Stingers won't and don't touch you.

[Teriander]

Wow, you really are a fuckin net mommy aren't you lol. You realize, that at this point, I am spelling missile 'missel' just to piss you off after you corrected me on it, just because I know you'll get all internet police about it. Next time you bust out the Grammar Police badge, try to sense some sarcasm. Don't go getting all asshurt over it, otherwise I'll make you a nice Net PoPo sig with photochop. If you want to call me an ace pilot, go ahead, your choice, I never made that claim.

Dude, you really have issues. I was trying to help your low budget public school education but if you insist on looking like a retard just to piss me off, good luck with that. BTW:: Your post are way off topic here. Learn to read and then come back.

[tehpwnerofnoobs]

:locked: We aren't even remotely on topic anymore...

[BarkingSquirrel]

Not all pilots love being untouchable. I personally love nothing more than being in a dogfight and being locked onto by both stationary aa lauchers and mobile aa vehicles and scoring the kill while only taking one missile(not taking any is impossible in that situation). Flying around untouchable is rather boring if you ask me.

About the missile behavior, on numerous occasions I've had an enemy dead to rights, not dodging or anything. I fire off two missiles, watch them actively dodge the enemy when no flares are deployed, continue flying another 100 meters, make an instant 90 degree turn towards a gas tower I had to strain myself to see, actively dodge the tower, make a 180 degree turn and slam into a fully loaded friendly transport chopper 500 meters away. I can not count how many times this has happened, and I'm sick of being instantly -48 points(8x6) and instantly kick/banned from a server for something that is not only not under my control, but also completely and utterly fucking insane.

I don't give a fuck what you say, there is no excuse for missile behavior like that.

[Reign.]

Yea... Its easier to shoot down a friendly then it is to shoot a bads.

[Ruhiger_Donner]

but in reality tv guided missles do go too fast thats why the military spends tens of thousands of dollars to train ppl how to use them. i have fired hundres in game and only resently am getting it down, the guided missles are mutch to be desirred tho i do admit. and the aa stingers ect are very very lacking, i agrre that they are suppose to go dead or ecplode close to the nearest heat source not just go on forever and then kill any randon thing that has the misfortune to come across it. and also the hole lock on thing is annoying a chopper can be litterly filling my view finder in the stinger site and i can miss with both missles it's almost better to fire them and hope to get lucky rather than wait for the lock. but unfortunatly we can't expect military precision in a game, if the missles tracked like we all want them to it would defeat the purpose of having the air craft. how ever i think maybe they could make it so the missle were a bit better against jets espically wiht the rash of kamicazi pilots.

[IVfluids]

Dude, you really have issues. I was trying to help your low budget public school education but if you insist on looking like a retard just to piss me off, good luck with that. BTW:: Your post are way off topic here. Learn to read and then come back.

You do realize that my ragging on you is a response to your trying to belittle me because you don't agree with me and a simple spelling error. Apparantly I am pissing you off, or you wouldn't insist on this little tirade about a spelling error of mine.

And I don't see where my post is really off topic, your talking about AA MISSILES (happy now). Guess what is strapped under the wings of those jets in the game... anti air MISSILES (made you happy twice).