Spetz
Member
+1|7099
I THINK WHAT BF2 LACKS:

1.tanks with those grates all around them to stop anti tank missiles
2.jets that represent real speed and design (unlike the f-35 or JointStrikFighter which has no hover capabilities what soo ever, as well as maybe a limited time for hover)
3.russian tanks featuring layers of armoured charges like they have in real life(pm me if you wana know what they do and how they poon)
4.realistic AA defence vs jets(only way to bring them down is when they fly right past and you are looking directly behind them)
5.lower the rate at which engineers repair vehicles(name me one guy who can repair a almost destroyed tank is 8 seconds)
6.fix the pathetic accuarcy on .50 cal weapons

__________________________________________________________________________________________

know of anything else that really sucks in the game? leme know i got a friend who works for EA, he may be able to help
SAS-Lynx
Scottish Moderator!!!
+13|7200|Scotland!!!
Moved
I.M.I Militant
We Are Not Alone In Here
+297|7143|Melbourne, Australia
o god man... ur a bit of a winger... seriously imagine if it was like that.. the enginneer thing.. ? wtf  ... does that mean when u get shot a medic will spawn an carry u bak to base an have to operate on u... for 12 hours...? b4 u can walk again.. how shit would it be... the AA is bad enuf as it is man its being improved with the new patch
aujt74
Member
+11|7119|Scotland!
It's all to do with balance. Most of the design decisions that have been made by EA/Dice have been in favour of balance instead of realism: the M95 being the best example I can think off.
In reality a .50 Cal bullet to the chest would laugh at body armour and continue right thru literally tearing you apart in the process, yet in game - for balance - the m95 reduces you to 2 bars of health. It stops one shot:one kill - even from full health - as in the AWP in Counter Strike - (OK so in BF2 the most you have to wait is 15secs or so until your back, unlike CS but the decision was still taken for balance).

so 1. - those grates don't stop anti tank missiles, they reduce their armour piercing abilities by causing them to start the detonatation process too early. But in BF2 for balance infantry must have a good chance at taking out armour without armour or air support of their own - otherwise we infantry might as well just die of fear as soon as an enemy tank rolls up if anti tank missiles are rendered ineffective if they hit the grates. As i understand it two well placed AT missiles, or 3/4 not so hot shots will take out a full strength tank - imagine having the entire side (and rear?) denied to you as a target as you pop up from behind cover quickly fire at the near enough invincible tank? You'd have players flooding forums about armour whoring even more than they do now.

2. the F-35 comes in several varients - at least one of which has VTOL (hover) capabilites. My understanding is theres 3 versions - one for each of the US armed services minus the army of course - an Air Force version, Marine version and Navy carrier version - typical eh? The marines one has VTOL which is also the one being sold to the UK to replace our Harriers etc. Which is the one in the game so... since the USMC has the VTOL F-35 it hovers in real life... Why else would they bother allowing a plane to hover if it didnt in reality?
This may seem at odds with the concept of balance ... sure there aint another plane that hovers in the game but why does that matter? Its hardly an advantage... whereas...

3. dont know much about this but again... most likely balance, the M1A1 has - for balance - got to be the same as the T-90, ok sure in real life i'm sure everyone would rather take their chances in the M1A1 over any russian hardware anyday as it has one hell of an advantage, but in a game - and thats all it is - things have got to be fair.

4. AA is being changed in next patch - AA always seemed passably OK to me, sure its a bit slow locking on but u can make side shots some of the time, but mostly head on shots work best. *Hint* wait until the noobs fire their flares as soon as they hear tone, then wait for a lock then fire both missiles

5. Again its a game, ok sure its not realistic but its.. a game?

6. the M95 is not *inaccurate* - it uses a .50 Cal bullet, the bullet has mass => it has a weight => it drops due to gravity...
next time you zoom in using an M95, look at the sight picture... theres the crosshairs plus little markings on below the centre... thats for range... using those ranging markings and a rough guess at how far away the target is I can get headshots on stationary targets a good majority of the time... also if the target is moving, which they mostly are, then well its harder to make but its not impossible - you lead the target allowing for its speed, lag and how much you had for breakfast this morning...

Anyways that a decent answer?
Way too long and detailed for a post like that... I must be drunk after a night out... hey wait i am
$kelet0r
Member
+16|7107
You're playing the wrong game - if you want a military sim play Operation Flashpoint or Armed assault when it arrives
1.Game balance
2.Game Balance
3.Sure it would look nice but think of the game balance
4.realistic AA defence vs jets - AA in real life is fairly hit and miss against jets anyway - it will be improved in the next patch
5.Why - engineers rock! plus they got a raw deal so far in BF2
6.Lol have you ever tried firing the 50 cal on a stationary transport?
Bernadictus
Moderator
+1,055|7161

1.tanks with those grates all around them to stop anti tank missiles
As said, they don't stop HEAT rounds, they just make the HEAT rounds detonate sooner.
Or, in case of SABOT, make the container release its payload sooner.

2.jets that represent real speed and design (unlike the f-35 or JointStrikFighter which has no hover capabilities what soo ever, as well as maybe a limited time for hover)
The F-35 or Joint Strike Fighter, comes in three flavours.

The F-35A - AIRFORCE
- Which is the CTOL or conventional takeoff version.

The F-35B - MARINES
- Which is the STOVL or Short Take Off Vertical Landing made for shorter runways and non-catapult carriers.
It has less range than the A and C variant because it has less fuel due to the massive turbo-fan needed to create the 20,000lbs of upward thrust.

The F-35C - CV (Carrier Version) - NAVY
- Which is the carrier function, with has larger wing and tail control areas for improved performance on carriers, and has a stronger structure to withstand catapult launches

As in the game, 2 plates open when taking of STOVL style, which is accurate. The engine also has the abbility to turn. Although in real life the engine nozzle would not be pussed further than 45 degrees to save fuel.

And about the speed, I like the current speed. Im not a plane man, but it looks fast enough. When it is made even faster, you can't fly a bombing run without having to fear the 'leaving combat zone' message.

3.russian tanks featuring layers of armoured charges like they have in real life(pm me if you wana know what they do and how they poon)
Armoured charges? For as far as my intelligence goes (and it is very, VERY accurate, I can tell you the US ARMY designation of all the rounds the M1A2 fires etc.) you mean the ERA - Explosive Reactive Armor.

The T-90 tank is protected by both conventional armour-plating and explosive reactive armour (ERA).

The T-90 is fitted with the Shtora-1 defensive aids suite which is produced by Electronintorg of Russia. This system includes infrared jammer, laser warning system with four laser warning receivers, grenade discharging system which produces an aerosol screen and a computerised control system.

It is also fitted with NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) protection equipment.

And here some info about ERA.

Explosive reacting armour is constructed of "bricks" or "tiles" of explosive sandwiched between two plates, almost always metal, called the reactive or dynamic elements.

Essentially all anti-tank munitions work by piercing the armour and killing the crew inside.

Explosive reactive armour's protective mechanism against shaped charge warheads involves producing an explosion when it is impacted by a weapon, moving the reactive elements and thus disrupting the jet of metal the warhead produces, significantly reducing its penetration capability.

The disruption happens by two mechanisms. First, the moving plates change the effective velocity and angle of impact of the shaped charge jet, reducing the angle of incidence and increasing the effective jet velocity versus the plate element. Second, since the plates are angled compared to the usual impact direction of shaped charge warheads, as the plates move outwards the impact point on the plate moves over time, making the jet have to cut through fresh plate material. This second effect increases the effective plate thickness during the impact significantly.

Most ERA is not of much use against kinetic energy projectiles, which are much thicker and heavier than the plates are, but the thicker moving plates of "heavy ERA" such as the Russian Kontakt-5 can break apart a penetrating rod that is longer than the ERA is deep, again significantly reducing penetration capability.

The effects on shaped charge warheads was discovered in 1967–68 by a German researcher, Manfred Held, working in Israel. He and his team were using the large quantities of wrecked tanks from the Six Day War to test shells. They accidentally discovered that tanks that still contained live ordnance could disrupt a shaped charge by the explosion of the shells, the basis of ERA. The concept was patented in 1970.

Explosive reactive armour has been held in great favor by the former Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1980s, and almost every tank in eastern military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, even the very old T-55 and T-62 tanks from forty and fifty years ago, used today by reserve units.

ERA tiles are used as add-on armour to the most vulnerable portions of an armoured fighting vehicle, typically the front of the hull and the front and sides of the turret. They require fairly heavy armour on the vehicle itself, since the exploding ERA would otherwise damage the vehicle and injure or kill the personnel inside. Usually, ERA is not mounted on the sides or rear of a vehicle, since the underlying armour is not as heavy on those parts. Exploding ERA also poses a danger to friendly troops in close proximity to the vehicle. Though it was once quite common for a dozen or so infantrymen to ride on the outside of a tank's hull, this is not done with ERA-plated vehicles—for obvious reasons.
4.realistic AA defence vs jets(only way to bring them down is when they fly right past and you are looking directly behind them)
The Linebacker has the same 25mm ATK Ammunition Systems (formerly Boeing Ordnance) M242 Bushmaster gun that is standard on the Bradley. The 25mm chain gun is dual-feed and has a standard rate of fire of 200 rounds per minute. it can fire a variety of ammunition, including APDS-T (Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot - Tracer), HEI-T (High Explosive Incendiary - Tracer) and APFSDS-T (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot - Tracer) rounds.

Getting hit by the 25mm cannon would force any plane (except maybe the large bombers) to crash and burn.

5.lower the rate at which engineers repair vehicles(name me one guy who can repair a almost destroyed tank is 8 seconds)
Same addition as the medic story. Have you ever seen a Marine repairing a tank with only a wrench? It is purely a game element.

6.fix the pathetic accuracy on .50 cal weapons
I do have to give you a right on this one. It's shells travel at 854m/s with a maximum range of 1800 effective meters. It's contents (depleted uranium shells) .50cal shells can penetrate an engine block, but can't kill a man with a bullet proof vest. Now I understand that the M95 shouldn't become what the AWP/AWM was for CounterStrik. And thus I doesnt need more power, but It does need a more effective range, and for the love of crosshairs, remove the 2 pieces of ducktape from the sight. In real life they are more like the M24.

Last edited by Bernadictus (2006-01-18 16:48:01)

JeeSqwat
Tactical Specialist
+41|7153|Canada

Spetz wrote:

I THINK WHAT BF2 LACKS:

1.tanks with those grates all around them to stop anti tank missiles
2.jets that represent real speed and design (unlike the f-35 or JointStrikFighter which has no hover capabilities what soo ever, as well as maybe a limited time for hover)
3.russian tanks featuring layers of armoured charges like they have in real life(pm me if you wana know what they do and how they poon)
4.realistic AA defence vs jets(only way to bring them down is when they fly right past and you are looking directly behind them)
5.lower the rate at which engineers repair vehicles(name me one guy who can repair a almost destroyed tank is 8 seconds)
6.fix the pathetic accuarcy on .50 cal weapons

__________________________________________________________________________________________

know of anything else that really sucks in the game? leme know i got a friend who works for EA, he may be able to help
Yah, how fun would it be if you got shot once and could never play the game again cuz your dead....thanx for wasting your $50
he_who_says_zonk
Member
+17|7145
o god man... ur a bit of a winger... seriously imagine if it was like that.. the enginneer thing.. ? wtf  ... does that mean when u get shot a medic will spawn an carry u bak to base an have to operate on u... for 12 hours...? b4 u can walk again.. how shit would it be... the AA is bad enuf as it is man its being improved with the new patch
lol, imagine that in more detail

you take any kind of wound in the opening moments of a game
you get pulled out by heli
your wounds are dressed
you wait a few months for it to heal
you're cleared for active duty

"Want to play some bf2 tonight?"
"Nah I can't sorry, leg wound is giving me trouble"
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7140
the planes are waaaaaaaay to fast, cruising at 900 kph? they should be realistic like 600... but can go to 1200 and take off speed is 150 kph
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Gawwad
My way or Haddaway!
+212|7109|Espoo, Finland

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

the planes are waaaaaaaay to fast, cruising at 900 kph? they should be realistic like 600... but can go to 1200 and take off speed is 150 kph
Do you still use the 1945 jets in Taiwan?

Take off speed is closer to 300kph (newer planes don't need that much though) and maximum speeds are around 2mach, 1200 very low for a jet...
Lobsters
Member
+0|7095
I'm suprised by the lack of VTOL aircraft in such a Marines-centric game.
H0ly(rap
Member
+10|7145|Nebraska

Spetz wrote:

I THINK WHAT BF2 LACKS:


6.fix the pathetic accuarcy on .50 cal weapons

and fix the crosshairs on the .50 cal sniper, for god sake why cant they be like in BF Vietnam, with the small lines and a dot in the middle,

__________________________________________________________________________________________

know of anything else that really sucks in the game? leme know i got a friend who works for EA, he may be able to help
ilyandor
Member
+31|7113|Phoenix, AZ
are you russian? is there an all russian (and therefore totally dominating) CLAN??? hook me up, bratetz
ilyandor
Member
+31|7113|Phoenix, AZ

aujt74 wrote:

T-90, ok sure in real life i'm sure everyone would rather take their chances in the M1A1 over any russian hardware anyday as it has one hell of an advantage
YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT RUSSIAN NOTHING, MAN...I LAUGH AT YOU...MUHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA.....IF YOU ONLY KNEW, MY FRIEND...
Kaosdad
Whisky Tango Foxtrot?
+201|7103|Broadlands, VA
For armor & mobile AA I'd like the gunner & driver to be separated.  Why?  In a rare moment of cooperation in a team we managed to bogart three tanks (two Chinese & a stolen USMC - Oil Fileds 64).  There we were rumbling along, spanking everything in our path when BANG!!  Air craft bombed us.  What would have been sweet would have been if we had mobile AA bringing up the rear facing rearwards.

However, this makes driving interesting (not impossible, just interesting).  Both the driver & gunner could earn armor points (but slower - half your armor points must come from being a gunner, half from being a driver) and share in the kill points.

For all vehicles I'd love to see a special VoIP channel for all folks within a vehicle regardless of squad.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard