I feel like the much better option would just be to have the radar station be towable, and controllable by one player.
I dont forsee a lot of players being willing to play the passive radar vehicle and be stuck on the whims, skills, or lack thereof of other random players, plus actually killing stuff is more fun than just staring at a radar lock until your teammate eventually (hopefully) kills them. So in the case of random games it’d probably end up with lots of the missile trucks spawning, but nowhere near enough radar trucks to go with them.
Would be kinda dull for the guy in the radar and would mean your team was at least 1 player short.
I’d love to see 2 player vehicles. like navigators in aircraft like the Tornado F3 or F-14, or for naval having 2 people control 1 ship. But I think in this instance, it just doesnt work.
Would be better to either
A) Have the radar towed
B) Have the radar be a second AI vehicle that follows you
C) Have the radar “off-map” and static
Or back to enlisted where you have an AI controlled vheicel as you have AI controlled squad mates in enlisted. You can add WP and set modes for them or switch in said AI companion.
In short add enlisted AI squad mates or in this case platoon vehicels.
The idea fo two players maning one unit is bad as the other guy in radar vehicle will have nothing to do expect for watching a screen on ascreen on screen for green dots to show up. Has no offensive wepons and has no defensive weapons on tiny maps…
I think having an offmap, stationary FCS Radar would be good for this. Switch between them, or, alternatively, the FCS Radar always scans and points in the direction that you (the missile carrier) is looking.
Offmap FCS radars would also introduce the need to counter them, aka ARMs, but they should be repairable because without them the missiles themselves are actually useless.
On another note, any system that uses an external fire control radar (Hawk, Kub, etc.) are way too long ranged for current ground map’s air map. Those types of SAMs would fit much better in air sim, and there isn’t really a “practical” way of adding them to GRB because the range disparity between a Roland and a Hawk is just so massive.
I remember sharing an idea like either last year or beginning of this year about secondary support vehicles. My idea was have them Radar vehicles stationary at the rear of the base while the main vehicle is able to use its radar and lock onto their targets.
2nd option is just drag them around attached to its rear like that churchill crocodile with the flamethrower.
Dude. Closing in on, and firing an ARM at, a SAM battery’s FCR and then having to dodge the resulting SAMs going after you because your ARM necessitated going well into effective range of the SAM to actually hit would be so fun in sim lmao. A SEAD aircraft would basically have to pull off every trick in the book to survive that.
Also, if they are ever going to add these kinds of SAMs, they need to model ECM. But I think they should model it to have “ECM Burn-Through” at ranges within like 30km for Ground RB players (and their SAMs) to not really have to deal with ECM. At ranges beyond that, though, ECM can actually do something for aircraft survivability, especially if SAMs are added, because then you have the added chance of the SAM going off track from ECM and not hitting you.
It’s really complicated as a system, but I hope it happens sometime
Sure let’s see if its a bad idea to remove the thing that singlehandedly upset the entire meta by existing
Like come on, it has 50% more range than anything else and has a radar that (depending on the aircraft) literally can’t be detected. When the option of a perfectly servicable alternative that would be equal to everything else in game exists (the Tor) and the Tunguska was literally fine
I’ll stop complaining when they do add the counters (anti-radiation missiles) but even still I will maintain it was a needless addition considering they added the Tor in the literal same update
