Jason.

If you double click on the vehicle after spawning it it you will open a new window where you can configure loads of stuff for that unit, one of the settings is called "pylons" (something like that anyway ), from there you can change which weapon is on each pylon of the jet.

From what I've played of them so far the AAF jet is probably my favourite, it's only a tad slower than the others (still very fast) but it handles beautifully, so is the most fun to fly imo. What makes the other jets so much better though? Can't really be weapons since that's customisable now, is it the stealth? What do you mean by "didn't give me fully access to the custom loadout", you can completely customise the loadout on the new jets and the old ones with the [Dynamic Loadout] tag, you can do it with most helicopters as well. I'm not sure how I feel about the new throttle system, it'll take some getting used to. Why do you need airbrakes to maintain a certain speed, can't you taxi at 20% thrust (for example)? I haven't tried out the new damage model much, but it looks like it's a HUGE improvement over the old system, which is basically dead or not dead. I've only tried ejecting once on the new NATO jet and I noticed you are ejected with the seat now, is that what you mean by "new" (I'm not familiar with enhanced btw)?

I think it should be quite simple to add a little "(Jets DLC)" tag to the relevant jets etc, and if someone who doesn't have the DLC still buys it, well, I think that's their problem, and my jet For your pricing: HMG >> GMG Since you've done the pricing it's given me an idea. Shouldn't basic vehicles be either super cheap, or just respawn at base (like they do now)? By basic I mean quadbikes, unarmed hunters, boats, (and ghosthawks?) etc. I think this is especially important for boats since they're hardly used anyway, so making people pay for them hardly seems necessary.

But with the reward points system wouldn't it be totally up to the players which asset they use? So we wouldn't rely so much on default spawns anyway, maybe there will still be greyhawks. But I doubt we would still have a respawning jet, and if we did it I think the buzzard would be best since it is (probably) the worst jet, so players will have to spend points to get a better jet. Same points apply to the UAV assets. Anyways, I'm hoping with this new system we'll get access to all the new assets from the DLC, even if they're even a slightly nerfed form.

Dynamic loadouts coming soon!

My advice for UAV ops, don't trust the UAVs. When I need to rearm a greyhawk I'll give it a loiter order at 200m altitude a few kms from base, from there I'll take over control and land it myself. Same goes for taking off, I'll do that manually then once in the air I'll give it a waypoint. For landing, try to be at around 100km/h and flying around 20m above the ground on the approach to the runway. Set yourself a waypoint (shift+L-mouse) on the map for the start of the runway. Make sure you're "aiming" for your waypoint, this will help you to have a steady descent and to make the most of the long runway. You want to be going around 80km/h (not sure exactly) once you reach the waypoint, at this speed the greyhawk will almost land itself, you can recognise this magic speed when you are unable to gain altitude by pitching up.

So it would be someone's job to sit at base and repair damaged helis? Can't see that catching on When we have trucks/crates that can do the same thing it will be quicker and easier for pilots to just do it themselves.

Scar you know how you're always telling people to stay on topic... So yea, lets not discuss that here. Although I would just add that it could be a good idea to do that on EU2 since it's not tanoa anymore

Wow that's a lot of things and I agree with pretty much all of them! The request supply crates was very buggy so rarely actually did anything, but if that's fixed then it would be nice to have, but isn't the current crate system good enough? The UGV (Stomper) is shit Seriously though it is super slow and if CSAT even looks at it it's wheels fall off. I think the UAV op has enough gadgets. The Medevac was just a landing pad with a medical hemtt next to it, but I agree it was nice to have

I thought that's how the PCML always is? Dumb-fire or lock-on, no manual guidance. But the bigger issue here... why you using a damn PCML for?!?! Get yourself a Titan already.

It's a high price for DLC but it should be worth it, I'll hold off buying it until the jets DLC is closer to release, in case any cheaper options pop-up. Although I wouldn't expect to get much use of the new jets in I&A as they seem very powerful.

Check that you're using the latest version (1.2.2), it works fine for me

Would have been nice if that could have been mention here. Anyway they sound like good changes, though I'll miss the cute lil fuel truck Stan's comment seemed to have came out of nowhere for me as well, hax?

Any update on this?

I can't say I've had much experience with the new medic system since I rarely play as infantry. However the things I liked about the previous system (as some have mentioned): Downed players can still talk in chat Downed players are visible on the map Players aren't perma-killed - I don't know the details of how it works currently, other than it happens too often Can drag downed players and transport them in vehicles (I don't know if this is in the current system?) If this could be added to the new system then it would be perfect(ish)

It's been broken for around a year now, so we shouldn't expect a fix any time soon

Back in I&A2 we had little fuel trucks that could be lifted by most helicopters. They were super useful for the (common) times when a pilot crash lands far away from base and needs to be refueled. Currently the only options we have are: 1. Drive a fuel truck - Not practical when on the other side of the map, you can't expect a player to spend 30+ mins driving to you 2. Get a repair specialist to refuel - This is a script which very rarely works, it's a great idea but until it's fixed it isn't a reliable solution 3. Sling a Huron fuel container - Requires a Huron since no other heli can lift it, so if the Huron pilot isn't responding or if it's the Huron that needs to be refueled, you're screwed. Also since it needs to be close to the heli to refuel, the pilot slinging it can end up hitting the downed heli's rotor in an attempt to drop it close (the fuel truck can be driven closer instead) This should be pretty easy to add as we'd only need a couple of them at base.

Although I don't agree with some of what @Stanhope has said, and that his posts have been regarding a buzzard armed with ATGMs which I have since said to ignore. I do appreciate that he's been willing to explain his opinions. @Lone I've given many reasons for how this change would be balanced or even be less powerful than the greyhawks, so when you just say: And I ask for you to explain: I feel that you're not taking it seriously. This applies exactly the same way to a good or bad UAV op. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here but the "cas system", being a UAV operator with 2 greyhawks, hasn't changed a bit since I&A2. And I don't see how it can be going back a step when it's not something that's been done before? @S0zi0p4th This change would be for when the jets update comes out anyway, so that's fine, but I thought we could still discuss it earlier?

Please forget I ever mentioned ATGMs, just pretend the buzzard has only GBUs and AA missiles. Would you mind elaborating on that? I know what you mean about pilots trying to use the shitty cannon for CAS, but I'm not so sure about FF, the benefit of it being weak is that it's pretty hard to TK with as well! You mean like this? I have tried it out on the dev branch and it looks really promising, it's one of the reason I made this post. But nobody seems to be paying attention to this and are too hung up on "ATGMs OP!"... I think the enemy jets have been changed to more more like how they were in I&A2, they will come in and stay on the map until shot down. That said I still agree they aren't too dangerous to pilots, with our own jet however, enemy CAS could be turned up a few notches as well.

@Stanhope I strongly encourage you to try out your strategy in the editor, things play out very differently in practice. I don't really see the point of your argument when you make no reference to the effectiveness to UAVs, which is the basis of mine. Everything you're saying can be done easier with greyhawks, so what exactly is your point? Also, it's fine to think that the ATGMs make it OP, but don't make that your reason to disagree with the whole idea. I've said twice already, the buzzard will soon be able to have it's armament customised, meaning the ATGM issue can be easily fixed. A rule which is very rarely listened to or enforced. Also I see no reason why this same rule wouldn't apply to the buzzard.

By helpless I mean that they have no way of fighting back, no way of defending themselves other than trying to avoid their attacks like you say. Also I'm pretty sure the jets get infinite missiles. I was going to make some points about balance, but I didn't think it was necessary, but it seems I was wrong! The only part that I could consider OP about the buzzard is the ATGMs, since they can by fired at long range without any assistance from other players. But that is why I mentioned that soon it will be possible to switch the ATGMs to another weapon, so think about it for the future, not just for right now. I'm sorry but this is completely unrealistic. If you're lucky you can take out 2 tigrises with your ATGMs (they won't always hit). But an AO will have more than 2 tigrises plus many AA squads. If you try dive bombing an AO after taking out 2 tigrises you'll be dead before your bombs touch the ground. As for taking out stuff with the cannon, I won't go into how suicidal it is, but it'll take about half a clip of your cannon rounds to destroy an ifrit, so not exactly huge potential. Assuming the buzzard is armed with 4 GBUs, I don't see why that would be OP when we currently have two greyhawks with 2 GBUs each? The buzzard is much more vulnerable to AA because it will be targeted at a much longer range, and it has half the number of flares. The buzzard will spend more time out of action rearming, compared to how you can always have 1 greyhawk in the air ready for targets whilst the other is rearming. The buzzard must rely on other players to lase targets (to be able to accurately and safely hit anything), whilst the greyhawks can self-designate targets, eliminating the need to work with the team. I honestly think that the UAV op with two greyhawks and darters is far more OP than the buzzard. @Cryo and what happens when the AO is the other side of the map?

Current situation: For a long time now the Greyhawk UAVs have been the only CAS option available in I&A (excluding reward vehicles). I think that the guided bombs that the UAVs have are quite ideal for gameplay. In theory UAVs are great, being able to take off/land, fly and even destroy targets by themselves. However as many know, UAVs are a little... unreliable, meaning that they must be controlled manually for most tasks. With two greyhawks in the sky the UAV operator won't have time for much else, like using darters. Enemy CAS: We currently have no way of dealing with enemy Neophrons aside from base AA (if available) or an AT player carrying an AA launcher (never). We used to have an AA buzzard in I&A 2, but not anymore This results in pilots and ground vehicles helplessly being destroyed by the enemy CAS. Yes I know we get it at the FOB but that can take many hours to get, so is not a solution. My idea: Remove greyhawks as a default spawn, and add them to the side rewards list. Add the buzzard CAS as a default spawn. For info, the buzzard has 300 20mm cannon rounds, 2 ATGMs, 2 guided bombs, and 2 AA missiles. My hope is that by having the buzzard we can keep the same CAS ability of the greyhawks, minus all the bugs associated with UAVs. By having a buzzard pilot we also have a more reliable way of dealing with enemy CAS. It would also mean that the UAV operator's new focus would be on using his darters much more effectively. The UAV op can also now be the primary person who can lase targets for the CAS pilot (replacing the previously useless JTAC role). Extra points: In the near future when the update for dynamic loadouts on jets arrives, the buzzard's loadout can be completely customised, for example the 2 ATGMs could be switched for 2 more GBUs etc. I don't know if it would be necessary, but with this change a new pilot slot could be added, possibly just for jets/CAS? Please discuss!

Save the greyhawks! I'm quite surprised you've all suggested removing the greyhawks as a default spawn and making them only available with enough points. You seem to be missing a critical problem, VERY few people would be interested in playing the UAV op if they only have access to a darter and have to wat 30 mins - an hours to get their first greyhawk. It makes about as much sense as forcing pilots to buy their first helicopter. And if you plan on making them super cheap... inb4 UAV op has a swarm of 10+ greyhawks I think the current system works fine regarding greyhawks, the 20 or so minute respawn time is sufficient to make them valuable imo

Firstly, I think it's great that you're encouraging this community interaction and listening to our feedback, as you've probably noticed already, there's a lot of opinions on this topic! It sounds nice to say "team-based actions", but I can't think of many other actions that points could be awarded for. Meaning that medics and repair specs would be earning more points than everyone else (especially medics). One way of solving this would be to reduce the points that medics and repair specs get from completing missions, to compensate for the additional points they will get by playing their roles. I like the idea of being able to pool your points together so that squads can buy vehicles that can benefit all of them (apcs). However I don't like the part about squads or the squad leader gaining additional points, I feel that this would be too easily abused and won't give any gameplay benefits. I don't see how this will work... if you gain points by completing an AO, then what's stopping a player in a tank doing huge damage to an AO, but before it ends he can get out of the tank so that he gains full points. If you plan on making it so that any player who was in a tank at any time for a duration of an AO gets no points, then think about what that will do to people using APCs to transport other players. Players will not want to get into someone else's APC to move around the AO as they know that doing so will reduce how many points they will earn. From my experience the only vehicles that should be penalised are: Wipeout, Kajman, Blackfoot, MBTs, and armed Orca. These are the only vehicles that can do serious damage to an AO. With these vehicles I'd recommend half points, since zero points seems a little harsh. Perhaps quarter points for the first 3 vehicles I listed. A few extra points: For FOBs, since you plan on removing the special vehicles that spawn at them, they could just become resupply points, with the different HEMTTs and a few hunters etc. Since this rewards rework is likely to take some time, can we expect a quick fix for the rewards system in the meantime (I'm thinking just changing the current reward vehicles). For limiting assets, ofc we can see how it goes, but I don't think there needs to be limits on ground vehicles, a limit of one armed air vehicle is enough imo (to make sure there are enough transport pilots).

I think refusing to take-off unless given an LZ is doing just that. I like what Cebi said: I think this is much more true, most pilots will do their job without requiring any input/destination from their passengers, much like a bus. Therefore the players (passengers) are used to this system where they can hop in a heli and trust the pilot to take them where they need to go. Sure in an ideal world the pilots could be more like cab drivers, but it's simply not going to happen, there is very little we can do to change the mentality of EU1 players, and that's something you need to accept